Extensive list of oil & gas co’s being sued in Louisiana

Click on this story to view the list of oil & gas companies being sued “Cameron Parish files lawsuit against 100-plus oil and gas companies” for coastal erosion issues.  Expectedly, the guy in the video claims they followed all the rules…..

 

———–my comment was………………

Karmageddon time……antiquated energy sources are a drag on the environment….you have to keep digging up what the earth no longer can provide. The zero sum game for energy sources (and all manufacturing) is a trade off for less clean water, less viable oceans, tainted air, & toxic soil…the very things we need for life.

                       Trinkets gotta go….

                       use less…

                       only necess(ary)…

                       save the rest.

For those whose have or had jobs, and those retired in the oil & gas industry …yes they have supported their families…but think again thirty years or so back when they put solar panels on the White House….that was our moment to embrace renewable energies and exploit those types of jobs…now think about everybody you ever love(d) exposed to toxins from digging up fossil fuels (that belong in the ground)…is their life worth the risk of those carcinogens?…did they pass imperfections in their gene pool? Suey time folks…follow the court proceedings and support seeing this suit til the industry realizes its history…its them or us really…

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Arlington Gaswells SPEW Ave 14 lbs of Benzene per DAY city-wide !

Screen shot 2016-02-08 at 7.51.42 PM

PIC link to video of councils latest ground breaking item (not fracking related) but NEXT to fracking that they have blessed into our good city without a health & environmental impact study…but rest assured the info is getting out there….read below….

If someone told you “sign here to be exposed to 5,000 pounds of Benzene per year city-wide (not including the 10-20 years worth of truck traffic emissions nor the two compressor stations emissions, nor the other town’s fracking emissions blowing to us)” would you have signed?

Averaging a quarter pound of Benzene per day per padsite times 55 padsites here in Arlington gasland Texas is 14 lbs day/city-wide. Note like radionuclides, there is no “safe” amount of exposure to Benzene…. and granted we drive stinky Benzene spewing cars and trucks…did we really need to industrialize our neighborhoods with gas mining production sites?

These BenZene emission estimates whiling including compressor engine blowdowns (planned MSS maintenance), they do NOT include new activity (like workovers or new wells being added which fall under the  NSPS quad o rules) and they do not include the Truck Fracking Traffic emissions daily coming and going from these sites to take away that toxic produced (flashing water) liquids to injection wells (that can later frack up our property & drinking water with frackquakes)

…we didn’t sign up for that ya’ll!     ARLINGTON CITIZENS CRY OUT TO COUNCIL TO TAKE HB40 AND CHALLENGE IT AT THE SUPREME COURT LEVEL TO REVERSE THE STATEWIDE BAN ON FRACKING BANS.

How did I obtain this BENZENE info? Well when you sue a large (albeit failing) energy company and are representing yourself, you dig deep, and in verifying Chesapeake’s permit with the state, I compared a small padsite like the Truman/CowboyStadium by my house to the big padsite(s) at GM and thought…that’s weird that the Truman permit has double the benzene than the GM one so I asked for an audit. Yesterday I rec’d the results on investigation numbers 1306229 Truman & 1306227 GM.

It turns out that GM underestimated on their electronic application their benzene emissions by .03 tpy or 60 lbs/yr.  They reported .02 tpy and should have reported .05 tpy….DSCN5280

DSCN5283

Two notes on this pic 1) Under “Level 1 New Sites”, TCEQ allows you to pick your registration timeframe “after the FRACK”how many businesses get that treatment? I’ve seen RRC their permit applications turn around in two days flat.2) H2S was found in Ft Worth

DSCN5282DSCN5284

Now that the Benzene audit is over…why does lil ol’ Truman site have more NOX (2.08 tpy) and Carbon monoxide (12.46 tpy) than GM is reporting for Nox (1.4 tpy) and Carbon Monoxide ( 8.4)? The VOC’s for Truman is 6.56 tpy and GM’s VOC’s are 9.36.

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: Jaret Wessel <jaret.wessel@tceq.texas.gov>
Cc: Clark ; Anne Inman <anne.inman@tceq.texas.gov>; aimi.tanada@tceq.texas.gov
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 12:27 PM
Subject: Q on Truman/GM audit / Feil vs Chesapeake SC18172
Mr. Wessel, Ref investigation numbers 1306227 & 1306229
 
Now that the Benzene audit for the smaller Chesapeake Truman padsite (in comparison to the large Chesapeake GM padsite) is over and TCEQ found out that GM under reported Benzene on their E application PBR by 60 lbs/yr)…why does the Truman site still have more NOX (2.08 tpy) and Carbon Monoxide (12.46 tpy) than GM for Nox (1.4 tpy) and Carbon Monoxide (8.4 tpy)? Should those numbers be audited too? 
 
I do not think GM is using catalytic converters (even though not mandated) on their lift compressors. During the December 2015 audit, the Truman site had one compressor running, and the GM had two of three running; so please respond if the differing types of engines they use account for this.
 
As for the VOC’s (coming off the storage tanks) they “are” appropriately higher for GM (9.36 tpy) than Truman (6.56 tpy).
I am extremely grateful for the first audit. The other department was brushing me off and we all know how polished I am in persistence.
 
Thanks
Kim Feil
 

—————–

 

So when you drive by a padside in a “dry” gas field like the Barnett Shale, if you are 300 feet away you “could” be breathing  17 ppb (that is above the TCEQ long term effect screening limits of 1.41 ppb).

aaaahhh the (invisible) smell of carcinogens in our neighborhoods….

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

1 ppm H2S @ Ft Worth Arc Park – unknown long term health effects

“Little information is available on the health effects from low-level exposures. The small body of available information varies widely.

DSCN5261

DSCN5259

Note the Carbon Dioxide attracts mosquitos too

The Arc Park site is one in Ft Worth that I have blogged about before. On FB I was laughing at the pictures on Google Earth capturing what looks to be a picnic for the Chesapeake employees and other political stakeholders.

The Brentwood Salt Water Disposal / Compressor Station / pad site was built at Arc Park in east Ft Worth. Originally they had an expensive/failed? (can’t get any info) test pilot program to evaporate produced water using the heat from the compressors…..”without scrubbers” per the salesman of those Everas units. The comment was made I recall was that the scrubbers were available and mandated in California but that they were not being used in Ft Worth…that was one of the first fracking battles I fought…but back to my H2S story here….this is the site that was tested…..FYI the balloon is not a reference to where the sample was taken…

Screen shot 2016-02-11 at 3.30.18 PM

1 ppm found of h2s was near the Chesapeake Campus.

 

The RRC plays DOWN the health risks from 1-10 ppm for an 8 hr exposure and calls it “safe”……..

B U T contrast that “short term safe ASSurance” from our RRC state frack luving fellows to a concerned DOCTOR of chronic long term low dose exposures ….

https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2007/10/Human-Health-Effects-from-Exposure-to-LowLevel-Concentrations-of-Hydrogen-Sulfide.aspx?Page=1

Human Health Effects from Exposure to Low-Level Concentrations of Hydrogen Sulfide

“Little information is available on the health effects from low-level exposures. The small body of available information varies widely.

EXPOSURE to high levels of hydrogen sulfide gas is a well-documented and understood hazard. OSHA and NIOSH standards have long recognized this acute risk with appropriate short-term maximum exposure levels for workers. However, long-term, chronic exposure to low levels of hydrogen sulfide is not as well understood.

Current hand-held detection equipment for hydrogen sulfide generally has a detection limit of 1 ppm, which is well above the odor threshold. This detection equipment is good for monitoring acute exposures, an application for which this equipment is generally used and is well suited, as OSHA and NIOSH standards are above this detection limit. However, if chronic toxicity for hydrogen sulfide exposure exists and is below 1 ppm, this equipment is obviously inadequate.”

Screen shot 2016-02-11 at 2.49.47 PM

 

:
:
:
:
:

Got nosebleeds since drilling came in? WE do!

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Arlington’s Drill Site Storage Tank’s CO2 = Mosquito Attraction

So if it isn’t bad ‘nough our fresh water frack ponds could attract (Zika/West Nile) mosquitos, think about all those produced water storage tanks in YOUR neighborhood with flash factor hydrocarbons. Carbon Dioxide attracts blood sucking mosquitos to feast on victims nearby.DSCN5256DSCN5257Yet another reason to ban fracking near people or at the very very least, MANDATE vapor recovery emission control devices….yep and I bet those lift compressors that are NOT mandated to have catalytic convertors emit hydrocarbons too!

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Seaweed as flocculent in produced water treatment

Produced Water Treatment Technology Combines Separation Equipment, Flocculent from Seaweed

Read more: http://www.environmentalleader.com/2016/02/09/produced-water-treatment-technology-combines-separation-equipment-flocculent-from-seaweed/#ixzz3zs2JCFr1

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Things you don’t see every day… TCEQ finding a fracking nuisance

Things You don’t see every day….In the seven years I’ve looked at TCEQ complaints/investigations….finally…fracking finally… I get to see an actual admittance of a nuisance violation! This one had a TVA reading of 2,500 ppm during a nitro lift operation for the infamous Parr toxic tort suit.

I KNOW OF an investigation taken DURING a nitro lift (near my son’s old junior high school) that was almost half the TVA reading that was found for the Parrs nitro lift….Reference on ACL #914402 the TVA reading near Bailey Junior High was 1,140 ppm (no health effects reported by inspector). Maybe 1/2 a violation was in order? Nah the inspector didn’t experience health effects.

BUT WAIT!…..Note I have two examples where TCEQ inspectors went out to the DWG Compressor Station where they had two stuck dump valve emission events. BOTH inspectors were sickened, yet no violations were found after the suma’s were deployed… Reference ACL #1108073 TVA 1,229 ppm, and ACL #1108078 (TVA ppm being PIR’d).

QUESTION: So how high does the TVA have to read or how sick does the inspector have to get before TCEQ finds a nuisance? In the Parr case the Suma canisters found exceedances.

I contend that the Suma canisters are only as good as the sample snapshot at that moment in time and the meteorological conditions can be a factor (like winds can dilute/disperse).

Read here how Dr Olaguer compares conventional air monitoring methods to (obsolete) landline like technologies when smart phone like technologies in real air time monitoring exist! Too bad they exist at a price we cannot afford ($250,000 for a project est.).

 

Screen shot 2016-02-10 at 11.21.14 AMScreen shot 2016-02-10 at 11.01.47 AMScreen shot 2016-02-10 at 10.59.39 AMScreen shot 2016-02-10 at 10.58.54 AMScreen shot 2016-02-10 at 10.57.45 AMScreen shot 2016-02-10 at 10.57.01 AM

 

Screen shot 2016-02-10 at 10.51.18 AM

TCEQ issuing a nuisance finding (Perr family)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

RADIOACTIVE tampons ? ask Texas A&M Agrilife to check the NORM

Just when U thought GMO cotton was nasty….how bout’ the prospect of (fracking related) RADIOACTIVE tampon risk!

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: “marketing@energywatersolutions.com” <marketing@energywatersolutions.com>; “help@agrilife.org” <help@agrilife.org>; “AgriLifeCR@tamu.edu” <AgriLifeCR@tamu.edu>
Cc: Ph.D. Avner Vengosh <vengosh@duke.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 8:47 AM
Subject: frackONcrack? Plz have Bob Avant check 4 NORM on that cotton thanks!
Regarding the pilot program with Anadarko, & Texas A&M Agrilife to grow cotton with recycled waste water from the oil & gas industry, please search out the work of Avner Vengosh of Duke University to ensure we are not creating what I call “frack on crack”.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

City of Arlington Insurance Requirements of the Frackers to frack in our neighborhoods

I found an 11/30/2012 email from Collin Gregory, City Of Arlington gas well inspector, responding to a citizen request for our insurance requirement of the frackers ….

Minimum Required Coverages 

Commercial General Liability Policy: $1,000,000 per occurrence

Excess or Umbrella Liability: $10,000,000
 
Environmental Pollution Liability Coverage: $5,000,000 dollars per loss
 
Control of Well Coverage: $5,000,000 per occurrence
Workers Compensation and Employers Liability Insurance: $500,000 dollars per accident
Liability Automotive Insurance: $1,000,000 dollars combined single limit per occurrence
DSCN5243DSCN5244
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Commons uncommonly close to fracking in Arlington

rolling Hills the commons

rolling hills the commons 2

photo credit here

These pictures were posted on Facebook on February 5 2016 note the nasty fumes and note the silos that hold the frac sand.

I commented on the city breaking ground video for The Commons….

Screen shot 2016-02-08 at 7.51.42 PM

City of Arlington youtube video link

 

“What? no frack well derrick in the back drop…come on!…What up and coming young intelligent person wants to pay high dollar rent near a natural gas production site and have BTEX spewing 24/7? Our good city never bothered to do a health and environmental impact study on Urban Drilling prior to allowing us to become an industrialized town….#nosebleeds R US #guinea fracked pigs … Funny how our previous councilman, Mel Le Blanc, boasted at the council meeting for the (failed to pass) N Center Street padsite to “look at the Viridian padsite example where high end homes will co-exist with existing gas wells” …wrong….those two LOBF Range Resource padsites were sold off to Legends and then plugged and abandoned….hah! Mr Kembel did try to oppose the Enervest drill site expansion at the Commons, but council wasn’t going for it…at least he tried…now to see the chips fall where they may. Good thing the Viridian was sold off cause if the price of natural gas goes back up and some gullable mineral owner thinks threre’s gas there…well Viridian homeowners might just get a little derrick action and then we’ll get to see if ol Mel LeBlanc was right about that “peacefully co-existing with gas wells” thang. Heres a link to some pics of the rig up near where the Commons will be… https://barnettshalehell.wordpress.com/2015/08/18/arlington-shale-shock-event-big-rig-fire-alert-18-wheeler/ And here is a February 6 2016 posting of even more recent fracking FUME activity at Rolling Hills Country Club which is near where the Commons will be….(aka this blog post)”

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Chesapeake 2015 Q3 loss almost 7 x’s more than 2014 Q3 profits

“Chesapeake logged a net loss of $4.6bn in the third quarter of 2015, from a profit of $692m in the same period in 2014”.
http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/02/08/chesapeake-no-plans-to-pursue-bankruptcy/

And so the market ditched CHK shares for a brief moment in the prospect of bankruptcy fears…

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment