Showing posts with label Hydrogen Sulfide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hydrogen Sulfide. Show all posts
Monday, May 6, 2013
Thursday, April 18, 2013
West, Texas Regulators Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Should NOT Have Been Trusted
Texas regulators knew in 2006 that the fertilizer facility that burned and exploded in West, Texasa had two 12,000-gallon tanks of anhydrous ammonia and was near a school and neighborhood, documents show. However, West Fertilizer Co., of West, Texas, told Texas Commission on Environmental Quality permit reviewers that emissions from the tanks would not pose a danger. That assertion was based on expected routine emissions, not the possibility of a catastrophic failure.
As a permit condition, the TCEQ required the company to build a wall between the tanks and a public road to prevent passing vehicles from striking the tanks. The company complied and on Dec. 12, 2006, the agency’s executive director issued an operating permit for the tanks, which already existed.
As a permit condition, the TCEQ required the company to build a wall between the tanks and a public road to prevent passing vehicles from striking the tanks. The company complied and on Dec. 12, 2006, the agency’s executive director issued an operating permit for the tanks, which already existed.
E&B Natural Resources is claiming that putting up this wall below will protect us from a similar explosion, fires and blowouts. Are they lying as well?
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Thursday, May 31, 2012
What is an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)?
17 Environmental Impacts
The EIR will analyze 17 different environmental impacts and will determine which ones are significant. Aesthetics, Agricultural resources, Air Quality, Biological resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gases, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population, Real Estate, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, Utilities, Mandatory Findings. It also describes mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to an appropriate or acceptable level.
Planning Commission & City Council
The information within an EIR allows the decision-makers (the Planning Commission and/or the City Council) to make an informed decision when considering whether or not to approve a project. The report also assists with deciding if approval conditions (entitlements) are necessary. The ultimate decision to approve a project, however, remains with the decision-makers. When the Planning Commmission or City Council approves an EIR, it is simply an acknowledgement that the EIR is true and accurate. It is only a step towards project approval, not a guarantee. The Planning Commmission or City Council may decide to instead decide to approve or deny the project based on overriding considerations. For example, the Planning Commission may find that a proposed project may provide monetary benefits to a community that don't outweigh a problems identified in the EIR, such as unsafe air quality, heavy truck traffic & real estate price decline that will negatively impact property tax revenue.
Public Review
There may also be one or more meetings about the report, either as a separate meeting or as an item in a Planning Commission agenda. Note that approval of the environmental impact report does not mean that the project is approved. Once the report is approved, decision-makers review the project, taking into account the information in the report and other considerations. The public has an opportunity to review and provide comments on a draft of an EIR by contacting, in writing, the planner listed on the EIR. Public input is then included in the EIR, and considered by the decision-makers along with other aspects of the report.
EIR Project Managers
Opinion: "Can Voters Rely on an EIR to Make a Voting Decision?"
It is important for the entire South Bay to understand this will be the 4th time in 80 years that Hermosa Beach has been faced with an oil drilling ballot measure. Hermosa Beach overwhelmingly banned oil drilling in public votes in 1932, 1958 and 1995. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will address many aspects of this process, but it will never fully disclose all the damage that oil drilling will bring about in a town 1.3 miles square. Our position as a great area to live will be severely tarnished. These safety and environmental damage resulting from oil drilling will effect generations to come.
An EIR is supposed to be a thorough analysis of: Air quality, Biological resources, Geology and soils, Greenhouse gases, Hazards and hazardous materials, Hydrology and water quality, Land use and planning, Mineral resources, Noise impact, Population and housing, Public services, Recreation, Transportation and traffic, Utilities & any other Mandatory findings of significance like real estate values. Upon the completion of the EIR, a thorough examination of the safety risks will be necessary as it was in the previous MacPhearson oil drilling project. A report like Bircher Report (safety study), which was done in relation to the MacPhearson project, will need to be done.
Its too complicated for the voters to rely on an EIR alone. Its too complicated and does not address safety to the residents. An EIR is meant to simply figure out how a project could get approved. Don't be surprised to see this EIR analyzed and separated by parts to make the environmental impacts appear smaller and insignificant to residents. It’s very important that the City Council get a report similar to the Bircher Report to fully understand the risks these kind of project present.
Hermosa Beach has been down this road before and completed an Environmental Impact Report for Macpherson Oil in the 1990's at this exact location. The City Council elected at that time showed great care and diligence in their decision making. They commissioned the Bircher Report and reviewed the EIR and concluded that it was unsafe and the air quality impact would have been too harmful on residents. Three City Council members Sam Edgerton, Julie Oakes and John Bowler unanimously agreed that to not proceed with oil drilling after reviewing all the findings. They felt that the safety risks were too great to allow the oil drilling project to proceed.
We need the EIR to be interpreted by professionals who will take into account the same safety issues our 1990 City Council had to. Our current council chooses not to heed this previous unanimous vote of their predecessors. It is unknown if they even read the prior EIR and related safety reports before agreeing to this settlement arrangement. The current city council viewed the outcome of a jury trail too risky and unlike our 1998 city council they put the citizens at risk, or in this case obviated the due diligence of a complicated project into a political vote where safety arguments and facts might get lost in the rhetoric..
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Dangers to Hermosa Beach Residents if Oil Drilling is Permitted
Toxic Pollutants Released During Oil & Gas Drilling
Here are just some of the risks sited by the California Coastal Commission in 1992 for the proposed Macpherson slant oil drilling project that was blocked by a resident revolt. Read the summary of the seven major risks addressed by the full California Coastal Commission detailed report. Its important to note that none of these issues can be fully mitigated by new technology as E&B Oil will likely claim. There are other risks associated with the project.
![]() |
E&B Natural Resources Sign at Site in Long Beach |
#1) This is an actual sign from E&B's drilling site in Long Beach, CA. The previous applicant (Macpherson Oil) proposes to locate a hazardous oil and gas industrial development in a fully developed urban area with nearby residences. Commission staff did not believe the applicant had fully analyzed the potential worst-case accidental release of hydrogen sulfide (see Wikipedia definition) that might occur. In addition, some nearby wells have historically produced significant amounts of hydrogen sulfide. As a result, the applicant agreed to fund an independent, third party review of its hazard risk analysis. The consultant, Arthur D. Little, Inc., working under the direction of Commission staff, determined that hydrogen sulfide, an acutely toxic gas, could be encountered during drilling and/or production and could pose a significant safety risk to offsite populations.
Hydrogen sulfide is lethal within a few breaths at concentrations of 1,000 parts
per million (ppm), and kills within ½-hour at concentrations of 300 ppm. Injuries
may occur at lower concentrations and occupational safety standards are
triggered at 10 ppm.
#2) The project poses a risk of fire and explosion.
#3) Methane Gas Leaks & Explosions - Cause of BP Oil Spill
#4) Withdrawal of reservoir fluids and associated changes in reservoir pressures may lead to subsidence. Subsidence of the nearshore area could lead to changes in beach profiles and result in loss of sandy beach. Subsidence can also cause increase seismic activity.
#5) Re-injection of produced fluids poses a remote risk of increased
earthquake activity.
#6) Project-related operations could result in an accidental oil spill from the
production facility/drilling site (a maximum 2,800-barrel spill), a tanker truck (a
maximum 175-barrel spill), and/or a pipeline (a maximum 141-barrel spill).
#7) I think this signs from E&B Oil explains our spilling concerns.
#8) Reduction of clean air to breath. Don't believe the lies that it won't stink.
#9) Drilling and well work-over activities require a 75 to 135-foot tall drilling
rig which (a) contrasts sharply with existing neighborhood building heights, (b) will be somewhat visible from several coastal public viewing areas, and (c) isincompatible with the low-profile visual character of this beach community. Apparently E&B Natural Resources will be proposing a smaller drilling rig.
#10) The applicant proposes to remove 12 parking spaces, six of which are
Public Access currently available to the public on weekends for beach access.
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Beverly Hills Bans Oil Drilling
The City of Beverly Hills recently passed a ban on drilling. Read the story in the Beverly Hills Patch, January 26th, 2011.
The amendment to the municipal code bans oil, gas and hydrocarbon extraction from surface rigs, but not wells located beneath Beverly Hills that are connected to sites outside the city. The law also prevents the leasing and construction of new hydrocarbon sites effective immediately.
“The Beverly Hills City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved an interim ordinance banning oil and gas drilling. Council members used the legislative action as an opportunity to reaffirm a united, long-held stance that Beverly Hills is no place for surface oil rigs. Councilwoman, Krasne chose to potentially "err on the side of caution" to protect children when she voted "happily, yes" on the ordinance.
"I'm going to say, right now, as I sit at home with a child who has lymphoma, that if there is just a small instance of cancer caused by an oil well on the school campus, then I'm going to err on the side of caution and put this ordinance in place," Krasne said. "If it can be proved to me that this is not the case, then at that time I will gladly lift the ordinance and have no problem."
The amendment to the municipal code bans oil, gas and hydrocarbon extraction from surface rigs, but not wells located beneath Beverly Hills that are connected to sites outside the city. The law also prevents the leasing and construction of new hydrocarbon sites effective immediately.
“The Beverly Hills City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved an interim ordinance banning oil and gas drilling. Council members used the legislative action as an opportunity to reaffirm a united, long-held stance that Beverly Hills is no place for surface oil rigs. Councilwoman, Krasne chose to potentially "err on the side of caution" to protect children when she voted "happily, yes" on the ordinance.
"I'm going to say, right now, as I sit at home with a child who has lymphoma, that if there is just a small instance of cancer caused by an oil well on the school campus, then I'm going to err on the side of caution and put this ordinance in place," Krasne said. "If it can be proved to me that this is not the case, then at that time I will gladly lift the ordinance and have no problem."