BLM acknowledges harm from Piceance gas wells
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
By BOBBY MAGILL
The Daily Sentinel
A proposed ExxonMobil natural gas field expansion project west of Meeker could slightly reduce water flows in Piceance Creek, impact area air quality and destroy sage grouse habitat, according to the Bureau of Land Management.
But those impacts are typical of natural gas development in the region, agency spokesman David Boyd said.
The BLM on Monday issued an environmental assessment of ExxonMobil’s plans to construct 1,080 new natural gas wells on 120 well pads in the 28,800-acre Piceance Basin Development Project Area, each containing up to nine wells per pad.
ExxonMobil also proposes to construct a new gas plant and new pipelines in the area.
If the BLM approves ExxonMobil’s expansion plans, approximately 1,740 acres could be disturbed with well pads, roads and other facilities for approximately 20 years.
The area’s gas fields have been operating since the 1950s.
Environmentalists worry the assessment doesn’t account for the overall impacts of surrounding energy development.
“It doesn’t look at what the agency itself understands is wrong with its current management plan and doesn’t take into account 15,000 future wells and potential oil shale development,” said Reed Morris, a Craig-based public lands advocate for the Colorado Environmental Coalition.
An ExxonMobil spokesperson did not return requests for comment.
According to the assessment, ExxonMobil’s project could slightly reduce visibility in the Flat Tops Wilderness for as many as 20 days each year. Northern goshawk and greater sage grouse habitat could be lost during project construction and cause nest abandonment and death during nesting season.
The BLM reports the ExxonMobil project’s long-term impacts to surface and ground water could cause salt and organic compounds to build up in the soil and in shallow ground water adjacent to the company’s evaporation ponds.
ExxonMobil may withdraw water from Piceance Creek, which could reduce water flows by nearly 6 percent in dry years, possibly affecting endangered species habitat downstream.
Such a water withdrawal can be typical of a natural gas development, EnCana spokesman Doug Hock said. EnCana is another major natural gas producer in the Piceance Basin.
“We try to use produced water, and we recycle about 95 percent of what we’re using,” he said. “We have rights on the Colorado River, but we don’t use an awful lot from there. It’s not unusual that (ExxonMobil) would be using some fresh water in their process.”
David Merritt, chief engineer for the Colorado River Water Conservation District, said the project’s impact on water flows in the lower Colorado River will be negligible, but overall water demand from regional energy development eventually could reach 50,000 to 100,000 acre-feet annually.
The BLM is seeking public comment through Nov. 3 on the environmental assessment, a copy of which is available online at www.co.blm.gov/wrra/.
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
By BOBBY MAGILL
The Daily Sentinel
A proposed ExxonMobil natural gas field expansion project west of Meeker could slightly reduce water flows in Piceance Creek, impact area air quality and destroy sage grouse habitat, according to the Bureau of Land Management.
But those impacts are typical of natural gas development in the region, agency spokesman David Boyd said.
The BLM on Monday issued an environmental assessment of ExxonMobil’s plans to construct 1,080 new natural gas wells on 120 well pads in the 28,800-acre Piceance Basin Development Project Area, each containing up to nine wells per pad.
ExxonMobil also proposes to construct a new gas plant and new pipelines in the area.
If the BLM approves ExxonMobil’s expansion plans, approximately 1,740 acres could be disturbed with well pads, roads and other facilities for approximately 20 years.
The area’s gas fields have been operating since the 1950s.
Environmentalists worry the assessment doesn’t account for the overall impacts of surrounding energy development.
“It doesn’t look at what the agency itself understands is wrong with its current management plan and doesn’t take into account 15,000 future wells and potential oil shale development,” said Reed Morris, a Craig-based public lands advocate for the Colorado Environmental Coalition.
An ExxonMobil spokesperson did not return requests for comment.
According to the assessment, ExxonMobil’s project could slightly reduce visibility in the Flat Tops Wilderness for as many as 20 days each year. Northern goshawk and greater sage grouse habitat could be lost during project construction and cause nest abandonment and death during nesting season.
The BLM reports the ExxonMobil project’s long-term impacts to surface and ground water could cause salt and organic compounds to build up in the soil and in shallow ground water adjacent to the company’s evaporation ponds.
ExxonMobil may withdraw water from Piceance Creek, which could reduce water flows by nearly 6 percent in dry years, possibly affecting endangered species habitat downstream.
Such a water withdrawal can be typical of a natural gas development, EnCana spokesman Doug Hock said. EnCana is another major natural gas producer in the Piceance Basin.
“We try to use produced water, and we recycle about 95 percent of what we’re using,” he said. “We have rights on the Colorado River, but we don’t use an awful lot from there. It’s not unusual that (ExxonMobil) would be using some fresh water in their process.”
David Merritt, chief engineer for the Colorado River Water Conservation District, said the project’s impact on water flows in the lower Colorado River will be negligible, but overall water demand from regional energy development eventually could reach 50,000 to 100,000 acre-feet annually.
The BLM is seeking public comment through Nov. 3 on the environmental assessment, a copy of which is available online at www.co.blm.gov/wrra/.
