Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Musings: Could Marcellus Shale Growth Be Sidelined By Legalities
Parks Paton Hoepfl & Brown via Rig Zone ^ | November 08, 2011 | G. Allen Brooks

Posted on 11/09/2011 5:36:27 AM PST by thackney

It has recently come to our attention that a lawsuit in Pennsylvania over the ownership of Marcellus shale gas rights could put many leases in jeopardy and slow the development of this huge natural gas resource. The case is John E. and Mary Josephine Butler v. Charles Powers Estate et al, filed in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. The Butlers are relying on previous rulings that established ownership of oil or gas doesn't change hands unless it's specified in a deed. In opposition, the Powers' heirs argue that the deed gave them the right to other minerals such as coal, and that they own the gas trapped in the shale the same way they would own the gas trapped in a coal seam.

For over a century, Pennsylvania has required landowners to consider oil and gas rights separate from the more general and common "mineral rights" when transferring ownership of resources beneath the surface of their property. The Powers argue that shale gas is different and should be considered part of the mineral rights because it is contained inside rock. Part of the argument rests on the fact that the gas in the Marcellus shale is not free-flowing since it has to be fractured in order to release it. In the case of coalbed gas, which also is trapped in the coal rock and only released once mining is underway, the ownership always remains with the mineral rights.

The Superior Court, the second-highest court in Pennsylvania, ruled that current law doesn't sufficiently address whether "Marcellus shale constitutes a mineral," sending the question back to the lower court to develop a trial fact record. Many oil and gas professionals would say that the Marcellus shale is merely a tight rock formation, but under laws that are more than a century old, that definition should not be considered a given. We will be watching this issue closely as it has the potential to upset popular assumptions about the role the Marcellus shale will play in America's energy strategy.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: energy; marcellus; naturalgas; shalegas

1 posted on 11/09/2011 5:36:32 AM PST by thackney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thackney
I don't understand why this is an issue.

If it's your property, whether separated from another element or not ... it is your property.

2 posted on 11/09/2011 5:53:51 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
It figures the attorneys would find a way to produce the Marcellus. If they tangle things up too much, there won't be any production, at least for a while. There are other formations elsewhere.

The real question comes in when discussing leases and should have been addressed by now, especially in the case of producing wells.

Also, if ceding title to the land does not cede mineral (oil and gas) rights, wouldn't those revert to the descendents of the tribes which occupied the area before the european settlers? Or do they not count? This could get really sticky.

3 posted on 11/09/2011 5:54:01 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Read this one last night and have to wonder how this will end. How do you see it?

The argument that shale oil is different from coal will be hard to argue when shale oil is referred to as “rock oil”.

I also wonder if this will be that big a deal in that how much of the leases in the Marcellus were actually proceeded by leases for coal.


4 posted on 11/09/2011 5:56:41 AM PST by Recon Dad ("The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win and cheat if necessary.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I know of no distinction in mineral rights in Texas. They can either go with the property in a sale or be retained by the seller as per the contract and the deed.

Thanks for the article. Shale oil/gas is widespread, Colorado has deposits that are being produced too.


5 posted on 11/09/2011 5:57:39 AM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

I have leased farmland for the coal in my career. You would be surprised at the number of land owners who don’t know someone else owns the coal or other valuables underneath.


6 posted on 11/09/2011 5:59:57 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
Shale oil/gas is widespread


Click to enlarge

7 posted on 11/09/2011 6:32:11 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I don’t know if you remember the “White Oil” fiasco in the Texas panhandle in the 1980’s, but this could be a similar situation if they let it get out of hand.


8 posted on 11/09/2011 6:35:26 AM PST by MrKatykelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: knarf

It’s an issue because the gas companies want to alter state law to skirt your rights as an individual property owner to say no to drilling.

They want to bundle or “collectivize” these rights for streamlined negotiation purposes and to minimize the impact of holdout landowners.

I am all for Marcellus Fracking but we cannot do this sort of harm to individual property rights.


9 posted on 11/09/2011 6:39:38 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Not generally. Mineral rights exist separate from the property ownership. They have separate deeds and separate transferal procedures—in most jurisdictions. It’s been that way for a very long time.


10 posted on 11/09/2011 6:44:52 AM PST by Sudetenland (There can be no freedom without God--What man gives, man can take away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson