Dimock Says Yes to Compressor Stations, No to Clean Air Council
Gloria DiGirolamo
Dimock, Pennsylvania Resident
Dimock Proud Member
Last week, I had the opportunity to speak at a compressor station hearing regarding four new Williams facilities being located in my community in Susquehanna County. I was there with several other local residents to support Williams. We all came out to tell the Clean Air Council (CAC) to stop bringing in people from other areas, including Philadelphia and New York, to tell us what we can do on our own properties. Here is the testimony I provided for the Department of Environmental Protection, during which the CAC very rudely heckled me, implying I was not knowledgeable about an industry operating all around us.
Unfortunately for this small group of outsiders, the people of Susquehanna County and Dimock Proud are much more educated on the subject natural gas development than they’d like to credit us. We know exactly what the issues are. We’ve also watched the CAC in action at other hearings and we know what their message is. We reject it. Here’s what I said at the hearing:
I support this application for compressor station approval. The proposed facilities will provide much needed infrastructure for the economic development of our area. The science also indicates it can be done safely, without negative impacts on our air quality or natural environment.
The Clean Air Council, out of Philadelphia, a region where the air quality is not so good compared to ours, seems determined to stick their nose in our business. The Council routinely opposes every compressor station under circumstance, even though they certainly have much bigger fish to fry closer to home. This suggests the Council’s mission is less about clean air than stopping natural gas development.
The Council makes much of something called the aggregation rule. This rule effectively combines permit applications when they are for nearby facilities. It assumes the combined impact will be magnified and, therefore, proposes everything be considered in the aggregate. The Council, obviously, wants to combine as many applications into one as possible so the emission levels are more likely to exceed some arbitrary standard and can be denied.
Your agency, the DEP, has applied common sense to this rule to recognize emissions are quickly dispersed as one moves away from a site, establishing a one-quarter mile threshold for evaluating impacts on a case by case basis. That approach makes sense.
The Clean Air Council, however, would recognize no distance at which aggregation rules would not apply. Instead, it would rely upon vague and undefined factors of dependence and interconnectivity, which can be endlessly abused without regard to the actual impact on air quality, and that should be the issue. Longer pipelines and larger systems will, by nature, have more dependence and interconnectivity, yet this has no bearing on what really happens to air quality. That should be obvious.
The one-quarter mile threshold, by contrast, allows for consideration of air quality within the area likely to be actually impacted by a given facility. it also allows decisions to be made without enmeshing applicants in an endless process and puts the focus squarely on reducing emissions. There is much progress on the front. Just this week, reports were released indicating air quality in Northeastern Pennsylvania has been improving, not suffering.
The American Lung Association’s State of the Air report, in fact, gave grades of “F” to Philadelphia and virtually every county surrounding it, but a “C” to counties such as Greene and nearby Tioga where there is extensive natural gas development. This should tell us something.
There are also several practical factors that ought to be considered. First, linking together facilities that are too far apart ignores the differences in air quality in between. It raises everything to the highest common denominator and invites abuse by those opposed to development.
Secondly, what is the point of aggregating facilities when the emissions standard requires meeting ambient air quality at the property line? Isn’t that far more important? Shouldn’t the aggregation factor only apply to the extent it affects this?
Finally, it’s very clear the one-quarter mile threshold encourages smaller facilities. Aggregation on the scale the Council wants would remove those incentives and lead to larger facilities and more concentration of emissions.
I support the application before you for all these reasons.
Let me also add this – we are proud, very proud of our community and pleased with the natural gas development taking place here. We even put together a video expressing our views, which you can watch here, if you’ve not yet seen it.
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter!
Bill Ferullo
Posted at 16:42h, 01 MayGloria the reason the Clean Air Council is concerned about the compressor station going in in NEPA is because they represent the interests of the people here that are concerned about their health.People that come from Philly or NJ or NYC have much more concern about this air problem because the air down where they live isn’t very clean and don’t want this to become a problem here in NEPA like it is down where they live.Also ozone coming from compressor pollution can contaminate a whole region (as much as 200 miles away) this is another issue too.How many of these compressor stations will be allowed here in NEPA before it begins to change our pristine air quality?The DEP at the meeting in Elk Lake High said they are monitoring the air .The closest monitor is in Scranton .I personally talked to Joyce Ebbs director of Air Quality PA DEP .She told me they do not have the funds to put monitoring stations everywhere they are needed .I called her to get one where I live in Bradford county.There will be one west of Towanda becuase there will be 8 compressor stations in that area .What about east of Towanda where I live we have 3 compressor stations planned there!Many of you people that support EID and gas drilling are only interested in the profit it will create for yourselves .Go beyond the money and consider the health effects that will come from this.You might think this is all real funny but it really is quite serious to us who care about the area more then the gain gas drilling brings…….!
Tom
Posted at 22:54h, 01 MayBill, do you really think you’re the only who cares?
Bill Ferullo
Posted at 20:18h, 02 MayNo I believe there are others who care I know quite a few,but I also believe you and all the supporters of nat gas couldn’t give a damn as long as it fills your pockets .Have you looked into monitoring gas co’s operations or taken water sampling from creeks or monitored air quality and soil around pads or made a complaint to the DEP or EPA I don’t believe so.Every meeting your group attends only supports this industry never questioning what it does that is wrong only saying it brings jobs and prosperity.Jobs and prosperity do not supersede health and the quality of life I know here in NEPA.This is something that has become secondary to many of you and our legislators that live here .To me this is primary and I will make sure it doesn’t become a secondary issue by keeping the true facts of what it does in the public’s eyes…..If you care show me don’t deny problems that have happened or are occurring with the drilling……there are plenty of negatives along with the jobs thing ,sorry !
Tom
Posted at 22:02h, 02 MayA holier than thou attitude doesn’t substitute for facts.