You had best put these on before you go any further.
First some exciting news: The Powell Barnett Shale Newsletter is changing it’s name to…
Nope, not kidding. That’s what it says.
The BS News has come up with an “analysis” and some “research” they claim disproves the Fort Worth League of Neighborhoods report and recommendation to the Fort Worth IDS. If you want to try and muck through it all CLICK HERE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Your IQ will decrease by at least 10 points. (Actually, I’m embarrassed for the guy.)
Here is the FWLN’s rebuttal:
Mr. Powell,
You begin your latest editorial regarding the Fort Worth League of Neighborhoods report to the FWISD by stating that ” there is little in the report…based on factual data…after our thorough analysis.” I should like to address the errors in your analysis and reiterate the factual data since I am the technical liaison on this report for the League.
Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, you have yet again falsely branded us as “anti drilling radicals.” This is interesting in that we have never stated that drilling should not occur. On the contrary, we believe that everyone has the right to harvest their minerals. We HAVE stated, however, that it must be done responsibly. Obviously you equate responsible drilling with radicalism. I believe this is what is commonly referred to as a Freudian slip.
Secondly, you state that carbon disulfide is a product of anaerobic biodegradation but to be more specific, carbon disulfide is produced when methane and sulfur combine. Both are known common constituents of natural gas. The only activity, OTHER than gas production, that could produce levels of carbon disulfide this high is the manufacture of viscose rayon and there are NO viscose rayon plants in North Texas.
You have completely failed to mention that one of the models in our report was based on data collected by TITAN Engineering for the Barnett Shale Energy Education Council (BSEEC). A fact conspicuously absent not only from your editorial but also from comments which Dr. Ireland of the BSEEC is making to publications.
In addition, you unequivocally state that Barnett Shale gas “is free of all sulfur compounds such as hydrogen sulfide, carbon disulfide etc. therefore [it] is not a source of carbon disulfide.”
After MY thorough analysis, I would refer you firstly to the appendices of the TITAN study which provide test results showing the detection of not only hydrogen sulfide but also carbon disulfide and carbonyl sulfide. There is no pagination but you will find these compounds in the Quicksilver Lake Arlington and the Chesapeake Arc Park site results. It would appear that both you and Dr. Ireland are either unfamiliar with the actual test results produced by TITAN for the BSEEC or you are now choosing to deny the results. Am I to understand that the BSEEC no longer stands behind its study?
Next I would have to move on and refer you to TCEQ’s final report on emissions in Barnett Shale. They, too, collected samples containing carbon disulfide. TCEQ states that elevated levels of carbon disulfide, ethane, 1,2 dibromethane and isopentane were detected above short term health benchmarks together with other toxic compounds. A total of “35 chemicals were detected above appropriate short term comparisons.”
Lastly, I would refer you to the ERG interim report to the City of Ft. Worth which also collected samples of carbon disulfide at 5 of 7 sites; Site 1, number of detections of carbon disulfide, 20, number of non detections, 0; Site 2, detections, 18, non detections 0; Site 3a, detections, 9, non detections, 0; Site 3b, detections, 6, non detections, 0; Site 4, detections, 20, non detections, 0; Site 5, detections, 19, non detections, 0.
You quote “one knowledgeable peer of dispersion modeling” and yet you fail to give his or her name. Nevertheless the quote is interesting in that this “knowledgeable peer” also seems to be unaware that ERG is “backing into” emission rates in its study for Ft. Worth. ERG states “estimated emission rates were calculated from the test data…”
Your publication and industry as a whole have been very keen to accept ERG’s interim conclusions. And yet, based on your editorial, your “knowledgeable peer” says that the protocols ERG has used are not reliable, ergo ERG’s interim conclusions must also be false.
Finally, you seem to be under the impression that Ms. Rich and Wolf Eagle were involved in this report. They were not involved or consulted in any way, at any time.
In short, Mr. Powell, you have failed to provide an accurate editorial and have conveniently omitted facts in spite of your “thorough analysis.”
In addition, it would appear that you are unaware that TCEQ routinely gives out canisters to private citizens when an odor issue is present at a gas facility. This is something which I encourage people to request of TCEQ so that as much data as possible can be amassed. Private citizens helping the TCEQ to gather data will be one of the most important aspects for on-going monitoring of gas sites in future just as it was important in helping TCEQ to monitor the cement kilns in Midlothian.
Based on your editorial, it is clear that industry has produced very little in the way of substance in its rebuttal to the FWLNA’s report.
Sincerely,
Deborah Rogers
About Sharon Wilson
Sharon Wilson is considered a leading citizen expert on the impacts of shale oil and gas extraction. She is the go-to person whether it’s top EPA officials from D.C., national and international news networks, or residents facing the shock of eminent domain and the devastating environmental effects of natural gas development in their backyards.
- Web |
- More Posts(5121)
The industry has fallen to one of the classic blunders. The first of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less known is this….if Mamma ain't happy, nobody is happy. There's nothing like a threat to a Mom's child to wake up the slumbering giant. We aren't going away. We don't have a short attention span. We aren't giving up. We aren't going to quit. We have both the intellect and the bravado to stand up to you. Physical intimidation won't work on us. The battle ends when you leave and return our neighborhoods to the way they were BEFORE you came here. If you won't leave, we will fight you every step of the way, making sure we can turn every hair you have gray. 100 hired guns aren't worth one person fighting for their home or their children's health, or their property, or their piece of mind. Get it, learn it, accept it. Each new well, is another set of new, fresh recruits. It's like recruiting after 9/11, it isn't hard. So keep pooring fuel on the fire, I'm just getting warmed up.
Oil prices will stop our economic growth pushing up food prices, utility costs and gasoline prices. Windmills and solar panels will not provide enough energy for years to come. The Middle East is falling into chaos and we do not have an energy policy.
Schools are fighting to keep teachers and being forced to do with less funding. So why would anyone work so hard to stop the production of our natural resources that we need for national security reasons?
Only a left wing activists who is trying to destroy our way of life would be so uncaring to do so.
I will pray you will see the truth and change your ways.
Anon 11:14, EXCELLENT!
Anon 7:51, I hardly know where to start but I will try to wade in.
1. Oil is one thing and natural gas is a completely different substance. Barnett Shale gas will not work in your car.
2. You seem to be saying this: Shut up and let your children get cancer. Be glad that you were the chosen ones to suffer for your country. Only a right wing, selfish moron would suggest such a thing.
3. You don't seem to get it that the FWLN is NOT saying do not drill. They are only saying to Drill-Right. Drilling right will actually create more jobs and will force the industry to innovate.
4. How would you feel about the whole national security scam if you knew the gas companies were selling the gas produced here to China?
The same old trite argument coming from industry shills. Wrap yourself in a red, white and blue flag and pledge allegiance to hydrocarbons. Bow down before us and be grateful that we are polluting your Neighborhoods, making your children sick because you can still drive your car as IF that is the only thing that matters.
The bottom line is that the FWLNA has done a good job and industry has not done a good job of explaining why the report is not valid. That speaks volumes in and of itself.
@Anon 7:51 AM – Don't presume to know a thing about me. Actually, I'm a right wing nut job (if you want to label me). Why do you think industry in urban areas is being "attacked like it never has before with organized and well-funded opposition>". – because it's coming from conservatives as well you idiot's! I'm not trying to ruin the country, but wrapping yourself in the American flag in the name of "national security" and then selling the asset to less than friendly countries really pisses me off. It is YOU who are selling our future energy security. A few flipping wells in one gas field in the city a national energy policy does not make.
One more thing, thanks for bringing up school finance and the Barnett Shale, this is one of my FAVORITE topics. We could raise 1 billion a year for Texas schools by getting rid of the tax incentive currently in place to drill in the Barnett Shale. Gas companies don't need an incentive to drill in the BS, they already make 20-50% margins and every hole is a sure thing. So while we are talking about the "greater good", which is it going to be, tax incentives for a few private companies or the future of all Texas children. You're a conservative, you don't want all of those uneducated kids sucking off of your government nipple, RIGHT?
Never get between mamma grizzly and her cubs! Do you think Mr. Powell worked in the O&G industry, just making note of his health problems (COPD) oxygen tank?
What, no response from Anon 7:51 AM? Short attention span, maybe.