MVCAC

mvcac@lists.osenergy.org

1014 discussions

Southern Methodist (Armendariz) Report on Air Pollution in Dallas-Fort Worth
by Dee Fulton 07 Jul '11

07 Jul '11

Came across another great report while surfing on air pollution and shale. I came across these paragraphs in The Tyee, a British Columbia newsletter: http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/07/07/ShaleEmissions/ "Al Armendariz at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas and now a regional manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, got things off to a roaring start in 2009. That's when he calculated that the compressors and equipment required to drill the Barnett Shale (a 5000 square mile region in north Texas) released more smog-forming pollutants than all the cars, trucks and airplanes in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The engineer also recorded that 7,700 wells in the Barnett Shale sent more CO2 and methane into the air than two 750 MW coal-fired power plants." I clicked on the link to the Armendiraz report. Full of good info. Look at the pie chart on page 25 of report......emission sources. http://www.edf.org/documents/9235_Barnett_Shale_Report.pdf Within that report, it says on page 1, Cost effective control strategies are readily available that can substantially reduce emissions, and in some cases, reduce costs for oil and gas operators. These options include: • use of "green completions" to capture methane and VOC compounds during well completions, • phasing in electric motors as an alternative to internal-combustion engines to drive compressors, • the control of VOC emissions from condensate tanks with vapor recovery units, and • replacement of high-bleed pneumatic valves and fittings on the pipeline networks with no-bleed alternatives. Back to The Tyee. A nice tidy summary of the Cornell study. This focuses on GHG impacts of shale drilling. "Then came a real myth buster from Cornell University. The ecologist Robert Howarth crunched some numbers and concluded that methane leaks and venting from shale gas wells (3.6 per cent to 7.9 per cent of production or twice as much as conventional gas) made the resource's carbon footprint 20 per cent to 100 per cent greater than coal over a 20-year period. (Methane has a 72 to 105 times greater impact than CO2 over a 20-year timeframe, but only a 25 to 33 times greater impact over a 100 year timeframe.) Howarth concluded that a lot the methane burped into the atmosphere during flow-back from fracking fluids and well completion. Substituting shale gas for coal or oil, he concluded, "may not have the desired effect of mitigating climate warming."

1 0

Article from NYT
by Wonderlin, William 06 Jul '11

06 Jul '11

This is a very interesting article from the New York Times about how the economic benefits of fracking are not living up to expectations: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1 Bill

2 3

More Fracking Effects
by Linda Shuster 30 Jun '11

30 Jun '11

The British Geological Survey believes earthquakes are a possible effect of fracking: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/small-earthquake-in-blackpool-maj…

1 0

EPA promises action on air pollution
by Dee Fulton 30 Jun '11

30 Jun '11

EPA chief promises action on air pollution from gas drilling by Andrew Travers, Aspen Daily News Staff Writer Wednesday, June 29, 2011 Printer-friendly version Email this Story Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson said Tuesday her agency is working on air quality regulations for areas impacted by natural gas production and hydraulic fracturing. In an interview with National Public Radio’s Michele Norris at the Aspen Ideas Festival, Jackson said her agency is acting to control air quality in areas that are facing new impacts. “You are going to have huge smog problems where you never had them before,” she said. “These are rural areas. ... There is a lot of activity around those wells and that has an impact on air quality — and we know it already. The EPA will soon be coming out with regulations to deal with the air quality around natural gas production.” The regulations are expected to come at the conclusion of an ongoing two-year study. “Fracking,” as the process is commonly known, has been used extensively in Western Colorado and Garfield County to drill wells accessing natural gas deposits. Fracking entails injecting high-pressured chemical cocktails into the ground to break up rocks so the gas can be extracted. Its environmental impacts, or lack thereof, have been hotly debated both locally and nationally. Jackson said in a congressional hearing on fracking last month that there are no known cases of the practice polluting water, despite worries from the environmental community and areas adjacent to natural gas fields. She added Tuesday that keeping groundwater safe from fracking pollution means keeping natural gas companies in line, and monitoring how they protect drinking water while drilling. “If you get a bad operator in there,” she said, “someone who is not responsible, who is not seeing how important it is to get this right, they can contaminate an aquifer.” Meanwhile, she praised the promise of cleaner energy from natural gas production and the economic boom it has provided to areas like Garfield County. “Natural gas is an economic engine in communities that, literally a few years ago, didn’t have one ... All of a sudden they are literally boom towns,” she said. “I think natural gas production is an incredible opportunity for this country to transition to a cleaner fuel.” Whether the burgeoning industry fulfills its promise, she argued, will depend largely on convincing people fracking is safe and that natural gas is profitable. “Natural gas production will thrive in this country,” she said, “unless the American people and investors come to believe it’s not going to be financially viable or it’s going to hurt their health ... The way you avoid that is by stepping up to regulation rather than running from it.” Mistakes during BP spill? Heather Rousseau/Aspen Daily News EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, right, and interviewer Michele Norris, left, host of National Public Radio’s All Things Considered, talk in a forum called “Protecting Public Health and Innovating for a New Energy Future,” during the Aspen Ideas Festival in the Greenwald Pavilion on Tuesday morning. Asked whether she believes her agency made any mistakes during the aftermath of last year’s massive BP oil spill off the coast of Louisiana, Jackson said the agency could have worked more efficiently with the U.S. Coast Guard. She also defended the EPA’s use of chemical dispersants to fight the spill. Jackson praised former Coast Guard head Thad Allen, but acknowledged a power struggle between them on who was in charge of oil on the shore and off of it. “I would have sat down earlier with Thad Allen, who I got along with and have tremendous respect for, and said, ‘Hey, let us do what we do best so that you can do what you do best.’ ... I think that could have helped a lot and I think it would have been a better partnership.” On dispersants, Norris asked Jackson about using chemicals that may have had harmful effects on the Gulf’s ecosystems in unknown and untested ways. Jackson said the risk was worth keeping more of the toxic oil from hitting the shore. “I think it was the right decision,” she said, “because we were trying to stop something that we won’t ever know what would have happened, which is a lot more oil coming on shore over a lot, lot longer period.” She said the struggle for the EPA was in getting BP not to over-use the dispersants, and to educate the public about why they were necessary. “The people of the Gulf region don’t know much,” the New Orleans native said, “but they know it sure doesn’t feel good to be putting millions of gallons of something else in there unless you absolutely have to.” Responding to Gore Jackson appeared to take in stride the recent criticism of her and the Obama administration levied by former Vice President Al Gore in a Rolling Stone magazine article. “Compared to some of the stuff that’s been said to my face, it was pretty mild,” Jackson joked. Gore accused the administration of not countering global warming deniers forcefully enough, and not making the scientific case for global warming in a 7,000-word essay titled “Climate of Denial.” “He has simply not made the case for action,” Gore wrote. “He has not defended the science against the ongoing, withering and dishonest attacks.” Jackson noted the prominence green jobs took in Obama’s campaign, and some of the administration’s work promoting carbon legislation. But, she said, the electorate isn’t calling for immediate action. “They’re not marching on Washington the way they did on Earth Day in the 70s,” she said. And, she added, Obama is doing what he can with the public will he’s been given. “He’s said, ‘Let’s do what we can do,’” Jackson said. andrew(a)aspendailynews.com Online E-edition WEATHER Current: 64° Mostly sunny Outdoor Recreation Movies Games Horoscopes Calendar « June 2011 » S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Visitor Guide Retail Aspen Snowmass Ski & Snowboard Rental Aspen Real Estate Access Aspen Properties Aspen Snowmass Real Estate Carol Dopkin Real Estate Inc. Greg Rulon-Joshua Co. Search Aspen Real Estate Services Aspen Rafting Colorado Fly Fishing Professional Internet Marketing Solutions Lodging Frias Properties of Aspen Ritz Carlton Destination Club Career Opportunities | Site Map | Contact Us Copyright © 2001 - 2011 Aspen Daily News

1 0

Fwd: Public Comment Periods and Public Hearings on 2012 DEP Proposed Rules
by Dee Fulton 28 Jun '11

28 Jun '11

Egads. More reading. dee -----Original Message----- From: WVEC - Don Alexander <paradox(a)spectrumz.com> To: Dee Fulton <dfvet(a)aol.com> Sent: Tue, Jun 28, 2011 12:33 pm Subject: Public Comment Periods and Public Hearings on 2012 DEP Proposed Rules West Virginia Environmental Council Action Alert June 28, 2011 WVEC Alerts Archive Public Comment Periods and Public Hearings on 2012 DEP Proposed Rules The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection has scheduled public hearings and comment periods for its 2012 proposed legislative rules. There are 10 proposed air rules changes this year. Here is the list, with a link to download or view the proposed rules: Division of Air Quality 45CSR8 – Ambient Air Quality Standards 45CSR14 – Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 45CSR16 – Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources 45CSR18 – Combustion of Solid Waste 45CSR19 – Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution Which Cause or Contribute to Nonattainment 45CSR25 – Control of Air Pollution from Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities 45CSR30 – Requirements for Operating Permits 45CSR34 – Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 45CSR35 – Requirements for Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to Applicable Air Quality Implementation Plans 45CSR42– Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Program The public hearing for all air quality rules will take place at 6 p.m. on July 11 in the Dolly Sods Room at DEP’s Charleston headquarters, 601 57th Street S.E., Charleston, WV 25304. The comment period will begin on June 10 and end at the conclusion of the hearing. For more information on any of the DAQ rules call 304-926-0475. There are three other proposed agency rule changes: Division of Water and Waste Management 33CSR1 – Solid Waste Management Rule The public hearing for this rule will begin at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, July 12 in the Coopers Rock Training Room. The comment period will end at the conclusion of the hearing. 33CSR20 – Hazardous Waste Management System The public hearing will take place at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, July 12, in the Coopers Rock Training Room. The comment period will end at the conclusion of the hearing. For more information on any of the Water and Waste Management Rules call 304-926-0495. Division of Land Restoration 60CSR3 – Voluntary Remediation and Redevelopment Rule The public hearing for these rules will start at 6 p.m. on Thursday, July 12, in the Coopers Rock Training Room. The comment period will end at the conclusion of the hearing. For more information on any of the Division of Land Restoration rule call 304-926-0455. Copies of all the rules are available here: http://www.dep.wv.gov/pio/Pages/Rules.aspx Copies of the rules are also available from the Secretary of State’s office. You may also obtain hardcopies of the information by calling the phone numbers listed above. Oral and written comments will be limited to the proposed revisions and will be made a part of the rulemaking record. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Public Information Office at DEP, 601 57th Street S.E., Charleston, WV 25304. Comments may also be e-mailed to DEP.Comments(a)wv.gov . Donald S. Garvin, Jr. WVEC Legislative Coordinator Dsgjr(a)aol.com Don Alexander WVEC E-mail List Coordinator Subscribe or Unsubscribe Online

1 0

June Meeting Minutes
by Linda Shuster 28 Jun '11

28 Jun '11

Attached please find a copy, in pdf format, of the minutes from the June meeting. Linda

1 0

LOE: Natural Gas and Greenhouse Gasses
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 27 Jun '11

27 Jun '11

The quick: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4 <http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4> The long ..... In the Stop the Fracking in Morgantown Industrial Park Facebook Group Jeff Young initiated a discussion about the recent MIT report, http://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/studies/natural-gas-2011.shtml . He said, This is important reading for anyone who wants a serious, broader view of the environmental implications of the gas boom. Key findings are that we could cut the country's greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector by 20% simply by switching from coal to existing natural gas plants. There would also be enormous benefits in reducing mercury, SOx, NOx and other pollutants. As one could easily predict, the discussion became very long, and Jeff recently deleted it. Early in the discussion I introduced him to the Tyndall Study, http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/shalegasreport to provide another perspective. And this is the result: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=5 <http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=5> On a side note: Some of you probably remember how in the past I have spoken about the MIT report, John Deutch, the DOE, and Cheniere. :) Note: In the same LOE show there is also a discussion about injection induced earthquakes: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4 <http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4> -Jonathan

1 1

EPA programs provide useful information on air pollution
by Duane330＠aol.com 27 Jun '11

27 Jun '11

EnviroBytes, a Summary of Issues and Events for weeks ending June 17, 2011 and June 24, 2011 EPA OFFERS ADVICE TO HELP ASTHMATICS DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS EPA's asthma program is offering useful advice to asthma sufferers and other vulnerable populations to reduce their exposure to asthma triggers and prevent unnecessary admission to hospitals and emergency rooms. Asthma affects 25 million people in the United States and one out of every 10 school-age children. It helps to keep aware of rising air pollutant levels through EPA's Air Quality Index website (_http://www.airnow.gov/_ (http://www.airnow.gov/) ) and limit strenuous outdoor activities when pollution levels are high. For more information, go to _http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/asthma/asthma.htm_ (http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/asthma/asthma.htm) and _http://www.epa.gov/asthma/awm/_ (http://www.epa.gov/asthma/awm/) . EPA IMPROVES INFORMATION ON TOXICITY AND EXPOSURE TO INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS EPA announced the release of two new chemical safety databases to improve public access to the toxicity and safety of chemicals. _ToxCastDB_ (http://actor.epa.gov/actor/faces/ToxCastDB/Home.jsp) (data from screening 1,000 chemicals) facilitates prioritizing chemicals requiring further testing. _(ToxRefDB)_ (http://actor.epa.gov/toxrefdb/faces/Home.jsp) (30 years of animal toxicity studies) provides data on exposure statistics including amounts found in food, drinking water, air, dust, indoor surfaces and urine. They are connected through the _ACToR_ (http://actor.epa.gov/) online resource that collects, links and compares data on more than 500,000 chemicals from more than 500 public sources. FEDERAL RADON ACTION PLAN BRINGS AWARENESS OF THE DANGERS OF RADON TO LOW-INCOME FAMILIES EPA joined forces with other federal agencies to reduce exposure to radon -- a naturally occurring, invisible and odorless radioactive gas -- to protect Americans from the leading cause of lung cancer in non-smokers and of an estimated 21,000 deaths each year. The Federal Action Plan promotes awareness of radon's dangers to approximately 7.5 million buildings and homes and helps low-income families protect their homes and loved ones. For more information, go to _http://www.epa.gov/radon/action_plan.html_ (http://www.epa.gov/radon/action_plan.html) EPA EXTENDS PUBLIC COMMENT ON A PROPOSED DRAFT RULE TO REDUCE MERCURY AND OTHER TOXIC POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS On June 21, EPA extended the comment period on the proposed draft mercury and air toxics standards rule by 30 days from July 5 to Aug. 4 while not altering the final issuance of the standards in November 2011. More than half of all coal-fired power plants already use widely available pollution control technologies to meet the standards and protect public health. The remaining roughly 44 percent of coal-fired plants are also expected to follow suit to reduce pollutants, prevent heart attacks, and premature deaths. For more information, go to _http://epa.gov/airquality/powerplanttoxics/_ (http://epa.gov/airquality/powerplanttoxics/)

1 0

Quote of the week: "wing nut organizations ... friends of the whatever"
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Jun '11

25 Jun '11

The Associated Press June 21, 2011 Gas industry cranks up PR push on W.Va. drilling By VICKI SMITH, MORGANTOWN, W.Va. As the rhetoric heats up over natural gas drilling in West Virginia's portion of the Marcellus shale field and opposition to the unconventional deep wells grows, the industry is cranking up the public relations machine. At a conference in Morgantown on Tuesday, the Independent Oil and Gas Association of West Virginia touted its 4-week-old "Just Beneath the Surface" campaign and website. President Mike McCown said it's designed to provide factual information to anti-drilling groups he referred to as "wing nut organizations ... friends of the whatever" -- groups that he argues should be supporting one of the state's most promising economic engines. _http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9O0EMFO0.htm_ (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9O0EMFO0.htm)

1 0

Fw: Cumulative impacts, aggregation for Marcellus pipelines
by James Kotcon 25 Jun '11

25 Jun '11

This is a pretty major issue, and I think the Army Corps is on the right track. JBK >>> "Donald C. Strimbeck" <dcsoinks(a)comcast.net> 6/25/2011 4:23 AM >>> Army Corps of Engineers, Marcellus Shale firms spar Marcellus companies worry new permitting rules may delay pipeline projects Premium content from Pittsburgh Business Times - by Anya Litvak Date: Friday, June 24, 2011, 6:00am EDT The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is butting heads with some Marcellus Shale companies who say the agency’s latest permit rules will delay pipeline projects. The federal agency, which regulates construction that involves dredging or filling of U.S. waters, has issued a clarification on how projects, such as pipelines that cross such waters, should be evaluated on their environmental impacts. The Corps says the clarification, which defines what constitutes a single project big enough to require the agency’s approval, won’t have an impact on how the Corps functions and is meant to be a guide to applicants. Yet, some in the Marcellus Shale industry are convinced the agency’s approach will mean more projects will fall under its scope and more of them will be delayed because of it. “Under the new (standard) they’re saying everything from the wellhead to the transmission line is a single project,” said Rob McHale, manager of environmental regulatory affairs at MarkWest Liberty Midstream & Resources LLC, a division of Denver-based MarkWest Energy Partners LP. McHale said the staffing constraints at the Corps and at other agencies required to review pipeline projects, such as the Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission, will mean, “the timing (of permits) will slow significantly.” But Wade Chandler, Pennsylvania permits chief for the Corps’ Baltimore District, which processes two-thirds of Marcellus activity applications in the state, cautions that if there are more permits coming his way, it’s because there’s simply more activity in the Marcellus shale. “Our scopes are limited to our permit areas,” which have not changed, Wade said. “We’re not expanding anything else.” WHAT MAKES A PROJECT Since 1988, the Army Corps, which regulates impacts to rivers, streams and wetlands, has allowed the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to unilaterally issue permits for projects whose impact to such waters is limited to less than 250 feet. If the impact is more than that, the application must be sent to the Corps for approval before the DEP can permit it. This program, which is revised every five years, is starting a new iteration July 1, with the definition of what constitutes a single project now spelled out in a newly added definitions section to make sure each permittee and regulatory agency is administering the law the same way. Whether a gas pipe will be judged as a single and complete project depends on the Corps’ new standard of whether it has independent utility: That is, would it be built even if other pipelines around it weren’t? According to Mark Haibach, vice president of ecological services with Civil & Environmental Consultants Inc., some Corps districts considered each stream crossing as a single and complete project, so a pipeline crossing five streams would be counted as five projects, with each one’s impact judged against the 250-foot threshold. Other districts, especially those in the area of the Marcellus within the past year, have treated all five crossings as part of a single project, summing up impacts and thereby making more projects fall under the Corps’ domain. The Army Corps’ new guidance makes it clear that regulators should consider as a single project all stream crossings that fit into a single pipeline project. INDUSTRY CONCERNS Currently, MarkWest’s stream crossing projects that don’t reach the 250-foot threshold get a DEP permit within 45 to 60 days, according to McHale. Those that need Army Corps approval take 60 to 75 days for MarkWest, though McHale said other companies have complained of longer waiting periods. MarkWest has had only a handful of projects go through the Corps review thus far, but McHale expects that number to jump once everything is consistently evaluated as a combined impact. For CONSOL Energy, getting a pipeline permit takes between nine months to a year, according to Katharine Fredriksen, vice president for environmental strategy and regulatory affairs, because many of its projects go through exceptional quality waters and require a more in-depth review. “Right now, pipelines are really the biggest bottleneck to actually getting Marcellus gas to market,” she said. The increased activity in general and what Fredriksen described as the Corps’ “expanded role” in pipeline projects will cause further delays, she said. Last year, testifying before the state’s House Republican Policy Committee, Ted Wurfel, Chief Oil & Gas’ environmental, safety and regulatory affairs manager, spoke on behalf of the industry, saying the “Marcellus Shale Coalition believes the DEP should return to … considering individual stream crossings as single and complete projects consistent with the applicable regulations.” “There’s always some difference in the way individual Corps districts will implement regulations,” Haibach said. But if the new permit program will cause the Corps to review more projects, it will be following a trend already in motion, he said. “For the last year, the Corps kind of reacted to the Marcellus Shale activity and the increase in project activity by increasing their scrutiny of projects,” he said. “Especially on pipeline projects, they’ve been opting to review projects more frequently.” Not everyone is convinced the Corps’ regulation will cause problems. The issue may be less about the actual permitting time lines than a general “sense that this is an attempt to federalize gas collection projects,” said Tom Johnston, assistant VP for environmental services with Harrisburg-based engineering group Skelly and Loy Inc., who dismissed the sentiment. “I don’t know that this is going to add as much burden to the gas companies as the gas companies think it is,” he said.

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

MVCAC