Shale Gas Can Pollute the Air, Too
But Marcellus companies might even profit from preventive measures
Pittsburgh Post Gazette
1 November 2010
By Joe Osborne
The Marcellus Shale Coalition says it's committed to protecting our
communities and our environment. Here's how it can prove it.
Earlier this month, the coalition -- a business association
representing many of the natural gas companies operating in the
Marcellus Shale region -- released a document titled "Guiding
Principles: Our Commitment to the Community." It consists of a list of
promises, including promises to provide safe work sites, operate
transparently, "implement state-of-the-art environmental protection"
and be "responsible members of the communities in which we work."
Drilling opponents and supporters can all agree that if Marcellus Shale
development proceeds, it should happen in a manner that protects
workers, the environment and communities. Another belief we all share
is a healthy skepticism for vaguely worded, feel-good public relations
campaigns like the coalition's "Guiding Principles."
If the coalition's commitment is genuine, and I'd like very much to
think that it is, the coalition can begin to demonstrate its sincerity
by reducing air pollution emissions from Marcellus Shale operations.
We hear a lot about the threat this industry poses to our water. Though
it receives less attention, the threat to our air quality is just as
significant. Compressor engine exhaust, offgassing from storage tanks
and raw natural gas emissions during well completions are just a few of
the many sources of air pollution associated with natural-gas
production.
The total air pollution created by this industry is astounding:
- In the Dallas-Fort Worth area, located in the Barnett Shale
gas play, annual emissions of smog-forming pollutants from the oil and
gas sector exceed emissions from motor vehicles.
- A 2008 analysis by the Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment concluded that smog-forming emissions from Colorado's
oil and gas operations exceed motor vehicle emissions for the entire
state.
- Wyoming recently failed to meet federal health-based
standards for air pollution for the first time in the state's history.
According to the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, emissions
from the state's growing oil and gas sector are to blame.
Natural-gas operations in the Marcellus Shale are expanding at a
breakneck pace. Texas, Wyoming and Colorado offer a preview of what's
to come if we don't address this problem now.
Fortunately, effective control technologies exist to reduce air
pollution from natural-gas operations. Better yet, because most of them
reduce emissions by increasing the amount of methane and other
hydrocarbons that are captured rather than entering the atmosphere,
they are not just cheap, they actually can pay for themselves in short
order -- often a year or less.
Utilizing these technologies makes so much sense from both an
environmental and economic standpoint that the federal Environmental
Protection Agency has partnered with industry to create the Natural Gas
STAR program, which promotes voluntary adoption of these cost-effective
pollution-control technologies.
While several of the Marcellus Shale Coalition members are members of
the Gas STAR program, most aren't. If the Marcellus Shale Coalition
wants to show its "Guiding Principles" are more than just words, it
should require coalition members to participate in Gas STAR. Every
year, program participants must document their emission reduction
activities in a report to the EPA.
Consistent with the coalition's commitment to operate transparently,
the coalition could make these annual reports available to the public.
This would allow Pennsylvanians to draw their own conclusions about
whether the industry is minimizing its impact on human health and the
environment and generally living up to its "Guiding Principles."
These recommendations would dramatically reduce air pollution while
increasing industry profits. If the Marcellus Shale Coalition members
implement them, we'd give them due credit and recognition. If they
don't, how could the public expect this industry to live up to the
coalition's "Guiding Principles" when what's good for the industry's
bottom line and what's good for the rest of us don't match up so
conveniently?
Joe Osborne is legal director of the Group Against Smog and Pollution (http://www.gasp-pgh.org).