About Air and Water

Showing posts with label emt gas drilling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label emt gas drilling. Show all posts

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Cattle From Tioga County Farm Quarantined After Coming in Contact with Natural Gas Drilling Wastewater

By US News Wire - July 1, 2010

HARRISBURG, Pa., July 1 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Department of Agriculture announced today that it has quarantined cattle from a Tioga County farm after a number of cows came into contact with drilling wastewater from a nearby natural gas operation.
Agriculture Secretary Russell Redding said uncertainty over the quantity of wastewater the cattle may have consumed warranted the quarantine in order to protect the public from eating potentially contaminated beef.
"Cattle are drawn to the taste of salty water,"
said Redding.
"Drilling wastewater has high salinity levels, but it also contains dangerous chemicals and metals. We took this precaution in order to protect the public from consuming any of this potentially contaminated product should it be marketed for human consumption."

Redding said 28 head of cattle were included in the quarantine, including 16 cows, four heifers and eight calves. Those cattle were out to pasture in late April and early May when a drilling wastewater holding pond on the farm of Don and Carol Johnson leaked, sending the contaminated water into an adjacent field where it created a pool. The Johnsons had noticed some seepage from the pond for as long as two months prior to the leak.
The holding pond was collecting flowback water from the hydraulic fracturing process on a well being drilled by East Resources Inc.
Grass was killed in a roughly 30- x 40-foot area where the wastewater had pooled. Although no cows were seen drinking the wastewater, tracks were found throughout the pool. The wet area extended about 200-300 feet into the pasture.
The cattle had potential access to the pool for a minimum of three days until the gas company placed a snow fence around the pool to restrict access.
Subsequent tests of the wastewater found that it contained chloride, iron, sulfate, barium, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, strontium and calcium.
Redding said the main element of concern is the heavy metal strontium, which can be toxic to humans, especially in growing children. The metal takes a long time to pass through an animal's system because it is preferentially deposited in bone and released in the body at varying rates, dependent on age, growth status and other factors. Live animal testing was not possible because tissue sampling is required.
The secretary also added that the quarantine will follow the recommended guidelines from the Food Animal Residue Avoidance and Depletion Program, as follows:
Adult animals: hold from food chain for 6 months.
Calves exposed in utero: hold from food chain for 8 months.
Growing calves: hold from food chain for 2 years.


In response to the leak, the Department of Environmental Protection issued a notice of violation to East Resources Inc. and required further sampling and site remediation. DEP is evaluating the final cleanup report and is continuing its investigation of operations at the drilling site, as well as the circumstances surrounding the leaking holding pond.
Media contact: Justin Fleming, 717-787-5085
SOURCE Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture

Read More

Sunday, May 3, 2009

Southlake gas drilling debate: Did city drag its feet or show needed caution?

By AMAN BATHEJA - Fort Worth Star Telegram - May 3, 2009
Gas drilling screeched to a halt in Southlake months ago, but it’s emerged as an issue in the mayoral race all the same.

Mayor Pro Tem John Terrell is vying with former Mayor Rick Stacy to be the city’s new leader.

Stacy argues that Southlake has been run ineffectually since he stepped down in 2003. As one example, he has repeatedly said the city missed out on a multimillion-dollar payday by not leasing its mineral rights before the natural gas market collapsed.

"It didn’t take 18 months to write the U.S. Constitution. Why would it take 18 months to write the ordinance?" Stacy said. "To miss that window of opportunity for the taxpayers, that cost us probably $12 [million] or $13 million."

The city spent well over a year holding public meetings on drilling before finally adopting a revised drilling ordinance last May. Before that, Southlake allowed drilling only in industrial areas. By last fall, the decline in natural gas prices had prompted most drilling companies to stop signing new leases.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
On his campaign Web site, Terrell describes himself as "a prime architect" of the new ordinance. He said the city needed to make sure that residents had time to have their say. The city needed to have the revisions in place before leasing its minerals rights to ensure that a drilling company followed the stricter rules. The city will lease its mineral rights when natural gas prices rebound, he said.

"There’s always a way to spin any story," Terrell said. "To me, our safety and our property values were far more important than the city retaining and extracting our minerals early."

1,000-foot setback

City Attorney Allen Taylor echoed Terrell’s argument. He noted that a drilling company that signed a contract before the new ordinance was approved would not have had to honor the revised ordinance’s required 1,000-foot setback for wells.

In October, the city issued a request for proposals to lease the mineral rights on its property, 520 acres on 46 sites scattered around the city. The request specified that a proposal must include a bonus of at least $20,000 per acre and a royalty of 25 percent or more of all revenue from oil and gas produced from the land.

The city received no responses, city spokeswoman Pilar Schank said. City staff spent time working with the council to create the request and issued it once "it met expectations," she said.

Karen Whitaker helped organize the White Chapel Corridor group in Southlake, whose members received signing bonuses of over $20,000 an acre for its mineral rights last summer. She questions why the city didn’t sell its mineral rights last summer as well, soon after the new ordinance was approved.

"We hit it at the perfect time, and I think at that point, if you were hitting your ear to the ground, you would have known the time was right," Whitaker said.

Whitaker said the bonus money would have been put to good use and agrees with Stacy that the city dragged its feet. "We need a rec center for our teens. There’s infrastructure that needs to be completed to handle our growth," Whitaker said. "We don’t have that, and that was free money."

Shortsighted criticism?

Southlake resident Tommy Pennington said he is comfortable with how the city handled the drilling issue.

"I’d love to see the city get the money, but at the same time I think we have to have our plan be solid instead of asking for forgiveness later when the damage is done," Pennington said.

Gene Powell, publisher of the Barnett Shale Newsletter, said the intense competition by drilling companies to sign up property owners is probably gone for good.

"I don’t think we’ll ever see bonus money anywhere near the range it was," Powell said.

Despite the worry about missed opportunities, Powell said, the focus on bonus payments was shortsighted. "The publicity has really been over the bonus money, which is wrong," Powell said. "The real money is in the royalties."

Whenever drilling companies did start signing up people again, Powell said, he expected royalty offers would be around the same levels they were last year.
AMAN BATHEJA, 817-390-7695

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Hot Water - Eastside activists join a growing line of folks worried about gas-drilling waste products.

By PETER GORMAN - The Fort Worth Weekly - Nov. 28, 2007
The two neighborhood activists were worried that high-speed truck traffic and spilled sand from a gas well were creating dangerous conditions along East First Street, between the Trinity River bottoms and Oakland Boulevard. “There were at least three accidents between July and September of this year, where cars just fishtailed off the road,” Mike Phipps, treasurer of the West Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association, said.

But when his partner, Ed Sakerka, went down to take pictures of the crashes and road conditions, to show the city that something needed to be done, he found an even bigger problem looming for that Eastside area.

“Ed was down there one day talking to someone who worked for Chesapeake, and the guy said ‘If you don’t like the amount of traffic here now, wait ’til all the trucks start coming through when they get the injection well finished.’” Phipps recounted.

It was the first either man had heard of an injection well planned for the Chesapeake drilling site at the old Arc Park softball field north of I-30. And what they found out has made them even more concerned about the price their part of Fort Worth may be paying for what once seemed like “free” Barnett Shale income.

Injection wells are the drilling industry’s preferred solution to the major problem of what to do with the millions of gallons of water used by the fracturing or “frac-ing” process required to free up natural gas from the Barnett Shale formation underlying much of North Texas. After the water — infused with sand and chemicals — is forced at high pressure into the shale and the gas is extracted, the leftover water is extremely salty, contaminated with carcinogens and radioactivity from naturally occurring materials, and even flammable because of traces of hydrocarbons. Drillers say recycling is too expensive, and they generally get rid of it by putting it back into the ground. But the injection sites are rarely on the same property as production wells, so companies wind up hauling the water away in heavy trucks that add even more to the street damage and dangers caused by traffic around well sites.

Fort Worth is suspicious of injection wells — so suspicious that they were banned until the city council decided in June 2006 to allow some to be drilled. Two permits were requested almost immediately, one for a shallow injection well on the North Side, which was denied, and one from Dale Energy for its site on East First Street.

The Dale request was for a deep injection well that would release wastewater into the Ellenberger Sand Formation that begins about 9,000 feet below the surface. That permit was granted and was transferred to Chesapeake Energy when that company bought up many of Dale Energy’s assets. But the council, alarmed at the shallow-well request, put a moratorium until April 2008 on any further permits, to allow safety issues to be studied.

Jim Popp, an investigator who worked with the oil and gas industry for more than 40 years, said local governments are right to be leery of injection wells — that in fact, they should be even more strictly regulated. He told Fort Worth Weekly that the wells and the liquid disposed in them are considerably more dangerous than the public has been told.

“You’ve got to understand that the terms ‘wastewater’ and ‘salt water’ are just wrong for what’s really being injected into those wells,” he said. “What you’ve got is a toxic waste dump. Plain and simple, that’s what they are.” Major spills are commonplace, he said, and can poison the air and groundwater. Tanker trucks unloading the contaminated water have blown up, and so have storage tanks at injection well sites, he said.

Even though the East First Street injection well isn’t operating yet, it’s already causing major friction between the city and gas company. Chesapeake wants to truck wastewater there from its leases all over the East Side. City officials say that goes against the logic of the ordinance.

“The city’s understanding is that the only waste that can be injected into that well is waste that comes from the wells on that immediate property,” Brian Boerner, director of the city’s Environmental Management Department, said. “We wrote the ordinance to get [wastewater] trucks off the street, not to take waste from other areas and have it trucked in to the well. But Chesapeake’s point of view is that it can take waste from any of their leases and inject it there. Which could mean more truck traffic, not less, and that’s the opposite of what we set out to accomplish.”

A Chesapeake spokesperson told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that the difference of opinion is merely a “gentlemen’s disagreement.” But privately, the company is telling people that this issue is so important that they may consider suing if the city doesn’t change its stance. Their stake in the debate is obvious: With 190 wells operating in Tarrant County alone and more being drilled daily, a disposal mechanism is critical.

A Chesapeake spokeswoman declined to comment on whether the company is considering legal action against the city.

David Lunsford, who supervises gas well inspections for the city, said the issue probably will have to be resolved by the city council, but he doesn’t expect it to happen soon. “It could take several months,” he said.

What the council finally decides will have a long-term impact. Gas developers told the council in late summer that they will need at least 15 injection disposal wells within the city limits in the next couple of years to handle all the wastewater that will be generated. For now, the waste is being trucked to commercial disposal wells in Somervell, Wise, and Parker counties. Unlike the East First Street well, which the gas company and the city agree can take waste only from Chesapeake drilling sites, commercial wells take waste from any gas or oil drilling operation that will pay the fee of about a dollar per barrel.

“Some of the wells in Erath are permitted to take 25,000 barrels of waste a day,” Popp said. “That’s great for the operator, but what about the people who live nearby? That’s more than 250 water tanker trucks a day coming and going. In Wise, where I live, the figure is 5,000 barrels a day, but that’s still 50 trucks hauling toxic waste through the neighborhood every day.

Chesapeake’s disposal well, by comparison, is allowed to take 25,000 barrels a day — about equal to the waste from 125 wells, many times more capacity than would be needed by the wells on the East First Street property alone.

And while drillers and commercial disposal companies claim that disposal wells are dug so deep and constructed so well that there is virtually no chance of aquifers being contaminated, Popp says that’s hogwash. “When the tanker delivers the waste, it isn’t injected directly into the well,” he said. “It’s transferred from the trucks to a tank and then later injected into the well. And there is a tremendous amount of spillage. Where they want to put a well near my place it’s a little above me, and that spillage is going to roll down like rainwater and pollute my stock tanks and poison the air around here.”

He noted that even if a well is properly constructed and the operator is legitimate, hazards abound. Disposal injection wells have backed up and contaminated drinking water supplies in many places in Texas, he said.

In a deadly incident just outside of San Antonio in 2003, two tanker trucks unloading wastewater at an injection site exploded when the running engine of one of them sparked a fire in the gas still mixed with the waste. Three people were killed. Afterward, the Federal Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board classified gas-well wastewater as a flammable material. In several other instances, storage tanks at injection well facilities have exploded when struck by lightning.

Part of the problem is that disposal sites, like most other aspects of the oil and gas industry in Texas, are largely self-policing, according to Ramona Nye, a spokesperson for the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates oil and gas wells.

Boerner, the environmental director, said Fort Worth has addressed the problem of explosions by requiring that all wastewater storage tanks be made from non-sparking material — “fiberglass or materials like it.”

However, one of Popp’s associates, who asked that his name not be used because of gas companies’ threats to sue him, scoffed at the notion that fiberglass or even steel tanks with lightning arresters would provide much protection.

“We had that storage tank over in Cresson in Johnson County get hit by lightning last March 29, and neighbors said it burned for six hours. And that was fiberglass,” he said. “So somebody pulled the wool over Fort Worth’s eyes if they think they’re protecting the populace with that move. And lightning rods? Well, lightning jumps. And if it jumps to a steel tank, that tank is going to go. That’s just reality.”

Popp and others sympathize with the problems facing Fort Worth and its citizens, but they’re tired of seeing gas-well waste being trucked to their counties from all over North Texas.

Popp insists that there are better solutions than disposal wells. “The gas and oil companies can desalinate the water and reuse it. They can separate out the toxic waste and dispose of it responsibly. It will cost them money, but that’s too bad,” he said. “They shouldn’t be allowed to stuff their pockets at the expense of our environment.”

Chesapeake envisions a series of underground pipelines that would transfer wastewater directly from their gas wells to their disposal sites. But Texas laws that give oil and gas companies the right to use eminent domain for transmission pipelines have no similar rights for water pipes, much less pipes carrying flammable or otherwise hazardous liquid.

“Chesapeake is working to acquire the right of way for transmission pipelines, and in the leases they’re also asking homeowners and others for the right to lay water lines at the same time,” Boerner said. “But they’ve got some big holes in their plans, so they’re still going to have to use a lot of trucks to get that water where they want it.”

“However you look at it, the issue is quality of life,” Phipps said. “And unless we can get those companies and those truck drivers to realize that this is a neighborhood and not a job site, we’re going to remain at odds.”

Monday, November 5, 2007

City of Arlington meets Nov. 7 to consider leasing Arlington Cemetery and inner city parks for gas drilling

By Susan Schrock - Fort Worth Star Telegram - Monday, Nov. 5, 2007
The Arlington City Council will vote Tuesday night to open up bidding to companies that want to lease gas and oil rights on 95 acres of city-owned land in north Arlington. The mineral lease would include Johnson Creek Linear Park, Doug Russell Park, College Hills Park, Senter Park, Fielder Park and Arlington Cemetery.
The Arlington City Council will receive updates Tuesday on the Dallas Cowboys stadium, the planned Viridian project in north Arlington near Bird's Fort and proposed design standards for the entertainment district.

The Arlington City Council plans a work session at 2:30 p.m. Tuesday and a regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall, 101 W. Abram St.

Telecast: Channel 16 on Arlington Time Warner Cable

Saturday, October 20, 2007

MUST READ: TxSHARON confronts Sen. Craig Estes on Water

Click on title. It will take you to Sharon Wilson's Texas Kaos journal: "I Channeled David Van Os this week!"

Monday, July 30, 2007

Citizens Speak Out Against Devastation of Green Belt in Letters to the Editor - Fort Worth Star Telegram -

STAR-TELEGRAM - Mon, Jul. 30, 2007

Drilling, nature tend not to mix

Let me make sure I have this straight: The Bedford City Council members, those same rogues who think that grandfathered storage sites are unsightly, want to explore putting natural gas rigs on the city's very limited park sites. (See Tuesday news story "150 attend meeting on plans for drilling.")

I noticed that during the public hearing on this issue, not a soul from the council seemed worried about how to get rid of the saltwater accumulations from these rigs, nor did any of them seem concerned that about 70 percent of these rigs go bust. None asked how the city would deal with them.

The amount of land needed for these wonderfully lighted sites seemed to grow from three acres to probably closer to five acres during the meeting, and this caused no consternation among our elected officials.

Who's kidding whom around here? We need to wake up and take stock of our community again.

Drilling in Bedford? Sure, let's put the first rig right there at City Hall, preferably over the seat of Councilman Charles Orean.

-- Hank Henning, Bedford

Chesapeake Energy recently purchased 55 acres on Scenery Hill, adjacent to the studios of KXAS/Channel 5 on Broadcast Hill and the Tandy Hills Nature Area.

Anyone familiar with the area recognizes that drilling on Scenery Hill acreage would be a travesty and a major historical and environmental disaster.

The Tandy Hills Nature Area is one of the few (and arguably the best) remaining examples of virgin prairie in this area. As long as it remains, people can enjoy its beauty and solitude and understand how things used to be. They can perhaps spy a fox watching them warily or see a wild turkey take flight. Whatever they see, it provides a connection to the beginning of this nation.

This heritage must not be allowed to vanish.

The most appropriate use for the Chesapeake site would be as an addition to the Tandy Hills Nature Area.

There are two practical alternatives. One is for Chesapeake Energy to donate the land for an expansion of the nature area, gaining a tax write-off and positive publicity in the process. The other is to destroy the land by using it for drill sites and ancillary operations, reaping a huge amount of negative publicity, probable demonstrations and possibly even lawsuits.

Whatever happens, it will hurt Chesapeake's bottom line. Donate the land for the benefit of future generations and enjoy a positive public relations bonanza. It's a win-win proposition.

-- Richard Marmo,Fort Worth

We need the money and the energy, so drilling should happen. But it should not happen near our schools, homes or parks. By "near," I mean within a mile or so.

Drillers should follow all Environmental Protection Agency regulations and not be exempt from any of them.

Also, how much water do they use? Where does it go?

There have been too many accidents and too many waivers from existing law to make me feel comfortable.

Here on the east side of Fort Worth, streets are in disrepair and could not handle more truck traffic. Trucks aren't allowed on our streets, but I understand that the drilling companies most likely would get an exemption from this.

Our big trees are our crowning glory, keeping our streets shaded in the summer. We've seen what drilling does to the areas around it.

Safety, water usage, air pollution, street destruction -- these are some of the reasons to keep gas drillers out of my neighborhood.

-- Kyle Anne Poland, Fort Worth
Read Letters to The Editor in the Star Telegram

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Residents oppose UTA gas drilling

By JOHN AUSTIN - Star-Telegram staff writer - Sat, Jun. 16, 2007


Drilling dispute ARLINGTON -- Everybody in North Texas, it seems, wants a piece of the region's red-hot gas-well action these days.

Everybody, that is, but Linda Yarbrough and her neighbors near the University of Texas at Arlington's Maverick Stadium on the west side of campus.

UT-Arlington officials signed a deal this spring to allow on-campus drilling. Seismic work has been delayed by heavy spring rains, but should begin this month according to John Hall, UT-Arlington's vice president for finance and administration.

Drilling sites have not been announced. Up to five potential drilling sites have been identified, but there has been no decision about how many wells will be drilled, Hall said.

University officials' plans to discuss the deal with residents near campus don't make Yarbrough feel any better.

Yarbrough moved to 1300 W. Second St. 14 years ago. Her neighborhood, Vellenga Acres, includes about 80 houses on large, heavily wooded lots.

"It would ordinarily be an ideal neighborhood," Yarbrough said, adding that she doesn't want to be anywhere near a gas well.

What's new?

City and university officials met last week to discuss the planned gas well. Yarbrough estimated that about 100 residents attended.

City Councilwoman Lana Wolff said a public meeting with residents is expected in early August, after Carrizo Oil conducts seismological studies and decides on well locations, pipelines and truck routes.

The university has posted questions and answers about the deal under the "Official Statements" section of its Web site, www.uta.edu.

The posting states that the final site "will also be chosen to minimize the level of peripheral noise to campus and community residents."

As a state university, UT-Arlington is not subject to city ordinances stipulating the distance or buffers between a rig and residences. But on its Web site, the university said its practice is to "meet or exceed all relevant city ordinances." Drilling is expected to last 30 to 45 days, according to the site, and after that time "there is virtually no noise or risk."

What's next?

Yarbrough plans to be at Tuesday's City Council meeting, along with neighbors, to underscore what they believe to be potential problems. On Friday, she sent a letter to Mayor Robert Cluck and City Council members calling for strengthened urban gas-drilling rules.

Among her recommendations:

Restrictions on hours of operation

1000-foot proximity limits between property lines and drilling sites

Mandatory, 24-hour on-site security

Online: www.uta.edu


See Map in Star Telegram

Grove 0, Gas Well 1 - Chesapeake won’t back off plans to level trees next to the Trinity Trail.

By JESSECA BAGHERPOUR - Fort Worth Weekly - Wednesday, June 27, 2007


Hikers and bikers on the Trinity near University Drive will soon find this view replaced, in part, by a gas drilling rig.

When Colonial Country Club signed a contract in May to allow gas drilling under its property off University Drive, it joined the long line of Fort Worth institutions expecting to rake in a lot of the green stuff from the Barnett Shale boom. What’s more, the club will be able to reap those profits without having to put up with the noise and traffic of a gas rig.

But the deal that’s making profits for Colonial apparently will end up costing local nature enthusiasts a lot of green of a different kind, when Chesapeake Energy Corp. cuts down a major part of an eight-acre stand of old-growth oaks, elms, and cedars along the Trinity Trail across the river from the country club.

Jim Marshall, former owner of Marshall Grain Company, bikes along the trail frequently. “It’s such a beautiful grove of trees, one of the prettiest on Trinity Trails,” he said. “It would be horrible if a large number of trees were to be destroyed.” On other parts of the trail, Marshall has installed special “ box nests” that are helping re-establish the Eastern bluebird in Fort Worth.

Marshall told Don Young, founder of Fort Worth Citizens Against Neighborhood Drilling Ordinance (FWCanDo), about Chesapeake’s plans, and Young was outraged. He said the grove is home to some of the biggest and oldest trees in Fort Worth.

“In a more progressive city, these trees would be classified ‘Heritage Trees’ and be protected,” Young said. He has used Trinity Trails since the 1970s, when he was a boy. Back then, he said, “People seemed to care more about nature.”


Young and others say they don’t think most people who use the trail are aware of what may happen to the trees over the next several months. In the last few weeks, Young has been stopping people along the trail to ask them if they know about the plan. Everyone he has talked to was unaware of it, he said — and all were under the impression that the land is part of the city trail system.

He also contacted several groups, including Save Our Parks, a committee devoted to preserving Fort Worth’s parks, and the local chapter of the Sierra Club, as well as Fort Worth City Council member Wendy Davis, all of whom said there was nothing that could be done. The grove is on private property, Davis said, and there is no action the city can take to protect the land.

Not even the city’s tree ordinance can help. Gas well sites are exceptions to the city’s Urban Forestry Plan, according to changes made in January to bring the plan into line with the city’s gas well ordinance. That means Chesapeake is free to clear the tract as long as it replaces a minimum of 30 percent of the trees removed — although there’s no rule about where the new trees must be planted. The company must submit its landscaping plans to the city before tree removal begins. The “replacement” trees must be a minimum of three inches in diameter.

Chesapeake spokeswoman Julie Wilson said the company will not need to clear the entire lot for drilling. Between three and five acres of land are generally required for well sites, she said. There will be more than one well site on the plot, with only one rig running at a time.

“I understand when people are upset when trees are removed,” Wilson said. “The good news is we will not be clearing the entire lot and plan to save as many trees as possible.”

Wilson also said that the land is better off under Chesapeake’s ownership. The prior owner planned to clear it completely in order to put up an apartment complex and a shopping center.

Wilson represented Chesapeake at a meeting with Davis on June 21. Marshall attended the meeting and suggested that Chesapeake drill instead on one of its other properties. He suggested the company use Union Pacific property that is already industrialized, the University Park Church location that is going to be developed, or an open area just upstream from the Hulen Street bridge. If the company relocates the drilling site, Marshall said, it could turn the grove into a public park. Wilson said she would have her company check into Marshall’s suggestions, but she reminded him that the parcel of land was expensive. Turning the land into a park would mean losing a great deal of money.

Terry Jensen, vice-chairwoman of the Fort Worth chapter of the Sierra Club, was horrified when she learned about Chesapeake’s plans to remove the trees. She said it is “environmentally irresponsible” for the club to allow the trees to be cut down for profit. “We don’t have many woods left in Tarrant County,” she said. “Trees are beneficial to the environment and to people’s way of life. ... We have an innate desire to enjoy nature. Some people seem to have forgotten about that.”
If Colonial Country Club wants the gas well royalties, she said, the club should “allow drilling on their own property.”

Young said he has looked at Colonial’s land and that the country club has plenty of room for a well site without much inconvenience to club members or to nature. Colonial officials did not return repeated calls about their part in the deal.

If Chesapeake goes ahead with plans to drill on the site, the company will do what it can to preserve the site’s beauty, including by planting replacement trees in the area, Wilson said. “With Chesapeake’s focus on ... being good stewards to the environment, we will be as responsible as possible while still taking care of our stakeholders,” she said.

The planting of new trees to replace the old is not an acceptable alternative, in Young’s eyes. “When they plant a sapling to replace an old tree, who’s gonna be here in 200 years to see that sapling?” he said. “Gas drillers are ruining this city, slowly but surely.”

Bernie Scheffler, co-owner of Panther City Bicycles, rides his bike along Trinity Trails every day. The grove is one of his favorite spots to rest. “That’s the most pleasant grove of trees along the whole trail,” he said. Scheffler said his many customers who use Trinity Trails have been unaware of the planned drilling until he tells them about it. They are surprised and saddened by the news, he said. Most of them thought the land was owned by the city. “In a sense it’s nice that we could use private land for so long,” he said.

Gas wells in urban areas are noisy, traffic-generating eyesores, the bike store owner said. “The best option for getting it stopped is going to be citizen protest,” he said. “It’s a big misconception that gas companies are unstoppable. People are going to have to band together and be vocal about what they want.”

See Fort Worth Weekly

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Benefits of smog plan aren't so clear

State agency's higher ozone levels make 2006 goal more elusive
By RANDY LEE LOFTIS - The Dallas Morning News - Saturday, June 9, 2007
Sometime between mid-December and late May, the most important environmental effort in North Texas took a turn. As a result, achieving an elusive clean-air goal by late 2009 for a region that is home to 5 million people might be harder.
Changes that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality made to the region's new smog plan from its proposed to its final versions eased pressure on oil and gas companies, electric utilities and cement makers to cut their emissions. Changes to the way local vehicle emissions plans are counted also affected the final version.
Under either version of the plan, local pollution levels still would be significantly lower in 2009 than they are now, since each version orders cuts in the emissions that form lung-scarring ozone, or smog, in the air.
However, the final version, which two of the state agency's three commissioners voted to approve May 23, allows higher ozone levels than the earlier version, triggering concerns among health groups and federal officials. That's because the final plan doesn't require the same deep pollution cuts throughout North and East Texas as the draft – 70 tons per day of reductions in the draft plan, 49 tons per day in the approved version.
In just the nine-county Dallas-Fort Worth area, where emissions have the biggest impact, the local cuts went from 33 tons per day in the draft to 27 tons per day in the final version.
The biggest loss to the plan came when a group of local traffic control measures didn't make their way into the final version. Timing and accounting problems led to that shortfall.
Emissions reduction requirements shrank for engines that run pipeline compressors across East Texas, Dallas-Fort Worth area power plants and Ellis County cement plants. The cement plants, North Texas' biggest industrial polluters, had faced 11 tons per day in reductions under the draft. That reduction dropped to 10.4 tons per day in the final version.
Environmental groups had sought twice as much reduction from cement plants.
In each case, the reduced requirements for cuts by industries came after the affected companies complained that the initially proposed cuts were too expensive or impractical.
The higher emissions translate to higher ozone levels under the final version than under the draft. The draft would have left two of the nine local monitoring stations with higher ozone levels in 2009 than the federal standard, 85 parts per billion. In the final version, that number increases to four.
...However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which must determine whether the plan meets federal requirements, already has signaled concern over the changes. EPA Regional Administrator Richard Greene wrote to the TCEQ on May 23 to say the agency might not be able to approve the revised plan.
The lingering smog problem in Texas has some Dallas-Fort Worth business leaders worried about air pollution's effects on people's health and the region's economy.

"We still need more help," said Garrett Boone, chairman of the Coppell-based the Container Store company and co-founder of Texas Business for Clean Air. "We're really concerned about North Texas. Austin and Waco are probably right on the edge; Austin's probably, I guess, barely in attainment. There's a whole bunch of things that need to be done."
...The average ozone level in North Texas has dropped since the mid-1990s, but it is still too high to meet the federal health standard. In the plan's baseline period, 1999-2001, all nine local monitors were over the federal limit of 85 parts per billion. To meet the federal standard, all monitors must be below the limit.
The worst ozone was in Denton, with a three-year reading of 101.5 parts per billion. Next was Frisco, with 100.3.

Ozone tends to be highest north and northwest of Dallas County because prevailing winds carry the region's emissions in those directions. By midafternoon, when temperatures rise, the sun cooks the emissions into ozone.
Neither the draft nor the final state plan achieves the federal goal outright. Under the draft, the highest ozone level predicted for 2009 is 87.7 ppb in both Denton and Frisco. Under the final plan, the highest levels would be 88.7 ppb in Frisco and 88.6 in Denton.
The final plan also would have two additional monitors higher than the federal limit. ... The EPA's outside science advisors unanimously endorsed a much tougher standard, as low as 70 ppb, citing what they called compelling medical evidence that the current standard doesn't protect people.


Read more

Travel to other worlds ... UTA Planetarium

Immersive full-dome 3-D Digital planetarium show narrated by Ewan McGregor (Obi wan Kepobi from Star Wars) - Astronaut takes you exporing the worlds of inner and outer space. The movie is projected all around you. You recline in specially constructed chairs which enables you to comfortably view the immersive full-dome planetarium show. Astronaut! (produced from the National Space Centre in England) goes beyond the stereotypical space movie. Experience a rocket launch from inside the body of the astronaut. Float around the international Space Station moving thorugh the microscopic regions of the human body! Discover the beauty and perils as "Chad", the test astronaut experiences everything thrown at him.




Summer Schedule (June 2-August 26):

Astronaut!


shows at the UTA Planetarium.


Wed. through Saturdays at 11 a.m.
and Thursday at 7:00 p.m.




Cosmic CSI

shows at the UTA Planetarium 3-D Digital Dome.


Wed. through Saturdays at 2 p.m.




Rock Hall of Fame 1 (The Original)


shows at the UTA Planetarium.


Thursday at 8:00 p.m.




Read more (Warning their flat dull website doesn't give much of a glimmer of the multi-dimensional experience you'll have once you enter the dome of the UTA Planetarium!)


Admission: Adults: $5.00


Seniors, Students, Children: $4.00


UTA Faculty, Staff & Alumni (with ID): $3.00


UTA Studens (with ID): $2.00


Groups of 10 or more with reservation: $3.00


Call 817 272-1183 or e-mail planetarium@uta.edu