Over the past three days our three expert witnesses, including former director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission Norm Gaume, award winning investigative science journalist Justin Nobel and Dr. Avner Vengosh, a Duke University Professor and Chair of the Division of Earth and Climate Sciences, exposed the extreme environmental and health risks posed by the proposed reuse applications authorized under the rule, as well as the failure of the rule to provide basic standards for treatment and due process protections for the public.
Our witnesses emphasized the importance of scientific rigor and standards to protect the public, the legal requirements of a permit process, the radioactive dangers to the public and industry workers, the significant complexities and challenges inherent in the treatment of a waste stream that is so highly saline, toxic and radioactive, and the disposal of the even more concentrated residual waste stream that inevitably results from the treatment process.
Oil and gas reuse proponents have spent three days questioning their expertise and trying to argue against the facts. They continue to try to find a rationale for the proposed rule by suggesting erroneously that:
They argue disingenuously that the rule is necessary to conduct the science and develop the standards that all now agree are necessary. In fact we don’t need a rule that allows unlimited demonstration and industrial projects, anywhere, of any size, to do the necessary research. That research was supposed to be conducted in scientific labs and on oilfield pilot projects by the Produced Water Research Consortium, and those research projects can continue under current law. The reason this rule fails to protect us is because the industry funded Consortium failed to produce any data useful for drafting scientific standards from the projects it did undertake on the oil field.
They argue outrageously that because drinking Water Quality Standards don't include standards specific to components of other types of waste, like personal care products or medical waste, there shouldn't be different standards for produced water. This argument not only fails to account for the extreme toxicity and sheer volume of fracking waste as compared to these other waste streams (20-25 billion barrels annually), it ignores the important fact that incomplete drinking water standards are not an excuse to promulgate additional inadequate rules that fail to protect the public. Existing drinking water standards do not include limits or require testing for compounds and radioactivity unique to fracking waste streams. One cannot be measured by the other.
They argue that there is no need for third party verification of industry claims. One Commissioner and several intervenors repeatedly tried to argue that third party verification is not a necessary component of an adequate scientific process, and that industry self-reporting of produced water constituents and treatment outcomes is an adequate process for development of treatment standards. It's hard to believe anyone would be persuaded by the absurdity of this argument, but nevertheless our expert Dr. Vengosh was forced to repeatedly explain why protection of the public requires oversight of industry by an unbiased third party!
The public comment provided on Monday by Lara Adler from Albuquerque spoke directly and eloquently to heart of the risks we face when industry is allowed to police itself:
Reuse proponents, including Rep. Nathan Small, the Governor's Infrastructure Advisor Rebecca Roose, Produced Water Research Consortium Chair Mike Hightower and NMOGA CEO Missi Currier gave public comment and testified that New Mexico needs this rule to increase economic diversification, but diversifying from an oil and gas based economy to one based on recycling of oil and gas waste is not diversification. It is just another example of the oil and gas industry's contempt for the people of New Mexico and continued abuse of our land and water as a sacrifice zone for their profit.
The three minute exchange below, between our lawyer Chris Dodd and NMOGA CEO Missy Currier illustrates perfectly the duplicity and dishonesty of these climate criminals:
One wonders how these people sleep at night, as billions of people and innocents around the world suffer and die in extreme heats, sometimes upwards of 140 degrees, and watch their homes, pets and businesses wash away in torrential rains rampant across the earth.
NMOGA witnesses began their testimony late yesterday afternoon, and we look forward to cross examination!
Comments