In The
News....Hey! Garfield County
got a new big-time smog detector! This is a great step forward....
five years too late, but uh... when are we gonna get our Beijing Slings?
Toon policy: Feel free to copy and
paste any cartoons to share with friends, but please don't use for
commercial purposes without permission! Just e-mail and ask....
projectforsaken@earthlink.net
CLEAN WATER.... or
not....
Glenwood Post
Independent [August 8, 2008]
"Decision
on oil, gas rules pushed back -
Extra time will allow
COGCC to hold more hearings"
Why do people say "pushed back"
when it seems like they ought to say "moved forward?" Doesn't time move
forward? I always miss meetings because of this. Is it just me? Probably.
So, The COGCC has decided to
'wait' until sometime in September to come out with their final rules,
thereby continuing deliberation of contentious issues and language.
This article
states: "The state’s rule-making process has been engulfed in controversy
from the very beginning, with the oil and gas industry criticizing the
proposed rules and its trade groups running hundreds of newspaper and radio
ads saying they could cause serious economic consequences to the state.
However, environmentalists an other groups say recent reports of spills and
contamination call out for more stringent rules for the industry."
Damn right. I am quite relieved that
such rule-making is extended since there is a big-time industry-wide effort
to, all at once, curtail stronger regulations that protect the public's
health, while hustling through minimal requirements and avoiding any
further responsibility. And, I think the Commissioners should also be
made aware of staff apparent efforts to minimize awareness of the new seep
found in here in June.
For example, relative to water quality
standards, industry stands to enjoy all sorts of exemptions - particularly
where they have polluted and continue to pollute West Divide Creek.
Despite assurances we keep receiving from EnCana
that the seep upstream is likely to go away, some folks appear to be
reserving serious doubts. This has been pretty typical over the years. We're
told all sorts of stuff, when reality is often something very different.
But, an ignorant public is a placated public.
Basically, what you see below is a lot of scientific
sounding stuff, but what it appears to mean is this: Limits to
contaminants are to be kept low in normal circumstances, but where
contamination has occurred before September 14, 2004 - a higher level
of toxic metal and other contamination is to be acceptable. Acceptable to
who? Not us, for sure! Who is deciding here and on what basis who
gets clean water and who doesn't. Of course, the seep in 2004,
occurred in April of 2004. So, EnCana gets a fat exemption and we get
to be poisoned. Why should EnCana benefit from these lower standards, by
not being required to clean up to a safer standard the contamination they
were found by the COGCC to have caused. And how did they cause the 2004
seep? The Schwartz well bore hole lost hundreds of feet of cement -
presumably into a fault they intersected while drilling. They knew they had
lost the cement, but decided to frac (blow the hell out of production zones
with explosives) anyway. The same genius who ordered that frac job was still
conducting the orchestra when we first started noticing bubbling again in
2007 after the Schwartz site was re-entered. It seems, based on
staff-recommended "clarifications" of the safe levels rule, the COGCC feels
that since it's just our one well in the creek downstream (plus all of Silt
and Rifle), it's okay for us folks to suck up some extra "contaminant of
concern" like toluene: 560 / 1,000; or, xylenes: 1,400 / 10,000. This is how
the public is protected from industrial pollution.
As you read the stuff below keep in mind the "fist number
/ second number" thing. Basically, the first number is considered the safer
number. The second number is considered "maximum exposure" - you
know... how much you can be expected to consume before your asshole falls
out - stuff like that. How about these schmucks that decide it's okay for
all of us to drink it, come and drink it themselves.
"Concentrations taken from CDPHE-HMWMD Table 1 Colorado
Soil Evaluation Values (December 2007).
2o Concentrations taken from CDPHE-WQCC Regulation 41 - The Basic Standards
for Ground Water.
3 For this range of standards, the first number in the range is a strictly
health-based value, based on the WQCC’s established methodology for human
health-based standards. The second number in the range is a maximum
contaminant level (MCL), established under the Federal Safe Drinking Water
Act which has been determined to be an acceptable level of this chemical in
public water supplies, taking treatability and laboratory detection limits
into account. The WQCC intends that control requirements for this
chemical be implemented to attain a level of ambient water quality that is
at least equal to the first number in the range except as follows: 1) where
ground water quality exceeds the first number in the range due to a release
of contaminants that occurred prior to September 14, 2004 (regardless of the
date of discovery or subsequent migration of such contaminants) clean-up
levels for the entire contaminant plume shall be no more restrictive than
the second number in the range or the ground water quality resulting from
such release, whichever is more protective, and 2) whenever the WQCC has
adopted alternative, site-specific standards for the chemical, the
site-specific standards shall apply instead of these statewide standards.
2Concentrations taken from API Metals Guidance: Maximum Soil Concentrations
3Concentrations are dependent on site-specific conditions
4 Consideration shall be given to background levels in native soils."
Now, if I am misinterpreting this, then someone from the OCGCC needs to
point it out. But it sure as hell looks to me like once, again, our health
is on the chopping block for the benefit of billion dollar business.
If you want to check these re-writes out for yourself, Go to the COGCC
homepage http://cogcc.state.co.us/
and scroll down the page until you find the big blue link to: "Draft Rules
with Clarifications (06/20/2008): Draft rules including previously released
clarifications and alternative language"
Oh, and the COGCC staff have clarified other stuff too, stuff that
pertains directly to how we define "water" or the things that may indicate a
impact to it - like "aquifer", "barrel" and Bradenhead Test Area". Careful
clarifications are how billion dollar business skirts responsibility and
leaves the rest of us swinging in the wind.
Though I cannot find a reference to it in the rewrite, I've been told
the COGCC has backed off requiring sensible setbacks from public water
sources. And also, that "public" and "private" are distinguishable. I always
considered us as part of the public, but you know, when it comes down to
municipal water treatment and private water wells out in the county - I
guess the country bumpkins can drink contaminated swill - or pay thousands
in private treatment facilities to eliminate or even minimize contamination
in aquifers. That seems pretty unfair since most of us moved out here and
have enjoyed access to clean water until industry came along. Of course the
same goes for our air quality, and look where we are now.
The "Sensitive Area Decision Tree" has been scratched out altogether.
Huh.... I wonder what that means.
And Chemical inventory took a significant hit when the following
aspects of disclosure were scratched out: "The chemical inventory shall
include how much of each chemical was used, how it was used, and when it was
used." Remember that nurse in Durango who nearly died from exposure to
fracing fluid? [see Week 43 "What the hell is wrong
with this Industry?"] Hmmm.
Here's a good thing staff is recommending: "Marking" That
is, the "marking" of pipelines. Here's what they say:
"(1) In designated high density areas, and where crossing
public rights-of-way or utility easement, a marker shall be installed and
maintained to identify the location of pipelines.
(2) The following shall be written legibly on a
background of sharply contrasting color on each line marker: "Warning",
"Caution" or "Danger" followed by the words "gas (or name of natural gas or
petroleum transported) pipeline" in letters at least one (1) inch high with
one-quarter (¼) inch stroke and the name of the operator and the telephone
number where the operator can be reached at all times."
This is great, because a few years ago EnCana tried to
force the installation of a gas pipeline, under our right-of-way, with
thingies sticking out above ground that could have been easily swiped with a
snow plow. They fought quite hard on this issue forcing us to seek legal
counsel and threaten lawsuit. There were all sorts of letters that had to be
written and we and a neighbor went to considerable expense urging EnCana to
relocate the pipeline a few feet north, off the actual roadway. They finally
relented. Guess what else? None of their pipelines are marked even where
they cross under the right-of-way. Under the old COGCC - 'do whatever
you want and screw the public policy' - they didn't' have to, and they
don't exactly put public safety first when it comes to saving a buck here or
there. Better to spend that money buying a college or a ball field.
All of this said and notwithstanding my extreme
disappointment and frustration in the COGCC's allowance of higher toxic
content in contamination already in place - which stands to directly and
adversely impact my family and successive generations of residents on this
property, I could not ask for more transparency or dedicated participation
in proceedings from the Commission. I credit Harris Sherman for this
approach and I, for one, deeply appreciate this monumental and extraordinary
effort by he, the Acting Director of the COGCC, the COGCC Commissioners, and
- with all due respect - COGCC staff.
Some of these folks may think I'm unduly hard on them, but
you know what? If you want to put yourself in the privileged position of
holding my family's wellbeing in your hands - I expect it to be
a responsibility taken seriously. And I'll tell you something
else, when I took an oath to protect and defend this country and stood at my
post 60 miles off the Soviet coast during the cold war - I damn sure took
the wellbeing of you and your family seriously. Even more seriously than I
took my
own.
Sometime after September 11, 2008 the final rules should be
out.
Solving Shale with CO2....
The Daily Sentinel [08-07-08]
"Chevron studying chemistry to develop oil shale underground; plant 10 years
out"
According to this article, Chevron is hoping to use CO2
(carbon dioxide - a greenhouse gas and constituent of natural gas) to bind
with rock and liberate oil shale from its formation. Both Chevron and Shell
are researching ways to sequester CO2 and other additives from groundwater.
In the article, Jim Koffer, a Chevron engineer was quoted as saying, "We
have to know if we put fluids underground, where they’re going to go,”.
But it isn't just
the introduction of foreign fluids that should be considered. It is also the
physical and chemical reactions and the creation of new compounds that must
be considered.
Thanks to a
conversation with a hydrologist this week, we
now know that CO2 can mobilize metals in the soils and allow them to migrate
into ground water sources. This is yet another concern which I bet state
regulators aren't even considering.
Hopefully, any
chemical reactions induced in the water-bearing geology will take into
consideration the full range of dynamics and potential consequences
associated with such an allowance. Only then can appropriate technologies be
fully developed and implemented.
Associated Press
[08-08-08]
"Oil company pleads guilty to killing birds "
According to the article from Billings Montana, "An
oil company has pleaded guilty to failing to protect migratory birds from
oil pits near wells in eastern Montana."
The article goes on to talk about the BLM finding 2 dead birds in oil
pits, but "In August and October of 2007, law enforcement found 22 dead
migratory birds in or near pits belonging to Enerplus Resources."
Although, pits out here in Colorado are supposed to be
fenced and netted to prevent birds from flying into them (from the sky, they
reflect light, jut like a water pond), I've seen many cases where they have
not been - in fact, such contemptible practices seem commonplace these
days.... a relatively 'minor' infraction as COGCC field inspectors busy
themselves with keeping up with the latest water contamination cases.
Announcement: A new grassroots effort to
protect Colorado from poor natural resources developmental practices is
evolving. Excerpts of the press release received 08-08-08 follows:
ANNOUNCING THE FORMATION OF
THE COMMITTEE TO SAVE COLORADO
"The Committee is a citizen
advocate group that will be composed of citizens, environmentalists, and
land owners who are concerned about the gas drilling invasion in
Colorado and the damage it is causing to our forest land, wildlife,
water sources, and human health.
The Committee is being formed, in
part, due to the fact that thousands of Colorado citizens' requests for
stricter environmental policies regarding gas drilling have been ignored
by the previous COGCC, state and federal agencies, and many elected
officials at all levels.
The Committee is opposed to the
cheap sale of public lands for energy extraction - like the Roan
Plateau. Since there was very little regulation by the previous COGCC,
the committee will request that the newly restructured COGCC implement
stricter industry rules and regulations.
A work in progress for Randy
Fricke for over three years, the Committee invites concerned citizens to
join their efforts to save the beautiful State of Colorado from the
harmful impacts of the gas drilling industry.
More committee activities will be
announced in the next few weeks.
Please contact randy Fricke, at
the above address to learn more."
|
