Energy industry association paid shrill, Steve Everley, spoke at a recent EPA SMOG hearing.
In following up on his EID blog, he has charts that are misleading .
So our SMOG SMASHING STALWART, SCHERMBECK,
brought the goods to debunk his junk……
“Steve, you should really stick to stuff you know something about. First, the nature of what’s causing ozone in DFW is changing, from primarily NOx to more VOCs – something even the TCEQ folks admit with their latest modeling. This is why when they, at the last minute, decreased their O&G emission estimates for the 2018 SIP based on 2013 RRC data, the Denton and other monitors’ ozone levels fell as well. If there wasn’t a causal link between the two, there would be no response from the monitors in the modeling. Whether that decease in estimated future emissions was appropriate or not is another question. The point is that TCEQ itself established a clear relationship between O&G pollution and DFW ozone levels. Then there’s the UNT study that shows monitors in the Fracking Region of DFW have higher ozone readings and more exceedences of the 75 ppb std than monitors in the Non-Fracking regions of DFW. The claims your industry makes that there’s absolutely no connection between O&G pollution and ozone levels defy credibility given the volumes of both NOx and VOCs produced – you still release more smog-forming pollution than all the cement plants and local power plants combined, sources we know impact the ozone levels in DFW. So please explain why the same kind of pollution in greater amounts from the O&G industry wouldn’t have an impact? The fact that, for the first time in probably a decade, the TCEQ is estimating that the O&G industry will emit slightly less VOC pollution than all the cars and trucks on the road in 2018 , is I suppose, reason for celebration, but this estimate is based on market and technical assumptions that may or may not exist in real life – and BTW, rest on assumptions about lower Barnett Shale production over the next four years that your own spokespeople disagree with. Kind of a dilemma from y’alls’s POV – either you agree that the Shale is being exhausted faster than you’ve admitted to Wall Street, or you’re causing more air pollution than you want to admit to EPA. Finally after coming down over a number of years in fits and starts , ozone levels in DFW began stagnating in 2008 – not 2011. 2011 was the first year severe drought conditions were felt. It won’t be the last. But the trend was started before that year and continued until this last summer’s wetter and cooler weather gave us a break. Combine this five year trend of stagnation with the UNT results that show the Fracking Region monitors separating themselves out from the rest of the region beginning in 2008, and you have some pretty convincing circumstantial evidence pointing to the one source of pollution that wasn’t decreasing, but actually increasing in volume – again according to the TCEQ numbers. The Commission really wants to help you guys out, it’s true, but when they have to submit hard data to the EPA, it gets much harder to hide the truth. You should really make it to more of those regional air quality meetings.”
And I said “sizzle-burn”! Yet of course Mr Everley insists on Nox being more reactive to ozone formation. Sounds like Everley is just parroting what I heard our NCTCOG transportation air quality guy, Kris, try to tell me years ago when I first started attending the air quality regional meetings.
YOU WANT NOX I’LL GIVE YOU FRACKING NOX…….just look at all the diesel NOX spewing drilling rig emissions the industry so kindly proved here…
what follows is “MY” comment on the EID site…
“ewe…ewe…ewe…Mr Kotter….. I have some information on fracking NOX!!!
Lets compare how GM needs 1,479 yrs to = 10 yrs of NOX from Barnett Shale JUST with the use Diesel Drilling Rigs.
The TCEQ emissions inventory Phase 1 and 2 did not include preproduction emissions such as drilling, fracking and flowback….go figure. Arlington’s major gas producer, Chesapeake, presented a NOMAC (contracted driller) presentation at the 2012 AADE Technical Symposium on how much money and emissions they could save using electricity during the drilling phase. FINALLY I can verify one of the PRE-PRODUCTION emissions figures.
Arlington TX Barnett Shale Blogger 
I will concentrate on the Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Of oXide/dioxide (NOX) figures that have eluded me over the last seven years that I’ve been studying urban drilling.
The Nomac presentation touted the electric drilling rig to eliminate emissions per well as follows…
63 tons of CO2 per well (4.2 tons of CO2 per rig per day x ave 15 days to drill each well) plus
4.6 tons of NOX per well
plus
.2 tons of VOC per well
= 67.8 tons per well (of which 93% is CO2 which is bad for Climate Change).
Multiply 67.8 tons x about 18,000 Barnett Shale gas wells estimated at the end of 2013 thus far, and we have added about 1.2 million tons of pollution from diesel emissions just during the drilling phase.
The Barnett Shale breakdown of these 1.2 million tons is….
1,134,000 tons CO2
82,800 tons NOX (big time ozone reactor)
3,600 tons VOC’s
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
GM as in General Motors and their emissions that I get PIR’s on just so we can compare industry to industry…..oh and that doesn’t include their ON-site gas well emissions…they don’t claim those. Happy Entertainment District breathing in Arlington GAsland/Ozone hell Texas.”