State pushes for legal end to shale wastewater discharges – News – The Times-Tribune
August 14, 2011
State pushes for legal end to shale wastewater discharges – News – The Times-Tribune.
Gas Drilling Awareness for Cortland County
August 11, 2011
AAA Aug. 10, 2011 6:20 PM ET
Texas plant will turn sewage into drinking water
ANGELA K. BROWN, Associated Press
FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — In parched West Texas, it’s often easier to drill for oil than to find new sources of water. So after years of diminishing water supplies made even worse by the second-most severe drought in state history, some communities are resorting to a plan that might have seemed absurd a generation ago: turning sewage into drinking water.
Construction recently began on a $13 million water-reclamation plant believed to be the first of its kind in Texas. And officials have worked to dispel any fears that people will be drinking their neighbors’ urine, promising the system will yield clean, safe water. Some residents are prepared to put aside any squeamishness if it means having an abundant water supply.
“Any water is good water, as far as I’m concerned,” said Gary Fuqua, city manager in Big Spring, which will join the cities of Midland, Odessa and Stanton in using the water.
When the water finally reaches the tap, Fuqua said, its origin is “something I wouldn’t think about at all.”
Similar plants have been operating for years in Tucson, Ariz., parts of California and in other countries. Water experts predict other American cities will follow suit as they confront growing populations, drought and other issues.
“It’s happening all over the world,” said Wade Miller, executive director of the WateReuse Association based outside Washington. “In some places … resources are down to very low levels, and this is one of the few resources available.”
The Colorado River Municipal Water District in West Texas began considering a wastewater recycling plant back in 2000 and broke ground last month on the facility in Big Spring, about 100 miles southeast of Lubbock. When finished late next year, it should supply 2 million gallons of water a day.
The timing couldn’t be better. This year’s drought has made a bone-dry region even drier, causing crops to wither and animals and fish to die off by the thousands.
At least one of the three reservoirs in West Texas may dry up if the drought persists through next year, as climatologists have predicted could happen. That means the district’s water supply could be reduced from 65 million gallons a day to 45 million, said John Grant, the water district’s general manager.
“We have limited water supplies in Texas, and you have to turn to other sources of water,” Grant said.
The new system could actually improve the taste of the region’s water by removing the minerals and salt that give it a distinctive briny flavor, he added.
The idea to recycle sewage isn’t new. Fort Worth and other cities across the nation have long used treated wastewater to water grass and trees and irrigate crops. But the new treatment plant in West Texas will be the first in the state to provide drinking water.
Astronauts aboard the International Space Station have been drinking recycled urine and sweat since 2009 — and consistently given the water good reviews.
For years, NASA had been working on equipment that would enable astronauts to recycle their wastewater for drinking, cooking and bathing. The system was launched to the space station in late 2008, and it took several months to conduct enough tests — in orbit and on the ground — to ensure the water was safe to consume.
Since the space shuttle fleet was retired last month, the space station’s recycling system is needed more than ever. Shuttles can’t deliver fresh water, and the agency says astronauts will need such recycling systems on future missions to an asteroid and Mars.
But some earth-bound people still need a little convincing.
“It just doesn’t sound very right, does it?” asked Liz Faught of Odessa. “I don’t want to drink it.”
Still, she had confidence that any public health concerns would be addressed long before the water arrives in the cities.
“I feel they would not do this and it be an unsafe practice,” she said.
The slightest suggestion of urine in drinking water can make people uneasy.
In June, officials in Portland, Ore., sent 8 million gallons of treated drinking water down the drain after a man was caught on a security camera urinating into a reservoir. City leaders said they didn’t want to distribute water laced, however infinitesimally, with urine.
The wastewater recycling process is long and complex. The first steps remove salt and impurities such as viruses and even traces of medicine. Then the wastewater is channeled into a lake or reservoir, where it’s blended with fresh water and eventually gets pumped into a water-treatment facility. There, it undergoes several more rounds of cleaning, disinfection and testing before finally reaching home faucets.
When the project was presented several years ago, there were no major protests during public hearings, Grant said. Most people don’t mind the idea once they understand that the treated water is safe to drink, he said.
“Folks out here have accepted it because they understand what the value of water is,” Grant said.
In California, the West Basin Municipal Water District in southwest Los Angeles County started treating wastewater in the 1990s because it had been importing 80 percent of its water. Using recycled water has not only cut down on importing costs but also helped the environment by eliminating the need to dump sewage in the ocean, officials said.
In Orange County, Calif., a similar project started several years ago now provides 70 million gallons a day, water that is considered nearly as pure as distilled, Miller said.
San Diego is also studying the idea.
___
Associated Press writers Betsy Blaney in Lubbock and Marcia Dunn at Cape Canaveral, Fla., contributed to this report.
___
Follow Angela K. Brown at http://twitter.com/AngelaKBrownAP
Follow Betsy Blaney at http://twitter.com/betsyblaney
August 2, 2011
Editorial overlooked facts on Auburn waste
To the Editor:
Is the erosion of the fourth estate at hand? One would expect hyperbole and condescension from cable news pundits, but newspapers, the last bastion of credibility, are they too caving into the economic pressures of the current news climate? My cause for concern is the July 25 editorial, “Money-Loser: Wastewater ban will cost Auburn’s ratepayers next year.”
The tone of the piece was drenched with derision and offered little to no facts. A fact that was glaringly overlooked was that Municipal Utilities Director Vicki Murphy asked the natural gas companies to stop delivering because pre-treatment testing showed that pollutant levels were out of compliance with the permits. So the fiscally responsible members of Auburn City Council, namely Mayor Michael Quill and Councilors Gilda Brower and Thomas McNabb, wanted to be prudent in not budgeting money from this tenuous revenue stream. They knew the money would not be there.
The $600,000 figure is an arbitrary figure used by Councilor Matt Smith for political gain. There is no sound, documented evidence that the 2011-2012 budget should have included that figure, given the fact that the companies were out of compliance in the previous fiscal quarter.
So that leaves us with the question: Why did the editorial board slam a small group of native Auburnians trying to protect their downstream neighbors from the contaminants in gas drilling wastewater? Perhaps it was easier to listen to an angry, uniformed, opportunistic politician than to research and look at the documented facts.
Terry Cuddy
Auburn
Jul 25, 2011 … Auburn rocks! The council sure struck a blow against hydrofracking, … from natural gas wells at the municipal sewage treatment plant?
http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2011/07/money-loser_wastewater_ban_wil.html
Original July 7 report http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/07/auburn_votes_to_ban_accepting.html
August 1, 2011
Niagara Falls Reporter: Frack, Frack, Everywhere a Frack.
“For all these reasons, the three categories of pollutants in the gas drilling wastewater are extremely challenging to manage. That is why PA has banned their discharge into POTWs.” ……returning to the nightmare of the Josephine Plant at Blacklick Creek
Blacklick Creek
—
July 28, 2011
Money-Loser: Wastewater ban will cost Auburn’s ratepayers next year | syracuse.com.
Wow! Auburn rocks! The council sure struck a blow against hydrofracking, didn’t it, when it voted July 7 to ban accepting wastewater from natural gas wells at the municipal sewage treatment plant?
Well, not exactly. Not at all, in fact.
What do you mean? It voted to stop treating the polluted wastewater from those controversial wells, right?
Uh, no. The water isn’t coming from horizontal-well hydrofracking — which isn’t going on in New York. It’s from conventional, vertical gas wells that have been operating in Upstate New York for years.
But the Cayuga Anti-Fracking Alliance says the Auburn plant isn’t equipped to handle the high salt concentrations, the radioactive agents and cancer-causing chemicals in the wastewater.
The plant employs a certified laboratory to sample effluent during both high-flow and normal-flow days. Vicky L. Murphy, director of municipal utilities, wrote last month that sampling for 33 “volatiles” (including benzene and toluene) and 13 metals detected no traces of volatiles on a normal flow day. Traces of Radium-226 and the metal barium were detected — in concentrations well below permissible state levels. High-flow testing detected three volatiles, three metals and Radium-226 — all below DEC permissible levels, Murphy said. She also noted that the Auburn plant complies with all state and federal regulations.
How can you be so confident it’s safe?
Auburn has been treating the water for 10 years. The wastewater amounts to less than 1 percent of the plant’s total water flow.
Then why did the council members vote for the ban?
Ask them. Some speculation: Democratic Mayor Mike Quill, a voting member, is up for re-election this year, and anti-fracking advocates have raised quite a fuss. Plus, his opponent is for the ban.
Anyway, what harm can a ban do?
Well, there’s the small matter of the $600,000 or so the city earns each year from the drillers — about one-fifth of the sanitation department’s budget. City residents will have to make it up somehow.
Indeed, on Wednesday, Auburn property owners learned they will be getting an increase in sewer rates. City Manager John Rossi said the unspecified increase was included in next year’s budget because of the anticipated shortfall in revenue from natural gas drillers.
@#$%&*! Can we have a do-over, please?
Exactly tax…they are politicians first and they will do ANYTHING to get reelected, it matters not if they are small hamlet politicians or Albany or DC they are all first and formost concerned ONLY with getting their sorry butts to stay in office and it doesnt matter what party they are from, vote them all out. As Will Buckley once said ( I’ll paraphrase) he’d rather be governed by the first 200 names in the phonebook than by the current thieving thugs. Politicians are overpaid ( mostly millioniare lawyers) maggots living off the common man.
and what Congel has done or has not done at the Carousel Center Mall expansion, AKA Destiny USA phase one, Brownfield Cleanup program participant, the The Post-Standard Editorial Board is OK with that?
I only ask because it seems that the The Post-Standard Editorial Board is more interested in the money side of stories than the public health issues side of the stories…
Here is a little hint for the The Post-Standard Editorial Board ‘it ain’t always about the money’…..
The plant would still be dumping, not treating, the salt ultimately into the Seneca River. The plant, designed for treating biological waste, was essentially relying on dilution since running the water through the plant did little or nothing to the waste water. The Seneca is used by farmers for irrigation and by many others for various purposes. It also flows very near some important wells which provide drinking water to considerable numbers of people.
I would have thought the editorial board of the post standard would have done a little more research into the issue. For example the total revenue this year from the waste water was $150k – much small than 600K. But hey why left the facts stand in the way of a good story?
@#$%&*! check your facts please. the gas companies left because they were out of compliance- before the city council had the chance to prohibit them, they were already gone because they broke regulations- the money was already gone- if auburn counted on that money being in the budget they would be screwed because they cannot count on the gas companies to be in compliance with regulations- how many ways do i have to say this? did an actual “reporter” write this editorial piece? because it failed the research test. there is VIDEOTAPE of vicki murphy explaining this to the city council in auburn. go check it out before you write again on this subject, please.
The misguided Auburn City council acted with total disregard to the consequences in their vote on an issue they did not understand and without regard to the recommendations of the city engineer. Instead they responded to the outside non taxpaying mob that invaded the city council meeting. Their lack of knowledge about what they voted on is deplorable. They have not acted in the best interest of Auburn’s taxpayers and they should be ashamed of their cavalier attitude to the taxpayers. Their actions will be remembered both for the added burden they have placed on the taxpayers and the jobs they have put at risk. Just my opinion.
The three members of council cast their votes after recognizing that the city’s wastewater treatment plant was neither designed, maintained nor constructed to accept such water. They recognized that the natural gas drilling companies could not meet the rules and regulations of the plant. In April, the city cited six firms for failing to submit any monitoring reports for some of 2009 and all of 2010. During that time 16 million gallons of flowback fluid was discharged into the plant. Once the city workers started calling their attention to it (spurred on by an article in the NY Times), many stopped delivering–what does that say? The three remaining firms continued to be out of compliance either by continuing their practice of not submitting the required reports or that the wastewater contained pollutant levels that were unacceptable at the plant. All stopped bringing the wastewater before the ban–at Vicky Murphy’s insistence. By that time, the city was making $150,000 over a six-month period. The $600,000 figure is complete conjecture and not rooted in fact. I contend that the three councilors absolutely acted with the interests of their citizens in mind. This money could not be counted upon.
Also, I resent being referred to as a member of an outside non taxpaying mob. I brought my check to pay my city taxes to the comptroller’s office a month ago. In this case, common sense, reason and logic trumped tainted money and corporate greed. It’s about time someone stood up for the people. I commend Mayor Michael Quill and councilors Gilda Brower and Thomas McNabb for making their decisions based on facts and not emotion.
July 26, 2011
Niagara Falls Reporter: Frack.
July 25, 2011
RE: frack water recycling: They power huge lights that light of the pads for the whole night. They don’t use street electric but generators which contribute to the noise. The trucks have large pumps that due to the volume of 5200 gallons per truck are large motors, the trucks endlessly are using their backup safety beepers, horns for instructions to the ground crew, etc. The three sites in our neighborhood will generate 800 trucks a day, 1600 with return trip passes.
Complete Interview:
1. Pollution of your well (two wells?). How did this show up?
2. The operations end up being more extensive than anticipated. The “pads” are large, and end up being used for other operations.
3. Extensive light pollution due to 24/7 operation.
4. Extensive trucking.
5. Feel free to add any other relevant details.
—
The Auburn Mayor and City Council caved to the enviro-wacko crowd. Their vote to ban wastewater had nothing to do with the facts or the impact on taxpayers, but instead with their fear of the (largely from Ithaca) protestors and other squeaky wheels. Its unfortunate for taxpayers and people looking for jobs, but not surprising — they are politicians after all.
Reply Post new