Perhaps to the surprise of no one, oil and gas drilling operations have been identified as the primary source of poor air quality in the Uintah Basin.
A multi-agency study released Tuesday finds that oil and gas operations in the Uintah Basin were responsible last winter for releasing into the air the great majority of precursor chemicals that combine to form ozone, a pollutant that has vexed the basin over the past several winters.
An emissions inventory, conducted as part of the 285-page study that measured ozone levels in the basin during the winter of 2011-12, found that oil and gas operations were responsible for 98-99% of the volatile organic compounds and 57-61% of the nitrogen oxides emitted from all sources studied. Ozone is principally formed as the result of the VOCs and NOx reacting together in sunlight.
The study was conducted by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, in association with the US Environmental Protection Agency, US Bureau of Land Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Utah State University, the University of California, the University of Colorado at Boulder, Western Energy Alliance and other entities.
The first phase of the study sampled air quality in 2011-2012 winter season. Point source estimation found drilling operations responsible for virtually all of the volatile organic compounds and about 60% of nitrogen oxides. (See also this
Denver Post article.)
There are two impressive elements in this study. One is the involvement of industry, government, and academic laboratories to design and collect data. The second is the willingness of industry to participate and fund the study.
Western Energy Alliance provided $2.125 million toward the Uintah Basin ozone studies, through contributions from Anadarko Petroleum, Berry Petroleum, Bill Barrett Corp., EOG Resources, Gasco Energy, Newfield Exploration, QEP Resources, and XTO Energy.
We have become so accustomed to obstruction and obfuscation from the oil and gas industry that responsible behavior is shocking. Of course, the real test of corporate responsibility will come with more expensive regulatory steps to control emissions. None the less, the first step toward a solution is for all to agree that there is a significant problem. So far, so good.
Industry representatives admitted that oil and gas drilling is pretty much the only major industrial activity in the area, so the findings came as no surprise.
Assuming that the second stage of data collection replicates and extends the findings, the fight will be over emission limits and who has primary regulatory authority. In reaction to emission standards adopted by Colorado, which mirror EPA recommendations, industry representatives bristled at federal regulation.
Kathleen Sgamma, vice president for government affairs at the Western Energy Alliance, a trade group, said that the fact that the EPA and and Colorado rules are so similar shows that air regulation should be left with the states.
"It is just another example of the federal government usurping state authority," Sgamma said.
EPA rules on emissions are strict (see final rule
here), particularly for methane and VOC emissions. State regulation would presumably offer greater latitude and fewer penalties.
In practice, the EPA typically allows the states to regulate emissions against a federal minimum standard, stepping in only when there is overwhelming evidence that state regulators have failed to enforce federal statutes.
I do hope the second phase of the emissions study includes the new tar sands extraction site in eastern Utah.