Updates
June 3, 2014: end of story? TRR absolves Range Resources completely. Rigzone is reporting:
Water contamination from explosive gas in the water supply of a North Texas neighborhood cannot be linked to nearby drilling, the Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) said in a recent report.
The investigation began after seven property owners in the neighborhood contacted the RRC about rising levels of methane in their water wells. An eighth property owner also found an increase of chloride in two water wells. In its finding that there was an insufficient link between the contamination of well water in the Silverado on the Brazos (Silverado) neighborhood in southern Parker County and drilling in the nearby Barnett Shale, the RRC, which regulates the state’s oil and gas industry, noted that the contamination has worsened in five of the eight private water wells it tested in September 2013, compared to the contamination measured in the same wells in 2010 and 2011.
However, the RRC geologist, Peter Pope, concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to reach a conclusion that drilling in the nearby Barnett Shale “caused or contributed to methane contamination beneath the neighborhood.” In its report, the RRC said that “the occurrence of natural gas in the complainants’ water wells may be attributed to processes unrelated to recent Barnett Shale gas production.”It's a very, very long article for Rigzone. A great article; under normal circumstances this would be the end of the story, but under normal circumstances we would have different leaders in Washington, DC.
Original Post
This is a long involved story.Synopsis:
A Fort Worth, Texas, resident found methane in his water wells. He sued the natural gas driller in the area, Range Resources.
Analysis of the "methane fingerprint" revealed that the methane in the plaintiff's wells was not coming from methane produced by Range Resources.
Range Resources can continue to drill.
Meanwhile, the Texas agency responsible for oversight of the oil industry in Texas is continuing to research the source of methane in the individual's water wells.
A couple of data points from the linked article:
On December 7, 2010, the EPA issued an endangerment order, ordering Range Resources “to take immediate action to protect homeowners living near one of its drilling operations who have complained about flammable and bubbling drinking water coming out of their tap.”Complete story here. Regional links break early and break often.
The federal agency said tests confirmed high levels of methane in the water, which could pose a risk of explosion or fire, and noted benzene, a known carcinogen, in the water.
During a hearing in January, David Poole, Range Resources’ general counsel, said the expert testimony would show the company’s gas wells were not responsible for the contamination of nearby water wells. The EPA did not send witnesses to testify at the January hearing.
I have no idea why Range Resources was ordered to protect the homeowners in this case when it had nothing to do with the problem. Is this "guilt by association" or "guilty until proved innocent"? It seems that was a responsibility for public officials to protect homeowners.
By the way, I had forgotten this, North Dakota has a similar issue. Mike sent this in (see comments below): "While the EPA wasn't involved, the story reminds me of the study where they found shallow gas deposits in all of the counties in North Dakota., and found natural gas in 21% of their water testing sites." I guess the EPA folks are learning about the oil and gas industry as they go along.
While the EPA wasn't involved, the story reminds me of the study where they found shallow gas deposits in all of the Counties in N.D., and actual Nat Gas in 21% of their water testing sites. I believe you posted the article.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/article_6639f134-1db8-11e0-8bd9-001cc4c002e0.html
Yes, I did post that. Thank you for reminding. Since some folks don't read the comments, I need to move your comment to the main posting. Thank you.
ReplyDelete