Chesapeake Energy's aggressive leasing for oil and gas worries even some of its contractors

Among large natural gas companies that own millions of acres of land leases in several states, Chesapeake Energy Corp. "has become the principal player in the largest land boom in America since the 1850s California Gold Rush," Reuters reports. The company has mastered the "land grab," or "an aggressive leasing strategy intended to lock up prospective drilling sites and lock out competitors." As a result, it now controls the rights to drill for oil and gas on about 15 million acres, or roughly the size of West Virginia.

Chesapeake has made land leasing the core of its business model. A Morningstar Inc. analysis shows that it spent $31.2 billion to get drilling rights over the last 15 years. In comparison, Exxon, which had 2011 revenue 35 times larger than Chesapeake's, spent $27 billion. "We believed that the winner of these land grabs would enjoy competitive advantages for decades to come as other companies would be locked out of the best new unconventional resource plays in the U.S.," the company wrote in its 2012 Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

A Reuters analysis of hundreds of internal Chesapeake emails and thousands of pages of documents showed the company is secretive about its leasing tactics, which some of its own contractors find dubious. "What emerged were approaches to leasing property that land brokers, land owners and lawyers say push ethical and legal limits. Chesapeake has unilaterally altered or backed out of leases. And in Texas and at least three other states, it has exploited little-known laws to force owners to hand over drilling rights and sometimes forfeit profits," Reuters reports. That apparently refers to forced-pooling laws, which allow oil and gas companies compensated access to the resources underlying land of owners who don't want to lease but are largely surrounded by those who have. (Read more)

Colorado officials, pressured by local officials, plan to strengthen oil and gas regulation

Driven by local pressure and public opposition, Colorado officials are poised to revise state oil and gas laws, much to the chagrin of industry groups, Bruce Finley of The Denver Post reports. The state has proposed buffer-zone restrictions on new wells and mandatory groundwater testing prior to drilling, but local officials worry those won't do enough to ease communities' concerns.

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission director Matt Lepore, left, said he will ask commissioners to launch a new rule-making session to revise the rules last set in 2008. "We want to get it right, as best as we can, for as many people as we can," Lepore said. Colorado Oil and Gas Association attorney Andrew Casper said the group has identified "numerous concerns" with the proposed revisions and a new rule-making session. Homebuilders have also voiced concerns about bigger buffer zones, which could complicate urban planning.

Local and state lawmakers said their communities are complaining regularly about fracking. Democratic Rep. Su Ryden of Aurora said most of her constituents "want drilling as far away as possible." Colorado Conservation Voters director Pete Maysmith said during an invite-only community discussion with Gov. John Hickenlooper that "neighborhoods and fracking don't mix." Maysmith's group gave the governor a petition with 14,500 signatures from residents in Adams and Pueblo counties asking for their communities to be shielded from drilling. (Read more)

Two-thirds of fracking-chemical disclosures omit at least one chemical on grounds of trade secrecy

Almost two-thirds of the disclosure statements filed by oil and gas companies about their hydraulic fracturing operations kept at least one chemical secret, according to a review of PIVOT Upstream Group's D-Frac database by Energywire. In 65 percent of fracking disclosures, companies said they needed to keep one or more chemicals secret to protect confidential business information, typically known as trade secrets.

Critics of drilling say widespread use of trade-secret exemptions undermines assurances by the industry that drillers are being open and honest with the communities where wells are fracked, Mike Soraghan of Energy and Environment News reports. Companies say they spend millions developing new fracking materials and don't want to give away their secret. Industry groups say the debate over trade secrets overshadows just how much companies have already disclosed.

Utah has the highest rate of trade-secret claims on disclosure statements at 94 percent, the highest of any state with more than 100 disclosures. Disclosure isn't mandatory in Utah, but in New Mexico, where it is, 84 percent of statements sent to FracFocus -- where PIVOT gets its information -- had a trade-secret claim.

All of BP America Production Co.'s 230 disclosures contained a trade-secret claim. BP and a small Texas company, Howell Oil & Gas, were the only companies with more than 100 wells that filed trade-secret claims on all of them. The rest of the top five companies are Exco Resources Inc., at 98 percent; Devon Energy Corp. and Noble Energy Inc., both at 97 percent. (Read more)

New fracking film starring Matt Damon set for release in December

A new film about hydraulic fracturing will hit theaters this December, but this time it's a feature film, not a documentary. "Promised Land" stars Matt Damon as Steve Butler, a gas company representative who comes to a rural, economically depressed town offering financial salvation in exchange for natural gas drilling leases. The film is being directed by Oscar-nominated director Gus Van Sant, who directed Damon in "Good Will Hunting."


The story behind "Promised Land" is very similar to that of real-life rural town, Dimock, Pa., where a group of residents complained that injection-well drilling caused gas to leak into their water, Mike Soraghan of Energy and Environment News reports. State officials said shoddy drilling contaminated 18 properties, and shut down the company, Cabot Oil & Gas Corp for more than two years. A $4.1 million settlement was eventually reached, giving the homeowners twice the value of their homes and restoring their mineral rights.

The film also stars Frances McDormand and Hal Holbrook, and was written by Dave Eggers, who wrote the book, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius. The movie is likely to please environmentalists and critics of drilling while angering drilling companies, Soraghan reports. Energy and Environment News is behind a paywall, but free trials can be accessed here.

Lax rules for disposal of drilling waste lead to injection of other toxic materials into the earth

One of the trucks, after it was enveloped by
flames fed by fumes from injection-well waste.
(Chemical Safety Board photo)

In January 2003, two tanker trucks exploded, killing three workers after fumes from what was supposed to be waste saltwater from injection wells ignited and burned in Rosharon, Tex. What the workers were really unloading, to be buried deep inside the earth, were thousands of gallons of volatile materials, including benzene and other flammable hydrocarbons. "What happened that day at Rosharon," explains ProPublica reporter Abrahm Lustgarten, "was the result of a significant breakdown in the nation’s efforts to regulate the handling of toxic waste."

"The site at Rosharon is what is known as a 'Class 2' well," Lustgarten writes. "Such wells are subject to looser rules and less scrutiny than others designed for hazardous materials. Had the chemicals the workers were disposing of that day come from a factory or a refinery, it would have been illegal to pour them into that well. But regulatory concessions won by the energy industry over the last three decades made it legal to dump similar substances into the Rosharon site -- as long as they came from drilling. Injection wells have proliferated over the last 60 years, in large part because they are the cheapest, most expedient way to manage hundreds of billions of gallons of industrial waste generated in the U.S. each year.''

ProPublica has analyzed records summarizing more than 220,000 well inspections conducted between late 2007 and late 2010, including more than 194,000 for Class 2 wells. This most recent installment of by the independent, nonprofit news agency on U.S. injection wells had reporters examining federal audits of state oversight programs, interviewing dozens of experts and exploring court documents, case files, and the evolution of underground disposal law over the past 30 years. The report is exhaustive and includes several links showing that fundamental safeguards are sometimes being ignored or circumvented by use of the Class 2 rules. (Read more) For a state-by-state count of unauthorized, overpressurized and leaking injection wells, go here.

Few state oil and gas agencies seek help from experts who review programs, suggest changes

There exists a team of oil and gas regulators, industry officials and environmental advocates who offer comprehensive reviews of state oil and gas oversight programs and make recommendations for improvement. It's called State Review of Oil and Natural Gas Environmental Regulations, but states aren't volunteering their oversight programs for evaluation. It's a predicament for STRONGER, Ellen Gilmer of Energy and Environment News reports.

State oil and gas regulatory officials are feeling pressure from the public and environmentalists to increase regulations on the booming industry, but Gilmer reports agency leaders are leery of STRONGER and the services it provides. They either don't have resources for it, or they fear increased public backlash. STRONGER's latest review was in 2007 in Tennessee. It did evaluate North Carolina's Department of Environmental and Natural Resources this year, but the state doesn't yet have any actual oil or gas wells.

The group has been evaluating hydraulic fracturing in Colorado, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania since 2010, but "It's unclear which states will come next or whether checked-off states' evolving regulations merit further review," Gilmer writes. Mississippi officials have never asked for a review. Kansas officials seemed interested, but haven't asked. Gilmer reports that Texas could be a candidate, but officials there are writing new rules that will likely have to be finished before a review is requested. (Read more) Many state oil and gas agencies are dominates by people from the industries they regulate.

Water pollution from oil and gas drilling can be expected in karst regions, federal expert says

More and more drilling applications have been filed during the natural-gas boom for karst regions, with "a type of geology made of rocks that dissolve in mildly acidic water over time," and and oil and gas wells do fail over time in karst regions, which provide easy geologic pathways for pollution, says James Goodbar, head of the Bureau of Land Management's caves and karst resources program, reports Gayathri Valdyanathan of Energy and Environment News.

Scientists worry that contamination will increase if drilling increases in these regions. If drilling is properly done, with the correct amount of steel and cement casings, not much casing is needed in most geologic structures. But when well bores intersect with caves, drilling can pose greater risks. The cement and metal can corrode and leak over time because it's not surrounded by rock. "Threats to the springs and the wildlife that depend on them may be significant," Valdyanathan reports.

The BLM updated requirements for karst drilling in 2006, requiring at least three layers of high-grade steel and cementing, and plugging from the lowest karst zone when abandoning a well. But those standards aren't applicable on non-federal karst lands, or on older wells. (Read more)

Gas drillers and farmers in West fight over water

Increased natural-gas drilling, which uses water-intensive hydraulic fracturing to obtain gas, has started a race for water in the West between companies and farmers. A single well can require five million gallons of water, and companies are snatching up what they need at water auctions, farm ponds, irrigation ditches and municipal fire hydrants, often leaving farmers high and dry in the arid landscape, reports Jack Healy of The New York Times. (NYT photo by Matthew Staver: Water tanker is filled to supply drilling site)

Environmentalists and farmers are concerned the deep pockets of energy companies will give them the edge in getting water rights, and this summer's drought amplified those concerns, Healy reports. "I don't think in reality that the farmer can compete with oil and gas companies for that water," Colorado corn and alfalfa farmer Peter Anderson told Healy. "Their return is a hell of a lot better than ours."

In average years, farmers pay about $30 for an acre-foot of water from local or state governments. Right now, oil and gas companies are paying as much as $1,000 to $2,000 for equal amounts, and farmers say they can't afford to match those bids, causing them to lose access to water they may need. Industry officials say the effects on water supplies are exaggerated because companies don't and can't "snap up the rights to streams and wells at the expense of farmers or homeowners," Healy reports. Officials say they lease surplus water from cities or buy treated wastewater, and in some cases buy water rights directly from farmers or others. (Read more)

Seminar on covering oil and gas drilling, with a field trip, set Sept. 27 in Youngstown, Ohio

Many rural areas are seeing a boom in drilling for oil and natural gas, which are more complex and perhaps more risky enterprises than ever before. To make sure journalists know enough to cover the subject, a half-day seminar will be held Sept. 27 at Youngstown State University in Ohio to "explain everything there is to know about the subject," say the sponsors: the Ohio Newspaper Association and the local newspaper, The Vindicator.

The program will include how horizontal hydraulic fracturing works, the economic impact of drilling, the environmental debate over drilling, and much more. After the program there will be an optional tour of drilling facilities. We recommend you do the whole day, including the field trip. You won't learn everything there is to know, but you don't have to. The cost to attend is a very reasonable $30, which includes lunch. For more information and registration, click here.

Natural-gas boom begets frac-sand boom in Wis.

The boom in natural gas drilling has caused a boom in one type of sand mining. Round silica sand is used in the process of hydraulic fracturing to hold open rock fractures so gas can be released. The sand boom is perhaps at its height in west-central Wisconsin, the largest producer of "frac sand" in the U.S.

There are no official employment figures for the frac-sand industry, but Kate Prengaman of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism used job-site estimates to calculate that when current and proposed mines are fully operational, the industry will employ about 2,780 people. The number of permitted and proposed frac-sand mines has doubled to 106 since last year, but sand isn't "instant money," Prengaman reports. It's expensive to transport, and local officials are charging sand companies for wear and tear on roads. The state Department of Transportation estimates the industry could produce about 50 million tons of sand a year, Prengaman reports.

Some residents are concerned sand mining will hurt air and water quality, local infrastructure and tourism. They have mounted protests and lawsuits to combat alleged wrongdoing by the industry. Local officials and industry representatives say sand mining will help local economies and increase jobs, echoing local battles in other parts of the country surrounding gas drilling. (Read more)

About 250 localities have tried to limit drilling's reach, worrying industry and some state officials

Many local officials in rural communities are not opposed to natural-gas drilling, but they are opposed to drilling close to homes, schools or hospitals. Citizens are increasingly turning to their city and town governments to help fight encroachment of drilling rigs when they feel state regulations aren't strict enough to control the drilling close to their towns. Jim Malewitz of Stateline reports the trend is "worrying" industry representatives and state officials who want to expand the "industry's reach."

At least 246 cities or towns in 15 states have passed laws restricting drilling on local land, according to Food and Water Watch, an environmental group. Malewitz reports some of the ordinances are "merely symbolic" because those towns don't sit atop gas reserves. More than 90 cities or towns in New York have passed resolutions addressing gas drilling, 14 in Pennsylvania have passed regulations, and some in Colorado are doing the same. A Pennsylvania appellate-court panel recently struck down a new state law that barred local officials from using zoning to prohibit drilling in certain areas.

State regulators and industry advocates say local pushback is "misguided and a dangerous obstacle to economic growth," Malewitz reports. Advocates say drillers should be exempt from local zoning laws because extraction depends on where the resources are, and sometimes residential areas and towns are included. Zoning laws differ from town to town, and Malewitz explains some zoning laws in several states. (Read more)

'Father of fracking' says it needs federal regulations to control small, independent drillers

You have probably never heard of George Phydias Mitchell, left, is one of the biggest names in natural-gas drilling and THE name in hydraulic fracturing, in which fluid is pumped into drill holes at high pressures to crack rock layers and release gas and oil. The technique has been used since the 1950s, but in the 1990s Mitchell, as head of Mitchell Energy & Development, pioneered use of the technique to get gas from deep, very tight shales that had previously been unproductive.

Mitchell who said last month that he favors more regulation of fracking. "The administration is trying to tighten up controls," he told Forbes' Christopher Helman. "I think it's a good idea. They should have very strict controls."

When Mitchell figured out that fracking could be very effective at breaking up shale and releasing gas, "This ultimately set in motion the boom in shale drilling that has spread across the country," Helman notes. More recently, innovations have led companies to horizontal hydraulic fracturing, in which a well turns horizontal to the surface to crack large sections of shale beds at once. Mitchell told Helman if companies don't frack the right way, "there could be trouble." He said there's no reason why they shouldn't do it right: "There are good techniques to make it safe that should be followed properly."

It's the smaller, independent drillers that worry Mitchell. They are "wild," he told Helman. Mitchell said most drillers follow the rules and are responsible and that costs to drillers to comply with federal regulations would be minimal. "After all," Helman wrote, "any extra costs associated with best practices ... would be passed on in the price of natural gas." (Read more)

Analysts blame market, not feds, for coal layoffs; say mid-Appalachia at start of long production drop

Coal train at Cumberland, Ky.
(Herald-Leader photo by Charles Bertram)

The prevailing opinion in Central Appalachia seems to be that federal anti-pollution rules are to blame for the loss of coal jobs — the "war on coal" that officials in the region decry — but independent analysts of the industry say market factors have been more responsible for recent, large layoffs.

Most notably, Bill Estep reports for the Lexington Herald-Leader, they "pointed to historically low prices for natural gas and the unseasonably warm winter, which left power plants with stockpiles of coal. Other factors, such as the slow recovery in manufacturing and the broader economy, also have played parts in the drop in demand for coal." And while that is bad enough news for the region, analysts now say that Central Appalachia is at the front end of a steep, long-lasting drop in coal production. "Some of these mines are not going to come back," said Michael Dudas, a managing director at investment firm Sterne, Agee & Leach, Inc. who follows the coal industry. 

Changes in drilling technology allow companies to unlock vast new sources of natural gas, sending supplies up and prices sharply down. The May price for gas was 43 percent lower than just a year earlier, said Manoj Shanker, one of Kentucky's Education and Workforce Development Cabinet economists. Many U.S. utilities have switched from coal to natural gas for electricity generation as a result.

In April, the national share of electricity generated using natural gas matched coal's share, at 32 percent, for the first time since the U.S. Energy Information Agency began keeping such records in 1973. "The Central Appalachian coalfield, made up primarily of Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia, faces other challenges as well, including competition from cheaper Wyoming coal and relatively high production costs," Estep writes. "It also costs more to produce coal in Eastern Kentucky, in part because the area has been mined for a century. Companies naturally went after the best seams first; those that are left are harder to get at, meaning higher mining costs and lower productivity." (Read more)

How many oil and gas inspectors per well does your state have? it may be hard to tell

The protection of property and the environment from damage by oil and gas operations depends greatly on the strength and attitude of state regulatory agencies, but their relative strength in personnel terms can be hard to calculate, Ellen Gilmer of Environment & Energy News reports.

"A recent overview of state shale gas regulations showcases major gaps in data available to compare, state by state, the force of oil and gas agencies," Gillmer writes. "Oklahoma, for one, doesn't know how many producing wells it has. . . . This lack of data comes at a time when understanding the workload of state inspectors has become crucial as states grapple with booming shale development and often shriveling budgets."

The analysis by the environmental think tank Resources for the Future uses maps to illustrate state  regulation. We reported on it here.

Injection wells getting more scrutiny as result of earthquakes and concerns about hydraulic fracturing

The advent of large-scale horizontal hydraulic fracturing to produce natural gas has focused new attention on injection wells, an old technology that is being used to dispose of drilling fluids after a frack job is completed.

The nonprofit, nonpartisan investigators at ProPublica have produced a four-part series (whichs eems likely to grow) on the subject, available here. Abrahm Lustgarten writes in the mainbar, "Over the past several decades, U.S. industries have injected more than 30 trillion gallons of toxic liquid deep into the earth, using broad expanses of the nation's geology as an invisible dumping ground."No company would be allowed to pour such dangerous chemicals into the rivers or onto the soil. But until recently, scientists and environmental officials have assumed that deep layers of rock beneath the earth would safely entomb the waste for millennia. There are growing signs they were mistaken." (Read more)

Injection wells are increasingly being blamed for earthquakes, usually small but occasionally damaging. Mike Soraghan of Environment & Energy News writes about a 5.6-magnitude quake that hit central Oklahoma last November. Jerri Loveland, who still can't afford to pay for the damage to her home, doesn't blame fracking. "Coming from an oil-industry family, she sees the connection as having more to do with the millions of gallons of salt-laden water that comes up with the oil and gets reinjected in deep wells nearby. In rare cases, that wastewater can lubricate faults and unleash earthquakes." But Oklahoma oil and gas officials have rejected advice against putting injection wells near geologic faults.

Fracking debate challenges objectivity and integrity of scientists, government regulators and journalists

The debate about environmental ramifications of horizontal hydraulic fracturing to produce natural gas continues to rage. Today's news digest from the Society of Environmental Journalists was dominated by a long list of fracking stories, some of which may help you sort out the facts.

New York Times environmental writer Andrew Revkin wrote on the paper's Dot.Earth blog, "Transparency and peer review matter in considering the merits of the science" cited by both sides of the debate. He had complimented a University of Texas Energy Institute report that downplayed fracking consequences, then discovered the lead researcher's ties to the gas industry weren't mentioned in the report, "leaving it up to journalists and watchdogs to reveal."

Photo: America's Natural Gas Alliance

Terrence Henry of State Impact reports Public Accountability Initiative, a nonprofit watchdog group, discovered Groat's financial ties to the gas industry, something he failed to mention in his fracking report. The PAI also investigated the University of Buffalo's fracking report stating the practice was becoming safer, and "identified a number of problems that undermine its conclusion." The executive summary of that investigation can be found here; the full analysis is here.

A recent Duke University study on fracking said some Pennsylvania aquifers might be at risk of contamination, but Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York geologist Tom Johnson told David Bertola of Buffalo Business First that the study raises many questions. “To me, the story here is not even so much about what is said in the paper, it’s a matter of some researchers here that put out an article is full of innuendo,” Johnson said. “They admit in several places that there’s more study that needs to be done.”

Some research is conducted by university professors, but is funded by the gas industry to help prove its claims about the safety of fracking, Jim Efstathiou of Bloomberg reports. A 2009 study predicted that drillers would avoid Pennsylvania gas fields if the state taxed their industry (as every other state does), and lawmakers voted against the tax. But Efstathiou notes the study was commissioned by drillers and led by an industry-friendly economist. Gas drillers "are taking a page from the tobacco industry playbook: funding research at established universities" that will counter critics' concerns, he writes.

Inside Higher Ed's Kaustuv Basu delved further into how the fracking battle is increasingly being fought at universities. A forthcoming study in New York says newborn babies' health is adversely affected by fracking, and Laura Olsen of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that officials in Washington County, Pennsylvania, are beginning a one-year air quality study near several gas-drilling sites. Meanwhile, the Obama administration refused to take a side in the debate, as the government continues its review of fracking risks, Peter Behr of Energy and Environment News reports(Subscription may be required).

Some fracking foes mislead public with false claims

Some critics of horizontal hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas say it contaminates groundwater with carcinogens, impacts human health and causes widespread air pollution. But some scientists say they are misleading the public just as much drilling companies who may twist the facts about fracking.

Many of the claims made by critics "have little or nothing to back them," reports Kevin Begos of The Associated Press. Reports that breast cancer rates rose in a heavy gas drilling area in Texas are false, he reports. Fears that natural radioactivity in drilling waste could contaminate drinking water aren't being confirmed either, he writes, and concerns about air pollution aren't typically paired with information about how burning natural gas is cleaner than burning coal. Duke University professor Avner Vengosh, who studies groundwater contamination, told Begos, "The debate is becoming very emotional, and basically not using science" on either side. (Read more)

Society of Environmental Journalists awards honor work on fracking, agriculture issues, many others

Reporting on hydraulic fracturing of deep shale for natural gas earned several reporters recognition in the 2012 Environmental Journalism Awards competition of the Society of Environmental Journalists. Other rural-oriented winners reported on other extractive industries, pesticide drift and patented seeds.

Photo: Barron Ludlum, Record-Chronicle

Ten reporters at the Denton Record-Chronicle in Texas won the Kevin Carmody Award for in-depth reporting in a small market  for “Citizens of the Shale,” a series that helped prompt the Texas legislature to requiring public disclosure of fracking chemicals and water use.

Mike Soraghan of Energy & Environment News won third place in outstanding beat reporting in a large market for his stories in Greenwire and The New York Times on the shale drilling boom. The entries were "Baffled About Fracking? You’re Not Alone;" "Big Mac Is King in N.D. Energy Boom, but Other Businesses Struggle to Keep Up;" In Fish-Kill Mystery, EPA Scientist Points at Shale Drilling;" "Earthquakes Erode Support for Drilling, but They're Nothing New;" and What EPA Really Said About Wyo. Fracking Pollution."

Second place in the small-market category went to Shauna Stephenson of the Wyoming Tribune Eagle for reporting on the Niobrara oil play; third place went to Clare Howard of 100 Reporters for "Downwind: Big ag at your door," about pesticide drift.

First prize for outstanding beat reporting in a small market went to Matthew S. Frank of the Missoula Independent and High Country News; second place went to Sandra Hausman of WVTF, the public radio station at Virginia Tech, for a wide range of stories, including one on fracking. The Columbia Journalism Review's Curtis Brainard won third place for a series titled "Environmental Journalism Under Fire." For links to those entries, click here.

In feature reporting, Paul Salopek won third place for “Closed-Source Crops” in Conservation magazine, which the judges called "a frightening and thought-provoking story that explores how multinational corporations have become the equivalent of the 'new seed oligarchy' in the agricultural world and how their practices and controls threaten biodiversity and food security." This category was won by Meera Subramanian for “India’s Vanishing Vultures” in the Virginia Quarterly Review. It "tells the story of an important but little-known ecological event, the sudden and rapid collapse of vulture populations in India in recent years." The story is here.

Oil and gas regulations very different from state to state; new report lays out the details

Natural gas is still booming in several areas of the country, inciting heated debate about the practice of hydraulic fracturing and the safety of groundwater in communities where gas is extracted. A new report shows that regulations placed on this industry vary widely from state to state. Some findings in the report: Drillers in Texas can dump oil and gas wastewater into unlined pits, while California bans such pits and requires the fluid to be stored in tanks. Ohio has no statewide requirement to report accidents and spills, and New Mexico has the fewest inspectors per well.

Researchers from Resources for the Future, an environmental think tank, looked at regulations in gas-producing states and created maps like the one above "showing the different state policies on issues like wastewater, enforcement and well construction standards," Energy & Environment News reports. To see all the maps, click here.

The researchers are trying to determine whether the differences are based on factors including geology and population density or institutional factors, such as the makeup of governments. "The effort could introduce more facts to a long-standing argument over the effectiveness of state regulation of oil and gas," E&E News reports. While environmental groups want drillers regulated by federal law, "The oil and gas industry prefers dealing with individual states rather than the federal Environmental Protection Agency," because state agencies aren't charged with "exclusively protecting human health and the environment."

"State laws order most of them to balance regulation with promoting oil and gas development, and they frequently have close ties to the local industry," E&E News reports. A Greenwire review last year found that more than 40 percent of state oil and gas officials come from the oil and gas industry. E&E News reports state agencies were created at a time when environmental protection wasn't a priority, and their main goal was to control production and protect oil from water. (Access to E&E News requires a subscription)

Study: Brine in Marcellus Shale could migrate upward, so drilling fluids might, too

A new study has concluded that salty, mineral-rich fluids naturally found below Pennsylvania's natural-gas fields could be seeping upward into residents' drinking water. The findings suggest that drilling waste and chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing "could migrate in ways previously thought to be impossible," Abrahm Lustgarten of ProPublica reports. (Getty Images photo by Spencer Platt: Gas drilling in South Montrose, Pa.)

Duke University and California State Polytechnic University researchers tested drinking-water wells and aquifers in northeastern Pennsylvania and found that water had mixed with brine that closely matches brine found in the Marcellus Shale in some samples. No drilling chemicals were found in the samples, and there was no correlation between where the natural brine was found and where drilling occurs. But, Lustgarten notes, its presence and finding that it had moved over thousands of vertical feet "contradicts the oft-repeated notion that deeply buried rock layers will always seal in material injected underground through drilling, mining or underground disposal."

The same Duke researchers found last year that methane gas was more likely to leak into water supplies in places adjacent to drilling. This is the second recent study finding that geology surrounding the Marcellus Shale region could allow contaminants to migrate more than previously expected. The other study, published in Ground Water in April, used modeling to predict that contaminants could reach the surface within 100 years. (Read more)