Horse out of the barn on gas drilling
http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101205/NEWS04/12050305
December 05, 2010
Horse out of the barn on gas drilling
The federal Interior Department is considering whether natural gas drillers should have to disclose the chemicals they use in hydraulic fracturing. This after-the-fact approach to environmental regulation says a lot about how Americans willingly accept unknown risks for the sake of immediate, relatively short-term energy gratification.
“Fracking” involves injecting millions of gallons of water containing chemicals and sand, deep underground. The pressure of the liquid creates cracks through which natural gas can flow and be extracted. The process is highly controversial because of the possibility of spills and of contaminating groundwater. Already instances of contaminated wells have cropped up in well-drilling areas of Pennsylvania, and many spills have occurred. This represents a major public health and safety concern. After all, the majority of Pocono-area residents rely on wells for their drinking water, and millions of Pennsylvanians and New Yorkers depend on clean drinking water from the Delaware River.
Material safety data sheets that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection obtained from drilling companies list nearly 80 chemicals they use in the fracking process, among them ethylbenzene, methanol, aqueous ammonia and sulfuric acid. These pose a threat to everything from the tiny organisms that live under rocks in streams to birds, fish, animals and humans.
Industry officials argue that disclosing exactly what they use in the fracking process would reveal valuable proprietary information. But as long as regulators allow this drilling method, the public should know the formula for what is flowing into the ground under their property and their neighbors’ property. And certainly workers should know what they may be exposed to. An Oil and Gas Accountability Project study reported that Colorado had about 1,500 reported spills of various types, including fracturing fluids, in five years, while New Mexico had close to 800.
Still, shouldn’t regulators be focusing more on how drillers are extracting gas, rather than on what’s in the fracking fluid? Requiring super-strong well casings would reduce the likelihood of blowouts that could pollute the shallow aquifers we tap for our drinking water. Requiring all drillers to recycle the little fracking fluid they recover would help, too. Instead, regulators say they want to know what’s in the fluid, presumably so that after the fact they can treat the used water, treat humans who’ve been exposed to it, or enable well owners to test for specific contaminants. That’s all about response, not prevention.
In recent years Pennsylvania has become a mecca for gas drilling companies eager to exploit the gas-rich Marcellus shale deposit. The substances flowing underground, and sometimes escaping above ground and into our streams, could produce a dangerous legacy for our future. The real fact is that we are risking our common environment and natural landscape and putting our clean water in jeopardy for the sake of a few decades of natural gas.
Unanimous Vote for Stronger Well Construction Standards
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/newsroom/14287?id=15270&typeid=1
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
11/18/2010
DEP Secretary Praises Unanimous Vote for Stronger Well Construction Standards to Prevent Gas Migration, Protect Public and Environment
Regulations Move to Attorney General for Approval
HARRISBURG — A set of new standards that will make natural gas wells safer were approved unanimously today on a vote of 5-0 by the state’s Independent Regulatory Review Commission, Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger said today.
Hanger praised the IRRC vote, saying the new regulations will, among other things, impose more stringent construction standards on gas wells, making them less likely to allow natural gas to escape and contaminate water supplies or cause safety concerns.
The final-form regulations now go to the state Office of Attorney General for final review and approval. The regulations were deemed approved by the House and Senate Environmental Resources and Energy committees.
“When gas migrates from a poorly constructed gas well through the ground, it can contaminate water supplies or build up to explosive levels in water wells or even homes,” said Hanger. “These strong rules will eliminate or significantly reduce the problem of gas migration from poorly designed or constructed gas wells, as long as the rules are followed or enforced.”
Hanger added that the new rules also will require drillers to report production and waste volumes electronically and to submit a detailed report of the chemicals they use in the hydraulic fracturing – or fracking – process. In addition to these important provisions, operators will be required to keep a list of emergency contact phone numbers at the well site and follow a new set of instructions on what steps to take in the event of a gas migration incident.
The regulations also include provisions clarifying how and when blow-out prevention equipment is to be installed and operated.
The Environmental Quality Board approved the regulations on a final vote of 15-1 in October, after receiving nearly 2,000 public comments during the comment period and a series of five public hearings. A majority of the comments supported the new regulations.
In drafting the regulations, DEP also met with numerous oil and gas operators, industry groups and environmental groups to discuss the regulations in detail.
The department used the public’s input to make several important changes to the regulations, which further improved the well-design requirements to prevent gas migration incidents, including:
· A provision that requires operators to have a pressure barrier plan to minimize well control events;
· A provision that requires operators to condition the wellbore to ensure an adequate bond between the cement, casing and the formation;
· Provisions that require the use of centralizers to ensure casings are properly positioned in the wellbore; and
· A provision that improves the quality of the cement placed in the casing that protects fresh groundwater.
Once all reviews and approvals are obtained, the regulations will go into effect upon publication in the PA Bulletin.
For more information, visit www.depweb.state.pa,us, and select “Public Participation.”
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg PA., 17120
CONTACT:
John Repetz, Department of Environmental Protection
717-787-1323
Halliburton unveils website with fracking details
http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFN1526804120101115?sp=true
Halliburton unveils website with fracking details
By Ayesha Rascoe
Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:36pm GMT
* Halliburton outlines chemicals in 3 fracking products
* EPA issued subpoena for Halliburton on fracking fluids
WASHINGTON, Nov 15 (Reuters) – Halliburton (HAL.N: Quote) unveiled a new website on Monday offering some details about the mix of chemicals used in a natural gas drilling technique, as the company attempts to allay public concerns about the impact of the practice on drinking water.
The new website outlines the make-up and concentration of the chemicals contained in three of its products commonly used for hydraulic fracturing in Pennsylvania.
(Website: http://www.halliburton.com/hydraulicfracturing )
“We believe this effort represents an important and substantive contribution to the broader long-term imperative of transparency,” David Adams, a Halliburton vice president, said in a statement.
The move follows the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision last week to subpoena Halliburton to force the company to turn over information about the chemicals it produces for hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. [ID:nN0983184]
But Halliburton said the website is not a response to EPA’s actions or meant to satisfy the agency’s demands.
“That was not the intent. What we’ve done is try to provide information in a way that the public can understand,” a Halliburton spokeswoman said on a conference call.
Fracking is a process that injects a mixture of water, sand and chemicals into rock formations to stimulate oil and natural gas production. [ID:nN18229665]
Although it has been around for decades, use of the drilling practice has exploded in recent years as companies use it to extract unconventional yet abundant reserves of shale gas.
The expansion of shale gas drilling in states such as Pennsylvania has raised ire of some homeowners in areas near gas development, who complain the drilling has contaminated their drinking water.
Environmental groups have called for more federal oversight of the practice and complete disclosure of all the chemicals involved.
Energy companies argue that the practice is safe, pointing out that it is done thousands of feet below ground, much deeper than most water sources.
In response to public concerns, some companies have begun attempting to make information about the chemicals used in fracking more accessible to the public.
Halliburton said its website, which does not list the chemicals used in individual well sites, will expand in the future to include details about fracking fluids for every state where the company’s services are used. (Reporting by Ayesha Rascoe; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)
Fixes: Clean Water at No Cost? Just Add Carbon Credits
Fixes: Clean Water at No Cost? Just Add Carbon Credits
By By TINA ROSENBERG
Published: November 15, 2010
In America, I turn on the faucet and out pours water. In much of the world, no such luck. Nearly a billion people don’t have drinkable water. Lack of water ─ and the associated lack of toilets and proper hygiene ─ kills 3.3 million people a year, most of them children under five.
Lack of access to clean water is one of the world’s biggest health problems. And it is one of the hardest to solve. Lots of different groups dig wells and lay pipes ─ but the biggest challenge comes after the hardware is in.
The villages of Africa and South Asia are littered with the ghosts of water projects past. A traveler winding through the dirt roads and trails of rural India or Ethiopia will find wells, pumps and springs with taps ─ but most of the wells will be contaminated, the pumps broken, the taps rusted away. When the British group WaterAid began its work in the Konso district of southwestern Ethiopia in 2007, the first thing it did was look at what had come before. It found that of 35 water projects built in the area, only nine were functioning.
Pieter Bauermeister Water must be transported by hand when there is an absence of fresh water in villages. These women in rural Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa, trek one and a half hours to gather water from Nongoma, a larger town.
People who work on providing clean water in poor countries estimate that about half the projects fall into disrepair soon after their builders move on. Sometimes someone loots the pump. Or it breaks and no one knows how to fix it. Or perhaps spare parts are available only in major cities. Or the needed part costs too much for the village to afford ─ even if it is just a few dollars.
Unlike one-shot vaccines, water systems need to function all day, every day, forever. So sustainability ─ the issue we find so important that it started off the Fixes series ─ is particularly crucial. It’s important to donors, who don’t want to see their money wasted. It’s important to the groups that do the work: no project is successful unless it’s taken over by local people to run. And it’s most crucial to villagers themselves, who grow cynical about promises after they see project after project inaugurated only to fail.
Now there’s a new way to save water projects from an early death: make clean water a for-profit business, charging people an unusual price: zero. Several multinational companies, such as Bechtel and Suez, already run for-profit water systems in cities around the world. These companies have attracted a lot of criticism, especially for the way they treat rural people and slum dwellers. The companies have little incentive to lay pipes to reach people who are far away, and if they do, they charge very high prices. I’m talking about something different: a water business run by a company that has headquarters in Switzerland, Vestergaard Frandsen, that plans to provide clean water to some of the world’s poorest people and charge them nothing.
Where will the profits come from? Polluters.
What will make this work are the global carbon credit markets. These markets were established after the 2007 Kyoto Protocol to limit greenhouse gases that cause climate change. The markets provide a way for wealthy countries and corporations to offset their emissions of these gases by financing other projects that will reduce emissions. Projects can be awarded credits if auditors certify they will cut carbon emissions ─ for example, a new wind energy plant whose output will replace coal energy. These credits can then be purchased by polluters, be they countries, companies or individuals. The system is highly controversial, as it allows wealthy countries to go on polluting as long as they can pay others to cut back for them. But it does provide financial incentives for the creation of green projects.
Most of the projects that have won certification from the carbon markets are big energy plants in India and China. Less than three percent of the credits come from projects in Africa, and none of them help people get clean water. But one of the carbon credit markets does grant credits for cookstoves that use solar energy instead of wood or coal.
Vestergaard Frandsen’s idea is similar. By giving people an alternative to boiling water in order to purify it, it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in countries where trees are scarce. Boiling water is harmful for many reasons. Burning coal produces greenhouse gases, and certain ways of burning wood can, too. The indoor pollution created by burning wood or coal is a prime cause of respiratory disease. The constant need for wood is deforesting poor countries. Women who are already spending hours collecting water must spend additional hours collecting firewood as well. From the standpoint of the carbon credit markets, however, the key point is that boiling water will eventually create demand for fossil fuel, as many areas are running out of trees. So for many reasons, finding a usable alternative to boiling is good for people and good for the earth.
Now it can be good business as well. If you are a hiker or camper, you may have heard about Vestergaard Frandsen’s LifeStraw. It’s a hollow stick equipped with a series of filtering membranes. You put the end of the stick in a river or puddle ─ or a toilet, for that matter ─ and suck on it. By the time the water hits your lips, it is clean and safe ─ its filters are fine enough to trap virtually all bacteria, viruses and parasites. The product has a bigger cousin called the LifeStraw Family. You hang it on your wall, pour dirty water in the top, open the tap and clean water comes out the bottom. No power or replacement parts are required. Each unit cleans about 18,000 liters of water ─ enough for a family for three years. The market cost of the unit averages out at a penny per ten liters of water purified.
Vestergaard Frandsen will distribute the LifeStraw Family for free. It is helping to sponsor a traveling campaign through the western part of Kenya set for April, 2011, that will reach 4 million families. The campaign bundles various products ─ each family that attends will get insecticide-treated bednets to protect against malaria, AIDS tests and counseling and a free LifeStraw Family.
The company is on the way to getting approval from one of the carbon credit markets for the LifeStraw Family, and expects to win it in February. Approval will provide a way for Vestergaard Frandsen to recoup its $24 million initial investment and to turn the product into a sustainable business ─ at no cost to users. It will earn credits for preventing greenhouse gas emissions, credits that polluters will then buy. The company will open free repair shops across western Kenya. Every three years, at the end of the units’ lifespan, it will replace them at no charge.
Why would a for-profit business do all this? Because the amount of carbon credits it receives depends on how much boiling it prevents ─ and therefore, how much water is purified. (Periodic audits will answer these questions.) The more the product is used, the more credits Vestergaard Frandsen is awarded, and so the more money it makes. So it has a strong financial incentive to maximize the number of families using the purifiers and keep them working properly.
You will notice that this financing method pays for performance. Normally, water projects get financing from donors up front. Whether they end up working or lasting is rarely even measured, because there is no cost for failure. But the carbon credit market penalizes failure. Vestergaard Frandsen also now has a good monetary reason to improve the product ─ to create one, for example, that can be refurbished instead of replaced, or one that lasts longer than three years. This kind of incentive is a rarity with products that are given away.
One problem that the LifeStraw program does not address is water collection: someone still has to fetch water to pour through it. Getting water is staggeringly burdensome — in southwestern Ethiopia, I met women who spend eight hours a day or more each day traveling back and forth to the river with 50-pound yellow plastic jerry cans on their backs. The need to help mom while she fetches water is a primary reason that many girls don’t go to school. Fetching water enslaves women.
But if the LifeStraw Family succeeds as a profitable business, it is possible that the carbon credit markets could also be used to finance many different types of projects. On Saturday, I’ll write about the wider possibilities. For villagers in Africa, however, none would be as important as using them to finance traditional water projects ─ ones like wells with pumps that do bring water closer to its users. After all, a family that used to boil river water is also cutting down on its emissions when its village gets a clean-water well. If running water pumps in rural Africa suddenly becomes good business, pumps will proliferate ─ and they will be maintained.
Tina Rosenberg won a Pulitzer Prize for her book “The Haunted Land: Facing Europe’s Ghosts After Communism.” She is a former editorial writer for The Times and now a contributing writer for the paper’s Sunday magazine. Her new book, “Join the Club: How Peer Pressure Can Transform the World,” is forthcoming from W.W. Norton.
Cabot Oil & Gas Responds to Pennsylvania DEP Announcement
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cabot-oil-gas-responds-to-pennsylvania-dep-announcement-2010-10-01?reflink=MW_news_stmp
Press Release
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:10 p.m. EDT
Cabot Oil & Gas Responds to Pennsylvania DEP Announcement
PITTSBURGH, Oct 01, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) — Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation (Cabot) today issued a statement reaffirming its position that its operations are safe, environmentally responsible and did not cause methane gas to migrate into Northeastern Pennsylvania water supplies. In addition, the company stated that though it does not agree with Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP) Secretary John Hanger’s assertion that the company is at fault, Cabot is committed to ensuring residents in an area of Pennsylvania deemed by the Secretary to have been “affected” continue to be offered and provided with clean drinking water.
Cabot’s statement is in response to a PaDEP press conference held yesterday in Dimock Township, Pa., during which the PaDEP announced its plans to proceed with a new water line from a neighboring community for the benefit of 18 or fewer homes. The PaDEP estimates the water line would cost about $11.8 million — or about $656,000 per home for which it would be built.
“Though methane was pre-existing in the area’s water prior to Cabot’s drilling, we, just like the PaDEP, want to help solve this problem,” said Dan O. Dinges, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer. “Our difference with the PaDEP is that the solution to methane in water has been venting water wells and putting them on water treatment devices, which cleans up the water quickly. We do not know why Secretary Hanger has changed his mind from endorsing separators to wanting this new pipeline that could take years and cost millions. As well, we have just drilled a new water well at one of the households that is making clean water, so we know that this is also a viable solution,” Dinges added.
In the Modified Consent Order dated April 15, 2010, Cabot attempted to satisfy the PaDEP demands by agreeing to plug certain wells and to offer methane separation systems to the litigants as the solution to the water problems, which Cabot strongly believes it did not cause. This was the preferred solution that PaDEP insisted upon and to which Cabot agreed. The order was clear in that the methane separation systems were the final solution; once Cabot made the offer to “affected” residents (which Cabot did), the company was deemed to have met the PaDEP requirement. The systems are now sitting in a Cabot equipment yard.
“Additionally, it was clear at the time that if we did not agree to this solution, an enforcement action was to follow completely shutting down the Company’s Pennsylvania operations; therefore, we were forced to accept this demand,” explained Dinges.
In the following months, the PaDEP told Cabot that it wanted more time in order to convince the litigants that the separation systems were the solution and requested Cabot agree to amend the order to remove the separator language. Cabot complied with this request, trusting the PaDEP’s assurance that separators were still the solution. After the plaintiffs’ lawyer publically stated in July that the plaintiffs’ preferred solution was a public water line from Montrose, this culminated in the PaDEP announcement in August that a new pipeline from Montrose is the solution, with no mention of the separators. Additionally, PaDEP disclosed that Cabot was expected to pay for the pipeline.
“The abrupt change in the PaDEP’s proposals — going from separators to building a multi-million dollar, multi-year pipeline project is an obvious attempt at placating the litigants and that is why we have taken our position,” stated Dinges.
Methane migration is a long standing issue in the area and throughout Pennsylvania and one that has been solved by the separation systems and by simply venting water well spaces. The allegation this morning that the water is unsafe has not been asserted by anyone. The only danger presented by methane is if it escapes into a confined space and that is solved as stated by a PaDEP publication, which instructs one to vent the water well to the atmosphere.
SOURCE: Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation
Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation
George E. Stark, Director, External Affairs
w: 412-249-3909
george.stark@cabotog.com
FRAC This!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-abrahams/frac-this_b_746217.html
FRAC This!
Rebecca Abrahams
Film and Television Producer
Posted: September 30, 2010 09:00 PM
Hydraulic gas drilling, also known as fracture drilling or fracking, promises to scale back the United States’ dependence on foreign sources of energy. But the development of natural gas underneath 50% of New York, 65% of Pennsylvania, about half of Ohio and all of West Virginia has sparked fierce debate among environmentalists and energy companies.
The process involves drilling down into rock formation and exploding it by using very high pressure liquid, mainly water – between two and seven million gallons of water per well mixed with sand and toxic chemicals. The deep pressure explosion results in freeing gas from shale rock to produce hydrocarbons.
At issue – whether the remaining chemicals are leaching into the drinking water of millions of Americans. Gas and oil companies now have their sights set on the Marcellus Shale, an interconnected watershed that delivers water to 16 million people in New York, Philadelphia, southern New Jersey, Ohio and West Virginia. Environmentalists are sounding the alarm that widespread drilling could taint the water supply.
In 2004, an Environmental Protection Agency study found no evidence of water contamination caused by fracking, a procedure used in this country for more than 60 years. But according to EPA employee and whistleblower Weston Wilson, the report was “scientifically unsound.” One of the study’s three main authors, Jeffrey Jollie points out that “it was never intended to be a broad, sweeping study.” It should be further noted that no samples were taken during the study.
Meanwhile, there are growing concerns about pollution, water contamination and health risks associated with hydraulic fracturing. One Dallas-Ft.Worth couple recently abandoned their home after doctors discovered fracking chemicals in their blood stream and lungs. In Dimock, Pennsylvania, a woman’s well water tested positive for ethylene glycol, propylene glycol and toluene after natural gas companies drilled in her area. Other residents were able to light their tap water on fire.
Josh Fox’s documentary “Gasland”, offers a compelling argument against hydraulic fracturing. The film follows Fox on his cross-country quest for answers about hydraulic fracking. Fox declined $100,000 to allow a gas company to drill on his Delaware River Basin property. He says the energy giants are destroying the environment just to make a profit.
“It’s a scam. It’s changing our entire American environmental democratic system to shoot the profits of energy companies. They can dump toxic materials into rivers and streams. They can pollute the air and they don’t have to clean up afterwards.”
Fox is referring to an exemption in the 2005 Energy Policy Act known as the Halliburton Loophole which prevents the EPA from regulating hydraulic gas drilling. The provision was a single page inserted in one of the longest bills ever passed. A bi-partisan majority signed off on the measure, including Senator Obama, with only 25 lawmakers voting against it, including Sens. Biden, Clinton, Kyl, Kennedy, McCain, Schumer and Voinavich to name a few. The reality is, many lawmakers probably never read the near 1400 page measure.
But as Fox points out, “There were people who understood what the exemption was but I think most of it sounds like there was a lot of ignorance about hydraulic fracturing in 2005. It hadn’t been done a lot. It really exploded after the measure was passed.”
Now Congress is considering a measure to regulate fracture drilling in advance of the EPA’s 2012 study on the process. The FRAC Act would require energy companies to fully disclose chemicals used in fracture drilling. Earlier this year, two top oil-field executives voluntarily disclosed to the House Energy Committee that their companies had pumped hundreds of thousands of diesel fluid in their fracturing compound – in violation of a voluntary agreement with the EPA.
Yet industry executives insist fracking poses no environmental health risks. Institute for Energy Research President Thomas J. Pyle, in response to Amy Harder’s National Journal post on the subject states, “The debate about hydraulic fracturing is more about EPA regulation of the process, which… has been successfully regulated by individual states since the inception of the technology in 1949, than disclosure.”
Pyle adds, “More importantly, by giving the EPA regulatory oversight of this process, the environmental movement scores a victory by shutting down the exploration of oil and natural gas as regulations are written. At its core, that’s exactly what the green movement seeks to accomplish.”
New York Environmental Protection Bureau Chief Peter Lehner, in the same article notes, “… fracking for natural gas is acceptable only if safeguards on the entire extraction process are in place. And right now, they are not. The consequences speak for themselves. Numerous investigations show that insufficiently regulated natural gas extraction has been shown to contaminate drinking water and endanger human health.”
Currently energy companies are exempt from the major environmental laws including the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Air Act, allowing them carte blanche to inject toxic materials into the ground near major water sources without being monitored.
Fox says, “The big problem is that the gas companies are so powerful they are actually convincing the federal government to overlook the damage to the water supply for a short term energy fix. They have enough money that they’ve persuaded state and federal governments that it’s not a bad plan, when it’s a horrible plan. When you start contaminating all the water supply it’s a very scary thing.”
Exxon Mobil’s $41-billion merger last December with natural gas company XTO allows for drilling in the Catskill and Delaware watersheds, which supply drinking water to all of New York City. It’s significant to note a clause in the merger states Exxon can back out of the deal if the Safe Drinking Water Act is reinstated.
“So they know exactly what they’re doing,” Fox says. “They know that stuff poses a hazard to the environment and they’ll get out of it. It’s all about their profit margins.”
A great deal of money is at stake and lawmakers may undoubtedly feel the pressure to support fracture drilling which promises to create 2.8 million jobs. In Pennsylvania, hard hit by the economy, the gas and oil companies have secured 550 drilling permits, creating nearly 30,000 jobs and $240 million in state and local tax revenue.
Fox argues the economic boost is a bad deal for Pennsylvania. “I don’t know why you can’t green and revitalize Pennsylvania’s economy by starting more off the grid houses since there are already more off the grid water supplies than anywhere in the country. It’s the perfect atmosphere. Having small windmills and solar panels and that would be supplementing your energy needs. Besides, once you have destroyed the water supplies, it’s so much more expensive to deal with that problem than it is to deal with an alternative energy source.”
As companies continue to drill, accounts of fracking dangers surface as well. In Allentown, Pennsylvania, 13 families have filed lawsuits against Southwestern Energy Company for allegedly leaking toxic fluid into local groundwater, exposing residents to poisonous chemicals and contaminating their water wells.
New York water may also be under threat. The environmental group Riverkeeper, testifying at an EPA hearing on September 16, 2010, detailed more than 100 cases of water contamination due to fracture drilling across the country.
According to Associated Press:
“Riverkeeper documented more than 20 cases of tainted drinking water in Pennsylvania; more than 30 cases of groundwater and drinking water contamination in Colorado and Wyoming; and more than 10 surface water spills of drilling fluid in the Marcellus Shale region. Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection has logged 1,435 violations of the state’s oil and gas laws in the Marcellus Shale in the last two and a half years.”
With those numbers in mind, Fox notes, “To not be monitoring what toxic chemicals an industry is pumping into the ground is insane, especially in large quantities near a water supply.”
Cabot and DEP clash over Dimock water contamination
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/cabot-and-dep-clash-over-dimock-water-contamination-1.1035426
Cabot and DEP clash over Dimock water contamination
by laura legere (staff writer)
Published: September 29, 2010
A clash between the state’s environmental regulators and gas driller Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. over the cause and solution for contaminated water wells in Dimock Twp. escalated on Tuesday, with the Cabot CEO accusing the Department of Environmental Protection of waging “a public war against us.”
The late- day salvo – in the form of a press release and 29-page letter from Cabot CEO Dan O. Dinges to DEP Secretary John Hanger – came hours after Mr. Hanger described as “very unfortunate and false” an advertisement by Cabot published Tuesday morning in area newspapers that criticized his department and its plan for replacing the contaminated private water supplies in Dimock.
Mr. Hanger could not be reached on Tuesday night to respond to Cabot’s letter.
In the advertisement published in The Times-Tribune and the Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin, Cabot challenged a state plan to compel the natural gas driller to replace the contaminated wells with an estimated 7-mile-long, $10.5 million public water line from Montrose, calling the proposal “unreasonable, unprecedented and … unfair.”
An official announcement of the water replacement plan will be made by Mr. Hanger on Thursday along Carter Road in Dimock, where the department found that Cabot contaminated 14 water wells with methane during its Marcellus Shale drilling operations.
Mr. Hanger said Tuesday he would not detail the plan, which he will explain on Thursday, but he said he was “disappointed” in Cabot’s statements in the ad.
“Cabot would do better spending its money on fixing the problems it caused than buying ads,” he said. “Frankly, the families in Dimock and the people of Pennsylvania deserve much better.”
Mr. Hanger found “particularly false” Cabot’s statement that the department has a “concerning” tendency “to communicate through the media instead of with the Company.”
The secretary said he and his senior team have had weekly calls with Mr. Dinges and other company leaders about the water replacement issue since April. When Mr. Dinges was on vacation and unreachable by satellite phone during a crucial period in the discussions, Mr. Hanger and his advisers communicated with a Cabot team “fully about all these matters” in his absence, Mr. Hanger said.
DEP suspended portions of Cabot’s extensive Marcellus Shale operations in Susquehanna County in April after it found that 14 of the company’s gas wells in Dimock were improperly constructed or overpressured and were causing methane to seep into water wells.
The company has paid more than $360,000 in fines and was ordered to fix the affected water supplies, but at least 11 of the 14 families refused Cabot’s proposed solution – methane elimination systems to be installed in each of the homes – saying the systems are inadequate to address the problems.
DEP is also conducting comprehensive testing of the well water in 34 homes in the Dimock area for a wide range of contaminants, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and glycol, after a private testing firm hired by residents detected many of those chemicals in their water, including some at levels above federal drinking water standards.
In its ad on Tuesday, Cabot said it does not believe it caused the contamination and “intends to fight these allegations through its scientific findings.”
It also criticized the logic of DEP’s water replacement plan.
“No private business model would support such an investment (in excess of $10 million) for so few users,” Mr. Dinges wrote in the ad. He said the water line is being planned without any study of the economic viability of the project, its physical impact on the route and how long it will take to install.
In the press release and letter distributed late in the day, Mr. Dinges went further with his criticisms, calling the department’s behavior toward Cabot “arbitrary and unreasonable” and saying that the department has ignored evidence “proving (Cabot) is not responsible for methane gas migration into local water wells … preferring instead to base unprecedented and costly mandates on biased and unscientific opinions and accounts.”
In support of its position, the company said it drilled a new water well for a resident who lives in the 9-square-mile area identified by the department as affected by the methane contamination and did not detect any gas in that water, Cabot spokesman George Stark said.
In its press release, the company also cites local emergency response officials who said they found no evidence that an explosion blasted a concrete slab off a resident’s water well on Jan. 1, 2009 – the incident that first spurred the department’s investigation into methane migration.
Asked what else might have broken and tossed aside the slab, Mr. Stark said, “We don’t have a theory as to how or why. What we do have is, when you have an explosion, there are certain tell-tale signs. And we didn’t see any of those.”
The attorney for Dimock families who have sued Cabot for damaging their water, property and health could not be reached Tuesday evening after Cabot released its letter.
In a statement released earlier in the day, attorney Leslie Lewis said she applauded the “courage and decisiveness” shown by the governor and Mr. Hanger on the water replacement issue and called the state’s plan to provide centrally sourced water to the residents “a considered and necessary one.”
She also criticized Cabot’s advertisement Tuesday, calling it “just another example of Cabot’s cynical attempts to divide the community, pitting neighbor against neighbor on the gas development issue.”
“The issue is whether Cabot has contaminated residents’ well water by their operations,” she said. “The unequivocal finding of the DEP and PA government is ‘yes’.”
Contact the writer: llegere@timesshamrock.com
Growing drought threatening well-water levels across state
http://live.psu.edu/story/48713/nw69
Penn State Ag Sciences Newswire – 9.27.2010
Growing drought threatening well-water levels across state
Friday, September 24, 2010
University Park, Pa. — After months of very little rainfall, and with long-term weather forecasts predicting little improvement through fall and early winter, well owners across the state have begun to grow uneasy, according to a groundwater expert in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences.
All of Pennsylvania is under a drought watch, and state officials recently declared a drought warning for 24 counties. The driest counties are in the far eastern and far western parts of the state, bordering Ohio and New Jersey. There is also a very dry region in the southwest around Somerset.
“The last serious drought we had that affected groundwater and well levels across Pennsylvania was in 2002, and I have already begun hearing from some of the people who experienced water-quantity problems with their wells then,” said Bryan Swistock, water resources extension specialist in the college’s School of Forest Resources. “Well owners should be conserving their water.”
This drought started in April, which was a dry month around the state, according to Swistock. That was followed by sporadically dry May, June and July. “August and especially September were very dry throughout the state,” he said. “The drought accelerated pretty rapidly.”
Historically, the current dry conditions are not that impressive, Swistock conceded, but he’s concerned by the current trend. “This drought so far is not a record-breaker by any means, but 2010 was in the top one-third or one-fourth of the state’s drier years in the records going back into the 1800s,” he explained.
“The official NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) long-term weather forecast indicates that this drought will be persistent in Pennsylvania through the winter. It may not get worse, but the outlook shows it is not likely to improve.”
The one caveat in the dry weather forecast is the unpredictable nature of tropical moisture that could find its way to Pennsylvania and ease drought conditions.
“If remnants of one or two of the tropical storms that form in the south Atlantic this fall move northward and track over Pennsylvania, they could eliminate the drought,” Swistock said. “There is a lot of tropical moisture around — but none of it has found its way to Pennsylvania yet.”
To recharge water tables and boost well-water levels, rains must fall before the ground freezes — usually in December — because after that, precipitation is not absorbed by the ground and simply runs off, Swistock pointed out. “We are now at our traditional annual low point for streams and groundwater,” he said.
“This is a critical recharge period we are entering — it’s a dangerous time to be in a drought condition.”
What you can do
Water-conservation measures become critical during times of drought. Homeowners relying on private wells can significantly reduce water consumption by changing habits and installing water-saving devices, according to Swistock.
“In emergency situations, changes in water-use habits can provide quick reductions in water use,” he said. “Examples include flushing the toilet less often, taking shorter showers, washing only full loads of dishes or laundry, and collecting water from roof gutters for outside use.”
It is important to note that certain drought declarations also may require water-use reductions or restrictions on water use, Swistock said. For example, a “drought emergency” declaration bans the nonessential use of water, such as car washing and lawn watering. These regulations apply to everyone, including homeowners with private wells.
Swistock advised water-well owners to monitor nearby groundwater levels online. “You might be able to detect potential problems early and implement water-conservation strategies that may prevent your well from going dry,” he said.
For more information on ways to save water around the home, consult the Penn State Cooperative Extension publications, “22 Ways to Save Water in an Emergency,” “Household Water Conservation” and “Managing Your Well During a Drought.” These publications are available at http://extension.psu.edu/water online.
You can learn about groundwater levels in your area through a website provided by the U.S Geologic Survey. Although not specific to your well, information from monitoring wells will allow you to observe the general trend in groundwater levels in your area. For a list of the available monitoring wells by county, go to http://pa.water.usgs.gov/durplots/well_duration.html online.
For more information on management of wells and springs in Pennsylvania, visit http://www.sfr.cas.psu.edu/water or contact your local Cooperative Extension office.
Shortage of rain must be taken seriously
http://www.tnonline.com/node/135919
Reported on Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Drought warning
Shortage of rain must be taken seriously
Last week, the Pa. Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued a drought warning for our newspaper’s entire coverage area – Carbon, Lehigh, Monroe, Northampton, and Schuylkill Counties.
The combination of lower rain than usual with the excessive summer heat has resulted in stream levels being well below normal.
One only has to see the receding shore line at Mauch Chunk Lake Park to understand how critical the water level has become.
The National Weather Service says rainfall is four inches below normal for the past 90 days in the Lehigh Valley. Carbon County has a 4.5 inch deficit for 90 days while in Monroe County, there is a 5.2 inch rainfall shortage for the three-month period.
The DEP is asking people to conserve water. One of the most common sources of waste water is a leak within your residence, such as a toilet. DEP says a leaking toilet can waste up to 200 gallons of water per day. Although many households are strapped for cash right now, fixing such a leak should be a priority since it can also reduce your monthly water bill.
DEP encourages residents to conserve water by taking showers instead of baths.
Also, keep water in the refrigerator to avoid running water from a faucet until it is cold.
Run your dishwasher only when it is full.
Water is a precious resource and we can’t ignore the fact that levels at our storage facilities are being reduced by the lack of rain. Generally, the water lines aren’t fully restored until spring when a good snow pack melts. A dry winter will make things very critical, so it’s best to start conserving now.
This is especially true if you rely on wells rather than city water.
The DEP could do more to help the situation by making its Web site more user friendly with drought advice, suggestions, and information. Very little is stated on the DEP site about the drought conditions.
After all, it is the DEP which issues drought warnings.
We agree that there is a drought. We have to think ahead, though, to assure that if the drought continues, we’ll still have enough water to meet our every day needs.
By Ron Gower
rgower@tnonline.com
Carbon County, PA Water deficit
http://www.tnonline.com/node/136939
Reported on Friday, September 24, 2010
Carbon County, PA Water deficit
Drought raises concern with local officials
By AMY MILLER amiller@tnonline.com
Carbon County has seen the effects of lower than normal rainfalls over the summer.
During the county commissioners’ meeting on Thursday, Commissioner Wayne Nothstein provided an update on the drought warning that was issued by the state Department of Environmental Protection last Thursday. A drought warning is issued when areas see a significant precipitation deficit as a result of little to no rainfall over a 90-day period. In some counties throughout Pennsylvania, deficits are as great as 5.6 inches below normal.
Nothstein said that Beltzville Lake, located near Lehighton, is down 15 feet as a result of dam releases that are needed to keep the salt water levels down in the rivers; as well as evaporation.
On Wednesday, officials at the lake closed the boat launches at Beltzville for the season because levels were so low.
Nothstein also said that Mauch Chunk Lake is experiencing lower than normal levels. Last week, the lake was down a total of 50 inches, but as of yesterday, the lake was showing that it was down 54 inches.
“It looks like the lake is losing a half inch a day,” he said. “I want to remind everyone, especially in the west side of Jim Thorpe, that is where the water supply comes from for Jim Thorpe.”
Nothstein added that the Lehigh River is also operating on less than half of its normal flow.
“As of Wednesday, the river was flowing at 169 cubic feet per second, which equates to 76,000 gallons per minute,” he said. “The average (normal flow of the Lehigh) over a 27-year period is 167,000 gallons a minute.”
Mark Nalesnik, Carbon County Emergency Management Agency coordinator, also noted that he was told the recreation pool at the Francis E. Walter Dam is completely used up.
He and Nothstein urge residents to try to conserve water usage when they can until the county gets a significant rainfall.
“It’s necessary to conserve water at this point,” Nalesnik said.
Four burn bans have also been put into place in municipalities throughout the county as a result of the drier than normal conditions. Those municipalities include Nesquehoning, Bowmanstown, East Penn Township and Jim Thorpe.
To conserve water, DEP suggests fixing any leaks in household plumbing, installing low-flow or aerators nozzles on shower heads and faucets, taking short showers instead of baths, replacing older washers with front loading washers, running the dishwasher and washing machine only when they are full, avoid running water excessively.
For more tips on conserving water, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us, keyword: drought.
In a related matter, Nothstein also announced that there is help for farmers that have been affected by the drought.
He read a portion of a press release from Speaker of the House Keith McCall (D-Carbon), stating that farmers in Carbon County are eligible to apply for low-interest emergency disaster assistance loans from the federal Department of Agriculture to help recover crop losses associated with the summer’s dry weather.
To apply for the loan, farmers need to contact the Carbon County Farm Service Agency in Lehighton at (610) 377-6300 or visit www.fsa.usda.gov.
Farmers have eight months from Sept. 10, to apply for the loans, the press release states.