Stanford Professor reviews Arlington Gas Well infra-red emission footage

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - June 27, 2010
Kim Fiel, President of Arlington Old Town Neighborhood Association became concerned when she learned that Chesapeake was applying for a Special Use Permit to drill several Natural Gas wells under a water tower near her home. She began attending P&Z meetings, City Council Meetings. Kim takes notes and asks questions and goes home and researches what she hears to learn more. She is concerned about the safety of her family and neighbors. Seeing video of infra-red footage shot of the pflumes of emissions coming from the UTA well complex where Carrizo has 20 of 22 proposed wells completed, she sent a link to the video footage to Stanford Professor Dr. Mark Jacobson, PhD of Stanford University. Some gas industry reps and at least one Arlington City Councilman have been stating that there is no health risk from emissions from the wells in Arlington. Kim decided to outside independent experts and get clearer answers to some of her questions.

Here is Dr. Jacobson's reply:

Subject: Re: Growth of natural gas drilling without Vapor Recovery Systems

Dear Kim,

Thanks for your email. Local emissions of all pollutants have local impacts on health and the environment. CO2 itself increases air pollution by increasing local temperatures and water vapor, both of which increase the formation of ozone and other pollutants. Ozone increases respiratory illness and mortality and cracks rubber, erodes building materials, and is very corrosive. The effects of CO2 on local air pollution are outlined in the paper at

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/urbanCO2domes.html

A summary of this effect by another group is located at

http://www.localcleanenergy.org/resources/the-jacobson-effect

Methane (CH4) emissions result in warming as well, but 21 times more powerfully per unit mass than carbon dioxide, so local emissions of CH4 will have similar impacts.

CO2 and CH4 will not directly affect health in normal polluted air. Their effects are by feeding back to other air pollutants through changes in temperature and water vapor, as described above.

Other chemicals are probably emitted in the plume in your videotape. Those will likely have direct health effects.

Industries will claim that pollutant concentrations in the outdoor air are lower than the federal standard for the pollutants. This may or may not be correct, but it is important to note that people are subject to health risk, including death, below the federal standard.

For example, the federal 8-hour standard for ozone is 75 ppbv now. However, epi studies clearly show increased deaths due to ozone start at around 35 ppbv. For particulate matter, there is no low threshold for health problems (e.g., they start above zero micrograms per cubic meter of air).

The bottom line is that all air pollution is bad and the only way to ensure a healthy environment for you and your family is to try to press your county to eliminate it as much as possible.

Sincerely,
Mark Jacobson
--
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Professor, by Courtesy, of Energy Resources Engineering
Director, Atmosphere/Energy Program
Stanford University
Phone: 650-723-6836
Fax: 650-725-9720
Email: jacobson@stanford.edu
Yang & Yamazaki Environment & Energy Bldg.
473 Via Ortega, Room 397
Stanford, CA 94305-4020
Website:
http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/