Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro making a video statement on 15 June 2020. Photo: From video statement
A US fracking company featured in the documentary Gasland has been charged with environmental offences following a two-year grand jury investigation.
Cabot Oil & Gas faces 15 charges after the investigation concluded that the company’s activities were responsible for methane pollution, described in the film, to the water supply in Dimock, in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania.
Gasland, directed by Josh Fox and nominated for an Oscar, was an early rallying point for the anti-fracking campaign in the UK and north America.
It was accused by fracking supporters of exaggeration, contradictions, inconsistencies, falsehoods and debunked anecdotes. Cabot Oil & Gas said the methane in Dimock water was naturally-occurring and not the result of its operations.
“Profit over our laws”
But the Pennsylvania attorney general, Josh Shapiro, said yesterday:
“The grand jury presentments prove that Cabot took shortcuts that broke the law, and damaged our environment — harming our water supply and public health.
“They put their bottom line ahead of the health and safety of Pennsylvanians. The Grand Jury repeatedly found evidence of a company that placed profit over our laws.”
In a video statement, Mr Shapiro said this was the first stage of a long legal process and more criminal charges would follow:
“I am here … to remind those fracking companies that the people of Pennsylvania come first. Our right to clean air and pure water comes first.
“If it’s against the law, and it hurts Pennsylvanians, we’re here to stop it — no matter how powerful or well-connected you are.”
15 charges
Mr Shapiro said his department had filed charges against Cabot on:
- 7 counts of Prohibition Against Discharge of Industrial Wastes
- 7 counts of Prohibition Against Other Pollutions
- 1 count of Unlawful Conduct under the Clean Streams Law
He said the grand jury heard testimony from several residents in Dimock and surrounding townships that they had suffered from the environmental hazards associated with repeated methane exposure.
A water well exploded and residents noticed their water was cloudy, brown or contained black specks. A former Cabot employee held a match to a jug of water from his own water supply and it caught fire. Another resident stopped drinking his own water and had to make a 14-mile round trip for alternative supplies. The problems had continued for a decade, according to the grand jury evidence.
These were not technical violations, Mr Shapiro said, and the company had denied that its operations could contaminate water:
“[It] failed to acknowledge and correct conduct that polluted Pennsylvania water through stray gas migration.
“Cabot continues to abdicate their responsibility to our environment and to the safety of our residents.”
Mr Shapiro said Cabot had taken pre-drill water samples to assess how clean local water supplies were before operations began.
But he said Cabot did not test its own samples for methane.
“As the grand jury presentment shows, Cabot’s failure to test its pre-drill samples for methane eliminated the ability to establish a baseline for properly assessing and addressing the problem of stray gas migration.
“In essence, if they didn’t test their samples there would be no proof that they were contaminating nearby supplies.”
Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection reviewed 10,615 water samples collected by other operators in Susquehanna County which did test for methane. These included samples for 12 drinking supplies in Dimock township.
Mr Shapiro said:
“All 12 of these sampling locations demonstrated excessively high methane levels. In fact, the highest reading was a level far exceeding the point at which gas filled water can literally explode.”
Cabot statement
Cabot said it would respond once it had fully reviewed the charges, but it valued “community commitment and environmental compliance.”
In a written statement, the company said:
“Cabot will continue to work constructively with regulators, political representatives, and most importantly our neighbors in Pennsylvania to be responsible stewards of natural resources and the environment.”
Legal battle
Yesterday’s charges are just the latest development in the long-running legal case between Dimock residents and Cabot Oil & Gas.
Fifteen families filed a federal lawsuit against the company in 2009. Most settled out of court and signed non-disclosure orders.
In 2016 a federal jury found the company negligent for polluting water wells of two families. A court rejected the compensation award totalling $4.24 million a year later and the families settled.
A ban on Cabot drilling in a nine square mile area of Dimock continues.
- Earlier this week, the fracking company, Range Resources, pleaded no contest to environmental offences over its handling of contamination at two well sites in Pennsylvania.
Links
Video statement of attorney general Josh Shapiro
DRILL OR DROP? 
Filthy industry nuff said just await the same old comments from the pro polluters
So, instead of buying that filthy stuff from USA, UK should look to producing much better and cleaner stuff from UK!
But we already know that from UK on shore oil and gas production, don’t we Jono!
How are the cases going regarding cobalt and DRC?
No. Leave it in the ground.
Home Produced Energy Now! The UK is not the US, different regulations, geology and opportunities it’s time to get fracking!
Silence the NIMBYs
[Comments removed by moderator]
‘Silence the NIMBYs’
Actually the opposite has already happened.
For eight years, local communities have led this fight. Since work started in Lancashire, 1,032 days ago, local people have been at the gates every single day. From Balcombe to Blackpool, Sherwood to Ryedale, people power has defeated the fracking industry before it got off the ground. This victory is one of the biggest the climate movement has ever seen.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/05/fracking-uk-protest-gas
The US is different from the UK in some ways with regards to fracking. In the US they know how to do the job. In the UK our start up companies don’t. There are some similarities to consider though. In the US it is proven that even if you cut corners the industry still looses money and in the UK the only figures presented also show it looses money. That is before you take into account any expensive ‘gold standards’
Any attempt to resurface would be futile and even the most gullible would be unlikely to part with any more money.
!0 years since unopposed planning permission granted for hydraulic fracturing of UK shale and not a therm of commercially viable gas.
‘it’s time to get fracking’ said a voice in the wilderness.
And just carry on with the current situation of importation, David?
Interesting how global can be used to further your agenda, but forgotten when it suits.
I, like yourself David, and everyone who contributes to DoD, utilise oil and gas and their by products. Unlike yourself, I seek to do that in the most responsible way for the GLOBAL environment.
Quote: “[It] failed to acknowledge and correct conduct that polluted Pennsylvania water through stray gas migration.
“Cabot continues to abdicate their responsibility to our environment and to the safety of our residents.” Yet to be proven in court of course, but how many times have the pro frackers claimed that with over 2 millions US wells drilled, there has never been a single case of water contamination?
‘Home produced energy now’ Oh yes please, lets have even more sensible renewables and battery technology investment. According to a huge scientific consensus, we’re seriously running out of time to ditch fossil fuels, particularly new sources thereof. I wonder how much of their own money the ‘usual suspects’ on here are willing to invest into potentially stranded assets of O&G?
No it’s not the US, there is a moratorium in place thank goodness. And yes, the U.K. geology is different to that in the US, from what I’ve read the UK’s geology is more complex and INEOS’ US expert geologist it’s informed a shale gas APPG that the geology of the Fylde didn’t look promising! And of course we have a tiny amount of shale compared to the US, so we would never be able to produce anything like the same amount of gas. Didn’t studies by ReFine and the Nottingham University/BGS estimate there is likely to be only a few years of supply and that fracking shouldn’t take place within 600m of a fault?
And now after years of the industry and supporters of fracking denying water contamination had occurred in Dimock and heavily criticising the film Gaslands, the truth is out at last.
Of course we should produce more home produced energy, green energy. Bring it on.
https://drillordrop.com/2016/09/13/fylde-doesnt-look-promising-for-fracking-veteran-us-geologist/
Hmm. Interesting group of excited comments. Wonder why no one is suggesting that electricity should be banned because of Pacific Gas and Electric and the 2018 terrible Camp Fire incident?
And, KatT, we are producing more home produced energy, including what you term green energy. Some of which is not so green when you look a bit further. They have even been plonking wind turbine blades into landfill in USA, so that should mean wind turbines are banned in UK!
There are down sides with all energy sources Martin but oil and gas are yesterday’s energy and proven to harm the planet the most. We have to reduce emissions. People can continue to deny the inevitable, just as many denied the Dimock water contamination, but reality and truth prevail.
So, Black Lives don’t matter to you, KatT. DRC and cobalt just another downside. Your truth and your reality. Try telling that to the families in DRC who are suffering the consequences of your dogma.
Here’s an idea. Try finding some alternatives that do NOT have so many issues, and you may find better acceptance. Acting like the three monkeys to your issues whilst magnifying every issue within energy sources you dislike is just protest, not a solution.
If all plastic was put in landfill then it would have no pollution issues, KatT! Other better ways to deal with it, but all you demonstrate is that if recycling of ANY material is not controlled, then there are issues.
And PS Martin, at least 85% of wind turbine components can be recycled so at least that’s something and turbine blades are highly unlikely to pollute our air, water, food, animals and oceans the way plastics have. And they are searching for ways to reuse the turbine blades. And wind is a carbon neutral green technology so far better than fossil fuels, full stop.
It’s interesting how someone is singing the praises of wind and other renewable energy sources, on the day that we have had to bring back a coal fired generating station on line to meet our electricity demand (at the moment, Fossil fuels are being used to supply 60% of our electricity).
http://grid.iamkate.com/
KatT, Wind farms are only carbon neutral if you ignore the manufacturing, transportation, maintenance, decommissioning and recycling processes involved.
There are pollution and health problems not only with their manufacture, but also where they are sited. Just ask Scottish Water why they no longer allow turbines to be built on their public water catchment areas.
As for the turbine blades, they are manufactured using a composite material made up of carbon fibers PLUS a type of plastic, or in some cases a combination of plastics.
Type in UK under the drop down country/state then click the magnifying glass further down the row to see how daylight has been powering UK homes.
https://www.solarmanpv.com/portal/Terminal/TerminalDefault.aspx?come=Public
John, on other days renewables have provided the lion share of energy. Granted not as frequently as gas but that will change. And no matter how you selectively choose facts, the reality is we have to reduce emissions and move away from fossil fuels and that is exactly what the world is doing. The more that is invested in renewables, energy storage, energy efficiency, the more renewables will replace fossil fuels and replace them they are. I can never quite understand why people sing the praises of fossil fuels full stop. The continued use of fossil fuels is destroying the planet.
Even the fossil fuel industry grasp this, there is no way back.
https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/oil-companies-renewable-energy/
KatT, the reason people sing the praises of gas for electricity generation is because it offers the flexibility required to provide the necessary back up for wind and solar that other forms of generation such as coal, nuclear and biomass cannot.
The more wind and solar capacity that is installed, the more the requirement for flexible back up increases.
This situation will remain until viable large scale storage solutions become available or a large scale renewable system that offers constant and reliable supplies is invented.
You mean those solar panels that are largely made in China, using energy from COAL in most cases to do so, and then installed in UK after being shipped half way round the world (but not by sail) by Polish teams who then ship the revenue back to Poland, leaving the poor locals to find out that agricultural land with a solar farm installed opens the change of use doors for neighbouring agricultural land to be covered by housing-with gas central heating??
Or do you mean those installed by householders who then find it costs more to keep them clean to generate a bit of electricity, than the energy value they generate. Local farmer covered his stables in solar panels and produced the vast quantity of electricity valued at 33p/day! So much benefit supplied- to window cleaners. LOL. Another local couple spent £15k on their panels. “Worst investment we ever made” was their assessment.
John-the antis are well versed at ignoring large parts of the picture. Selenium was such an issue regarding PNR, although it was not there (LOL), whilst the issue regarding cobalt and how much of it is obtained, can just be ignored. Plastic in the sea can be presented as a problem which can not be eradicated by recycling, whilst ocean mining for rare minerals required for “alternatives” can be ignored. Planning issues can be trashed even when there is no justification, and costs of £500k can be racked up, whilst hugely expensive schemes such as Swansea Bay can still be promoted although the hugely expensive bit relies upon locals in Cornwall allowing their countryside to be blown to smithereens, without which (and they have said NO) the costs go way above hugely expensive. No wonder private finance is keeping well away from that.
Bearing in mind that we are less than a week away from the longest day, solar performance today has been disappointing to say the least, peaking at just over 2.5GW when you would of expected a peak of around 10GW.
Renewables as a whole have not performed well for the past month, their combined output has only peaked above 10GW twice, whilst average demand has remained low at 25.5GW due to the lockdown.
Guess what provided the back up and heavy lifting, then image how much more gas will be required if or when our economy recovers.
John, the price of oil actually went negative this year, the fracking industry in the US is on it’s knees and all the energy experts and industry have been consistently reported on difficult times and outlook for the fossil fuel industry.
Read what BP forecasts and how they are investing in renewables.
And it seems that not only did renewables have an excellent year last year but have performed pretty well during the pandemic, whilst the fossil fuel industry has been crippled.
https://www.current-news.co.uk/news/uk-has-record-breaking-year-for-low-carbon-energy
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/renewable-power-surges-pandemic-scrambles-global-energy-outlook
https://www.edie.net/news/12/BP-forecasts–17-5bn-assets-hit–accelerates-strategy-restructure-to-prioritise-renewables/
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/apr/30/covid-19-crisis-demand-fossil-fuels-iea-renewable-electricity
https://www.edie.net/news/12/BP-forecasts–17-5bn-assets-hit–accelerates-strategy-restructure-to-prioritise-renewables/
And Brent Crude is already back to $40/barrel, KatT, so you may have missed that, you may have missed petrol pump prices starting to rise again. Next year forecast is $55-$60/barrel. Maybe BP have also missed that, or maybe they are following BA.
China is back to using as much oil now as before Covid-19.
So, yes, if people are in lock down together with much of industry then energy requirement will drop and so will price. EXCEPT-wind energy prices have NOT dropped! So, alternatives are ripping off the public, fossil fuel is NOT. Wind energy companies profiteering whilst fossil fuel companies were losing money hand over fist. Not too much there for promotion of alternatives for the consumer.
You seem to be a few weeks out of date.
KatT, the negative prices lasted two days and only applied on the future market to those that were able to take delivery of at least 1,000 barrels of West Texas Intermediate at the end of May from the Cushing Oil Hub in Oklahoma.
The UK market price for electricity also dropped during that period, also due to the lack of demand. Falling from £45/MWh to less than £20/MWh, yet we still had and are still having to continue paying the UK’s two largest offshore wind farms £162.47 and £173.96/MWh for their electricity.
Due to wind and solar not being able to respond to the low demand, this also created a surge in balancing costs. The cost of balancing the grid over the Bank Holiday weekend alone amounted to £50m.
The National Grid now expects the total bill for balancing the grid this year to be around £2 billion, that figure is based on the optimistic assumption that costs and electricity consumption return to normal after August.
If demand remains low during a post-Covid recession, the multi-billion pound costs of managing and subsidising renewables will need to be recovered from a much smaller volume of sales and customers. That is a recipe for rapid and abrupt price rises, the like of which the British public have never seen before.
BP first entered the renewable energy sector in 1981, BP Solar was both a manufacturer and installer of photovoltaic solar cells.
The company expanding its focus on renewable energy sources in 2005 when it established an alternative and low carbon energy business, which including solar, wind, biofuels, and hydrogen power.