iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Marcellus Shale Gas Region Has More Natural Gas Than Previously Estimated, USGS Reports

First Posted: 08/24/11 10:18 AM ET Updated: 10/24/11 06:12 AM ET

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- The U.S. Geological Survey said Tuesday that the Marcellus Shale region contains some 84 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, recoverable natural gas, far more than thought nearly a decade ago.

Tuesday's figure is much higher than the last government assessment in 2002, which suggested about 2 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas.

The USGS said the estimate came from new information about the gas-rich formation underlying New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, and from technical improvements in how wells are drilled.

Environmental groups have expressed concerns that the process of extracting the gas from deep underground could contaminate the water supply. But gas industry groups welcomed the independent government estimate.

"While some critics continue to question the viability of responsible domestic shale gas development, it is abundantly clear – as laid out by this new data – that the Marcellus Shale will continue to lead the way in meeting American's energy needs for years to come," said Kathryn Z. Klaber, president and executive director of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an organization of energy companies that says it's committed to the responsible development of natural gas from the shale formation and the enhancement of the region's economy.

The agency also estimated there are around 3.4 billion barrels of undiscovered, recoverable natural gas liquids. That product attracts a premium price over the natural gas.

The USGS figures represent an average of several possibilities about the gas reserves, located thousands of feet beneath the surface and coaxed out of the ground through high-volume hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

The new survey suggested that the gas reserves are 43 trillion cubic feet to 144 trillion cubic feet, and the gas liquids are 1.6 to 6.2 barrels, with a 95 percent probability of the low range and 5 percent of the high range.

More than 3,300 wells have been drilled across Pennsylvania in just the last few years. The boom has raised concerns about the use of fracking, which injects chemical-laced water to break up the shale and allow natural gas to escape into the shale to push out the minerals. Environmental groups and the Environmental Protection Agency worry that the process could damage water wells, poison groundwater or harm trout streams. But the industry insists it's safe.

The USGS Marcellus assessment covered areas in Kentucky, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.

--


FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- The U.S. Geological Survey said Tuesday that the Marcellus Shale region contains some 84 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, recoverable natural gas, far more than thought nearly a...
PITTSBURGH (AP) -- The U.S. Geological Survey said Tuesday that the Marcellus Shale region contains some 84 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, recoverable natural gas, far more than thought nearly a...
Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 87
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
09:01 PM on 09/12/2011
Shale gas is not natural gas. It's fracking.

Solar is cheaper than natural gas used for peaking generation.
panels lasting longer and better than predicted http://solar.gwu.edu/Research/EnergyPolicy_Zweibel2010.pdf Great article about price of solar now 3$/W installed. last 100 years, 1-2 cents pwer KWH after the first 20 years and the loan is paid off.

http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/10/solar-power-graphs-to-make-you-smile/

Great chart of energy source amounts: http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/23/solar-power-intro-3-key-solar-power-points-top-solar-power-news/
http://www.panelprice.com/
http://www.sunelec.com/ 75 cents per Wp.
cheapest new solar panels 1-2$/Wp http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/solar_panels.htm
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:46 AM on 08/26/2011
this is just crazy...to get just a fraction of all that gas out would take tens of millions of wells....do you people have any idea what that will do to our world ? and again there is already a glut of gas and the marcellus gas is already targeted for export to japan...china...india...etc....
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
08:38 AM on 08/28/2011
84 tfc / 20 million wells ("tens of millions - lowest I could go, since you pluralized it) is 4200 mcf (4200000 cf). You wouldn't even accidentally, subconsciously, under duress, think about drilling a well that has that amount of total production. At even lets say $5 / mcf, that is, what, $21,000. That doesn't pay the comans salary for the well, let alone the rig and everything else. Come on, man, what kind of a post is that, really?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PAGasDriller
04:46 PM on 09/03/2011
It will take between 30,000 and 50,000 wells to drain the Marcellus. In Western PA, it's a triple stacked play. Marcellus in the middle, Utica below, and the several upper devonian shales above it.

America has twice as much natural gas as Saudi Arabia has oil. Well over 100 years worth. And that is just with today's technology. It's evolving very quickly and wells are producing more and more. The green revolution is going to be blue.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:16 PM on 08/25/2011
The crazy thing is - they're just estimating the Marcellus shale here. They're not estimating the Utica shale, which is below the Marcellus shale.

The technology to use natural gas just gets better and better. The number of kwHr per BTU keeps going up. The availability of cars that can run on both natural gas and gasoline, and switch back and forth, just keeps going up.

Penn, NY, OH, WVa are just at the very beginning of the boom. Look at the price difference between a BTU of oil and a BTU of gas. It's huge right now - 3-4X the historical average. Society is entering the "golden age of gas". We will spend the next 40 years drilling out gas, and slowly transitioning from oil and coal to gas.

The US is the leader in shale gas not because we have the most shale, but because we invented the process. The rest of the world will start using this technology as well. The price of gas will remain low for the next 40 years, as shale gas become the dominant source of global energy.
photo
thundermummy
my micro-bio is empty
09:15 AM on 08/25/2011
Funny, according to Bloomberg the estimate has been downgraded from 410 trillion cubic feet to 84 trillion, NOT upgraded from 2 trillion cubic feet. Hmmm, US Geoligical Survey and Bloomberg or blurb from AP?

http://www.businessinsider.com/wow-us-slashes-marcellus-shale-gas-estimate-by-80-2011-8
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
05:11 AM on 08/26/2011
Thats a good find - I had never heard numbers that high before. Most in the industry were thinking in the 60's, to be honest, which may come closer to the mark, since that is what we do professionally. Of course, i remember the Bakken being a small play 10 years ago, with less than a billion boe - I believe it is now up to 4.3, and a new estimate may increase that this year. It was the US Geological Survey that did this report - I know some of those guys, and they are good geologists, truly. Not sure what IEA and Bloomberg based their estmates on. Expect this number to increase as we increase the effectiveness of frac technologies, as well as change the well spacing allowances. Here is the key - watch closely if companies begin to ask for more wells/section. If they are going to tighter spacing, that means that through tracer and pressure testing, they can confirm they are not draining the entire reservoir. Estimates in many cases are based on drainability, and if the frac jobs aren't drianing as much as they think they are, then 1. the reserve estimates will go up and 2. tighter spacing/more wells will be drilled, upping output and creating a serious number of jobs.
02:45 PM on 08/26/2011
"Tighter spacing" of wells can actually decrease total production by rapidly reducing pressure and leaving more gas in the shale. More wells means the possibility of more environmental disruption, accidents and spills of fracking fluids. A more effective technique has been to use several horizontal shafts that fan out from a single location.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PAGasDriller
03:23 PM on 08/27/2011
the EIA estimated 410TCF. USGS upgraded its estimate from 2TCF... and 84TCF is just its median number. The high estimate is 140TCF. Two different agencies. Almost all geologists say the USGS report is very conservative, and it is KNOWN for very conservative estimates. Real number is probably somewhere between high end USGS estimate and EIA estimate. Either way, it's an absolute boatload of gas from just ONE formation. Huron, Rhinestreet, Burkett, Geneseo shales in the upper devonian group and the Utica far below the Marcellus will also be huge producers of natgas, and that is just here in PA.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bbrecht
"pray for the dead, fight like hell for the liv
08:28 AM on 08/25/2011
Is the department of interior engaging in junk science?

Other studies show the amount of gas to be overestimated

http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-10-28/shale-gas%E2%80%94abundance-or-mirage-why-marcellus-shale-will-disappoint-expectations

But I guess the fracking industry needed a little boost to overcome opposition from those who will be effected by the air and water pollution, and from those who will pay for the infrastructure. Thank you Dick Cheney for allowing these outlaws to do their work UNREGULATED. We didn't need that clean water act anyway.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
08:27 PM on 08/24/2011
It's not "natural" gas, it's shale fracked gas. More CO2 and more water use.
photo
thundermummy
my micro-bio is empty
02:46 PM on 08/24/2011
Bradford County has gone from pastoral to sh!thole in just a few years. Guess why.
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
05:34 AM on 08/26/2011
My guess is your friends and neighbors leased out their mineral rights?
photo
thundermummy
my micro-bio is empty
01:54 PM on 08/26/2011
Doesn't matter if you lease or don't lease if your neighbor does. My folks live on a dirt road in the sticks. Used to be a quiet dirt road in the sticks. Now it's constant truck traffic as drivers try to shortcut the highway. Not one person on that road likes it but they can't close it off to trucks because the county commissioners are in bed with the industry and refuse to hear their complaints.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roshi98
Dum spiro, spero
01:21 PM on 08/24/2011
The same people clamoring to start fracking without ANY substantial,definitive research into the environmental impacts the process might carry are also, by and large, global warming denialists. Ironic considering how they parse and snip every possible tidbit of "conflicting" evidence to reject the "theory". But no, with fracking let the drills and and fracturing begin.

This resource will NOT stay on our shores, folks. At least 75% of it will be shipped overseas, mainly to Asia and Europe where natural gas use is far higher than here in the States because they INVESTED in public transportation and home energy reliant on it far earlier than we have. For our purposes, there's maybe 20 years of supply dedicated to us in these deposits, that's it.

These are also the same people who have demanded LESS regulation, successfully, over the past 12 years, which is the reason why state environmental protection bureaus have about 2 inspectors for every 600 wells. Do the math, folks. Does that seem like adequate protection from (inevitable) shortcuts and cost savings by extractors to you?

This planet CANNOT support our continued use of energy as a mere commodity much longer. We are heating up the planet and consuming hundreds of millions of years of stored energy in just over a century. It's basic physics. This planets will go on, with or without us (or as many of us). We need to WAKE UP and change our approach before the planet does it for us.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gottlieb
hated by left since 1973 and right since 1982
09:53 PM on 08/24/2011
I agree with you completely but I don't see much chance for change with the amount of money being spent by the climate change denial industries. I will continue to boycott, petition, and campaign for change though. I have changed my lifestyle so my carbon footprint is 0.18 metric tons of CO2 but I live in a close to the city center urban neighborhood where I can walk everywhere or use the streetcar, light-rail or bus. I see politicians just kicking the can down the road in regards to climate change. I don't see anything getting done until a major event focuses people's attention. I think this is called the threat of hanging can focus your mind. Keep commenting and don't let me get you down. I just get disillusioned with my fellow Americans when I read stories like this. I will do something positive for the planet tomorrow by going out with the Forest Park Conservancy into Forest Park and help restore its ecology some more. It is 5,000 acres of urban forest which will sequester more carbon with a little help from its friends.
photo
John Mainstream
I'm a Clinton Democrat that is now an independent.
01:11 PM on 08/24/2011
Great news for Americans who need jobs.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
08:35 PM on 08/24/2011
as long as they don't have to breath or drink water....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ecolke
Judge a man's character by how he treats animals.
11:46 AM on 08/24/2011
We do have to have a transition from finite resources, like coal, oil, and NG to alternatives like wind, solar, and geothermal. NG is the cleanest burning fuel of the FF. As for the fracking, it should be regulated; the proprietary protection of the fracking fluids needs to be lifted. As citizens, we should know what is and isn't being left deep in the geological understory. There are problems in WY, PA, and everywhere there has been a major uptick in fracking. Just be honest and find out what is causing the problems rather than trying to convolute the issue. Something has happened in parts of WY and in PA. What?
We enviros should push for NG extraction to be regulated to protect gw resources, but also realize that NG is the cleannest burning fuel of all of the FF. There needs to be more give and take, but the coal and oil industry make it difficult to trust them.
photo
djh6721
Sic gorgiamus allos subiectatos nunc:
11:23 AM on 08/24/2011
Invest in cancer research you're going to need it. Let me see if I get this right, You shoot hundreds of thousands of gallons of heavily toxic water into the ground to break up the shale that is the barrier between the process and the water table, what could go wrong? Even my dog is smart enough to realize that just because I hid his toy behind my back it didn't disappear.
11:50 AM on 08/24/2011
Thats not what they do, they inject water with SOME additives not "heavily toxic water" and they do this thousands of feet under the water table. The break up of shale is down there not near the water table.
photo
djh6721
Sic gorgiamus allos subiectatos nunc:
12:30 PM on 08/24/2011
http://8020vision.com/2011/04/17/congress-releases-report-on-toxic-chemicals-used-in-fracking/

Perhaps that will help. Also a little basic physics. You pump tons of water "thousands of feet" under the water table through a hole in the earth that passes through the water table and you don't see a problem here? As I like to say to all those who also argued Depleted Uranium was safe. Fine lets extract a great big sample from the sight and have your kids drink it for a few years if they don't die, I'll join them.
photo
djh6721
Sic gorgiamus allos subiectatos nunc:
12:44 PM on 08/24/2011
750 chemicals many proprietory and as yet unrevealed but what they do know already is TOXIC. Yes Heavily toxic I have no idea what you have been reading but here goes

http://8020vision.com/2011/04/17/congress-releases-report-on-toxic-chemicals-used-in-fracking/

The barrier between the TOXIC water and the water table is the very thing that is being fracted, thousand of feet or tens of thousands of feet water seeps to the lowest point available. You also assume there will be no leakage just clean perfect operations. They say Liberals are dreamers.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
personal beliefs
Things never go according to plan, so plan accordi
12:32 PM on 08/24/2011
You need to do some research before spewing from now on.
photo
djh6721
Sic gorgiamus allos subiectatos nunc:
12:36 PM on 08/24/2011
http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Hydraulic%20Fracturing%20Report%204.18.11.pdf

Indeed someone should read the list of carcinogens.
05:28 PM on 08/24/2011
We have a water table because rain water seeps down through fractured rock near the surface. Fracking fluid comes back to the surface under pressure and is stored in plastic lined holding ponds. When a gas well is poorly constructed ( it happens) the fracking fluid can escape near the surface and get into the water table. There have been many failures of poorly designed plastic lined holding ponds. I could go on....
11:08 AM on 08/24/2011
The real trick will be trying to stop the idiot Politicans from giving it away to oil and gas Companies . That gas belongs to the People and should not be given away . I would like to see a Govewrnment run Gas co. I have property on Va. Eastern shore and would like a pipeline run under the Bay to provide us with natural gas. It would provide good jobs and reduce the price of heating homes on the Delmarva .
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
05:42 AM on 08/26/2011
That is true but mainly for the Western states, which have extremely high %'s of government "owned" land. Where you are, the majority of the land is privately owned, and the gas belongs to your friends and neighbors with property.
10:34 AM on 08/24/2011
"benefit the masses..." does it benefit the masses if the fracking process turns out to be poison for the masses' drinking water? if it weren't for environmentalists your local river would catch on fire at some point...have a glass of PA well water, and keep drinking, and please feel free to share with your ilk.
11:53 AM on 08/24/2011
The thing about water wells is that over time they sometimes go bad and when that happens when there is a gas well around everyone blames it on the well but in the real world it is only a well that has gone bad and has nothing to do with the gas well.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bbrecht
"pray for the dead, fight like hell for the liv
08:38 AM on 08/25/2011
Sure thing and entire rivers go bad too, huh?

http://whyy.org/cms/news/regional-news/2010/07/27/in-pa-the-fate-of-%E2%80%9Cfracking%E2%80%9D-depends-on-what-river-you-live-near/42616
01:28 PM on 08/24/2011
Most drilling experts indeed have said that contamination of drinking water with fracking liquids is highly improbable. Even critics of fracking tend to agree that if wells are designed properly, drilling fluids should not affect underground drinking water. Industry officials also emphasize that all forms of drilling involve some degree of risk.
From this report, if you care to read it. But, you have already made up your mind that fracking is or will kill millions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/us/04natgas.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
photo
thundermummy
my micro-bio is empty
09:26 AM on 08/25/2011
So you cite a line in an article that says the industry calls itself safe? Huzzah! Also, the asbestos industry says their product taste great on ice cream!
10:09 AM on 08/24/2011
We need the fuel. We need the jobs. This is great news and for our national security and the jobs it will provide domestically. This natural resource needs to be extracted. Logically, it is a win, win for us to extract this resource. The arguments against extracting it doesn't put food on the table. It will be interesting to see if this president will cave to the demands of the environmentalists for fear of losing votes instead of doing what will help our job situation. The environmentalists will vote for him regardless of what decision he makes and I certainly hope he realizes this and decides to allow development for the obvious benefit to the masses as opposed to the concerns of the folks who are opposed to any develpment regardless of how many jobs it will create.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
garder54
10:53 AM on 08/24/2011
Well, i wouldn't say it is a win-win. Both sides need to concede something to the other. Gas companies can not just come in and rape the enviroment, but environmentalists need to realize the energy needs to come from somewhere. This can be done right if thought out well enough, and both sides are willing to give a little. I think you are missing the environmentalists point of view in your analysis.
11:56 AM on 08/24/2011
garder, no one is raping the environment, the well is only like a 8" hole drilled in the ground and once done and the drill rig is removed it takes up a area around an average house lot.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hayduke1969
I warned you.
11:02 AM on 08/24/2011
The economic impact is minimal. The companies doing the drilling are mostly owned by foreign companies (yes, Texas counts as a foreign country). Pennslyvania has a governer who carries water for these drilling firms, ensuring that they can exploit our resources tax free. The surface water is being depleted; the ground water poisoned.

Your rosey apologetic spin bears no resemblence to the facts on the ground.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
personal beliefs
Things never go according to plan, so plan accordi
11:08 AM on 08/24/2011
speaking of facts on the ground...how many wells have been poisoned? Your facts are pure speculation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pmoschetta
Where are the Jobs, Speaker Boehner?
11:53 AM on 08/24/2011
Halliburton has set up permanent shop outside of Pittsburgh, and their trucks/drilling rigs are constantly on the turnpike and interstate 70.
But you're correct Hayduke, Corbett is a leading proponent of deregulating the shale drilling business and has his head so far up their rear ends, he won't even consider taxing the drillers on any level.
There was a huge stink earlier in the year when it was discovered that the haulers of waste frack water was being disposed of illegally along streams locally, but then the local municipal treatment plants refused to take the water, too.
The frack water will eventually contaminate the ground water, and by then it won't matter, because according to the Halliburton Loophole of the Energy Act of 2005, they can pretty much do whatever they want.
It's good reading and brought to us by Mr Dick Cheney who lobbied for this loophole