Alberta Makes Concessions To Oil-Sands Producers In Parks Plan

- Alberta Makes Concessions To Oil-Sands Producers In Parks Plan

Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Dow Jones Newswires
CALGARY
by Edward Welsch

A final version of the Alberta government's land conservation plan for the oil-sands region released Monday made some concessions to oil companies after the original plan threatened to cancel parts of several oil-sands leases in order to preserve them for caribou habitat.

"What we think this plan achieves is a balance between the environment, development and the community aspect of living and working in Alberta," Sustainable Resource Development Minister Mel Knight said during a press conference.

Knight said there may still be parts of some oil-sands leases cancelled, but that the effect would be "very, very little," and the plan "is going to be quite satisfactory to most operators in the area."

The original parks plan released in April, which sets aside more than 7,000 square miles for recreational parks and wildlife including caribou, was panned by some of the oil-sands developers who were seeing parts of their leases cancelled.

However, most developers in the area, including Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) and Athabasca Oil Sands Corp. (ATH.T) said they had worked with the government to ensure that the parts of their leases that would be revoked were on plots that weren't economically viable.

Knight said the government worked with other companies to shift conservation land around for the final conservation plan, but he declined to provide any specific details.

Jennifer Grant, director of oil-sands research for the Canadian environmental think tank Pembina Institute, said it appeared that the government had shifted some lands around to accommodate oil-sands leases owned by Sunshine Oil Sands Ltd., a privately owned developer that was particularly hard hit under the draft plan.

Executives of Sunshine Oilsands, which is planning an initial public offering in Hong Kong later this year, weren't immediately available to comment because they were traveling in China.

"The government's efforts to accommodate industry interests are apparent in this version of the Lower Athabasca Regional Plan, with the adjustment of some protected areas," Grant said. She said more loopholes were introduced in the latest plan that allow companies to get exemptions to environmental standards.

Knight said though the plan had critics, it set aside a large portion of land for protection that wasn't there during the industry's last resource boom in the mid-2000s.
Copyright (c) 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Oil & Gas Post

Promote Your Page Too
LINK

House Passes Bill to Drill in Parks

- House Passes Bill to Drill in Parks

Friday, May 27, 2011
The Columbus Dispatch, Ohio
by Jim Siegel

With Ohio facing $500 million in backlogged capital projects at its state parks and gas prices still flirting with $4 a gallon, House Republicans say now is the time to allow oil and gas drilling in parks and other state-owned land.

After a three-hour debate, the House voted 54-41 yesterday for a bill that would create an Oil and Gas Leasing Commission to oversee the leasing of state-owned land for oil and gas drilling.

"It will not solve Ohio's problems or energy-price problems, but it is a component we cannot ignore," said Rep. John Adams, R-Sidney, the bill sponsor.

Republicans said House Bill 133 would create jobs and help lower energy prices. Oil and gas drillers are particularly interested in southeastern Ohio and Salt Fork State Park.

"If this gas boom takes off like we understand it is, there aren't going to be enough hotels. There aren't going to be enough houses. There aren't going to be enough restaurants to handle all of the people who are coming into this state," said Rep. Matt Huffman, R-Lima.

Two Republicans joined all Democrats in voting against the bill. Franklin County lawmakers broke along party lines.

Democrats argued that with 99.5 percent of Ohio already available for drilling, the bill is unnecessary. They also questioned the economic benefits, and argued it would cause significant damage to state parks, hurt tourism and harm the economy.

"We're not against drilling. We're against drilling in parks," said Rep. Robert F. Hagan, D-Youngstown, who went on to question whether Republicans were on drugs.

Democrats also suggested Republicans would face voter backlash over the bill in next year's elections. In response, Speaker William G. Batchelder, R-Medina, pointed to gas prices.

"I would say that causes people to have a different view than they might have at $2.50," he said.

Batchelder said the ongoing revenue stream for capital projects at Ohio parks is vital. "When you look at them, you can see it," he said of the lack of upkeep. "I think six members used the phrase 'pristine parks.' I don't know where they're going. I have not seen those."

State revenue estimates from oil and gas royalties range from a few hundred thousand dollars to about $9million, depending on factors such as the level of oil and gas production and market prices, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Service Commission.

The bill divides state land into four classes, which, Adams said, will deal with issues related to federal encumbrances or deed restrictions. Energy companies would have the greatest access to land in which the state clearly owns all the development rights.

Ohio owns the mineral rights to 34,590 acres in state parks, less than one-third of the land.

Republicans added an amendment yesterday that would ban drilling on state nature preserves, which Jack Shaner of the Ohio Environmental Council called a positive step. But he strongly opposes the bill.

"Ohio has always promised that its parks would remain a natural park, not an industrial park," he said, adding that the new leasing commission would be "too industry-cozy." He said the director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources should have the final say on whether drilling is allowed in state parks.

Tracy Sabetta of the National Wildlife Federation of Ohio said she is concerned that the bill does not explicitly exempt Lake Erie from drilling. While a federal ban remains in place, there are efforts to repeal it, she said.

Rep. Dave Hall, R-Killbuck, said the bill essentially bans Lake Erie from drilling because of the way it is classified.

Gov. John Kasich's proposed state budget also would open state parks to drilling, but it left the Ohio Department of Natural Resources in control of the leasing process.

Both Hall and Batchelder said they prefer the House drilling language to what is in the budget. Laura Jones, spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, said the office is "pleased with how our concerns (with the bill) have been addressed."

"It's very positive that the landholding agency is the entity entering into the lease as opposed to the commission," she said.

Copyright (c) 2011, The Columbus Dispatch, Ohio

Oil & Gas Post

Promote Your Page Too