Antero Resources Battlement Mesa Natural Gas Development Plan Meeting 7

Antero Resources
2009-10-07

Antero Resources

Battlement Mesa Natural Gas Development Plan 

Meeting #7

Envirnonmental Program - Air Quality and Water Resource Protection and Noise, Dust, Weed, Light, and Visual Mitigation

October 7, 2009

continue reading...

BMOGC Meeting Series – Brief Overview

 

  • July 1st – Introductory Meeting (define future mtgs and public involvement process)
  • July 29th - Pad Locations, Facilities, and Setbacks
  • August 5th - Surface Use Agreement
  • August 19th - Drilling Schedule and Pace
  • September 2nd - Traffic Plan
  • September 16th – Drilling, Completion, and Water Management Plan
  • October 7th– Environmental Program
    • October 21st – Emergency Response Plan and Pad Security Plan
    • November 4th – Post Drilling and Completion Operations and Interim Reclamation

 

 

(All meetings are open to the public and times are posted in Grand Valley Echo and on battlementmesacolorado.com website)

 

Slide 2

 

 

Today’s Meeting Purpose

    

 

 

  • Review Major Aspects of Environmental Program

–     Air Quality and Odor Mitigation

–     Surface Water Resource Protection

  • Spill Prevention
  • Stormwater/Erosion Control

–     Mitigation Strategies

  • Noise
  • Dust
  • Light
  • Weeds
  • Visual/Aesthetics
  • Question and Answer Session

Slide 3

 

 

 

 

Air Quality Modeling Study – Brief Overview

 

    

 

 

  • What are the major potential emission sources involved in natural gas development?Temporary

–      Truck Traffic and Construction of Pads and Pipelines – fugitive dust

  • Controls = reduce traffic (water pipeline), gravelling pads and dust suppression via water/Soiltac®

–      Drilling Rig Generators – diesel fumes and exhaust emissions

  • Controls = electric grid power-substitute for diesel generators, low NOX engines where grid unavailable

–      Drilling Reserve Pits

  • Controls = pitless drilling

–      Fraccing Operations – diesel fumes and exhaust emissions, flowback tanks

  • Controls = Green completion skids and covered flowback tanks

Long Term

–      Production Tanks – VOC emissions from condensate flashing (> 90% of potential)

  • Controls = Combustor flare controls and automatic igniters

–      Separators and Wellheads – fugitive VOC emissions from valves and flanges

  • Controls = Low bleed valves and routine maintenance of connection integrity

–      Water Handling Facility – VOC and bacterial odors

  • Controls = Eliminate through use of covered pit design and vapor collection/combustion

Slide 4

 

 

 

 

Air Quality Modeling Study – Brief Overview

 

    

 

 

 

  • What did Antero model and why?
    • The community expressed concerns about air quality

−    Expansion of voluntary Antero programs

 

  • Antero modeled VOC emissions from production tanks because:

–          Continuous source of emissions over the productive life of a natural gas well

–          Uncontrolled emissions can be relatively significant compared to the other emission sources

 

  • Purpose of modeling study

−   To identify and evaluate the potential air quality impacts at nearby residences from production tanks at planned well pads

 

 

 

 

Slide 5

 

 

 

 

Air Quality Modeling Study – Brief Overview

 

    

 

 

 

 

  • Potential Air Quality Impacts

–      EPA approved air model (AERMOD) used to estimate air quality impacts

–      Air Quality Impacts = Predicted benzene concentrations around well pads

–      EPA model used Rifle Airport meteorological data and worst case production tank emission rates

 

  • Modeled Benzene Concentrations

–      Compared to EPA Health Based Standards and

–      Colorado Air Monitoring Data

 

  • Conclusion – Modeled Worst Case Benzene Concentrations at Nearby Residences Are Significantly Below EPA Health Based Standard

 

 

Slide 6

 

 

 

 

Modeling Inputs – Worst Case Emissions Scenario

 

    

 

 

  • Assumptions

–        No tank emission controls

–        Up to 20 wells on a completed pad (2x Antero actual dev. plans)

–        11 proposed pads

–        1.78 bbls condensate per MMscf  (Grand Valley and Parachute Field)

–        Each well makes 2 MMscf/day

–        Each pad was modeled assuming 75 bbls/day condensate

  • Antero Tank Emission Factor

–        EPA Approved Model (E&P Tanks 2.0) -  Used  to determine condensate tank VOC/benzene emission rates

–        Uncontrolled Benzene emissions ~ 0.36 tpy from each well pad

–        Uncontrolled Emission Factor = 0.026 lbs benzene/bbl condensate

Slide 7

 

 

 

 

Modeling Inputs – Worst Case Emissions Scenario (cont.)

 

    

 

 

 

  • Why Model Worst Case Uncontrolled Emission Scenario?

–        Actual production tank well pad emissions controlled by flare with potential to be fitted with auto igniter

–         Actual modeled emissions (controlled) will be significantly less than worst case modeled emissions (uncontrolled)

–         If worst case modeled benzene concentrations are below EPA health based standards then actual benzene impacts will be significantly less

 

 

 

 

Modeling Inputs – Meteorology

    

 

 

 

  • Used a Rifle Airport 5-yr meteorological dataset
  • Rifle Airport dataset provided by Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (CDPHE)
  • Rifle Airport - Wind direction/speed data

–      Most representative of Battlement Mesa meteorological conditions

–      Prevailing wind direction are from west and south (see Rifle Airport Wind Rose Slide)

  • Rifle Airport - Terrain influences

–      Similar to Battlement Mesa

–      Both locations immediately south of river and I-70

–      Rifle Airport at 5,500 ft, Battlement Mesa at 5,100 to 5,500 ft

 

 

 

 

  • Closet meteorological dataset is Williams’ Parachute Creek Gas Plant (PCGP), however it was not used because:

–       Located in Grand Valley oriented NW to SE

–       PCGP Wind Rose shows prevailing winds parallel to Grand Valley

–       Dataset limited to 1-yr

 

 

Slide 9

 

 

Modeling Inputs – Rifle Airport Wind Rose

 

Dominate Wind Directions

 

West

 

Air Quality Modeling – Predicting Impacts from Well Pad Production Tanks

 

 

  • Modeled potential offsite impacts at “Receptors” out to 1,500 feet in all directions from each well pad location

 

  • Receptor = residence, golf course clubhouse, schools, etc.

 

  • Impacts = Modeled 24-hr Benzene Concentrations

 

  • Identified location of Potential Maximum 24-hr impacts relative to each pad location

 

  • Modeled Results – See Area Specific Well Pad Impact Maps

–      Area specific maps include setback distances

  • 350 ft - COGCC Setback in high density areas
  • 500ft - Antero Internal Setback
  • 1,000 ft

 

 

Slide 11

 

 

 

 

Benzene Air Quality Data - Monitored

 

    

 

 

 

  • Compared modeled worst case uncontrolled 24-hr benzene concentrations to monitoring data in Denver, Grand Junction and Piceance Basin.

 

  • Average monitored 24-hr benzene concentrations

–           Denver = 2.5 to 3.2 µg/m3   (data collection follows EPA monitoring protocols)

–           Grand Junction = 1.6 µg/m3  (data collection follows EPA monitoring protocols)

–           Parachute = 3 µg/m3 (likely less than 3 µg/m3 because benzene “non-detects” not counted – Garfield County monitoring data)

 

  • Benzene monitoring data for Colorado are presented in following table

 

 

 

 

Monitoring Data – Benzene Background

 

Benzene Monitoring Results in Colorado

- 24-hr Measured Concentrations

 

 

 

Location

24-hr Conc. (ug/m3)

Average

Maximum

1Denver - Urban Site 1

3.2

7.4

1Denver - Urban Site 2

2.5

7.2

1Denver - Urban Site 3

2.8

7.0

2Grand Junction (Powell)

1.6

4.2

Glenwood - Courthouse

1.2

3.5

New Castle - Library

2.0

15.0

Rifle - Henry Bldg

2.9

6.9

Parachute

3.0

5.1

Silt - Cox

1.0

1.9

Silt - Bell

2.0

7.4

Butterfly

2.0

7.7

Isley

1.2

3.0

West Landfill

4.4

7.5

Sebold

1.1

2.7

Haire

1.0

2.3

 

1 Denver data from 2003 monitoring project

2 Grand Junction 2006-2007 data (Powell site)

* Garfield County date from 2005-2007 study

 

Benzene Air Quality Data - Modeled

 

    

 

 

–       Worst case modeled benzene concentrations were compared to:

  • EPA acceptable 24-hr exposure of 30 µg/m3 = benzene health based standard (U.S. EPA. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) on Benzene. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. 2002)

 

–       Residential (receptor) locations are all below the EPA standard of 30 µg/m3

 

–       9.2 µg/m3 was the highest modeled 24-hr concentration (house north of N Pad). (maximum out of 365 X 5 yrs = 1825 days)

 

–       Background benzene 24-hr concentration of 3 µg/m3 in Parachute was added to modeled results for comparison to the health based 24-hr standard.

 

–       Maximum Modeled benzene 24-hr concentrations for each well pad are presented in the next slide.

 

 

 

 

Benzene AERMOD Results – All Pads

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Antero Resources - All Proposed Production Pads

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1: AERMOD Modeled Benzene Impacts from Uncontrolled Tank Emissions

 

 

 

- Rifle Garfied County Airport Meteorological Data

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maximum Modeled Benzene Concentrations (µg/m3)

 

 

 

Distance to Sensitive Receptor (feet)

 

Closest Sensitive Receptor2

Average of Monitored Benzene Samples

collected in Parachute

 

 

 

Total

Comparison To Acceptable Health-Based Threshold Concentrations (µg/m3)

Pad Location

24-hr (acute)

24-hr Background

Acute (24-hr) - EPA1

Acute (24-hr) - Utah TLV2

Pad N

~615'

6.17

3.0

9.2

 

 

 

 

 

30 (µg/m3)

 

 

 

 

 

53 (µg/m3)

~515'

0.67

3.0

3.7

Watson Pad

~680'

0.90

3.0

3.9

Pad A

~529'

0.55

3.0

3.6

Pad B

~585'

0.80

3.0

3.8

Pad C

~535'

3.79

3.0

6.8

Pad D

~540'

3.10

3.0

6.1

Pad E

~730'

1.56

3.0

4.6

Pad G

~1030'

1.65

3.0

4.7

Pad K

~2600'

0.24

3.0

3.2

Pad L

~1056'

4.52

3.0

7.5

Pad M

~745'

1.20

3.0

4.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

** Acute exposures are considered short-term 24-hr exposures

 

 

 

 

1 EPA accepted standard for short-term exposures below which no inhalation health impacts are anticipated

 

 

 

 

Air Quality – Base Map

 Picture Placeholder

 

Slide 16

 

 

Air Quality – Southeastern Pads

 Picture Placeholder

 

30

 

 

Slide 17

 

 

Air Quality - Southwestern Pads

 Picture Placeholder

 

30

 

 

Slide 18

 

 

Air Quality – Northern Pads

 Picture Placeholder

 

30

 

 

Slide 19

 

 

Air Modeling Study - Conclusions

  • The modeled benzene concentrations at or above the EPA health based standard of 30 µg/m3 do not extend beyond pad boundaries

 

  • The modeled benzene concentrations at ALL residential receptors are between 3.2 and 9.2 ug/m3 - well below the 24-hr EPA acceptable exposure threshold of 30 ug/m3 (includes background)

 

  • Antero installed control measures will reduce incremental benzene emissions by approximately 95%

 

  • The highest modeled benzene concentration (worst case scenario) at nearest residence is about 30% of the acceptable EPA health based standard, average is                           about 19% of the acceptable EPA health based standard

 

 

Air Quality – Odor Mitigation

 Picture Placeholder

 

  • All tank venting emissions are routed to a VOC combustor
  • VOC combustor will operate with igniter

 

 

 

 

Slide 21

 

 

Air Quality – Odor Mitigation

 Picture Placeholder

  • Purpose is to eliminate odor/VOC releases to atmosphere
  • Gas is routed to the sales line instead of vented/flared

 

Slide 22

 

 

Air Quality – Odor Mitigation

 

 

Storage tanks enclosed for odor control

 Picture Placeholder

Slide 23

 

 

Air Quality – Odor Mitigation

 Picture Placeholder

Example of Cover Technology for Water Handling Facilities

 Picture Placeholder

Water Storage and Treatment Facility (Pad F)

 

Slide 24

 

 

Air Quality – Summary

    

 

 

 

 

 

  • Well Pads – potential air emissions reduced and/or eliminated with controls or design (e.g. electric power from grid)

 

  • Production Tank Air Quality Modeling Study

−     Dr. Walker of Mesa State said during his August 2, 2009 GVCA annual meeting that “air quality modeling is a useful predictive tool for estimating exposures to VOC emissions from oil and gas.”

−     The modeled benzene concentrations at ALL residential receptors are well below the 24-hr EPA acceptable exposure threshold of 30 ug/m3

 

 

 

 

 

Slide 25

 

Complete the form below to download this document now.
Fill out the form to get access to the complete article.