Category Archives: natural resource management

BOEM Extends Public Comment Period on Environmental Review for Geological and Geophysical Survey Activities Off the Atlantic Coast

Latest on comment extension about the Atlantic Seismic Final PEIS, which includes up to three deep stratigraphic test wells and up to five shallow test wells…..

Note to Stakeholders
March 31, 2014

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is extending the public comment period for the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for geological and geophysical (G&G) survey activities off the Mid- and South Atlantic coast. The comment period will be extended for 30 days and will now end on May 7, 2014.

The comment period is being extended in response to requests from the public asking for additional time to provide input.

The PEIS assesses G&G activities conducted under BOEM’s oil and gas, renewable energy and marine minerals programs through 2020, including deep-penetration and high-resolution seismic surveys, electromagnetic surveys, magnetic surveys, gravity surveys, remote-sensing surveys and geological and geochemical sampling. The PEIS also evaluates reasonably foreseeable environmental effects in adjacent state waters.

The PEIS is available for public comment at: www.boem.gov/Atlantic-G-G-PEIS/.
The February 27th news release announcing the original completion of the EIS and request for public comments can be found here: http://www.boem.gov/press02272014/

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) promotes energy independence, environmental protection and economic development through responsible, science-based management of offshore conventional and renewable energy resources.

About the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) promotes economic development, energy independence, and environmental protection through responsible, science-based management of offshore conventional and renewable energy resources.

For More Information:
Caren Madsen or Blossom Robinson BOEM Office of Public Affairs (202) 208-6474
Please visit us at www.BOEM.gov

Special thanks to Richard Charter

New York TImes: Environment: Panel’s Warning on Climate Risk: Worst Is Yet to Come


By JUSTIN GILLISMARCH 30, 2014

31climate-master675
Greenland’­s immense ice sheet is melting as a result of climate change. Credit Kadir van Lohuizen for The New York Times

YOKOHAMA, Japan — Climate change is already having sweeping effects on every continent and throughout the world’s oceans, scientists reported Monday, and they warned that the problem is likely to grow substantially worse unless greenhouse emissions are brought under control.

The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that periodically summarizes climate science, concluded that ice caps are melting, sea ice in the Arctic is collapsing, water supplies are coming under stress, heat waves and heavy rains are intensifying, coral reefs are dying, and fish and many other creatures are migrating toward the poles or in some cases going extinct.

The oceans are rising at a pace that threatens coastal communities and are becoming more acidic as they absorb some of the carbon dioxide given off by cars and power plants, which is killing some creatures or stunting their growth, the report found.
Continue reading the main story
Related Coverage

Borrowed Time on Disappearing LandMARCH 28, 2014
slideshow
Photographs: Rising SeasMARCH 28, 2014

Organic matter frozen in Arctic soils since before civilization began is now melting, allowing it to decay into greenhouse gases that will cause further warming, the scientists said.
Photo
Rajendra K. Pachauri, center, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, speaks during a press conference in Tokyo on Monday. Credit Shizuo Kambayashi/Associated Press

And the worst is yet to come, the scientists said in the second of three reports that are expected to carry considerable weight next year as nations try to agree on a new global climate treaty. In particular, the report emphasized that the world’s food supply is at considerable risk — a threat that could have serious consequences for the poorest nations.

“Nobody on this planet is going to be untouched by the impacts of climate change,” Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman of the intergovernmental panel, said at a news conference here on Monday.

The report was among the most sobering yet issued by the intergovernmental panel. The group, along with Al Gore, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for its efforts to clarify the risks of climate change. The report released on Monday in Yokohama is the final work of several hundred authors; details from the drafts of this and of the last report in the series, which will be released next month, leaked in the last few months.
Continue reading the main story

The report attempts to project how the effects will alter human society in coming decades. While the impact of global warming may actually be outweighed by factors like economic or technological change, the report found, the disruptions are nonetheless likely to be profound.

It cited the risk of death or injury on a widespread scale, probable damage to public health, displacement of people and potential mass migrations.

“Throughout the 21st century, climate-change impacts are projected to slow down economic growth, make poverty reduction more difficult, further erode food security, and prolong existing and create new poverty traps, the latter particularly in urban areas and emerging hotspots of hunger,” the report declared.

The report also cites the possibility of violent conflict over land or other resources, to which climate change might contribute indirectly “by exacerbating well-established drivers of these conflicts such as poverty and economic shocks.”

The scientists emphasized that climate change is not just some problem of the distant future, but is happening now. For instance, in much of the American West, mountain snowpack is declining, threatening water supplies for the region, the scientists reported. And the snow that does fall is melting earlier in the year, which means there is less meltwater to ease the parched summers.
Continue reading the main story

In Alaska, the collapse of sea ice is allowing huge waves to strike the coast, causing erosion so rapid that it is already forcing entire communities to relocate.

“Now we are at the point where there is so much information, so much evidence, that we can no longer plead ignorance,” said Michel Jarraud, secretary general of the World Meteorological Organization.

The experts did find a bright spot, however. Since the group issued its report in 2007, it has found growing evidence that governments and businesses around the world are starting extensive plans to adapt to climate disruptions, even as some conservatives in the United States and a small number of scientists continue to deny that a problem exists.

“I think that dealing effectively with climate change is just going to be something that great nations do,” said Christopher B. Field, co-chairman of the working group that wrote the report, and an earth scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, Calif.

Talk of adaptation to global warming was once avoided in some quarters, on the grounds that it would distract from the need to cut emissions. But the past few years have seen a shift in thinking, including research from scientists and economists who argue that both strategies must be pursued at once.
Photo
Tracks were flooded at Grand Central Station in Oct. 2012, after Hurricane Sandy hit New York. Credit Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times

A striking example of the change occurred recently in the state of New York, where the Public Service Commission ordered Consolidated Edison, the electric utility serving New York City and some suburbs, to spend about $1 billion upgrading its system to prevent future damage from flooding and other weather disruptions.

The plan is a reaction to the blackouts caused by Hurricane Sandy. Con Ed will raise flood walls, bury some vital equipment and launch a study of whether emerging climate risks require even more changes. Other utilities in the state face similar requirements, and utility regulators across the United States are discussing whether to follow New York’s lead.

But with a global failure to limit greenhouse gases, the risk is rising that climatic changes in coming decades could overwhelm such efforts to adapt, the panel found. It cited a particular risk that in a hotter climate, farmers will not be able to keep up with the fast-rising demand for food.

“When supply falls below demand, somebody doesn’t have enough food,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a Princeton University climate scientist who helped write the new report. “When some people don’t have food, you get starvation. Yes, I’m worried.”

The poorest people in the world, who have had virtually nothing to do with causing global warming, will be high on the list of victims as climatic disruptions intensify, the report said. It cited a World Bank estimate that poor countries need as much as $100 billion a year to try to offset the effects of climate change; they are now getting, at best, a few billion dollars a year in such aid from rich countries.

The $100 billion figure, though included in the 2,500-page main report, was removed from a 48-page executive summary to be read by the world’s top political leaders. It was among the most significant changes made as the summary underwent final review during a dayslong editing session in Yokohama.

The edit came after several rich countries, including the United States, raised questions about the language, according to several people who were in the room at the time but did not wish to be identified because the negotiations are private.

The language is contentious because poor countries are expected to renew their demand for aid this September in New York at a summit meeting of world leaders, who will attempt to make headway on a new treaty to limit greenhouse gases.
Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story
Advertisement

Many rich countries argue that $100 billion a year is an unrealistic demand; it would essentially require them to double their budgets for foreign aid, at a time of economic distress at home. That argument has fed a rising sense of outrage among the leaders of poor countries, who feel their people are paying the price for decades of profligate Western consumption.

Two decades of international efforts to limit emissions have yielded little result, and it is not clear whether the negotiations in New York this fall will be any different. While greenhouse gas emissions have begun to decline slightly in many wealthy countries, including the United States, those gains are being swamped by emissions from rising economic powers like China and India.

For the world’s poorer countries, food is not the only issue, but it may be the most acute. Several times in recent years, climatic disruptions in major growing regions have helped to throw supply and demand out of balance, contributing to price increases that have reversed decades of gains against global hunger, at least temporarily.

The warning about the food supply in the new report is much sharper in tone than any previously issued by the panel. That reflects a growing body of research about how sensitive many crops are to heat waves and water stress.

David B. Lobell, a Stanford University scientist who has published much of that research and helped write the new report, said in an interview that as yet, too little work was being done to understand the risk, much less counter it with improved crop varieties and farming techniques. “It is a surprisingly small amount of effort for the stakes,” he said.

Timothy Gore, an analyst for Oxfam, the anti-hunger charity that sent observers to the proceedings, praised the new report for painting a clear picture. But he warned that without greater efforts to limit global warming and to adapt to the changes that have become inevitable, “the goal we have in Oxfam of ensuring that every person has enough food to eat could be lost forever.”

Press Democrat.com: President Obama designates Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands a national monument (w/video)

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20140311/articles/140319932

President Barack Obama signs a document proclaiming the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands as part of the California Coastal National Monument during a signing ceremony in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. From left are: Scott Schneider, President and CEO, Visit Mendocino County Inc.; Leslie Dahlhoff, Former Mayor, Point Arena; Michael Boots, Acting Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality; Neil Kornze, Principal Deputy Director, Bureau of Land Management; Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif.; Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif.; Nancy Sutley, Former Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

By MARY CALLAHAN
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
March 11, 2014, 9:26 AM

President Barack Obama made it official Tuesday with an executive order bringing the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands into the California Coastal National Monument. Among those present for the Oval Office ceremony was Larry Stornetta, whose family owned the property for three generations. “Unbelievable. Unbelievable,” Stornetta, 64, said from the Philadelphia airport Monday en route to Washington. “It’s a once in a lifetime deal.”

Stornetta Lands National Monument Designation

President Barack Obama speaks before he signs a document designating the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands as part of the California Coastal National Monument during a signing ceremony in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. Pictured from left to right: Merita Whatley, Manager, Point Arena Lighthouse and member of Point Arena Merchants Association; Scott Schneider, President and CEO, Visit Mendocino County Inc.; Leslie Dahlhoff, Former Mayor, Point Arena; Michael Boots, Acting Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality; Neil Kornze, Principal Deputy Director, Bureau of Land Management; Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif.; Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif.; Nancy Sutley, Former Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality; Larry Stornetta, rancher and former land owner of a portion of the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands; Eloisa Oropeza, Tribal Chairwoman, Manchester-Point Arena Band of Pomo Indians.

President Barack Obama signs a document proclaiming the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands as part of the California Coastal National Monument during a signing ceremony in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. From left are: Scott Schneider, President and CEO, Visit Mendocino County Inc.; Leslie Dahlhoff, Former Mayor, Point Arena; Michael Boots, Acting Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality; Neil Kornze, Principal Deputy Director, Bureau of Land Management; Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif.; Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif.; Nancy Sutley, Former Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.

President Barack Obama finishes signing a document proclaiming the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands as part of the California Coastal National Monument during a signing ceremony in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. From left are: Scott Schneider, President and CEO, Visit Mendocino County Inc.; Leslie Dahlhoff, Former Mayor, Point Arena; Michael Boots, Acting Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality; Neil Kornze, Principal Deputy Director, Bureau of Land Management; Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif.; Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif.; Nancy Sutley, Former Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.

In the absence of Senate approval of the legislation, the White House announced Saturday that Obama would use his authority under the 1906 Antiquities Act to add the Stornetta lands to the 1,100-mile California Coastal National Monument, a collection of more than 20,000 off-shore reefs, rocks, islands and seastacks.

Special thanks to Richard Charter

Newsweek: Oil Prospectors Seek Their Next Big Strike in South Florida’s Everglades

http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/02/28/oil-prospectors-seek-next-big-strike-south.html#.UxM82PhhCIQ.email

By Victoria Bekiempis / February 27, 2014 2:18 PM EST
Prospectors are looking for untapped regions in areas like Florida, near a habitat for an endangered panther. Imke Lass/Redux

The letter was printed on plain white paper in plain black type, and but for its unfamiliar globe logo “Total Safety” and its unsettling message, it was no different from most of the junk mail filling the mailboxes of 30 homes in a rural south Florida area called Golden Gate Estates, east of Naples.

“Dear Sir or Madam,” it read, “Total Safety US, Inc. is currently going around your area gathering information on households for Dan A. Hughes, so we can develop a contingency plan. We need the name of the main contact of the household, the number of people in your household, address and a number where you could be contacted in case of emergency, if you have transportation to evacuate and if you have any special needs in transportation.”

This message from “the world’s leading provider” of safety service solutions to the petrochemical industry went on to instruct recipients to contact a Jennifer Jones with any questions about the still unspecified project coming to their neighborhood. Each household had its own reference number.

With a little research, one of the many perplexed recipients, a retired artist by the name of Jaime Duran, learned that Dan A. Hughes was a Beeville, Texas-based oil outfit and that the company planned on drilling a test well on the pasture alongside his log cabin, less than 1,000 feet from his front porch.

“We could hear the cows in the next field when we moved here,” says Duran. He and his wife, Pamela, bought the lot at the end of an unpaved, one-lane road because they wanted a quiet place where they could grow fruits and vegetables in their golden years, far from the traffic and pollution of more populated areas. They liked the croaking of cicadas around sunset, the humid shadow of mosquitos during summertime, even the bear that ransacked their garden. And they had no reason to think that it would change. The neighboring lot was zoned agriculture and, he says, “This road was a dead end.”

But for companies like Dan A. Hughes, undeveloped plots of south Florida are anything but dead ends – they are new beginnings for the region’s long languishing petrochemical industry. As the price of oil climbs, American prospectors are increasingly looking for untapped regions, even in areas like Florida which, traditionally, aren’t big fonts of fossil fuels the way Pennsylvania or Kansas might be.

The state has had some small-scale petroleum production since 1943, when Humble Oil & Refining Co. struck oil south of Immokalee – the nation’s top tomato-producing region. There are now 162 wells operating in the state. In the south, they are in Collier, Henry, Lee and Dade counties. (There is also some production in the Panhandle’s Escambia and Santa Rosa counties, near Pensacola.) Refining peaked at 45 million barrels in 1978, amid the gas crisis, but has since spiraled to less than 2 million barrels annually.

A new pack of wildcatters, however, is convinced that the next big crude discovery is just around the corner – in the Sunshine State – and is actively seeking land leases and permits.

Of course, south Florida’s landscape is more than a little different from Louisiana’s Cancer Alley or Texas’s derrick-littered landscape. Much of the wildcatting could take place on the known habitat of the endangered Florida panther, of which there are estimated to be about a hundred extant. The area — comprised of the watershed that replenishes levels in the Big Cypress National Preserve and the Everglades — is also integral to the area’s hydrological health. It fills the aquifers millions of south Florida residents rely on for drinking water.

The looming conflict over south Florida’s oil potential also underscores several mining controversies in Florida and across the U.S. – the often uneasy relationship between mineral rights owners, homeowners and preservationists – and local politicians’ efforts to protect constituents above business interests.

***
Barron Collier was a Southerner through and through, hailing from a prominent Tennessee family that even claimed relation to Virginia Dare, “the first white woman born to English parents in North America,” according to Paradise for Sale: Florida’s Booms and Busts by Nick Wynne and Richard Moorhead. His entry into the business world belied this lofty pedigree. Collier got his start as a low-level railroad hand – a sales solicitor, in fact, but invested in a printing company, which produced advertising placards for subways and streetcars. A few years and a few shrewd business moves later, Collier had amassed a “virtual monopoly on this form of advertising,” making him “a millionaire many times over” by the age of 26.

At one point during negotiations with a Chicago railroad, Collier agreed to buy an island off the coast of Florida from the company’s president, spurring what would become a fascination with the state’s wild lands. The Everglades, in particular, “captured Barron Collier’s soul.” From 1921 to 1923, Barron Collier bought 1.5 million acres in southern Lee County, to make livable the swamps and cypress stands. He would later get a county named after him, Collier County, in exchange for funding an interstate linking Tampa and Miami.

Collier’s purchases and developments were so extensive that one historian remarked in 1926 that he would be “the first man to make a billion dollars from land” – with the potential to exceed even the Astors’ profits from New York City real estate. Despite a lack of evidence – and the fact that prospectors had tried unsuccessfully to find oil in Florida since 1901 – Collier was convinced that the earth under the state bubbled with black gold, telling his son shortly before his death: “I can smell it.”

Four years later, Collier’s nose was vindicated when Humble Oil and Refining Company (since absorbed by Exxon) struck oil on the Sunniland trend, which spans from Fort Myers to Miami. His descendants stood to profit greatly from his persistence: Collier businesses own around 200,000 acres in southwest Florida. Though they donated 160,000 acres to form the Big Cypress National Preserve, they kept the mineral rights to this combined acreage.

Despite the potential profits from mineral rights, Sunniland is no Alaska’s famed Prudhoe Bay, which boasts both the U.S.’s and North America’s proved reserves and produces some 236,750 barrels of oil daily. Rather, Sunniland’s 16 or 17 wells yield 2,400 barrels daily, according to the trade publication Oil and Gas Investor. A consultant who spoke to Newsweek on background because he works closely with the oil industry says that in Florida it’s also more costly to seek oil, as it has to be transported by truck.
A confluence of market forces and new technologies, however, have given prospectors more reasons to dig in Florida, including Sunniland. In the past five years, the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has received 39 drilling applications and granted 37 of them. (The other two applications were incomplete or withdrawn, according to the DEP.) Sixteen of these have been applied for in the past year – 14 of which are in Collier and Hendry counties, according to reports.

Prospectors also have economic incentive to dig deeper. The few wells drilled in the lower portion of Sunniland level all showed signs of oil. This has prospectors such as Brandt Temple, president of New Orleans-based Sunrise Exploration, actively developing the area. “Sunrise identified the play in 2010 and a number of wells have been permitted or drilled so far,” Temple said in an email to Newsweek. “Operators are keeping a tight lid on their results so far. Sunrise and its partners plan to drill a well in Hendry County this year.”

“Time will tell – every play is different,” he added. “When we take a good look at the stunning technology breakthroughs in drilling and completions that have SAFELY revolutionized the oil and gas industry in the past decade in CO, CA, PA, TX, OK, ND, MS, LA, MI, WV, OH and Canada – there is no reason to think those same technologies will not be successful here in FL as well.”

Another draw is horizontal drilling, which allows prospectors to put a longer network of pipes in underground rock formations, and hydraulic fracturing, a.k.a., fracking. The DEP has generally downplayed potential fracking, saying that Florida’s geography is not amenable to the practice. In an internal memo from 2011, one official even said it’s “not a factor” in south Florida.

In a recent email to Newsweek, department officials echoed these sentiments.
Florida’s present oilfields are not contained within shale, “the prime target of conventional hydraulic fracturing in other states.” In 2012, however, a DEP official requested a conference call with a prospector, saying there is an “imminent fracking job in S. Florida,” the Fort Myers News-Press first reported. The paper also notes that Alico, Inc., claims to have discovered as many as 94 tons of fracking sand in nearby Hendry County.

Plus, there’s some precedent for fracking in Florida. The DEP does have record of some wells being fracked, the last being in 2003, on the Panhandle.

The geological traits that make Florida good for oil exploration might also make it particularly environmentally risky. Andrew Zimmerman, an associate professor in the University of Florida’s geology department, tells Newsweek that the state’s oil is found in cracked, porous limestone formations. This is also the same rock sourcing drinking water. Plus, south Florida already has its share of water problems. In addition to water managers constantly balancing over-wet or over-dry conditions, they are often being caught between the two bad choices of over-drawing from aquifers or dumping fresh water into the ocean. Lake Okeechobee, which is also a major player in the region’s water sources, is another ongoing problem, as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has recently diverted polluted water into the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Rivers from the lake to prevent its 80-year-old dike from bursting. That has dealt a near deathblow to these rivers’ estuaries, with locals complaining that the lake’s waters containing agricultural chemicals from nearby farms have killed numerous manatees, dolphins, fish and oysters.

The Everglades is also in the midst of a massive $1 billion restoration project, a joint state and federal effort which will protect some 2.4 million acres of interconnected wetlands by returning them to their natural state. These areas aren’t just habitats for more than 60 threatened and endangered species. They are also integral in providing approximately 7 million south Florida residents’ drinking water, according to Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection. “Because of that high probability of contamination spreading itself into the aquifer, I would be very hesitant to encourage any growth of the oil industry,” Zimmerman says.

He’s not coming from an alarmist standpoint, he explains, even admitting that oil exploration can be completed safely. However, there’s always a risk. “If you do any type of activity long enough, you’re going to have accident,” and, considering the water problems in south Florida, “it’s not going to be worth it.”

The developers are also asking the EPA for a permit to dig an injection well, which would pump brine, a salty, watery by-product of drilling, back into the earth for storage.

A recent ProPublica investigation revealed that injection wells, which have been growing in popularity as a means of waste disposal, are not as safe as previously thought, having “repeatedly leaked, sending dangerous chemicals and waste gurgling to the surface or, on occasion, seeping into shallow aquifers that store a significant portion of the nation’s drinking water.”

In south Florida specifically, the report notes that “20 of the nation’s most stringently regulated disposal wells failed in the early 1990s, releasing partly treated sewage into aquifers that may one day be needed to supply Miami’s drinking water.”

Florida has another big reason to be wary. In 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, said by many to be the worst oil spill in American history, dumped 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, killing wildlife and laying waste to coastal economies dependent on the fishing and tourism industries.

The DEP contends that Florida’s oil operations have been safe throughout the years, without any “major accidents, spills, or blowouts” but admits that there have been some incidents. Since 1972, there have been 393 reported spills – totaling 1,281 barrels of crude oil spilled and 16,636 barrels of brine spilled. The DEP maintains that this amount is minimal, equating to .0002 percent of what has been produced.

The consultant to Florida’s oil industry who spoke to Newsweek on background agreed that nothing major had happened but did mention one incident pointing to pragmatic issues in addressing problems. In the early 1960s, when several fields operated on the Sunniland formation, operators decided to build a pipeline to Port Everglades, near Fort Lauderdale, rather than transport it by truck.

The pipeline operated until the late 1990s and closed because of “corrosion issues.” The pipeline couldn’t be fixed because there had been so much development above where it had been placed underground – and because part of it ran through newly designated water conservation areas. So, it was drained, flushed and filled with fresh water.

There’s also the issue of wildlife – the proposed drill site is less than a mile from the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, located in what some describe as popular roaming grounds for the animals. The DEP has told residents that “the well location does not contain habitat for federal or state listed wildlife species…. No listed species have been observed on site.”

The South Florida Wildlands Association counters that there has been “an actual panther observation in the proposed drill site (a rare occurrence even for seasoned panther scientists).” Data from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, the conservancy continues in a letter to the DEP opposing drilling, “show the area to be a hot spot for our state animal.” The commission maps provided by the conservancy show that two female and three male panthers’ home ranges “either include or are immediately adjacent to the proposed drill site.”

Another three call home the Picayune Strand State Forest, which is immediately south of the proposed drill site and part of the Everglades restoration project.

Alexis Meyer, who coordinates the Florida Sierra Club panther campaign, tells Newsweek that the challenge to panthers’ viability is habitat destruction. “They have no place to go,” she says. “The oil and gas exploration is happening right in panther primary habitat – which are the lands essential to their continued existence.” Humans near the slated drill site area also concerned about their habitat.

In a worst-case scenario, drilling could have deadly consequences.

Hydrogen sulfide is a gas that smells of eggs but rivals hydrogen cyanide in its potential to kill and is often present in fields with sour crude oil, the kind found in south Florida.
A DEP document maintains that hydrogen sulfide is not a big concern in south Florida, saying in a memo that “southwest Florida wells drilled to the lower Sunniland formation generally yield low or zero volume natural gas or H2S concentrations.”

Jennifer Jones, the coordinator referenced in the Total Safety letter to Sunniland residents, was a bit more direct when discussing safety procedure in the area, saying in April that “if something goes wrong, if a well blows up, hazardous gases can be released.”
These kinds of fears aren’t fueled by mere fear-mongering. In October, a North Dakota oilfield worker died after being exposed to hydrogen sulfide on the job. In July, a father and his son-in-law died because of hydrogen sulfide exposure on a Kansas oilfield.

***
As more and more Americans are learning that new drilling technologies could quickly turn the land under or next to their property into an oil field, questions about who owns mineral rights and what the owners of said rights can do with their resources abound, as well as legal confusion.

D.R. Horton, the country’s largest home builder, has held on to the mineral rights under “more than 10,000 lots” in Florida alone,” including a subdivision in Naples, near Golden Gate Estates. This is a common practice “in states where shale plays are either well under way or possible,” Reuters recently reported.

Most of the affected owners didn’t even know. Many of these states do not require developers to disclose this to buyers, meaning, as with D.R. Horton, a contract gives the builder “all geothermal energy and resources…on, in or under the lot.” In other words, homeowners who don’t own mineral rights can have hydrocarbon development on their property and have absolutely no say in the matter. (The Tampa Bay Times reports that D.R. Horton has sent letters to some Florida homeowners offering to return severed mineral rights, but it’s unclear how many letters the company had sent.)

In one Greeley, Colo. subdivision, homeowners learned, after purchasing their home, that an oil company would begin drilling under their neighborhood “right across the street,” Reuters also notes. The confused residents received one consolation – the oil company would let them pick the landscaping to hide the well heads and keep noise down.
Duran has seen firsthand how ugly this situation could get. During a meeting with prospectors to discuss their ongoing concerns, a prospector told Duran, his wife, a neighbor and several activists that they shouldn’t make so much of a fuss, threatening: “If we wanted to, we could drill right on your property and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

There was one consolation for Duran who, because of the oil well slated for next door, has felt pretty powerless these last few months: He made sure he owned the mineral rights under his property before moving in.

There has been some pushback about mineral right severance in general and how they are used in Florida. Some members of the Florida house want developers to disclose to would be homeowners before they sit down to sign paperwork whether the mineral rights have been severed from their property.

Increased attention toward Florida’s petroleum resources has also rekindled conversations about the industry’s future there, as State Senator Darren Soto recently penned a letter to the DEP asking for the agency “to immediately suspend all recently approved oil exploration permits in the Everglades to assure the Environmental Protection Committees in both the Senate and House have a chance to review the risks and effects of this decision.” Because of backlash from Duran and other concerned residents, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to a public hearing March 11 before deciding whether to grant the injection well permit.

Special thanks to Richard Charter

EPA moves to protect Bristol Bay fishery from Pebble Mine — Agency action begins process to prevent damage to world’s largest sockeye salmon fishery

While the announcement just now by EPA does not have direct implications for protecting Bristol Bay from offshore drilling, EPA’s recognition and acknowledgement of the world-class salmon stocks there can’t hurt …..Richard Charter

_______
Release Date: 02/28/2014

Contact Information: Hanady Kader, EPA Public Affairs, 206-553-0454, kader.hanady@epa.gov

(Washington, D.C.-Feb. 28, 2014) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is initiating a process under the Clean Water Act to identify appropriate options to protect the world’s largest sockeye salmon fishery in Bristol Bay, Alaska from the potentially destructive impacts of the proposed Pebble Mine. The Pebble Mine has the potential to be one of the largest open pit copper mines ever developed and could threaten a salmon resource rare in its quality and productivity. During this process, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cannot approve a permit for the mine.

This action, requested by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, reflects the unique nature of the Bristol Bay watershed as one of the world’s last prolific wild salmon resources and the threat posed by the Pebble deposit, a mine unprecedented in scope and scale. It does not reflect an EPA policy change in mine permitting.

“Extensive scientific study has given us ample reason to believe that the Pebble Mine would likely have significant and irreversible negative impacts on the Bristol Bay watershed and its abundant salmon fisheries,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “It’s why EPA is taking this step forward in our effort to ensure protection for the world’s most productive salmon fishery from the risks it faces from what could be one of the largest open pit mines on earth. This process is not something the Agency does very often, but Bristol Bay is an extraordinary and unique resource.”

The EPA is basing its action on available information, including data collected as a part of the agency’s Bristol Bay ecological risk assessment and mine plans submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Today, Dennis McLerran, EPA Regional Administrator for EPA Region 10, sent letters to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the State of Alaska, and the Pebble Partnership initiating action under EPA’s Clean Water Act Section 404(c) authorities.

“Bristol Bay is an extraordinary natural resource, home to some of the most abundant salmon producing rivers in the world. The area provides millions of dollars in jobs and food resources for Alaska Native Villages and commercial fishermen,” McLerran said. “The science EPA reviewed paints a clear picture: Large-scale copper mining of the Pebble deposit would likely result in significant and irreversible harm to the salmon and the people and industries that rely on them.”

Today’s action follows the January 2014 release of EPA’s “Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska,” a study that documents the significant ecological resources of the region and the potentially destructive impacts to salmon and other fish from potential large-scale copper mining of the Pebble Deposit. The assessment indicates that the proposed Pebble Mine would likely cause irreversible destruction of streams that support salmon and other important fish species, as well as extensive areas of wetlands, ponds and lakes.

In 2010, several Bristol Bay Alaska Native tribes requested that EPA take action under Clean Water Act Section 404(c) to protect the Bristol Bay watershed and salmon resources from development of the proposed Pebble Mine, a venture backed by Northern Dynasty Minerals. The Bristol Bay watershed is home to 31 Alaska Native Villages. Residents of the area depend on salmon as a major food resource and for their economic livelihood, with nearly all residents participating in subsistence fishing.

Bristol Bay produces nearly 50 percent of the world’s wild sockeye salmon with runs averaging 37.5 million fish each year. The salmon runs are highly productive due in large part to the exceptional water quality in streams and wetlands, which provide valuable salmon habitat.

The Bristol Bay ecosystem generates hundreds of millions of dollars in economic activity and provides employment for over 14,000 full and part-time workers. The region supports all five species of Pacific salmon found in North America: sockeye, coho, Chinook, chum, and pink. In addition, it is home to more than 20 other fish species, 190 bird species, and more than 40 terrestrial mammal species, including bears, moose, and caribou.

Based on information provided by The Pebble Partnership and Northern Dynasty Minerals, mining the Pebble deposit may involve excavation of a pit up to one mile deep and over 2.5 miles wide — the largest open pit ever constructed in North America. Disposal of mining waste may require construction of three or more massive earthen tailings dams as high as 650 feet. The Pebble deposit is located at the headwaters of Nushagak and Kvichak rivers, which produce about half of the sockeye salmon in Bristol Bay.

The objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. The Act emphasizes protecting uses of the nation’s waterways, including fishing.

The Clean Water Act generally requires a permit under Section 404 from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers before any person places dredge or fill material into wetlands, lakes and streams. Mining operations typically involve such activities and must obtain Clean Water Act Section 404 permits. Section 404 directs EPA to develop the environmental criteria the Army Corps uses to make permit decisions. It also authorizes EPA to prohibit or restrict fill activities if EPA determines such actions would have unacceptable adverse effects on fishery areas.

The steps in the Clean Water Act Section 404(c) review process are:

Step 1 – Consultation period with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and owners of the site, initiated today.
Step 2 – Publication of Proposed Determination, including proposed prohibitions or restrictions on mining the Pebble deposit, in Federal Register for public comment and one or more public hearings.
Step 3 – Review of public comments and development of Recommended Determination by EPA Regional Administrator to Assistant Administrator for Water at EPA Headquarters in Washington, DC.
Step 4 – Second consultation period with the Army Corps and site owners and development of Final Determination by Assistant Administrator for Water, including any final prohibitions or restrictions on mining the Pebble deposit.

Based on input EPA receives during any one of these steps, the agency could decide that further review under Section 404(c) is not necessary.

Now that the 404(c) process has been initiated, the Army Corps cannot issue a permit for fill in wetlands or streams associated with mining the Pebble deposit until EPA completes the 404(c) review process.

EPA has received over 850,000 requests from citizens, tribes, Alaska Native corporations, commercial and sport fisherman, jewelry companies, seafood processors, restaurant owners, chefs, conservation organizations, members of the faith community, sport recreation business owners, elected officials and others asking EPA to take action to protect Bristol Bay.

For information on the Clean Water Act Section 404(c) visit: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/cwa/dredgdis/upload/404c.pdf (PDF, 2 pp, 600K)

For information on the EPA Bristol Bay Assessment, visit: http://www2.epa.gov/bristolbay

Follow @EPAnorthwest on Twitter! https://twitter.com/EPAnorthwest

Special thanks to Richard Charter