More Reasons to Question Whether Gas Is Cleaner Than Coal – ProPublica

More Reasons to Question Whether Gas Is Cleaner Than Coal – ProPublica.

More Reasons to Question Whether Gas Is Cleaner Than Coal

.

An drilling rig Ray, N.D. (Karen Bleier/AFP/Getty Images)

One of the main advantages of natural gas is that it is supposed to be far cleaner than oil or coal. Right now Congress is even considering a T. Boone Pickens-inspired bill aimed at converting the nation’s truck fleet to run on natural gas. If it’s passed, it will be in large part on the assumption that such a move will help the nation reduce climate-changing greenhouse gases.

But evidence continues to mount that natural gas is not as clean as we like to think.

In January, a ProPublica investigation found that large amounts of “fugitive” emissions were left out of common comparisons between coal and gas and that if these emissions were counted the advantages of natural gas dwindled. Our report found that the Environmental Protection Agency’s emissions estimates from hydraulic fracturing in shale formations were 9,000 times higher than the agency had previously estimated. We also quoted Robert Howarth, a Cornell University professor, saying that he would soon release research that showed that the emissions from gas were even worse.

More details of Howarth’s research, which is reportedly scheduled to be published in the journal Climatic Change, were released by The Hill and The New York Times this week. Howarth’s conclusion — that shale gas production is actually far dirtier than coal in terms of greenhouse gas emissions — is attracting national attention.

Howarth’s findings are based in part on the EPA’s revelation that far more gas escapes into the atmosphere in production fields than was previously known, and on a mathematical tweaking of the intensity of methane gas’ effect on the atmosphere. Howarth, whose figures for total emissions exceed even the EPA’s revised estimates, calculates the impact of methane in the atmosphere over a 20-year period, saying the urgent need to address short-term climate change justifies that calculation. Over 20 years, methane is considered 72 times as powerful as carbon dioxide in its effects on climate change. Using that approach, Howarth concludes that gas may be between 20 and 100 percent dirtier than coal.

The EPA uses a different factor, calculating methane’s effect on the atmosphere over 100 years, in part because the gas degrades over time. Using the 100-year time frame, methane’s potency is diminished by about one third. ProPublica used this calculation in January and determined that in some cases — where an old and inefficient power plant was used to burn the gas, for example — natural gas may hold a 25 percent advantage over coal throughout its lifecycle, far less than the 50 percent advantage generally touted.

Howarth’s calculations erase even that small advantage though. When he used the 100-year measure, he concluded that the greenhouse gas emissions footprint of coal and gas were equal.

There’s plenty of parsing left to do here before clear answers emerge about exactly how natural gas stacks up. But one thing is increasingly certain: Without sustained efforts to shut off and capture leaked emissions in the gas production fields, whatever advantages natural gas does present will be diminished.

Follow on Twitter: @AbrahmL

AP: Pa. accused of rubber-stamping gas permits | AP | 04/13/2011

AP: Pa. accused of rubber-stamping gas permits | AP | 04/13/2011.

AP: Pa. accused of rubber-stamping gas permits

ALLENTOWN, Pa. – Pennsylvania environmental regulators say they spend as little as 35 minutes reviewing each of the thousands of applications for natural gas well permits they get each year from drillers intent on tapping the state’s lucrative and vast Marcellus Shale reserves.

And the regulators say they do not give any additional scrutiny to requests to drill near high-quality streams and rivers even though the waterways are protected by state and federal law.

Staffers in the state Department of Environmental Protection testified behind closed doors last month as part of a lawsuit filed by residents and environmental groups over a permit that DEP issued for an exploratory gas well in northeastern Pennsylvania, less than a half-mile from the Delaware River and about 300 feet from a pristine stream.

Reporting by the AP suggests that applications are rubber-stamped, rushed through with little scrutiny and rarely rejected. The staffers’ statements indicate that DEP regulators are overburdened , and possibly ignoring environmental laws , as they struggle to deal with an unprecedented drilling boom that has turned Pennsylvania into a major natural gas player and raised fears about polluted aquifers and air.

The agency has denied few requests to drill in the Marcellus Shale formation, the world’s second-largest gas field. Of the 7,019 applications that DEP has processed since 2005, only 31 have been rejected , less than one-half of one percent.

“Even those of us who are skeptics of the DEP, I think we all want to assume that they’re doing the basics. And they’re really just not,” said Jordan Yeager, a plaintiffs’ attorney who is challenging the drilling permit awarded to Newfield Appalachia PA LLC, a unit of Houston-based Newfield Exploration Co.

The agency declined to comment about any aspect of its permit review process, even to answer general questions.

But the depositions of four DEP staffers responsible for processing permits , taken in late March and filed with a regional water agency this week , reveal that:

, The agency doesn’t consider potential impacts on legally protected high-quality watersheds, beyond checking that wells meet minimum setbacks required of all gas wells in the state.

, Staffers don’t consider whether proposed gas wells comply with municipal or regional zoning and planning laws.

, They don’t consider the cumulative impact of wide-scale development of wells in a concentrated area.

, They appear to have a fuzzy understanding of laws that are supposed to govern their work. A supervisor was unable to define the requirements of a key anti-degradation regulation that says pristine waterways “shall be maintained and protected,” while a geologist said he didn’t know that streams and rivers legally designated as “high quality” or “exceptional value” are entitled to an extra layer of protection.

Asked by Yeager whether he had “any understanding of what it means to be an HQ watershed,” DEP geologist Joseph Lichtinger replied: “Only that it means high quality.”

“Any understanding what high quality means?” Yeager persisted.

“No.”

“Do you know what that means in terms of the level of protection that they have under the law?”

Lichtinger, who performed the substantive technical analysis of drilling permit applications, shook his head, then answered no.

Lichtinger and his supervisors also acknowledged they did not take into account that Newfield’s test well would be drilled within the federally protected wild and scenic Delaware River corridor.

The geologist testified that he spent as little as a half-hour, and up to a full day, scrutinizing each individual application. His direct supervisor, Brian Babb, testified that he took an average of two minutes per application to review Lichtinger’s work. Finally, Craig Lobins, a regional manager with the oil and gas program, told plaintiffs’ attorneys he typically spent another two minutes on each application before signing off on the permit.

“What these depositions reveal is that the state is doing next to nothing in approving permits, even in the Delaware River basin, even in high quality watersheds, even in the wild and scenic river corridor,” Yeager told The Associated Press. “All together, they are spending less than 35 minutes in approving these $5 million industrial sites that have the ability to pollute the water that’s relied upon by (millions of) people. It is unconscionable.”

But Yeager said he didn’t fault the DEP rank-and-file.

“They’ve got limited time to do a massive job. What we have allowed DEP to do is to terribly understaff this permitting process,” he said. “If we’re getting it wrong in this case, we’re getting it wrong for every well site that’s being developed.”

State law generally requires DEP to process applications within 45 days. It’s DEP policy to give drilling companies their money back if they fail to consider permits in a timely fashion. Permit fees for Marcellus Shale wells , raised recently to pay for additional enforcement staff , cost between $900 and $3,000, depending on the depth of the well bore.

Citing the lawsuit, former DEP Secretary John Hanger declined to comment on the specifics of the depositions, or on the sufficiency of the permit review process. But he pointed out that overall staffing in the oil and gas division increased from 88 in 2008 to 202 in 2010, and that some of those positions were in permit review.

“The staffing issues are ones the department needs to review constantly as this industry evolves and changes,” said Hanger, who left office in January when Republican Gov. Tom Corbett took office.

Hanger repeated his call for modernization of Pennsylvania’s 25-year-old oil and gas law. He also touted a new regulation that mandates 150-foot buffers from pristine waterways, meant to protect more than 25,000 miles of high-quality streams and rivers. However, that regulation largely exempted oil and gas wells, requiring only that they leave existing buffers undisturbed “to the extent practicable.”

DEP awarded a drilling permit to Newfield last May. It was among a handful of exploratory wells grandfathered by the Delaware River Basin Commission, a federal-interstate agency that monitors water supplies for 15 million people, including half the population of New York City. DRBC has declared a moratorium on almost all Marcellus Shale drilling in the watershed while it drafts regulations.

The Newfield well was sunk about 300 feet from Hollister Creek, whose legal designation as high quality means it supports an abundance of fish and other wildlife. In November, DEP site inspectors found deficiencies in Newfield’s erosion and sedimentation control plan and required the company to make fixes.

The plaintiffs, which include the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the Damascus Citizens for Sustainability and three nearby property owners, have appealed Newfield’s DEP permit to the state Environmental Hearing Board. They want the well decommissioned and the site restored to its original state. A hearing on the appeal is scheduled for late May.

Steuben County, NY May Accept Marcellus Drill Cuttings in County Landfill | Marcellus Drilling News

Steuben County, NY May Accept Marcellus Drill Cuttings in County Landfill | Marcellus Drilling News.

County, drillers nearing accord on road use agreement – Bath, NY – The Courier

County, drillers nearing accord on road use agreement – Bath, NY – The Courier.

y Mary Perham

Posted Apr 14, 2011 @ 08:00 AM
Print Comment

The cost of road repairs in Steuben County could be the biggest stumbling block in future road use agreements with gas drillers.
The agreement now calls for drilling companies to pledge between $150,000 per mile and $300,000 per mile for to repair county roads damaged by construction or haulage during future drilling of the Marcellus Shale in Steuben.
Public Works Commissioner Vince Spagnoletti said the drillers’ routes could run 100-150 miles, meaning the gas companies would be required to pledge as much $45 million to ensure county roads will stay in good shape.
“They think it (costs) too much,” Spagnoletti told the county Legislature’s Public Works Committee. “But we think they can pay it.”
Spagnoletti said the amounts are in line with state Department of Transportation’s agreements with local contractors.
Spagnoletti said companies would need to set aside 0.5 percent of the total, or $225,000, before the proposed road use agreement could be signed.
The purpose of the road use agreement is to ensure the companies maintain and repair any county roads damaged by the expected heavy traffic caused by drilling.
The amounts are determined by the condition of the roads before any construction begins.
Legislators are concerned the cost of repairs would fall on taxpayers if the gas companies fail bring the roads back to their original condition.
Committee members also wanted to be sure the roads stay driveable throughout the driller’s use.
“These roads still need to passable day to day,” said Legislator Patrick McAllister, R-Wayland. “I mean, it could take a week, two weeks for them to fix the roads. We don’t want that.”
The proposed road use and repair agreement was modeled on an earlier county policy for wind farm developers, and is available for municipal use, too.
Officials have been working on the new road policy for several months, anticipating the time natural gas companies begin drilling Marcellus Shale deposits in Steuben.
There now is a statewide ban on natural gas drilling, which expires in 2.5 months.
Steuben’s draft agreement rates road conditions, and designates or restricts haul routes based on those conditions.
Road conditions also determine the bond Steuben will require firms to post to ensure the quality of the repair of each route.
Spagnoletti said the county also may require the gas firms rebuild some roads before use.  Roads in the southern portion of the county – where drilling is expected to begin – are built over clay and could become hazardous very quickly, he said.
Enforcement of the agreement also concerned committee members.
Spagnoletti said the county can’t stop hundreds of trucks meeting the legal weight limit.
However, the county can post a lower weight limit, and cut off all truck traffic, he said.
The state DEC also may include road use agreements as a part of the permits required for its environmental impact statement he said later.
County Administrator Mark Alger said the county expects to meet with town officials in May to discuss the road use agreement and make other recommendations about the impact of future drilling in Steuben.

Key points in the draft agreement include:
• Drilling companies must notify the county of their routes.
• Once the routes are approved, the roads will be surveyed at the driller’s expense.
• Based on the survey, bonds will be determined and in place before the companies use the roads.
• The roads must stay in good condition during use by the gas firms.
• Once the heavy traffic ends, the roads will be analyzed again at the driller’s expense, and restored to their original condition.
• Gravel roads are included in the draft and rated for use in town agreements.

Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations

Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations:  A letter

Robert W. Howarth, Renee Santoro and Anthony Ingraffea

SpringerLink – Climatic Change, Online First™.

Here’s the direct link TO THE SITE
LINK TO PDF OF STUDY
LINK TO SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Fracking gel: Canadian company presents a natural gas alternative | Press & Sun-Bulletin | pressconnects.com

Fracking gel: Canadian company presents a natural gas alternative | Press & Sun-Bulletin | pressconnects.com.

Fracking gel: Canadian company presents a natural gas alternative

5 Comments
Binghamton University students, from left, Brendan Woodruff and Annie Garbowitz, both members of the New York Public Interest Research Group’s BU chapter, hold a “frack attack” exhibition during Binghamton University’s annual Earth Day celebration at Dickinson Amphitheater on Thursday in Vestal. The exhibition demonstrates the potential impacts that natural gas hydraulic fracturing has on the lives of students, said NYPIRG Campaign Coordinator Brendan Woodruff. The exhibition included a 15 foot mock drill rig and an interactive table on the impacts of increased truck traffic. / REBECCA CATLETT/ Staff Photo

Binghamton — If all goes according to plan, a Canadian company could be using a petroleum-based gel to fracture the Marcellus Shale even before New York opens the gates for high-volume hydraulic fracturing.

Maybe.

In a presentation Thursday at the Broome County Office Building, a representative from GasFrac Energy Services Inc. said the firm, which has worked on natural gas and oil rigs in Canada and Texas, has had discussions with gas companies about contracting to tap into the state’s portion of the Marcellus. The company developed a patented fracturing method that uses Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) — plus three chemical additives — to break the shale and release natural gas, as opposed to conventional hydrofracking, which uses large amounts of water mixed with chemicals.

“We’ve done exploration-type work in an area of the Marcellus in Pennsylvania with an operator already, and our intent is to follow up again,” said Robert Lestz, chief technology officer for GasFrac. “It has to be economically viable, and it has to be good for us, the energy companies and the local communities. It’s going to depend on whether we have an operator willing to go forward with this process.”

The method would not be subject to the provisions of the state’s Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement, which is currently under review by the Department of Environmental Conservation and will only guide permitting for the type of hydrofracking being used by companies in Pennsylvania and other shale formations. But a DEC spokesman said it doesn’t have enough information to determine which set of rules would apply to the GasFrac process, and it would not be able to proceed until that is sorted out.

“DEC is aware of the LPG process but there have been no permit applications or other submissions, including scientific and technical studies, that would enable us to conduct an evaluation at this time,” spokesman Michael Bopp said.

Lestz gave a two-hour presentation to area lawmakers, municipal leaders and residents Thursday in both Binghamton and Owego. On Wednesday, he met privately with members of the Tioga County Landowners Group to push his company’s method as a more eco-friendly alternative to traditional hydrofracking, which has been on hold in New York since July 2008.

GasFrac claims its process can produce the same yield of natural gas — or even better — from the tight shale formation while using about 20 percent of the liquid used in water-based fracking. A traditional high-volume hydrofracking job can use upwards of eight million gallons of water.

Less fluid would mean less truck traffic, Lestz said. Most of the LPG turns into propane after the fracking process and returns to the surface, according to the company.

However, widespread implementation of the company’s method won’t happen overnight, if it happens at all. Currently, GasFrac has just four crews, with plans to expand to eight by the end of the year.

“We are incrementally increasing the volume of our crews,” Lestz said. “The way the industry adapts to new technology is not necessarily immediate. It takes a growth period. We’re trying to couple our technologies with companies that are more progressive and see the total value, because it is a challenge if you’ve always been doing it one way or a common way to understand how this thing is going to grow.”

It hasn’t been all smooth sailing for GasFrac, which began using its technology in 2008. In January, a propane leak and subsequent explosion at a well site in Alberta, Canada led to three workers suffering non-life-threatening burns and the company to temporarily suspend its operations. Lestz said the company has since learned from the incident and made adjustments at its work sites, including where its workers are positioned.

The method has its detractors, but Tioga landowners coalition members said it is on board.

“We have convinced ourselves that hydrofracking can be done safely if it has the right set of governance at the DEC, the right terms in the lease and some adult supervision,” said Nick Schoonover, chair of the Tioga group and the state chapter of the National Association of Royalty Owners. “This, because it doesn’t involve harmful chemicals and has considerably less environmental issues and truck traffic, offers a very interesting and appealing alternative.”

FLOWBACK-TXOGAP-HealthReport-lowres.pdf (application/pdf Object)

FLOWBACK-TXOGAP-HealthReport-lowres.pdf   Natural Gas Flowback: How the Texas Natural Gas Boom Affects Health and Safety,  April 2011

EARTHWORKS – The Dark Side of the Boom: How Natural Gas Drilling in Texas Threatens Public Health and Safety

EARTHWORKS – The Dark Side of the Boom: How Natural Gas Drilling in Texas Threatens Public Health and Safety.

The Dark Side of the Boom: How Natural Gas Drilling in Texas Threatens Public Health and Safety

Sen. Lon Burnam Joins Calling for ‘Urgent’ Reforms

Joint Release:
EARTHWORKS’ Texas OGAP * Public Citizen Texas * Environment Texas * Texas Campaign for the Environment * Clean Water Network * Downwinders at Risk, Texas Drought Project * Argyle-Bartonville Communities Alliance * Dallas Area Residents for Responsible Drilling * Flower Mound Citizens Against Urban Drilling * Wise County Alliance for Responsible Drilling

AUSTIN, TX, APRIL 14 — State, local and federal officials and regulatory agencies are failing to protect Texans from the health and safety risks of the natural gas boom, according to a report released today by the Texas Oil & Gas Accountability Project (OGAP).

State Sen. Lon Burnam of Fort Worth joined OGAP, other state advocacy organizations and community groups in releasing Flowback: How the Texas Natural Gas Boom Affects Health and Safety. The report finds that authorities either lack the resources to deal with the air pollution, water contamination and other problems that accompany natural gas production; are limited in their response by inadequate laws and regulations, or continue the long Texas tradition of favoring the oil and gas industry at the expense of citizens.

The report gives voice to the families and communities on the front lines of a public health crisis that is spreading from the Barnett Shale region in North Central Texas to other parts of the state. It pulls together for the first time detailed results of air and water testing as well as health effects data linking residents’ symptoms to toxic chemicals used in drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking).

Flowback roundly criticizes the inadequacy of policies and the response of authorities at all levels of government, but reserves its sharpest criticism for the Texas Railroad Commission: long the oil and gas industry’s lapdog, (the commission) must become a watchdog. The state Sunset Commission recently recommended the complete restructuring of the Railroad Commission because of conflicts of interest with the industry.

We want to lift the veil of denial that hangs over the gas patch, said Sharon Wilson, organizer for Texas OGAP. The reports of health and safety effects across two dozen counties are real, not coincidences or isolated examples. Current laws make it hard to tie a specific illness to a specific well, but residents of these communities know that where drilling goes, problems follow.

Burnam is among state lawmakers trying to address the problems, as the author of bills to prohibit gas wells within 1,200 feet of schools and to reduce air pollution by requiring vapor-recovery units on wells in the Barnett Shale. The report welcomes those efforts but says broader reforms are needed, including:

  • The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality must strictly enforce emission limits from oil and gas exploration and production equipment
  • As the Sunset Commission recommends, the Texas Railroad Commission — whose members currently are elected, often with hefty campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry — should be replaced with an appointed commission that puts the health and safety of Texans first. The new commission should require full public disclosure of drilling and fracking chemicals on a well-by-well basis.
  • The Texas Water Development Board must evaluate the impact that hydraulic fracturing, which uses hundreds of thousands of gallons of water for each injection.
  • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should identify sources of drilling chemicals in groundwater and regulate air pollution from oil and gas exploration and production.

For More Information

Download Flowback: How the Texas Natural Gas Boom Affects Health and Safety

Contact:

Sharon Wilson, Texas OGAP, (940) 389-1622

Bill Walker, Texas OGAP, (510) 686-3122

Andy Wilson, Public Citizen Texas, (512) 477-1155

Some water treatment plants refuse to take fracking fluid

Some water treatment plants refuse to take fracking fluid.

Post-gazette NOW

 

About the Author
Daniel
Malloy
emailEmail Author
202-445-9980Call 202-445-9980
Follow me on TwitterFollow me on Twitter
Daniel graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2007 with a bachelor’s degree in journalism. He joined the Post-Gazette in November 2007 after an internship covering sports at the Boston Globe. At the Post-Gazette, Daniel has been a general assignment reporter and covered the Allegheny County courts beat before becoming the paper’s Washington, D.C., correspondent in September 2009.
More »
Some water treatment plants refuse to take fracking fluid
Wednesday, April 13, 2011

WASHINGTON — Several wastewater treatment plants in Western Pennsylvania have stopped taking in waste from natural gas hydraulic fracturing amid controversy about potential waterway contamination.

Testifying before a Senate committee examining natural gas extraction, Environmental Protection Agency deputy administrator Robert Perciasepe was asked about a recent flap over stream contamination related to wastewater treatment plants. A New York Times report about radiation found in Pennsylvania streams near plants that treat fracking “flowback” water prompted additional testing and information gathering from EPA and state officials.

Mr. Perciasepe also revealed that, “In many cases, those plants have stopped taking some of those fracking fluids.”


» A website for ongoing coverage, resources, comments and more.


Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection spokeswoman Katy Gresh said seven treatment plants, including six in southwestern Pennsylvania, have ceased processing fracking waste. She couldn’t say for sure their reasons for doing so.

Mr. Perciasepe testified that some wastewater plants are ill-suited to treat the fluid, which is mostly water but also includes a cocktail of chemicals that would be dangerous in drinking water. The state has demanded additional and frequent testing for harmful contaminates at facilities that treat fracking fluids and public water suppliers downstream from them, though its tests last fall showed no abnormal radioactivity.

Mr. Perciasepe testified that possible solutions for treatment plants would be to put new constraints on plants that treat fracking waste, or to pre-treat the wastewater before it arrives.

Jeff Cloud, the vice chairman of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, testified that in his state, fracking waste is barred from being processed at treatment plants. This prompted Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., who chaired the hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, to wonder why this isn’t the case in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.

The answer is partially due to geology.

In Oklahoma and other states, leftover fluid can be re-injected into abandoned wells. This is not possible in Pennsylvania because the geology doesn’t permit deep well injections.

Conrad “Dan” Volz, of the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Public Health, testified that the waste could go to sites in Ohio, but it’s more convenient for Pennsylvania companies to dispose flowback water in nearby treatment plants. And, he said, it was an “oversight” by DEP to allow it.

A critic of DEP and of environmental impacts of the Marcellus Shale drilling boom, Dr. Volz recently announced he is leaving Pitt because the administration was trying to muzzle his views.

“I was told not to talk about a lot of Marcellus Shale issues that are very politically sensitive, and I wasn’t willing to do that,” he said in an interview after the hearing, adding that he might return to consulting.

Dr. Volz testified about his study finding that a creek in Indiana County, located near a treatment facility that took on flowback water, had a slew of contaminates. An industry group discounted the study as isolated and limited to an area with no impact on drinking water or other human activities.

Much of the hearing focused on the debate over whether federal or state authorities should be the primary regulators of fracking. The process is exempt from federal oversight except when diesel fuel is used in fracking or when the EPA sees an imminent danger.

Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., testified before the committee on the merits of his bill that would give EPA oversight over the practice. Instead of regulations of varying strength across different states, Mr. Casey said, “I’m in favor of a national standard.”

Support for and criticism of his FRAC Act broke on predictable partisan lines, with Democrats backing Mr. Casey and Republicans opposed.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a leading EPA critic, lauded the economic benefits of increased natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania and other states.

“A virtual boom in natural gas development is transforming America’s energy security — due in no small measure to the absence of federal regulation,” he said.

Daniel Malloy: dmalloy@post-gazette.com or 1-202-445-9980. Follow him on Twitter at PG_in_DC.
First published on April 13, 2011 at 12:00 am

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11103/1138930-455.stm#ixzz1JRE1taka

 

A Year Later, The Prospect of Fracking Remains | hburgnews.com

A Year Later, The Prospect of Fracking Remains | hburgnews.com.

A Year Later, The Prospect of Fracking Remains

Jeremiah Knupp — March 21st, 2011

This story was funded in part by hburgnews.com readers via Spot.Us. Thank you for your support of community-funded journalism.

Turn west off of VA 259 onto Bergton Road and you drive into the far northwestern corner of Rockingham County. The narrow paved road winds you into a land of sheep pastures and chicken houses, hunting cabins and homes, rolling hills and wooded ridges that rise into the mountain that creates a skyline marking the border with West Virginia. Whether that skyline will someday feature a natural gas derrick is a question that remains unanswered.

The intersection of Crab Run Road with Bergton Road is near the site of a proposed natural gas well in western Rockingham County. Photo by Holly Marcus for hburgnews.com

 

In early 2010, plans to drill a natural gas well in Bergton brought Rockingham County into the national debate over the use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (known as hydrofracking), a process that pumps fluid (a mixture of water, sand and chemicals, several million gallons in total) into the ground at high pressure to fracture rock and release trapped gas for extraction through a well. The Marcellus Shale formation that travels through a region that extends from New York to Tennessee is estimated to contain a large gas reserve. Carrizo (Marcellus) LLC, a Houston-based energy company, applied for a special use permit with Rockingham County to drill on a lease it owns in Bergton.

While the industry claims the process is safe, others maintain that the damaging effects of hydrofracking include ground and surface water pollution and lowered air quality.  Equally debated is the economic gain a community can expect from natural gas drilling. To some it brings a boon of jobs, industry and tax revenue. For others, the potential costs to repair damage to the environment and transportation infrastructure caused by the process outweigh any benefits.

The permit will allow the company to drill an exploratory well and then mount a hydrofracking operation if the well proves viable. The request immediately brought a firestorm of objections from members of the local community who voiced their objections at the permit’s public hearing. The county’s Board of Supervisors tabled the request at their Feb. 24 meeting to do more research on the process.

In August, with their request still on the table Carrizo unexpectedly announced that it had stopped “actively pursuing” the permit (“Energy Company Backs Off Gas Permit,” Daily News-Record, Aug. 31). Now, a year after the prospect of gas drilling captured local headlines, Carrizo’s request remains on hold.

Carrizo maintains it has no plans to pursue the special use permit in the near future.

“There’s really no point,” said Carrizo’s director of investor relations, Richard Hunter. “As a company we have to decide how to best allocate our resources. We faced very aggressive local push-back, especially compared to the welcome we received in Pennsylvania and West Virginia.”

“There would need to be an attitude change in the local population,” Hunter added, when asked what it would take for Carrizo to renew its interest in Rockingham County. “Frankly, local residents should be flipping out. They should approach local legislators and let them know ‘I own a 7-11. I own a hotel. I own a bulldozer and we want this here.’ It’s a loss of opportunity for those people.”

A natural gas well site in Wetzel County, W.Va. Sand trucks and trailers are on the left, with the fracturing pumps clustered around the center. Photo used by permission of http://www.marcellus-shale.us.

 

Following the initial tabling, the members of the Board of Supervisors spoke to local geologists, conservation groups and those in the energy industry and took a trip to Wetzel County, W.Va. to see the hydrofracking process first hand. At least two remain unconvinced that the process is safe enough for Rockingham County or that there are enough controls in place to hold a company accountable for the damage that it may cause when operating a gas well.

“You have to respect people’s property rights, but you have to ask yourself ‘How much are we hurting for revenue?’ before you approve a permit like this without considering the safety issues,” said Pablo Cuevas, the supervisor who represents District 1 in Rockingham County, which includes the area where the proposed drilling was to take place. “We need energy. We need gas. We need oil. But you’re dealing with a company that is a group of investors. They hire other companies to do the drilling and do the trucking. You have five or six companies working under contract, so the energy company has very little to lose if something goes wrong. I would not approve a permit under the current circumstances.”

“You don’t trade clean water for dollars,” stated Fred Eberly, county supervisor from District 5. “How do you un-contaminate water once it’s been contaminated?”

Carrizo stated that it has no plans to change its drilling procedures.

“Our process has not changed,” Hunter said. “It was established many years ago and we started by drilling in densely populated areas of Fort Worth [Texas]. We can’t refine the process.”

Although Carrizo’s was the first (and currently the only) attempt to use hydrofracking in Virginia the state Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME) feels that the agency’s current standards are stringent enough to regulate hydrofracking.

A natural gas drilling site in West Virginia with a square impoundment dam used to store the fluid that returns to the surface after hydrofracking. Photo used by permission of http://www.marcellus-shale.us.

 

“We believe that the existing requirements in Virginia, which are as strict or stricter than any other state’s, are up to the task of addressing this kind of well drilling process,” said DMME spokesman Mike Abbott.

Abbott stated that if Carrizo renews its request, the permit that DMME was prepared to issue would still be valid if the conditions of the original application were still current.

“The agency found their application to be technically complete, but we chose not to issue the permit while the company was still pursuing the special use permit through the county,” he said.

“We’re giving them [Carrizo] a chance to prove to us that the process is safe and answer our questions; to show us the data that proves that this all works,” Eberly said. “The ball is in the court of the people who want to drill.”

Local opposition groups, like the Community Alliance for Preservation (CAP), have urged local residents to not let their guard down.

“Citizens can contact their supervisors and express their opinion and stay vigilant for new proposals,” said CAP spokesperson Kim Sandum, who noted that many people in the community believe that hydrofracking is “old news.” “People need to learn about the process and be educated so that you can discuss the issue in an intelligent way when they speak to their supervisor or their neighbors.”

While the prospect of natural gas drilling in Rockingham County hangs in the balance, the process is already taking place in West Virginia. A permit has been issued for a well in Hardy County, less than a mile from the Rockingham County border.

“We will be drilling near the border at some point, but not in 2011,” Hunter said. “We have a good-sized position in Hardy County, right on the other side. When we drill the wells the people in Rockingham County will be able to see the derricks.”

Looking east downstream from where Bennett Run and Crab Run converge at the intersection of Crab Run Road with Bergton Road. The property of the proposed drilling site lies just west of these water sources. Photo by Holly Marcus for hburgnews.com

National Forest lands, which make up 140,000 acres in Rockingham County, are also open to gas drilling in a process that does not require the county to approve a special use permit. According to officials with the George Washington National Forest there are no gas leases currently held on National Forest lands in Rockingham County, although there are some in nearby Highland County.

The administration of the George Washington National Forest is currently revising its Management Plan, a document that will determine which areas, if any, are available for gas leases and hydrofracking. A draft of the plan will be announced mid-April, followed by a public comment period before it is approved this fall.

In Rockingham County nearly 15,000 acres (about 2.5 percent of the county’s total) have been leased for natural gas by six different companies. While most of these leases are in the northwest corner of the county, leases have been sold within a quarter mile of the town of Broadway and within half a mile of the city of Harrisonburg. There are also nearly 1,500 acres leased in two large plots near US 33 on Shenandoah Mountain, in close proximity to Skidmore Fork Lake, Harrisonburg’s water reservoir.