Methane in Groundwater in Pennsylvania – Published Report

Journal Article Evaluates Methane Sources in Groundwater in Pennsylvania— Opponents of shale development have pointed to cases of alleged methane contamination of water wells in northeastern Pennsylvania as evidence of hydraulic fracturing contaminating water. A new study in the journal “Groundwater” suggests that naturally-occurring methane is ubiquitous in northeastern Pennsylvania as the region’s groundwater is contained in a hydrocarbon bearing rock that is interspersed with water wells that lack structural integrity (Carbon County Groundwater Guardians Support this Effort) of the private water well construction standards bill discussed above).  Additional information can be found via the following link:

http://www.ngwa.org/Media-Center/press/2013/Pages/2013-05-24-groundwater-.aspx

If you are in Pennsylvania, you can contribute to the Citizen Groundwater Database and help track change for FREE and if you would like to learn about our Natural Gas Related Information, please visit us at http://www.private-well-owner.org

Volunteer
We seek new people at all skill levels for a variety of programs. One thing that everyone can do is attend meetings to share ideas on improving CCGG, enabling us to better understand and address the concerns of well owners.

Everything we do began with an idea.

We realize your time is precious and the world is hectic. CCGG’s volunteers do only what they’re comfortable with. It can be a little or a lot.

For more information, please go to CCGG’s About Page or contact us.

Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.

Location Change for May 1 Hearing Washington County Compressor Station

The new location – VFW Barto Post 6553 at 65 Run St. in Slovan, Washington County.

Immediately following the open house which starts at 6:30 pm- the hearing will start.  The anticipated start time is at 7:30 p.m., members of the public may present up to five minutes of formal testimony for the public record. The testimony will be recorded by a court reporter and transcribed into a written document, and DEP will create a written response to all relevant testimony.

Those who wish to present oral testimony should contact DEP Community Relations Coordinator John Poister at 412-442-4203 or register that evening prior to the hearing. Only those who register can give testimony at the public hearing.

For anyone unable to attend the public hearing, written comment should be submitted by the close of business on May 11 to Alan Binder, PA DEP Bureau of Air Quality, Southwest Regional Office, 400 Waterfront Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15222.

Copy of the Annoucement

Website Provided for Educational Purpose.

Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 Carbon County Groundwater Guardians on Facebook
Join the PA Water Forum on Facebook
Private Well Owner Outreach Program

Environmental Protection Agency Dramatically Lowered Methane Loss During Drilling

“PITTSBURGH (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency has dramatically lowered its estimate of how much of a potent heat-trapping gas leaks during natural gas production, in a shift with major implications for a debate that has divided environmentalists: Does the recent boom in fracking help or hurt the fight against climate change?

Oil and gas drilling companies had pushed for the change, but there have been differing scientific estimates of the amount of methane that leaks from wells, pipelines and other facilities during production and delivery. Methane is the main component of natural gas.

The new EPA data is “kind of an earthquake” in the debate over drilling, said Michael Shellenberger, the president of the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental group based in Oakland, Calif. “This is great news for anybody concerned about the climate and strong proof that existing technologies can be deployed to reduce methane leaks.”

For the whole story

For Methane Issues in Pennsylvania
For Fact Based Dimock

Using Nitrogen and other Gases to Hydraulicly Fracture Black Shale Fields

“Typically, nitrogen is delivered to the well site as a refrigerated liquid that is gasified prior to injection and then is injected into the well to enhance recovery.  As the primary component of the air we breathe, the benefits of nitrogen include it being inert, environmentally friendly, non-flammable, and when gasified, exhibiting very low densities with large expansion factors. These properties make nitrogen the perfect choice for safely and efficiently tackling the toughest well needs.”

[amazon_link asins=’146656685X’ template=’ProductAd’ store=’webdespro-20′ marketplace=’US’ link_id=’b9a24eb2-c0cd-11e7-b071-b9824db60a02′]

Interesting Links

Ferus Website on Nitrogen
Superior Well Services- B.F. Environmental (Nitrogen Gas Frac Library)
Gas Frac B.F. Environmental (Nitrogen Gas Frac Library)
EPA Report on Types of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids
Information on FracWater Chemistry and Flowback Water

Website Provided for Educational Purpose.

Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 Carbon County Groundwater Guardians on Facebook

Webinar to examine stray shale-gas migration into groundwater

Sampling stray gas that is bubbling up through surface water.

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Investigations into natural gas from shale development migrating into groundwater will be the focus of a free, Web-based seminar offered by Penn State Extension.

To be presented at 1 p.m. on March 21, “A Geochemical Context for Stray Gas Investigations in the Northern Appalachian Basin,” is part of a monthly series of one-hour webinars.

According to presenter Fred Baldassare, senior geoscientist with ECHELON Applied Geoscience Consulting, as shale gas exploration and development has increased over the past five years, stray gas migration in groundwater has become a hot topic. He will discuss the various sources of methane and the need to review each case individually to determine its origin.

“The occurrence of methane in aquifer systems represents a natural condition in many areas of the Appalachian Basin,” he said. “The origin can be the result of microbial and thermogenic processes that convert organic matter in the aquifer strata to methane, and to lower concentrations of ethane and heavier hydrocarbons in some areas of the basin.

“Or it can result from the progressive migration of hydrocarbon gas over geologic time from the source and/or reservoir to the aquifer.”

But in some instances, Baldassare pointed out, the stray gas that occurs in the aquifer and manifests in private water supplies can be the result of gas-well drilling.

“That happens where pressure combines with ineffective casing cement bonds to create pathways,” he said. “Alleged incidents of stray gas migration must be investigated at the site-specific level and must include isotope geochemistry to determine gas origin and diagnostic evidence to determine a mechanism of migration.”

Presented by Penn State Extension’s Marcellus Education Team, the monthly natural-gas webinars usually are offered from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. on Thursdays. Upcoming webinars will cover the following topics:

–April 24: Utica Reservoirs — Mike Arthur, Penn State professor of geosciences and co-director of the Penn State Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research.

–May 16: Shale Energy Development’s Effect on the Posting, Bonding and Maintenance of Roads in Rural Pennsylvania — Mark Gaines, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Bureau of  Maintenance, Operations and Roadway Management, and Tim Ziegler, Penn State Larson Transportation Institute, Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies.

–June 20: Royalty Calculations for Natural Gas from Shale — Jim Ladlee, associate director, Penn State Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research.

Previous webinars, publications and information also are available on the Penn State Extension natural-gas website (http://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas), covering a variety of topics, such as Act 13; seismic testing; air pollution from gas development; water use and quality; zoning; gas-leasing considerations for landowners; gas pipelines and right-of-way issues; legal issues surrounding gas development; and the impact of Marcellus gas development on forestland.

Registration for this webinar is not necessary, and all are welcome to participate by logging in to https://meeting.psu.edu/pscems . For more information, contact Carol Loveland at 570-320-4429 or by email at cal24@psu.edu .

< http://news.psu.edu/story/267750/2013/03/08/webinar-examine-stray-shale-gas-migration-groundwater >

Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law. Well water testing and educational program.

 Carbon County Groundwater Guardians on Facebook

Tree Risk Assessment for community trees webinar scheduled

www.tnonline.com/2012/nov/28/tree-risk-assessment-community-trees-webinar-scheduled
Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Tree Risk Assessment for Community Trees webinar, Tuesday, Dec. 4, 12-1 p.m. ET. Participation in the web seminar does not require any special software. To view live and previously recorded seminars all you need is a high-speed Internet connection and sound. To take part in the live seminar, visit https://meeting.psu.edu/pacommunityforestry. Login in by registering as a guest (type your name). To view previously recorded webinars, please visit: http://www.pacommunityforests.com/webinar/index.htm.

Gas discharge noise startles neighbors – again

citizensvoice.com/news/gas-discharge-noise-startles-neighbors-again-1.1407649
By Robert L. Baker (Staff Writer)
Published: November 24, 2012

MONROE TWP. – Elizabeth Ide said her husband, Mark, rousted her out of bed around 3 a.m. Friday, but not to go after post-Thanksgiving sales.

There was a loud noise that apparently came from a nearby gas dehydration facility, and it went on and on, she said, for more than 30 minutes.

“He tried to get us dressed and out the door, but we weren’t even sure if we were better off staying indoors,” Ide said. “There were no warnings and no one ever explained anything.”

Friday’s incident marked the second time since September that a deafening sound from the dehydration facility startled neighbors.

Kunkle Fire Chief Jack Dodson said he had tankers and an ambulance near the Chapin Dehydration Plant’s driveway entrance to Hildebrandt Road within minutes, “but our protocol is not to enter a gas site until the plant operator arrives.”

Dodson acknowledged he heard the loud noise, saying it was akin to a freight train going by or a large plane landing, and it was emanating from something being spewed in the air 50 to 100 feet.

People five miles away near Frances Slocum State Park apparently heard it and numerous residents from Dallas Township, Luzerne County, and Monroe Township, Wyoming County were alarmed, Dodson said.

The tone went out over Luzerne County 911 at 2:57 a.m. and Kunkle responded at 2:59, Dodson said. PVR Partners plant operator John Stoner was on scene 20 minutes later and the gas flow was shut down at 3:32.  Kunkle emergency responders were back at the station by 4:30.

Ed Senavaitis, safety and regulatory compliance manager for PVR Partners, based in Williamsport, said a safety device at the Chapin facility operated as intended. As of early Friday afternoon, there was still an ongoing investigation as to what set it off.

Senavaitis said there was no overcompression of the line, but something malfunctioned, “and we’ll conduct an investigation until we figure it out.”

He said he had no idea about the volume of material that evaporated or dissipated into the atmosphere.

“The safety device is designed to relieve gas as needed and when our manager arrived, he closed a valve and put everything back into normal operations mode,” Senavaitis said.

Dodson said before the valve was closed, people were contacted at the Transco line, where the gas is fed, and at Chesapeake, a major supplier of gas being moved from the Baker-Hirkey Compressor Station in Washington Township – another PVR Partners facility – southward through the Chapin facility.

Dodson and Senavaitis confirmed that at no time was any individual in danger.

Still, Elizabeth Ide said she wanted answers.

“I thought there wasn’t supposed to be any noise, and here we’ve had two incidents,” she said.

Dodson said the whole incident was a wake-up call that some emergency protocols obviously still have to be worked out.

Looking at a spill prevention, control, and countermeasure plan that Chief Energy established when the Chapin plant was built, Dodson said he had two very serious questions for PVR Partners after a similar incident of a shorter duration occurred on Sept. 30.

In that incident, neither the fire company nor Wyoming County 911 was notified.

In Friday’s incident, Luzerne County 911, which notified Kunkle Fire Company, did not in turn notify 911 in Wyoming County, where the plant is actually located.

So Dodson wants to know first, why PVR Partners did not rewrite the Chapin plan after they took over Chief Gathering’s Marcellus assets earlier this year?

Secondly, he wants to know why the established protocol that seems very clear – including contact of Wyoming County EMA – as established by Chief was not followed.

He said late Friday afternoon he was getting answers, even if a little late, and he anticipated a new SPCC plan would be forthcoming this week by PVR Partners.

As soon as that arrives, Dodson said he is working out a timetable about how to better keep the public informed as to what’s going on.

While Dodson does not want to downplay the fear factor that the loud noises created in both incidents, he wants to see some mechanism in place that lets the public know if they are actually in danger.

He said the siren at the Kunkle fire hall will go off at 11 a.m. Dec. 15 as a test drill so the public can hear and know when it goes off after that date that they might be in real danger.

Ide said that given the noise of Friday’s incident, she’s not even sure they’d be able to hear the siren.

Still, Dodson wants to work something out.

“We were lucky this time, and not a few people were very nervous,” he said. “We all deserve better than that.”

bbaker@wcexaminer.com

Pennsylvanians want more electricity to come from renewable sources

live.psu.edu/story/60984#nw69
Thursday, August 30, 2012

There is broad support for increasing the amount of renewable energy production from sources such as wind in the state.

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — There is broad public support among Pennsylvania residents for increased renewable-energy generation, according to a study recently conducted by researchers in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences.

The research found that Pennsylvanians rate hydropower, solar electricity and wind power highest among electricity generation technologies, followed by nuclear power and natural gas. The results indicate that the average Pennsylvania household is willing to pay an extra $55 per year to increase renewable-energy production by an amount equal to 1 percent of Pennsylvania electricity consumption.

The study, “Pennsylvanians’ Attitudes Toward Renewable Energy,” was conducted by Clare Hinrichs, associate professor of rural sociology, and Richard Ready, professor of agricultural and environmental economics, with assistance from doctoral students John Eshleman and James Yoo. The project was funded by a grant from the Center for Rural Pennsylvania, a legislative agency of the Pennsylvania General Assembly.

“The dominant message that came across was that there is broad support for increasing the amount of renewable energy production in the state, and there is broad support for the state taking an active role in encouraging that,” Ready said. “The majority of Pennsylvanians support strengthening the state’s alternative-energy portfolio standard that mandates that a certain amount of electricity comes from renewable sources.”

Ready noted that researchers were surprised they did not find a single group of respondents who disagreed. Read more

Energy a focus at Penn State’s Ag Progress Days

live.psu.edu/story/60528#nw69
Monday, July 30, 2012

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Energy — be it solar, wind, biofuels from plants or natural gas extracted from the Marcellus Shale — again will be a focus at Ag Progress Days, Aug. 14-16.

New this year is the Renewable Energy Showcase, a series of presentations on energy resources and conservation practices, to be held on Tuesday, Aug. 14, in the Learning Center Tent at Main and East 9th streets (below the Pasto Museum).

“These will be short, informative presentations by industry experts and Penn State Extension energy specialists,” said Ed Johnstonbaugh, extension educator, who is coordinating the showcase. “The topics will focus on conservation, solar and wind energy, and biogas and biomass energy. We have a great lineup of educational and thought-provoking presentations.”

Topics will be presented all three days at the following times:

Noon — Conservation
–Travel Adventures on a Solar-Powered Canal Boat
–Energy Efficiency and Conservation to Lower Costs
–Southwest Pa. Renewable Energy Incubator Project Update

1 p.m. — Solar and Wind Energy
–Solar Energy 101, Financing Options, System Design, and Combination Benefits
–Why Wind? Developing the Partnerships

2:15 p.m. — Biogas and Biomass Energy
–Manure Cures: Benefits of Biogas
–Switchgrass Pellets for Fuel
–Warm Season Grasses as Bioenergy Crops and for Environmental Benefits
–Woody Crops as Biomass Energy Resources

Ag Progress Days visitors also will have the opportunity to talk with commercial exhibitors involved in alternative-energy opportunities and conservation in the Energy Conservation Area on West 9th Street.

In addition, energy crops and biofuels will be the subject of an exhibit in the new Joseph D. Harrington Crops, Soils, and Conservation Building at the end of East 5th Street. Information will be available about several varieties of plants that can be grown by farmers in the Northeast and converted into energy.

“Our team is working to develop bioenergy cropping systems that provide value-added co-products and soil-conservation benefits in addition to bioenergy,” said Dan Ciolkosz, extension associate who  specializes in energy crops. “This work will be on display at Ag Progress Days.”

Show attendees also can collect fact-based and timely information on issues related to Marcellus Shale exploration, leasing and drilling from Penn State extension educators and commercial vendors at the Marcellus Center on West 10th Street.

“The development of the Marcellus Shale has impacted the agricultural community in many ways,” said Tom Murphy, extension educator and co-director of Penn State’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research.

“Our focus this year at Ag Progress Days will be to present science-based information on topics ranging from the latest research on industry workforce development to remediation techniques after pipeline installation, and many other related subjects in between.”

Sponsored by Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences, Ag Progress Days is held at the Russell E. Larson Agricultural Research Center at Rock Springs, nine miles southwest of State College on Route 45. Hours are 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Aug. 14; 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Aug. 15; and 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Aug. 16. Admission and parking are free.

For more information, visit the Ag Progress Days website at http://apd.psu.edu. Twitter users can find and share information about the event by using the hashtag #agprogress.

Air quality concerns raised as gas compressor stations multiply

The number of natural gas compressor stations planned for Northeastern Pennsylvania is multiplying as companies lay more pipelines to carry Marcellus Shale gas to customers.

The state has issued or is considering 29 air quality permits for separate stations in the northeast region, all of them in Susquehanna, Wyoming and Luzerne counties, according to a tally by the Department of Environmental Protection. Nearly two dozen of the permits are for stations planned within a 15-mile radius of the Susquehanna County seat in Montrose.

DEP has issued 383 of the permits statewide since October 2005, according to the agency’s tally. Not all of the permitted stations have been built and some may never materialize.

The permits cover facilities related to gas production, including compressor stations and dehydration units that strip liquid from the gas and speed it up for transport through interstate pipelines.

Each station emits a mix of pollutants – volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), formaldehyde and greenhouse gasses – in varying amounts that are limited by the type of permit governing the site.

Residents concerned about the proliferating stations’ impact on air quality have brought basic questions to public hearings in the region that are sometimes held as the state considers issuing permits: How many compressor stations will be built here? What is the combined impact of all these new pollution sources? When, if ever, can the state say stop?

The state considers the cumulative effect of the compressors using an existing network of monitoring stations that measure the ambient air quality, mostly in urban areas, Mark Wejkszner, DEP’s regional air  quality program manager, told an audience at a hearing this spring in Susquehanna County. The closest monitors are in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, about 30 miles away.

Pollution levels above federal air quality standards measured at those stations would determine if the state issues fewer or stricter permits, he said, but “right now, we’re in compliance with all of them with a lot of leeway.”

Environmental groups have criticized the state in lawsuits, letters to federal regulators and in public comments on proposed permits and regulations arguing that DEP is not doing all it can under the law to limit the amount of pollution the oil and gas facilities are allowed to emit.

They say that the state’s current air quality monitoring network is inadequate to measure the impacts of gas drilling and infrastructure in rural areas far from the established monitors clustered in population centers and point out that it is too late now – years into the development of the gas-rich shale – to measure what the air was like before the wells, pipelines and compressors were built.

“DEP does not have a comprehensive monitoring program to monitor contaminants in the air throughout the shale play regions of the state,” PennFuture president George Jugovic Jr. said. “We’re not monitoring for VOCs in these rural areas. We’re not monitoring for toxics. Having already begun this development, baseline is not really a question anymore. Now the question is can we get monitoring to ensure there are  no local or regional impacts as we move forward.”

Jugovic was the director of DEP’s southwest regional office prior to joining PennFuture last year. He testified at a state House Democratic Policy Committee hearing in February that his former regional office alone has permitted over 13,000 tons per year of NOx emissions from compressor stations. If each station emitted the maximum allowed by its permit, it would add up to about 10 percent of the NOx emissions from all sources of air pollution statewide.

Nitrogen oxides, which are commonly released in car exhaust and cigarette smoke and by burning fossil fuels, can contribute to respiratory problems and lung damage on their own as well as when they are combined with sunlight and volatile organic compounds to form smog.

Environmental groups also say the state is not using a tool frequently enough that would limit emissions by considering connected wells, pipelines and compressors owned by the same company and built near one another as one pollution source governed by one, stricter permit – a process called aggregation.

None of the oil and gas air pollution sources permitted in Northeastern Pennsylvania have been aggregated, a DEP spokeswoman said, but all of them have been evaluated to see if the aggregation rules apply.

“It’s like a cumulative impact assessment,” Jugovic said. “If you look at each pollution source individually, it never looks like a significant impact on the air or the water. But whenever you look at it more holistically, you start seeing a bigger potential impact, which may lead you to regulate it differently.”
Read more