This past Tuesday, AuburnPub.com hosted a live event where readers had the opportunity to live chat with Dave Palmerton, a geologist and the CEO of the Syracuse-based Palmerton Group, an environmental consulting firm. This was an excellent chance for those who have a difficult time getting out to events to be able to ask pertinent questions from their home.

From what I could tell observing, there were quite a few people who logged on to get their questions about the Marcellus Shale play and how it will impact New York answered. In addition to a great discussion, throughout the forum, the paper ran a poll asking those participating: Should New York allow Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling?

The answer: 85% said yes (that’s no typo – it’s 85% said yes), 15% said no and there was no one who was undecided.

This further demonstrates the overwhelming desire people have to see natural gas development happen, and New York is not only NOT opposed to drilling as the touring anti-frac panel affectionately known here as the Magical Mystery Tour would have you believe, but is straight up for it.

If you didn’t have the opportunity to participate, here is the text from the forum.

Robert Harding:

Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to today’s online Q-and-A featuring David Palmerton of Syracuse-based Palmerton Group. He will discuss hydrofracking with us and take your questions. Feel free to submit your questions now for David.

Tuesday June 21, 2011 12:48

Robert Harding: David will be joining us in about 10 minutes, but don’t hesitate to send your questions ahead of time. Questions will be taken on a first come, first serve basis (unless there are duplicates or inappropriate questions). Tuesday June 21, 2011 12:49

Robert Harding: David, welcome to this online Q-and-A. Why don’t you first introduce yourself, tell us who you are and then we’ll move on to questions. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:00

David Palmerton: Thank you, it’s a pleasure to participate. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:01

David Palmerton: I am a geologist and CEO of an environmental consulting firm. I have almost 30 years in environmental consulting with several years experience in oil and gas. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:02

David Palmerton: Ready to go. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:03

David Palmerton: Robert, Do you want me to start answering questions? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:04

David Palmerton: I will go in order. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:06

David Palmerton: The major myth is that gas development can not be done in an environmentally responsible way. And “hydrofracking” is a new technology that contaminates groundwater. These are not true. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:07

David Palmerton: The purpose of frack fluid: Put simply, hydraulic fracturing is a technology used to stimulate the flow of energy from new and existing oil and gas wells. By creating or even restoring millimeter-thick fissures, the surface area of a formation exposed to the borehole increases and the fracture provides a conductive path that connects the reservoir to the well. These new paths increase the rate that fluids can be produced from the reservoir formations, in some cases by many hundreds of percent. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:08

David Palmerton: There are many hundreds of well in New York that have been stimulated by hydraulic fracturing, at least going back into the 1970’s. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:09

David Palmerton: Hydraulic fracturing has been around since about 1947. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:09

David Palmerton: It’s hard to say what’s going to happen with the moratorium and the many disruptive bills being introduced in the NY legislature. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:11

David Palmerton: The Department of Energy recently reiterated that natural gas is the best fossil fuel with the lowest overall carbon footprint contrary to some reports. This is availavle at the DOE website under natural gas. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:13

Robert Harding: Excuse me … this is Jeremy Boyer, filling in for Robert who had an emergency come up. I just logged in and have some questions in the system from readers … Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:14

Janis: But isn’t the horizontal hydrofracking fairly new, and the volume of harmful chemicals used sooo much more? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:14

Jim: Can you clarify? I hear there are 14000 active wells today and that 90 percent of those were fracked. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:15

David Palmerton: A recent study by Tim Considine suggests that: An end to the moratorium would spur over $11.4 billion in economic output. Some 15,000 to 18,000 jobs could be created in the Southern Tier and Western New York, regions which lost a combined 48,000 payroll jobs between 2000 and 2010.* Another 75,000 to 90,000 jobs could be created if the area of exploration and drilling were expanded to include the Utica shale and southeastern New York, including the New York City watershed. (This assumes a regulatory regime that protects the water supply but permits drilling to continue.) Localities and the state stand to reap $1.4 billion in tax revenues if the moratorium is allowed to expire. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:18

Tom Jones: Do environmentalists and the makers of the film Gasland not understand that by not converting from coal to natural gas, and by not changing the large truck-fleet in the US from running on petrol to natural gas, it will both hurt our economy and the environment in the long run? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:20

Phil Jones: Methane has a direct greenhouse effect that is 21 times stronger than carbon dioxide. But methane oxidizes and turns into carbon dioxide within 10 years in the atmosphere, rendering the article stating natural gas exploration might be dirtier than coal as invalid… Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:20

David Palmerton: The drill rig is only on-site during the drilling which may be over in a few eeks, but depending on how many wells are to be drilled from the dpad the drill rig could be moved to another location at the same pad. At most less than a few months. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:21

David Palmerton: Is our moderator here? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:22

Robert Harding: This is Jeremy Boyer, filling in for Robert … he had to step out for a few minutes because of an emergency. I’ve posted some questions submitted by readers. Are you seeing them? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:23

David Palmerton: Am I supposed to be answering the comments under “recent comments” or those posted? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:24

Robert Harding: Let’s go with those posted … Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:24

David Palmerton: OK I will wait to see the post and then answer. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:25

Bruce Alderton: The second draft of the GEIS (sGEIS) is expected to be released on or about 1 july. What is your take on the results from that report? How likely is it that the moratrium will be extended? When do you think the first hydrofracking will take place? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:26

David Palmerton: There is politics and there is science and technical. The report covers the scientific technical issues and I believe the NYSDEC has done a very thorough job. It’s hard to say how the politics will turn out. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:27

Jim: What are your thoughts about the recent MIT study? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:28

David Palmerton: The multidisciplinary, comprehensive study, conducted over three years by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), concluded the potential environmental issues related to hydraulic fracture stimulation are “challenging but manageable,” and that natural gas development is important for national security and energy independence. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:29

kathy: i understand trhat there is also a way to contain the methane and use it effectivly ? is that a common practice or something in the future? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:31

Connie Corr: Are there any reports of contamination of drinking water in New York State as a result of hydrofracked wells? I have heard that the contaminated waters that have been reported are not due to fracking. What is your take on that? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:32

David Palmerton: The methane produced by gas wells goes right into the pipeline system. If you are referring to methane released, testing usually contains the methane. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:32

Jim: Can you tell us how groundwater is protected in the fracking process? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:33

David Palmerton: No. Remember there is a difference between groundwater contamination as a result of surface impacts rather than from hydrofracing which occurs thousands of feet below. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:33

Connie Corr: If I am not mistaken, one nat gas company used compressed methane as fracking fluid. How effective is this method? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:34

David Palmerton: Groundwater is protected by multiple strings of casing that are cemented in place. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:34

David Palmerton: Connie you may be thinking of propane frac? It is used in Canada. It uses less water but has other drawbacks such as tanker trucks hauling and compressibility issues that don’t perform as well as water to break the rock. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:35

Janis: but whenever you “frack” a good amount of the thousands of gallons of water used to frack will come back up to the surface and will be contaminated, correct? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:36

David Palmerton: All water from the 300+ year old rock has salts and natural minerals that can be harmful if not handled properly. The frac water returns can have compounds that you don’t want to release to the environment. This is why its captured and treated or disposed. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:38

Bill Katzmaier: Do you have any knowledge whether the state legislature at the time being is being pressured by lobbyist groups from the coal industry? Is it a possibility that the coal industry strongly opposes natural gas exploration in general in the US and in NYS in particular? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:38

David Palmerton: I don’t have any knowledge of such pressure but I have heard this rumor before. I don’t think it makes much sense since natural gas has a much bigger impact on NY’s economy. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:39

kathy: i saw something last night that said that the released methane although tested and safe ..had some kind of gathering apparatus that could even use that…to futher promote energy… Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:39

David Palmerton: Sorry, but not sure what you are referrring to. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:39

kathy: question…if the water is so lethal as the naturalists make it seem i dont see the rig workers in hazmat suits…is there anything that shows the averege amt of chemicals in ground water vs that after fracking..now i mean the stuff that seeps not the stuf thats tanked away Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:40

David Palmerton: No studies of groundwater in the northeast have shown any contamination by frac fluids of any kind. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:41

Janis: You said the water is catpured and treated, or disposed. Disposed where and how Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:41

David Palmerton: Most companies are now recycling the water and using much less. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:41

David Palmerton: The disposed water is typically going into injection wells in Ohio. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:41

Robert Harding: David, I am back. My apologies for the technical glitch on my end. A question I wanted to mix in here: If New York State decided to allow companies to obtain drilling permits to drill in Marcellus Shale areas, how long would that whole process take from start to finish (from the receiving of the permit to the beginning of the drilling?) Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:43

David Palmerton: It will take some time for the NYSDEC to get up to speed. As I understand they will not be issuing permits until they are ready. Typically the process should take less than one month from permit filing to drilling. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:44

dk: Do you see any negative points of NY allowing us to drill? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:45

David Palmerton: Not if the NYSDEC follow through with the elements of the SGEIS (eg the new regulations). Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:45

Jim: Is it true that drillers will not receive a permit to drill until they submit a fluid disposal plan to the DEC, and that the fluid must go to an authorized disposal facility? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:46

David Palmerton: The current SGEIS proposed has the drillers tracking all fluids from beginning to end. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:46

Kate Mingstone: Do you have any idea which companies and which countries that has an interest in the natural gas in Marcellus and possibly other shales in Appalachia? Is it mainly domestic companies or are China interested in getting into these shales? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:47

David Palmerton: There are many independants, but now that the Marcellus is so productive there are super majors in the play. There are firms from India, France, Norway currently operating. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:48

David Palmerton: China is not a likely player. At least not directly. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:49

John: Which specific interests does the Palmerton group have in NY? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:49

David Palmerton: We perform a wide variety of environmental consulting, helping companies with env problems. Also, I am a member of IOGA of NY. We work for oil and gas companies as well as landowners, and other types of companies. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:50

dk: How long do you think the Gov. will put the comment period at after the release of the sgeis? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:51

David Palmerton: Comment periods are typically 30 days. I’m not sure sure what the Gov may have in mind. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:52

Bob: A recent article suggests that there is relatively unlikely that the drilling moratorium will be extended: http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110619/NEWS/106190323/-1/SITEMAP What do you think will happen after july 1st? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:52

David Palmerton: I don’t think it makes sense to extend this already lengthy process that has been very thorough. There are many bills being introduced in the legislature that are often at cross purposes and don’t always jive with the facts or the science. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:54

Robert Harding: David, as we know Pennsylvania is already drilling. What lessons can be learned from what Pennsylvania is doing? Not only from a drilling perspective but from an environmental conservation perspective? Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:55

David Palmerton: Pennsylvania has a long history with oil and gas dating back to its first day in the 1800’s. The PA process has operated fairly well but NY will have much better environmental regulations, because we already do. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:58

David Palmerton: Also the industry is learning, adapting to new requirements, and recycling. Industry will adapt and move towards better environmental conservation. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:59

Robert Harding: I know we have to wrap it up here in a minute, so David why don’t you take this opportunity to write a “closing statement.” Or, make a case for Marcellus Shale drilling in NY. Tuesday June 21, 2011 13:59

David Palmerton: We see the economic benefits and job (over 48,000) created in PA with relatively few environmental incidents. Incidents will happen in any industry, yet given the amount of work being done its clear the industry in the northeast is performing exceptionaly well. The environmental benefits of having a cleaner fuel source, less dependence on foriegn imports is also imperitive. The gas development can be done in an environmentally responsible way and we should be looking at the science and using a little less rhetoric. Tuesday June 21, 2011 14:02

Robert Harding: David thanks for joining us today and again my apologies for the technical issue on my end. I hope to have you back again to discuss these issues. Thanks also to IOGA NY for helping set up this Q-and-A today. Tuesday June 21, 2011 14:03

Robert Harding: David, enjoy the rest of your day and thanks again. Tuesday June 21, 2011 14:03

David Palmerton:

Thank you Robert. I’d be happy to come back any time. Tuesday June 21, 2011 14:03