Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Who Wrote the SGEIS ?

Who Wrote the SGEIS ?

Ratings: (0)|Views: 595|Likes:
Not the DEC
Not the DEC

More info:

Published by: James "Chip" Northrup on Jun 20, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Monkey Business - Who wrote the NYS SGEIS for HVHF?/ Fischer, W.C. 2/28/2012
2 x 10
and the Three Monkeys Who Wrote SGEISComparing the Michie Report and the GAO Report toResearch Conducted by NTC, and ICF InternationalIn Support of the Revised Draft of the SGEIS
A White Paper:
 By William C. Fischer Part 1
an you recall the kindergarten fun of one child whispering something into the ear of the nextchild, then laughing at what comes out after five have had their turn? That seems to parallel howthe following section came to be written into the revised draft of the SGEIS
: Wellbore Failure
As described in Section, the probability of fracture fluidsreaching an underground source of drinking water (USDW) fromproperly constructed wells due to subsequent failures in the casingor casing cement due to corrosion is estimated at less than 2 x 10
(fewer than 1 in 50 million wells). Hydraulic fracturing is not knownto cause wellbore failure in properly constructed wells.
Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement On The Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory ProgramWell Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing to Develop the MarcellusShale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs
Monkey Business - Who wrote the NYS SGEIS for HVHF?/ Fischer, W.C. 2/28/2012
This isn’t kindergarten
and the outcome won’t be funny.
Where could such a number have comefrom? It appears in several non peer-reviewed industry reports written by J. Daniel Arthur of ALL Consulting, Tulsa, Oklahoma in which he consistently references the
2 x 10
number to a1989 paper by Michie and Associates. The Michie report calculated a hypothetical risk based ondata from 19 of 50 oil and gas basins in the U.S., by using a computer model to estimate theprobability that an undetected and simultaneous, three mode casing failure would occur in aClass II waste water injection well in an oil field in the Williston basin, a geologic formation inNorth Dakota.How is this information relevant to assessing the probability that an underground source of drinking water (USDW) in New York will be contaminated by the High Volume Slick WaterHydraulic Fracturing (HVHF) process used to complete a natural gas well drilled into in theMarcellus formation? After earning $ 433,833.24 in research and consulting fees, the expertsseem to have missed how these two scenarios might differ. How could New York authoritiesaccept such a number as applicable to HVHF contamination when, as this very research wasbeing conducted for N
ew York’s DEC
, John Hanger, the Secretary of the Pennsylvania
DEP,publicly announced in a Dimock church that Cabot Oil and Gas had contaminated
the groundwater around 18 of 63 wells drilled in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania? How could theexperts have also dismissed a July 5
, 1989 Report by the United States General AccountingOffice, titled
 Drinking water: safeguards are not preventing contamination from injected oil  and gas wastes
The Science
Governor Andrew Cuomo has
stated that a decision on hydrofracking should be based “on the
facts and on the science.
The scientific method has four steps:1.
Observation and description of a phenomenon. [
contamination of USDW’s near 
 HVHF operations]2.
Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon.3.
Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena. [Radioactivecontamination, increased health risks, adverse effects to indigenous flora andfauna, etc.]4.
Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independentexperimenters and properly performed experiments. [NOT DONE]One of the most critical hypotheses to be tested can be stated as:
Under a regulatory regime that enforces best management practices, HVHF will not contaminate USDWs.
Monkey Business - Who wrote the NYS SGEIS for HVHF?/ Fischer, W.C. 2/28/2012
A literature search may identify variables that can affect an experiment, but it is not a substitutefor empirical research. The relevance of empirical testing is dependent upon the attributes of reliability and validity. Reliability is the repeatability of results from similar tests. Validity is theappropriateness of the method used to test the variables. For example, a thermometer is used totest for heat, a spring to test for resistance. After data have been collected, statistical inquiryusing computer modeling may assist in projecting the risk of an unwanted outcome [such asgroundwater contamination], but only if the data are both reliable and valid.
The Consulting Contracts
With the advent of the HVHV technology,
 New York’s
existing1992 Oil, Gas, and SolutionsMining GEIShad to be updated. The New York State Energy Research and DevelopmentAuthority (NYSERDA) subcontracted this work:
Contractor amount Date let CompletedICF International $88,263.00 3/15/2007 12/10/2009URS Corporationm $87,488.38 3/25/2009 6/28/2011Alpha Environmental Inc $59,995.24 3/25/2009 12/4/2009Nagle, Tatich, Cranston, LLC $48,321.00 3/25/2009 11/3/2009Geological Consulting Services $74,820.87 3/31/2010 in processSocioeconomic Consulting Services $24,999.20 3/30/2010 2/9/2011Sammons/Dutton $49,995.55 3/31/2010 6/17/2011Total $433,883.24
Under contract #9679, ICF International was tasked with researching eleven items, the second of which was
researching the subsurface mobility of fracturing fluids and additives
.Under contract # 11170, NTC Consultants was tasked with researching two items: (1)
anassessment [of] adverse cumulative impacts with respect to noise, visual effects, air quality andwater resources
”; and
“An assessment of 
the impact of drilling on community character.
III. The Foundation Document
In April 2009, a report was prepared by ALL Consulting of Tulsa, OK, and the Ground WaterProtection Council of Oklahoma City, OK, for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of FossilEnergy and National Energy Technology Laboratory, under contract DE-FG26-04NT15455. Thedocument is titled,
 Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer.
Itsprincipal author is J. Daniel Arthur of All Consulting. Direct quotes or modified versions fromthe text form the basis of numerous other industry papers. It is a foundational document for the
oil and gas industry’s mantra that HVHF is a safe and proven technology.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->