| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Oil company wants mineral rights for 90-plus acres of Genesee County park land
Holloway Reservoir lies just next to Holloway Regional Park, an area vulnerable to the May 1 state auction of gas and oil rights on Friday, March 28, 2014 at Holloway Regional Park in Davison. Katie McLean | MLive.com
Katie McLean
Print Ron Fonger | rfonger1@mlive.com By Ron Fonger | rfonger1@mlive.com
on March 30, 2014 at 6:00 AM, updated March 30, 2014 at 6:04 AM
RICHFIELD TWP., MI -- Hikers, mountain bikers and horseback riders might have to make way for a new activity at Richfield County and Holloway Regional parks:
Drilling for oil and gas.
A company that's buying up mineral rights from private property owners all around eastern Genesee County is also interested oil and gas beneath the surface of 90 acres of land in the two parks, according to filings with the state Department of Natural Resources.
The DNR says Western Land Services has asked the state to include more than 25 acres of Richfield Park and more than 67 acres of Holloway Regional Park near Wolverine Campground in a May 1 oil and gas lease auction.
There's been no final determination whether the land will be included in the auction -- something that DNR Director Keith Creagh will determine in coming days.
And after recent protests from the county over fears of wells sprouting up on wells on park lands, the DNR has already changed the classification on the land, taking away the winning bidders ability to construct drilling wells on the surface of the land.
The state controls access to oil and gas on the properties as a result of previous DNR grants that required the transfer of those rights from the county to the state, but is accepting public comments on the possible leases until Friday, April 4.
The county Board of Commissioners, Parks and Recreation Commission and Sierra Club Nepessing Group are among already rallying against the proposal.
Even though drilling on the surface of the park land would not be allowed here, there is the potential for drilling or fracking on adjacent property and for mining oil or gas underground, said Mary Uptigrove, Michigan DNR manager of mineral rights management.
The potential for increased drilling or fracking is quickly becoming a hot button issue in county, where Western has been active in offering mineral leases and where hundreds of residents have turned out, looking for answers at meetings in recent weeks.
"I don't think a park is the ideal place for an oil" drilling operation, said Robert Young, a volunteer with Richfield Park BMX, a group that hosts bike competitions here three or four times a week from May through October. "I hate to see that area ruined."
MLive-The Flint Journal could not reach Brian Benson, senior project manager for Ludington-based Western, which has landmen working in Genesee and Lapeer counties.
Landmen or companies can nominate property where the DNR owns mineral rights for inclusion in the agency's twice-yearly lease auctions. Those auctions generate royalties, rent, and bonuses that have amounted to more than $750 million in the last 10 fiscal years, according to the state.
That cash has helped boost the Michigan State Parks Endowment Fund and the Game and Fish Protection Trust Fund, but the money isn't worth losing people's unrestricted use of the land, said county Parks Director Amy McMillan.
The county Board of Commissioners has authorized McMillan to request the state make the mineral rights on the park properties "nonleasable" or to initiate talks aimed at purchasing those rights to protect the land in the future.
"This seemingly sudden interest is curious. It's surprising," said McMillan, who said this is the first time county park land has been proposed for inclusion in an oil and gas auction since she became director in 1999.
"These areas are legitimately and actively used for recreation purposes. They aren't in the middle of nowhere," she said. "This (could) absolutely interfere with the public use of (that land)."
Uptigrove credited McMillan and county attorney Andrew Thompson with already having successfully lobbied to change the classification of the parks land nominated for the auction so that wells could not placed on the surface land.
Others have been speaking out as well.
Land owners, local government officials and environmentalists have also said they are concerned -- particularly by the potential for fracking, the method of pumping high-pressure water, sand and chemicals thousands of feet below the ground to free oil and gas from rock.
Environmental groups have claim the process could harm groundwater and cause seismic disturbances while proponents of fracking say it is safe and is done thousands of feet below the aquifer.
Linda Berker, a member of the executive committee of the Sierra Club Nepessing Group, said anyone who enjoys parks should complain about the potential for opening them to drilling.
"The smell of an oil and gas well is really not what you want to smell when you're recreating," Berker said. "(That's) a nuisance that can cause ... negative health effects."
The DNR says nominated land for which the state owns mineral rights could be finalized in advance of the April 10 meeting of the DNR Commission, a seven-member public body whose members are appointed by the governor.
Even if the rights to drill for oil and gas are purchased, companies must also meet Department of Environmental Quality requirements before that activity can start, Uptigrove said.
"We (are) working with the county. (Its representatives) are submitting information," said Upigrove, who called this a "preliminary stage" of discussion.
In addition to the county park land in Genesee County, land under consideration for oil and gas leasing in the May 1 auction is in Barry, Cheboygan, Clare, Crawford, Genesee, Grand Traverse, Isabella, Jackson, Kalkaska, Lapeer, Lenawee, Mecosta, Midland, Montcalm, Oseola and Sanilac counties.
Western has become a known name in Genesee County recently as landmen have been offering five-year leases to private property owners at $35 per acre plus a 12.5 percent royalty.
Those offers have been out of the ordinary for the county, for which no oil or gas permits have been issued since 1995.
The DNR Web site says mineral leases with the state prohibit drilling within wetlands, habitat defined as critical to the survival of an endangered species, and drilling within 1,320 feet of any lake or stream.
Michigan has allowed leasing of oil and gas rights on state-controlled land since the late 1920s. |
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:10 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Exploring for Oil & Gas in Michigan
Key steps for exploring for oil & gas in Michigan
As tough as it is to get Michigan's oil and gas out of the ground - sometimes requiring drilling more than 2 miles below the surface of the earth - the real work is finding oil and gas deposits in sufficient quantities to make drilling and production cost-effective. There are several key steps that take place before a drilling rig is ever moved onto a location.
Identifying A Prospect
When the industry begins its search for new oil and gas, many things have to happen before a wildcat, or exploratory, well is drilled. A company relies on geology and geophysics, using the latest technological advancements to target a promising formation in an area that has never produced oil or gas. Although a wildcat well involves a high degree of risk - only about one out of every seven exploratory wells actually discovers enough gas or oil to be economically productive - success means a new source of energy has become available.
Mineral Rights and Leasing
Once a prospect has been identified, an oil and gas company must determine who owns the mineral rights to the area. In most cases, they are owned by the same person who owns the surface rights to the property. However, it is possible for mineral rights to be owned by someone else. These are known as severed mineral rights.
Once the mineral owner has been identified, a lease will be negotiated to give the company the right to enter the property to explore, develop and extract oil and gas from that property. The lease is a contract between the company and the owner of the mineral rights. The owner is paid an amount of money - called a bonus - when the lease is signed. In addition, some leases provide the mineral owner rental payment, normally paid annually, if no drilling has started or no royalty payments - based on the amount of oil and natural gas produced -are made. The lease also spells out the manner in which royalty payments are to be made. A successful venture can be highly profitable for the mineral rights owner. In recent years, oil and gas companies have paid more than $80 million annually in royalties to private mineral owners in Michigan.
Permitting
Prior to drilling a well, an oil and gas company must get a drilling permit, which is issued by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The DEQ oversees, regulates, and manages oil and gas development in Michigan. Seeking a drilling permit, in many cases, also requires working with the following: Michigan Department of Natural Resources; the Michigan Public Service Commission; and the federal Environmental Protection Agency. To apply for a Permit to Drill, the company must be legally registered to do business in Michigan and must be bonded with the DEQ.
Drilling permit applications must provide full details of safety systems and structural integrity of the well design. Surveys of the location must address surface waters, floodplains, wetlands, natural rivers, critical dune areas, threatened or endangered species, and/or other environmentally sensitive areas. Other permit considerations proximity to any buildings, fresh water wells, public roads, pipelines and power lines.
Additional requirements include an Environmental Impact Assessment, landowner notification of drilling plans, and project descriptions for any soil erosion and sedimentation issues.
On state-owned lands, well site permits are required from the Department of Natural Resources, with well surface locations reviewed by both the State Forester and the State Wildlife Biologist.
Prior to final approval of a permit, a DEQ Field Geologist must review the drilling site. If wetlands or surface waters are nearby, there are further inspections by DEQ Land and Water management personnel, and/or fisheries experts.
Drilling
Once leasing has been completed and a drilling permit has been issued by the DEQ, the drilling phase can begin. The oil and gas company must, under the oversight of the DEQ:
Establish a location. Select a drilling location, consisting of about one acre. The best sites provide minimal impact of the surface and can use existing roadways.
Prepare the location. The drill site is cleared and leveled; top soil is stockpiled at the edge of the location for use after drilling is completed.
Drill. When the location is prepared, a drilling rig and its associated equipment are moved onto the site. Normally, drilling activity is ongoing 24 hours a day and, depending on the depth of the well, can take anywhere from two to 60 days. Numerous safety procedures are followed to protect Michigan's other valuable natural resources - water, air and the surface.
Once drilling reaches its final depth, a decision is made to either complete the well for production or plug it as a dry hole. If the well is dry or unproductive, the well bore is plugged with cement, following the instructions of the DEQ. All the equipment is removed and the site is restored. In many cases, unless the drilling took place in a wooded area, the impact is not noticeable within a year.
If the well is determined to be a producer, the drilling rig is moved off the location and replaced with a smaller rig, known as a completion rig. Using the smaller rig, again under the oversight of the DEQ, the well bore is cleaned and the formation is treated to allow oil and gas to flow into the well bore and up to the surface. A facility is constructed that will include all production equipment necessary to safely produce oil and gas. A typical production facility will include the wellhead, flow lines from the wellhead to other equipment, storage tanks, dehydration and treating equipment, compressor and meter stations.
Production
A well is ready for operation once the production equipment is in place. In an oil well, the oil is brought to the surface and placed in storage tanks on the site. If gas is produced, either with the oil or independently, it is metered and transported to market via pipelines that are regulated by the Michigan Public Service Commission. Oil is moved on a prearranged basis via truck. Once again, production activity is monitored - normally on a daily basis by the oil and gas company.
If an exploratory well is a producer, the company may want to drill additional wells. There are known as development wells. Engineers and geologists study cumulative production, reservoir pressures and other characteristics to determine whether additional drilling locations are needed.
Restoring the Site
Production continues until a well becomes uneconomical. At that time, the well is plugged and the site is restored to as near its original condition as is practical. Site restoration may include reseeding grass and planting vegetation, ground cover and trees to re-establish the original topography.
Copyright 2011 Michigan Oil & Gas Producers Education Foundation | 124 |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:37 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Locations - Oil & Gas wells - download database - State of Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality | DEQ - DEQ-OOGM Download in a Microsoft Access database well locations of oil and gas wells in Michigan.
www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3311_4111_4231-97870--,00.html
DEQ - Oil & Gas - State of Michigan
DEQ-OOGM staff monitor the environmental impacts of well drilling operations, brine disposal wells, oil and gas production facilities, and gas storage wells.
www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3311_4111_4231---,00.html
DEQ - Production of Oil and Gas wells - download - State of Michigan
Michigan started issuing permits for wells in 1927. There were some wells drilled before then, and a few of them are still producing. Computerized tracking of oil ...
www.michigan.gov/deq/0,4561,7-135-3311_4111_4231-97834--,00.html |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:39 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:42 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Michigan’s Oil and Gas History
Michigan has a rich history of oil and gas drilling. In fact, hydraulic fracturing has been used extensively for many years in Michigan. The first reported hydraulic fracturing in Michigan was in 1952 on a well in Elk Township, Lake County, located in the northwestern part of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula, 80 miles north of Grand Rapids. The well was drilled to the Ellsworth Shale at a depth of approximately 1,100 feet.
According to the Oil & Gas Producers Education Foundation (MOGPEF), Michigan's oil and gas industry contributes to the state's economy in a variety of ways:
•Providing more than 10,000 industry-related jobs.
•Paying 14,000 private mineral owners more than $80 million in royalties annually.
•Contributing nearly $1 billion in oil and gas income (royalties, rentals, lease bonuses) to the State of Michigan since 1927.
•Paying more than $40 million in severance taxes and oil and gas fees to the State of Michigan annually.
•Michigan produces about 30 percent of the natural gas the state uses.
Drilling activity in Michigan has primarily targeted the Antrim Shale for more than 20 years, accounting for nearly 80 percent of all oil and gas drilling in the first decade of the 21st century. The Antrim Shale covers roughly 39,000 square miles producing along a belt across the northern part of the Michigan Basin and extends in Ohio and Indiana. A brownish-black shale that overlies the Traverse Formation, the Antrim Shale mainly produces methane. Approximately 12,000 wells in Michigan have been hydraulically fractured, the majority in the Antrim Shale at depths of 500 to 2000 feet. With more the 9,700 Antrim Shale wells in production, the Antrim Shale continues to be the dominant formation for natural gas development in the state.
Northern Michigan Antrim Gas Wells
Within the last few years new potential gas and oil reserves from “unconventional” sources have been discovered in Michigan. Though the depths of the shale vary depending on location, they are typically significantly deeper than the Antrim Shale. Due to the depth, millions of gallons of freshwater are now being used for each new well, substantially more than traditional shallow drilling techniques. Deep well or high-volume fracking can use up to 100 times more water than historic wells. On average, between 5-6 million gallons of water are used per well. In general, the deeper and longer the wells legs are, the more water is required to drill and frack the well. Along with a greater volume of water used, a greater amount of unknown chemicals are used as well.
Oil and natural gas reserves are found in a variety of geologic formations. In Michigan, the formations that have been targeted to date for high volume hydraulic fracturing include A-1 Carbonate, Antrim, Black River (Van Wert), Collingwood, Niagaran, and Utica. To get an idea of where high volume hydraulic fracturing is occurring, below is a map showing the location of high-volume hydraulic fracturing active permits and pending applications in Michigan as of December 2012. An up-to-date map can be accessed at the MDEQ Office of Oil, Gas, and Mineral website: http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,4561,7-135-3306_57064---,00.html
High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Applications and Permits
In Northern Michigan, the predominant potential oil and gas play is the Collingwood Shale. The Collingwood Shale is a natural gas field below much of northern third of Michigan, in the heart of the Michigan Basin. It is about 40 feet thick and is sandwiched between the Utica Shale and Trenton Black River limestone formation.
Collingwood Shale
Petoskey Pioneer 1-3 Well SiteIn the spring of 2010, Encana, a leading North American energy producer, revealed that it’s subsidiary, Petoskey Exploration LLC, had successfully tested a well in Missaukee County in the Collingwood Shale formation. Known as the Petoskey Pioneer well, the well produced an average of 2.5 million cubic feet of natural gas a day for 30 days, making it the most prolific single source of natural gas in Michigan. While production then dropped to 800,000 cubic feet per day, the output is still significant for a Michigan gas well. This well targeted the Collingwood Shale at 9,500 ft. true vertical depth, with a 5,000 foot horizontal penetration using hydraulic fracturing.
Since 2008, over 50 permits for high volume hydraulic fracturing have been issued by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Office of Oil, Gas and Minerals (OOGM).
The most up to date list of permits and applications for high volume hydraulically fractured wells is available on the MDEQ Office of Oil, Gas, and Minerals Website.
Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council • 426 Bay Street, Petoskey, MI 49770
PH: (231) 347-1181 • Fax: (231) 347-5928 • www.watershedcouncil.org |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:46 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Concerns
While oil and natural gas development pose inherent environmental and public health risks, concerns about the effects of oil and gas drilling exploration and production have emerged alongside the rapid growth in the use of fracking technology in the last decade. Potential environmental and social impacts have generated a significant amount of controversy and public debate.
The list of potential threats is varied and long. It is important to note that not all of these potential impacts are directly related to the process of hydraulic fracturing itself, rather are a result of the oil and gas extraction process in general. Most of the evidence for the risks is anecdotal at this point and much is still unknown about the long-term impacts. There are many studies underway to evaluate the environmental and public health effects of oil and gas drilling in the 21st century.
Primary Concerns with High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing and Oil and Natural Gas Extraction
Water resource impacts from Hydraulic Fracturing Water Resources
Contamination of surface, ground, and drinking water with oil and gas, fracking chemicals, or wastewater can occur. There are three main ways that oil and gas development can lead to water contamination.
•spills and leaks of chemicals, waste, or oil and gas during transport, storage, and use
•migration of oil and gas or other fluids through cracks in the rock (either natural or those caused by fracking) that eventually reach aquifers
•failure of the well if designed, constructed, or operated incorrectly
Water withdrawals for water used in fracking hold the potential to cause significant environmental harm. Water withdrawals can lead to wells, springs, and wetlands running dry, lake levels dropping, and reducing stream flow with great harm to wildlife.
Land Use
Several acres of land per well site are cleared of vegetation and leveled to accommodate drilling equipment, collection and processing equipment, and vehicles. Farm and forest land is being replaced with well pads, roads, pipelines, and other infrastructure. These large areas of cleared land and many miles of roadways can scar the landscape and result in habitat fragmentation.
Air Quality Air Quality
Construction equipment, fracking equipment, and unintentional gas leaks are sources of negative air emissions during the drilling, fracking, and production processes. Also, during the initial fracking period, gas that flows up is often vented into the air or flared. This venting and flaring of gas is the largest source of air pollution from oil and gas extraction.
Global Warming
Some methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from natural gas deposits can migrate to the surface through tiny fractures in the ground, and fracking may exacerbate this. Oil and natural gas production and processing accounts for nearly 40 percent of all methane emissions in the U.S., making the industry the nation’s single largest methane source. Additionally, using more oil and gas could deter investment in renewable energy.
Earthquakes
The use of hydraulic fracturing to open underground natural gas formations has a low risk of triggering earthquakes. While the fracking itself causes tiny ‘micro’ earthquakes, these are virtually undetectable at the surface. If a well is fracked near an active fault, larger earthquakes can be caused, although they are still small. However, there is a higher probability of earthquakes from wastewater injection because it involves larger volumes of water.
Public Health
Hydraulic fracturing might pose public health threats to people who live near the wells or are exposed to water contaminated with fracking chemicals or gas. There are claims of headaches, nosebleeds, disorientation, fainting, sick animals, and development of cancer and other chronic diseases. Water contaminated with fracking chemicals and toxic metals likely pose the most significant risk to humans and animals. The chemicals used in the fracking fluid include known carcinogens and some of the chemicals are attributed to endocrine disruption as well as neurological and immune system problems.
Social Impacts
Water, sand, and chemicals must be supplied to the well site and wastewater produced must be disposed of. As a result, there is often an increase in truck traffic which can add significant wear and damage to local roads, create congestion, and produce local air pollution. Concern has also been expressed regarding an influx of temporary workers and the impact to a community’s way of life. An increase in oil and gas workers can result in increased rental housing and labor costs, increased crime and, subsequent, public safety costs, as well as more demand for health and education services.
Local impacts on communities
There may be more pronounced impacts on local communities as drilling operations involve lights 24 hours a day and noise pollution in the initial month of drilling. There can also be issues with localized air pollution, odor, and glare from flaring.
Water Resources
From an environmental perspective, the most significant impact of shale gas development results from the use and disposal of the water needed to fracture wells.
Water Withdrawals
Water withdrawals can reduce water storage in aquifers which in turn may reduce discharge to surface waters, or increase recharge from other sources to fill the depleted aquifer. The withdrawal of surface water can also directly reduce the flow in streams and the water levels in lakes and wetlands.
In general, more water is needed to hydraulically fracture a well with a longer wellbore. Based on current activity in Michigan, an average of 7.5 million gallons of water are used to fracture each well. However, almost all of the water withdrawn for hydraulic fracturing in the Great Lakes Basin will not be returned to the source watershed to replenish water resources; instead, the water will be placed underground during use or for disposal.
By law, surface water withdrawals are prohibited for drilling operations and are discouraged for fracking operations. Therefore, the source of water used in fracking is typically groundwater. Oil and gas operations are exempt from the registration and permitting requirements under Part 327, Michigan’s Water Use Law, which regulates large quantity withdrawals. The MDEQ responded to concerns regarding water withdrawals and begin requiring high-volume hydraulic fracturing operators to use a Water Withdrawal Assessment Tool as part of the permit process to ensure that adverse impacts from the water withdrawal will be avoided. The water withdrawal evaluation requirement can be found in the MDEQ Supervisor of Wells Insruction 1-2011.
MDEQ has also provided an explanation of the process they use evaluating water withdrawals: Water Withdrawal Analysis for High Volume Hydro-fracturing.
Contamination of Water Resources
Errors in gas well construction or spills during transportation can occur and lead to water contamination. Fluids can spill before they are injected and fluids recovered from fracturing can contaminate surface waters. Additionally, drilling into these formations can create pathways by which fluids or natural gas itself can find its way into water supplies if drillers are not careful.
Of greatest concern is that fracking uses hundreds of chemicals, which are mixed with water and pumped underground, directly through aquifers, to fracture rock. Many chemicals used in the fracking process are “undisclosed” from the public because it is considered to be a trade secret and proprietary information. The chemical constituents in fracturing fluid range from benign substances to those that have acute or chronic health effects.
Source: Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer
Fracking fluid is typically 99 percent water and sand (or other granulated material) and approximately one percent chemicals.
Fracking Fluid Graph
However, when millions of gallons of water are being used, the volume of chemicals per fracking operation is very large. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that a well stimulated using 6 million gallons of fracturing fluid would be injected with 30,000 to 120,000 gallons of chemical additives.
Wastewater Disposal
Once the fracking process is complete, anywhere from 25-75% of the fracture water comes back to the surface. This means that each well produces millions of gallons of wastewater, called flowback and produced water, which will have to be disposed of. Options for disposal include underground injection wells, discharge to surface waters, and use of commercial or publicly-owned treatment facilities. Another option used elsewhere in the country is for the waste to be treated and re-used in another fracking job.
In Michigan, the law requires that the waste be disposed of in deep injection wells. However, because these fluids are part of an oil and gas operation, the fluids are designated as an oil and gas waste, even if there are hazardous chemicals in the wastes. This designation results in less protective requirements for the construction, operating, monitoring and testing, reporting, and closure for well owners or operators. Applicants who wish to inject wastes associated with oil and gas operations in a disposal well do not have to identify hazardous waste components in their analysis of the waste product. Additionally, oil and gas injection wells are exempt from local zoning.
Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council • 426 Bay Street, Petoskey, MI 49770
PH: (231) 347-1181 • Fax: (231) 347-5928 • www.watershedcouncil.org |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:48 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Why West Michigan's oil and gas - and fracking - boom failed to materialize in 2013
Jim Harger | jharger@mlive.com By Jim Harger | jharger@mlive.com
Follow on Twitter
on January 26, 2014 at 7:05 AM, updated January 26, 2014 at 12:55 PM
GRAND RAPIDS, MI – An oil and gas drilling boom that was hoped for – and feared – in West Michigan during 2013 never materialized.
While leases were signed and state lands were auctioned off for exploration rights amid fears that “fracking” would soon follow, the oil drilling rigs never arrived.
No permits applications to drill for oil were filed with the state Department of Environmental Quality in Kent County or other West Michigan communities last year, according to DEQ records.
Oil drilling activity was down 8 percent across the state, according to the Oil and Gas News, a publication of the Michigan Oil and Gas Association. A total of 140 holes were drilled last year compared to 153 drilling completions in 2012, the publication said in its Jan. 10 weekly edition.
Jerome Czaja, Kent County’s chief deputy register of deeds, said the number of oil and gas-related filings also fell sharply last year – an indicator of industry interest. Last year, 311 oil and gas-related documents were filed compared to 2012, when 527 documents were filed, Czaja said.
“The foot traffic has really diminished, too,” said Czaja, referring to the oil leasing agents who lined up in his office during 2012 to scour property records before negotiating leases with landowners. “They still pop in once in a while.”
There were no drilling permits requested in Kent, Ottawa, Allegan, Ionia and Barry counties last year, said Richard Sandtveit, vice president of engineering for Trendwell Energy Corp. of Rockford. Sandtveit’s company explores for oil and gas deposits throughout Michigan
Sandtveit blamed the decline in part on an unsuccessful Ionia County well drilled in November 2012 by Rosetta Resources of Houston, Texas. Sandtveit said Rosetta plugged the well last year because it did not produce enough to justify its operation.
“I believe you would have seen more activity if they had a high producing well,” Sandtveit said of the well in Ionia County’s Orange Township. “They were costly wells to drill.”
Rosetta Resources was hoping to find new oil and gas fields in the A1 Carbonate rock formation, according to DEQ records. Rosetta Resources also applied for permission to drill in Muskegon County’s Ravenna Township but did not actually drill that well.
RELATED: Why 'fracked' oil well in Ionia County was plugged by Texas firm
Sandtveit said most of last year’s drilling activity in Michigan focused on the southeast corner of the Lower Peninsula, where relatively shallow wells were successful in retrieving oil from the Trenton-Black River formations.
The lack of activity in West Michigan also has relaxed some of the opposition that formed last year after the state Department of Natural Resources auctioned off the drilling rights to its public lands in Kent and Ottawa counties last year.
Much of the opposition still centers around “fracking,” otherwise known as deep well hydraulic fracturing, a process which pumps high volumes of water and chemicals into oil wells in hopes of improving their production.
The West Michigan Environmental Action Council, which rented anti-fracking billboards last year in hopes of sparking a statewide moratorium, has stepped back and is now focusing on behind-the-scenes efforts to tighten up state regulations, said Nick Occhipinti, the group’s policy and community activism director.
A statewide ballot initiative to ban “fracking” in Michigan also foundered last year. Volunteers for the Committee to Ban Fracking and the Michigan Clean Water Coalition collected 70,000 signatures, far short of the 258,088 signatures they needed to collect within six months put their proposal on the ballot.
According to its website, the group will renew its campaign when it raises enough funds.
RELATED: Pros and cons of 'fracking' debated in Ottawa County
Jim Harger covers business for MLive/Grand Rapids Press. Email him at jharger@mlive.com or follow him on Twitter or Facebook or Google+. |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:53 am |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
