« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Exploring Natural Gas Onshore

Just a few years ago, you could’ve bought all the land you wanted in DeSoto Parish, LA for $1,000 or so an acre. While oil and gas production was not unknown in the rural northwestern parish, most thought DeSoto’s glory days were gone forever.

The Haynesville Shale natural gas play has changed all that.

“People went to bed one night poor and woke up the next day rich, enabled to buy a Cadillac and pay cash,” said Mayor Curtis McCoy of Mansfield, the parish seat. “It’s kind of like the show ‘The Beverly Hillbillies.’ ”

Susquehanna County in northeastern PA is DeSoto’s counterpart. The Marcellus Shale is hot – red hot – in much of PA, but especially Susquehanna.

The New York Times compares and contrasts DeSoto Ph. and Susquehanna Co.:

When a Rig Moves In Next Door

This article is informative and balanced, and I would urge anyone with an interest in the subject to read it in its entirety. As much as I normally pick on the NYT for editorial bias, its reporters normally take the time and effort to get most of the details right in their reporting of energy issues.

A point often missed in considering energy policy and politics is the direct benefit to landowners in an active play area. Oil and gas companies can’t just drill wherever they want; instead, they must secure the right, in the form of a mineral lease, from the mineral owner (which is, inmost cases, the owner of the surface of the land. In exchange for the granting of the lease, the mineral owner benefits from the lease bonus, a payment which may range from several hundred dollars per acre to many thousands of dollars per acre in some of these hot plays. Landowners whose surface is impacted by operations may be entitled to monetary payments for locations, rights-of-way or water rights.

Perhaps most significantly, the mineral owner is entitled to a royalty share of production. That means that, without bearing any cost, the mineral owner gets a 1/8th to 1/4th share of all the value produced by the well.

Here’s how that works, at least in Louisiana: the state has determined that one of these big horizontal Haynesville wells can “drain” 1,280 acres (that’s two square miles, and double the acreage normally assumed for vertical gas wells of similar depth). The owners of the 1,280 acres that make up that “unit” will receive their proportionate share of the royalty based on how many acres they own.

The owner of 120 acres who leased at $5,000 per acre got a check up front for $600,000. If all 120 acres get put into a unit of a moderately successful well, he might be looking at royalty payments on the order of $20,000 — per month. (these royalty payments will decline along with the well’s production). At no risk of investment. All this on land that could have been bought outright for maybe $120,000 just five years ago.

So mineral development is mighty welcome in the deep piney woods of LA, but not so in PA. A large part of the reason is unfamiliarity, and the play for hysteria by environmentalists, playing on the natural fears of residents with sophisticated plays like the movie Gasland.

FURTHER south, in Dimock Township, more than a dozen residents have joined a lawsuit against Cabot Oil and Gas, which is accused of causing methane to bleed into residents’ water wells — and in some cases, spew from the kitchen tap. The recent documentary “Gasland” featured some of these landowners — many leasing to Cabot — igniting fumes coming from their faucets.

Area resident Martha Losey, 78, disagrees that gas development caused the methane in the drinking water:

“My father dug our well in 1945, and we knew it had lots of iron in it, and we thought it had something else, but we weren’t sure, because it had lots of bubbles in it,” Ms. Locey said. “So my nephew took it to school in the ’60s, and the science teacher lit it, and it burned, so he said, ‘It’s methane.’ ”

“The truth is, our well has been that way since 1945,” added Ms. Locey, who has signed an affidavit in support of the gas company’s legal case. “I don’t think Cabot was here back then.

Cross-posted at VladEnBlog.

COMMENTS

  • jomo2009

    are, no doubt, saying, “Let’s get crackin’ with the fracin’.”

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    I appreciate the topic and the information, but have a slightly different view of the NY Times’ coverage. The media and Obama present a single topic of “energy” because it fools people. Everyone likes energy. When the NY Times, Soros, and Obama talk about “energy” they mean killing America or at least America’s middle class. Either by additional EPA regulations, ‘climate’ and ‘energy’ related executive orders, versions of cap and trade, etc. (although cap and trade is now in effect in 10 northeast states and California). The NY Times came out with another editorial just before the elections stating in effect how urgent global warming was. The NY Times alone, if it told the truth about the ‘climate’ industry could bring the whole thing crashing down. I understand they aren’t about to do that, but it shows how outrageous this situation is. It has grown for decades, from before the failed 1993 BTU tax, pushed mainly by billionaires and haters from the UN who saw an easy mark. Just from reading RedState, people are starting to realize balkanization of our country has already happened with the loss of California. California was lost because the left was very patient and changed the culture. Enough people there honestly believe they are saving the environment with cap and trade, and that it doesn’t matter what happens to people. That’s why I can’t say one good word about the NY Times or its “energy” reporting.

  • cactusjack

    Your focus on the land – the minerals and the dirt – is particularly critical. Particularly in the Northeast and Pacific West, the caricature exists that a chortling fat businessman in a suit, puffing a cigar, collects all the money after running the peasants off their land with rigs and caterpillars. Then the money made goes to the Republican Party . Reality is quite different. Investing, “wildcatting” domestically, is actually a great but vanishing American phenomenon. It means private citizens are getting together with local banks, usually, drilling the well, *taking the risk* and *creating new wealth* if a well comes in. This is creation of new value and wealth, in a literal sense , something our economy desperately needs now. Especially in PA, and now in LA after 0s moratorium. And the money they continue to make on their royalties often goes into future drilling investment or into the local community in many ways. But it can only happen in States which have through wise policy protected or not usurped or taxed to death, private interest in mineral and surface estate of the land. OK, TX and LA come to mind. PA too. But there are States where the feds moved in and “severed” the minerals before the land could be homesteaded, or by federal lawsuits afterwards – and took them for themselves – NM comes to mind. The feds control huge royalty stakes in producing properties, crowding out private ownershipp. And in some areas of the State they also own the surface, controlling access and permitting. Pity the TeaParties in the Western States. They are some of the strongest groups with some of the best land and tax issues that get us fired up, but in the end so much of politics as everything else comes down to, *who controls the land. *Did you know the federal government owns 85% of the land in NV, 57% in UT and 45% in CA for example? Hard to start a tax revolt when they’ve already got most of our states by the yin yang.

  • juumanistra

    I’d just like to add the rider that landowners, like every other demographic subset of humanity, have their angels and assholes. Most are good, salt-of-the-earth folk, but it’s always the ones who aren’t who you remember: The ones who want their big, fat bonuses yesterday, their juicy royalty cut tomorrow, and set their lawyer to work signing a new lease the microsecond the delay rental payment is late. (Of course, as I’m one of those bottom-dwellers who aspires to O&G practice, I probably shouldn’t be so hard on a useful segment of my potential client-base.)

    Though probably the worst are landowners who sign their leases with dollar signs in their eyes and then have their delicate senses offended by the the actual drilling of the well(s). There is no such thing as a free lunch, after all, and a bit of noise pollution is a bargain for the potential revenue streams. (Of course, there’re also the times in which operators crack foundations and collapse houses from drilling and/or operating a well. Grievances are, at least, justified there. …even if in half of the jurisdictions in the country, the court will laugh at you and tell you that is what you signed up for when you signed the lease.)

  • ladyimpactohio

    to counteract “Gasland.”

    http://conservative-outlooks.com/2010/04/17/gas-odyssey-the-film-fuel-for-thought/

    Last I heard, ACORN founded Working Families Party in NY was successful in keeping the hydrofracking moratorium in the Marcellus Shale indefinitely.