Published at the Edmonton Journal – edmontonjournal.com February 12, 2009

Alta. family fights for court costs after battle with oil company

By Jamie Komarnicki, Canwest News Service

CALGARY — Six years ago, the Ball Ranch near the small community of Bragg Creek, Alta., experienced its worst calving season in memory.

“We had weak calves, premature calves, sick calves, dead calves and we lost some cows, as well,” said Susan Graham, who runs the ranch with her husband, Craig, and her mother, Agnes Ball, 72.

“We had never experienced anything like that with our herd — ever.”

The decimated herd was the latest blow in a mounting battle pitting the small ranching family against one of the nation’s largest corporations.

It’s a fight some legal experts describe as the oil-and-gas industry playing “hardball.”

Recently, a Calgary judge ruled in the ranchers’ favour.

A Court of Queen’s Bench justice found in December that an Imperial Oil pipeline leak exposed a portion of the family’s cattle to hydrocarbon contamination.

The two parties were in court Thursday to argue over costs.

An Imperial Oil spokesman declined to comment on the case but said the company is proud of its relationship with local communities.

“We take great pride in our environmental record, particularly in maintaining positive relationships with our neighbours, which makes this case particularly troubling,” Pius Rolheiser said.

Nigel Bankes, chairman of natural resources law at the University of Calgary, suggested the judge’s ruling indicates the case could have been settled out of court “without putting the family to the cost, expense and emotions associated with proving a case in court.

“What that suggests is oil and gas companies will play hardball with landowners,” Bankes said.

The dispute began in the summer of 2002, when Agnes Ball returned from a weekend vacation to find a massive pit dug near a sour gas pipeline running through land where some of her cattle grazed. The leased land has been in the family since the 1940s, she said.

She said an Imperial employee later told her it was doing some work on a sour gas pipeline.

Cattle were grazing nearby, she said.

“I was furious,” Ball said Thursday.

The family’s concerns over contamination mounted.

When the calving season proved disastrous, they decided to take further action.

After repeatedly tangling with the company, Ball launched a lawsuit against Imperial Oil in 2004.

Family members insist that if they had known about the pipeline work and contaminated soil and water, they would have moved the cattle — and avoided the crushing calving season and damage to their herd that followed.

In December, the judge awarded the family nearly $70,000 in damages.

Their lawyer argued Thursday in court that the ranchers deserved as much as $150,000 for legal costs.

“If the David is ever intended or able to take on the Goliath, so to speak, costs do need to be acknowledged at the outcome of this decision,” said Spencer Bates outside of court.

Calgary Herald

Tags: , ,



From a pipeline safety activist:

Some pipeline basics:
http://www.pstrust.org/pipeinfo/beginners.htm
http://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/indus-act/blank-cert/blanketcert.pdf

Getting involved before the pipeline is built:
http://www.pstrust.org/pipeinfo/involvement.htm

A good summary of what you should do after the pipeline is built:
http://www.pstrust.org/pipeinfo/landowners.htm

Note links at the bottom of that page, such as:
http://www.ownerscounsel.com/

Page for local governments:
http://www.pstrust.org/pipeinfo/localgov.htm

It’s virtually impossible to stop a pipeline from being built once they claim eminent domain. That’s gone all the way to the US Supreme Court for a non pipeline eminent domain issue, and was upheld. Yes, private companies can take your land for their gain.

You also need to know some details about the pipeline:
*If it’s a gas gathering (production) pipeline, then it’s regulated by an agency in your state.
*If it’s a gas gathering pipeline, then how will the pipeline company deal with the steel corrosive compounds in the raw gas that can corrode the pipeline quickly if not controlled? Note that raw gas is unodorized, so finding a leak in a raw gas pipeline by smell is not recommended.
*How much land will need to be cleared of all vegetation before the pipeline is built?
*Who is responsible for restoring the land after the pipeline is built, and how will that be done?
*How much land will need to be kept clear of trees, shrubs, out buildings, above ground pools, etc. after the pipeline is built? Some people got a real shock when pipelines near them decided to start clearing their pipeline Right of Ways (ROW) as wide as the easement deed allowed. Or, they find restrictions on what they can plant on & near the pipeline.

Tags: ,



Press release from Environmental Defense Fund: 

http://www.edf.org/pressrelease.cfm?contentID=10489

Analysis Links Pollutants with Barnett Shale Gas and Oil Production

Environmental Defense Fund today released an analysis that compared trends in air pollution data collected by the state with public records of oil and gas activity in the Barnett Shale and found a correlation between the ambient levels of common hydrocarbons and the amount of condensate produced by natural gas wells in Denton County.

A related analysis released today of state air pollution monitoring data between 2002 and 2008 found that the air in Denton county contained more non-methane hydrocarbons (including some potentially hazardous pollutants) than any of the other counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth area where such monitoring was conducted.

Hydrocarbons include many chemicals found in natural gas and petroleum. Most are considered volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone or smog. Environmentalists are also concerned because methane, a main component in natural gas, contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

“EDF is not opposed to shale drilling for natural gas, a valuable national resource and cleaner transition fuel,” said Ramón Alvarez, Ph.D., senior scientist who led the analyses. “We simply want to see production done in the most environmentally responsible way possible. The good news is that many emissions controls can actually increase profits for natural gas producers.”

Results of these analyses come at a time when the oil and gas industry is drawing increased attention from the development of unconventional resources like the Barnett Shale, some of which are located near population centers. The New York Times reported last week about the challenge of persuading gas and oil producers to employ emission reduction measures that frequently pay for themselves.

Numerous cost-effective ways exist to reduce emissions from oil and gas production. Most of these measures have paybacks of less than one year. “An environmental trifecta is within our reach,” Alvarez said. “Oil and gas operators can use proven emissions controls to increase profits after short payback periods, while helping improve local air quality and minimizing climate change.”

The oil and gas industry releases about 37 tons of VOC emissions per day in Denton County, which ranks second in the region behind Wise County’s 42 tons per day. These emissions are substantial, nearly equal to a third of the 100 tons of VOC emissions produced daily from all of the cars and trucks in the nine-county DFW ozone nonattainment area.

Proposed recommendations by EDF include: expansion of VOC monitoring, especially in other Barnett Shale counties with significant condensate production (e.g., Wise, Hood, Parker); adoption of cost-effective oil and gas emissions controls, beginning with condensate tanks; and analyzing the effects of emissions in the Barnett Shale area on health and regional ozone levels.

Analyses are available via downloadable PDFs on the EDF website. To access the self-guided presentation of EDF’s analysis, visit here. To access the related analysis “Analysis of AutoGC and VOC Canister Data in the DFW Area” by Dr. Birnur Guven, visit here.

Tags: , ,



CDOG  Responds to NPR’s Un-Natural Gas Propaganda Campaign

In September, NPR’s Morning Edition broadcast a 3 day series on the issue of extracting natural gas from stone, the content of which suggested NPR is now just another Naturalgas Propaganda Resource. Below are links to the 3 days of NPR’s un-natural gas promotion, with a CDOG response below each link.

Link to Day 1, of NPR’s petro dollared propaganda campaign:
09/22/2009 Rediscovering Natural Gas by Hitting Rock Bottom
www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113043935

CDOG Response to Day 1:
In your 09/22/09 Morning Edition story, Rediscovering Natural Gas by Hitting Rock Bottom, NPR framed the issue as gas drillers being nice small independent entrepreneurs struggling against an energy market dominated by big oil and big coal. That’s false. Those little gas drilling wildcatters are controlled by big oil and gas corporations, which use them to limit liabilities (evade deep pocketed corporation responsibility for purposeful pollution). The not so small “independent” Nornew, positioning itself over the Marcellus shale here in New York, is actually a subsidiary of the international O&G corporation Norse Energy, based in Norway.

Your report focused upon increased estimates of possible gas quantities, without providing evidence of the quality deficits, like the water wells now being destroyed in Pennsylvania by this form of drilling.

The only downside to ripping remnants of gas from stone that the NPR reporter reported was that gas prices are too low, making it difficult for the optimistic “energy independence” drillers to make a profit from their [money] expensive operations. The National Propaganda Radio reporter didn’t report on any of the costs to the public that the drillers externalize. To be truly FOXworthy fair and balanced there was a brief reference to “many environmentalists” after which only an institutionalized, industrialized “environmentalist” position was offered.

Unconventional horizontal hydrofracturing drilling, to extract natural gas from low-permeable stone formations, is environmentally unsound. The Halliburton developed process focused upon solving the industry’s extraction problem… with absolutely no concern for the environmental costs to others, from the industry’s use of it.

The scale of the drilling (number of wells and hydrofractures required), that’s necessary to extract those myriad remnants of gas so tightly bound up within the stone, will over time have a catastrophic cumulative negative environmental and human health impact… polluting air, ground, and water in this desperate process of extraction intended to maintain our fossil fuel dependancy.

All of the enormous quantity of clean fresh water used in the hydrofracture process is permanently removed from the natural water cycle, because the chemicals added to it cannot be fully removed to change the toxic waste, which the process creates, back into the safe drinking water it was before the drillers abused it.

The massive amount of toxic waste created by the drillers, which they either do not leave in the hole, or (Love Canal) bury at the site, is taken to municipal sewage waste treatment plants, through which the chemicals then pass on to be dumped into our rivers… and eventually come out of our faucets.

Link to Day 2, of NPR’s petro dollared propaganda campaign:
09/23/2009 Who’s Looking At Natural Gas Now? Big Oil

www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113080237

CDOG Response to Day 2:
The nice “small independent company” that developed the new production techniques to rip the last remnants of natural gas from stone, having the small guy innovation which NPR falsely claims beat BIG oil, was… Halliburton!

If NPR considers Halliburton to be a “mom-and-pop” operation, then what does it consider to be a beastly overlarge corporation?

Those little guy operators that NPR romantically astroturfed are the private contractor gas driller domestic equivalents, here at home, of what Blackwater is where fossil fuels can be found elsewhere.

National Propaganda Radio’s reporting implies that the remnants of natural gas, which the myriad tentacled energy industry has in recent years been so hazardously ripping from the earth, are ENORMOUS; but then NPR claims they’ve been deposits too small scale to have yet attracted large corporations. If the remnant areas were large corporation considered so profit inconsequential, then why has the Millennium Pipeline been built to and now through those areas? Would the vast matrix of gas drilling rigs and pads, packed close together covering the whole landscape from the Catskills for 350 miles or more all the way across the broad breadth of New York State to Lake Erie, which will be necessary for the industry to successfully unconventionally extract all that natural gas trapped down there too tightly within non-porous stone… be small scale?

NPR cloaks the socially irresponsible decisions of individual landowners in American Dream apparel, romanticizing those who place their communities in long-term nightmare jeopardy to personally short-term profit themselves. Is inviting a dangerous marauding invading occupier into your neighborhood a good neighborly thing to do? Is the energy industry’s economic draft persuading farmers to site chemical toxic waste production facilities on their farms the way a sane society would provide farmers an adequate income? Is embracing toxic waste production the way any sane society would provide farmers their only ability to have the healthcare they’ll need when the extraction chemicals used produce the effects they cause?

Link to Day 3, of NPR’s petro dollared propaganda campaign:
09/24/2009 With Little Clout, Natural Gas Lobby Strikes Out

www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113138252

CDOG Response to Day 3:
By Day 3, NPR’s petro dollared propaganda campaign has become more subtle, providing some seemingly innocuous banter at the end, to reluctantly acknowledge the existence of some environmental “concern” regarding the type of drilling required to get the last remnants of gas from rocks that couldn’t be gotten before.

That ripping of gas from stone with the Halliburton hydrofracking process is not something that “might cause some contamination.” It has in the past; it does now; and it will whenever and wherever it is used, regardless of how tight, or tighter the un-enforced regulations are typed upon paper. The hydrofracturing process is the underground equivalent of mountaintop removal. Both of those extraction procedures have devastating environmental impacts, with mountaintop removal’s just being more readily apparent, while hydrofracture of low to non-permeable tight-gas bearing rock is insidious… like the cancers that it produces.

Being corporate media, when NPR turned its attention to the “political reality” it too subtly sporting announcer focused upon the gas lobby not having as much game as the coal lobby. The Waxman-Markey Bill is the product of industry bribery, with the biggest bidding bribers being rewarded. Yes, like a losing coach would, former [in the pocket of the gas industry] Colorado Senator Tim Worth “chewed out” the gas industry players… for being too cleaner than coal, when bribing Congress.

The gas industry is not the energy constituency with “the most to gain and the most to offer.” No! Those with the most to gain are we, The People, and those with the most to offer are the other environmentalists, who urge us to focus on serious conservation first, and rapid deployment of pervasive alternative renewable energy solutions, with the relocalization of energy production being necessary to bring our carbon footprints down to a size we can survive in.

National Propaganda Radio is still maintaining the false dichotomy of needing to choose gas or coal, repeating gas industry favorable claims of “some environmentalists” with those “some” being the institutionalized industrialized “environmentalists” who claim these last remnants of gas, which are so environmentally damaging to extract, are needed as a bridge-fuel to transition away from coal.

However, those “environmentalists” have taken the wrong exit, onto a bridge to nowhere. Gas from low to non-permeable stone is not a bridge to “transition” away from fossil fuels, but rather a desperate means to maintain the energy industry’s profits from our fossil fuel addiction dependence.

This nation has often displayed how quick and vigorously it can exert huge human energy devoted to the murder and mayhem of wars purposefully designed to government spend enormous amounts of money earned by working people to provide obscene profits to the most ruthless few. We would not need to choose only between dirty coal that won’t become clean, and the remnants of gas that’s so dirty when extracted, if we as a nation treated climate change as a problem of truly existential graveness, which it is.

What would some other environmentalists have to say?

We should stop spending trillions of dollars to fight wars over oil resources that are being used up by those wars fought over them. We should claw back the trillion dollars stolen by banksters. We should exert the same highly concerted human energy and ample money distribution, normally provided by this society only when engaged in global war, and direct that enormous effort and money into providing solutions for global survival… and make that transition from fossil fuel dependence to renewable energy independence be completed as fast as possible.

This nation, with the capacity to exterminate all life upon the planet with just a 20 minute war, surely has the capacity — if it can find the will — to make our planet sustainable in the years that is needed to be done, rather than waiting decades until it’s too late… and then can’t be done.

David J. Cyr

Delhi, NY
GPNYS SC member – Delaware County

Tags: ,



…of the 17 families [whose water has been affected] I am aware of they are not all seniors-some are younger with children. They are not all within 1000 feet of the Gesford site which was the site where the gas company contaminated the aquifer with methane gas which did not come from the Marcellus but from gas above it- isotopic testing was done. The activities of the gas company have altered the water quality in our valley and above. Today I have bubbles. Others have a film on their dishes and their animals are extremely thirsty all the time. Some families get water from the gas company most buy and haul water in. The gas company has stated that unless DEP orders them to provide water they do not have to. Also DEP does not have an accurate record of who is not drinking their water and why. Water wells are private and not regulated by DEP. So unless the water well owner calls them with a complaint they are unaware of any problems. My question is how can the “on going investigation” be accurate if all the information is not compiled. The missing info could be the key.

The gas migration issue is still being investigated-the headlines were misleading stating no fracking fluids found in Dimock water supply….the violation was that the company contaminated the aquifer-fact-they did.

As far as the “promises” we were all promised great compensation- “you’ll see $90,000 a year on as little as 5 acres! or “you won’t be living in this trailer next year. You’ll have a nice new house.” Nothing was ever disclosed to most of us concerning the nature and scope of the industrialization of our community – ONE well was mentioned with the infamous little Christmas tree pipe to mark its location. Drive around our neighborhood- you will see tall vents on water wells, jugs of water behind homes, and disillusioned folks inside the same homes they had 3 years ago. The dwindling royalty checks will soon equal the amount of money some of us spend on buying water…

Tags: , , , , ,



.

It speaks for itself.

.

Tags: , ,



“Pretty much in the middle of nowhere” describes a lot of places in upstate New York.  What natural gas has done to DISH, Texas, it will do to us too.
dishtxcover

"DISH is located just off FM 156, a few miles west of I-35 and Denton. It's pretty much in the middle of nowhere, which, from the drillers' point of view, made it the perfect place for gathering, compressing, and transmitting natural gas to and from all directions." - Fort Worth Weekly, 10/14/09

And what has the natural gas industry done to DISH, Texas, that it will also do here?  Here’s an excerpt from an October 14 article:

The wind blows through pretty freely now, however, since most of the trees have recently died.

“After the explosion and what happened to my horses, all my boarders took their horses out of there,” said Burgess, now 56. “Who could blame them? This was going to be my retirement, but now it’s valueless.”

The words “valueless” and “worthless” come up a lot in conversation with people from DISH.

Read the entire article:

Sacrificed to Shale

More from DISH’s mayor:

The news that I continually get makes this nightmare worse and worse. I have yet another twenty something young lady who has undiagnosed neurological problems that started when she moved here. She has been shipped out of state for testing on a number of occasions, and they have been unable to diagnose the problems she is having. I am having difficult time in know what the next move should be. I wonder if there is a medical doctor out there who may come to help us here? Maybe there would be someone who could perform toxicology tests on the citizens. Please give me any input you may have, and if you know of anyone who may be willing to help, please let us know. Maybe you could post something on your websites or blogs soliciting help. Together I know you reach thousands of people. Thanks.

Calvin Tillman
Mayor, DISH, TX
(940) 453-3640

Tags: , , , , , ,



Analyst: Gas shale may be next bubble to burst

By Judith Kohler Associated Press
Oct. 12, 2009, 6:33PM

DENVER — The promise of enough natural gas to last the United States more than 100 years based on discoveries of vast shale formations could be the country’s next speculative bubble to burst, a speaker warned Monday at a conference exploring the notion that the world’s oil and gas are diminishing rapidly.

Arthur Berman, a Texas-based geological consultant, likened the optimistic projections for production from gas shale fields across the country to banks buying into mortgage securitizations, which spurred the housing market crisis and economic meltdown.

“In the midst of a boom or a bubble, it’s hard to sit on the sidelines,” Berman said during the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas conference. “If you’re not in one of these plays, then Wall Street says, ‘Well, what’s the matter with you guys?’”

That was the psychology leading into the current financial crunch, Berman said. Analyses show that gas shale fields in Texas and elsewhere aren’t as profitable and likely don’t contain as much retrievable gas as the industry and others portray, he added.

Based on the experience in the Barnett Shale in Texas, Berman said he doesn’t expect the yields from the wells to be high enough or last long enough to make the gas shales that profitable, even when current low gas prices rise.

. . . . .

Energy analyst Randy Udall said after the panel discussion that the peak-oil group, which he co-founded, is studying the implications of discovery of the gas shales.

“The increase in production would suggest that natural gas will play a larger role in the future,” Udall said.

But to boost the role of gas to the levels promoted by Dea and others would require a significant increase in development, Udall said. The U.S. gas production peaked 35 years ago, Udall said, and the roughly 10 percent jump in production over the last four years required doubling the drilling rate.

Complete story at: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6664313.html