Gas Storage Beneath Seneca Lake

The fun forum. Discuss anything here.

Moderators: Brenda, Kelly

User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
Posts: 2740
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:01 pm
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Location: Lodi

Seneca Lake gas-storage proposal advances to DEC
Public meetings scheduled on Inergy plan
5:35 PM, Apr. 3, 2011
Written by
G. Jeffrey Aaron

The Kansas City-based energy company that is looking to establish a liquid petroleum gas storage facility on the western side of Seneca Lake has completed the preliminary environmental impact statement (EIS) required for the project.

Meanwhile, Inergy -- the company behind the $40 million project -- and Gas Free Seneca, a citizens' group concerned about it, have each scheduled separate public information sessions on the plans.

Inergy spokeswoman Debbie Hagen said the draft environmental statement was submitted to New York's Department of Environmental Conservation on March 15.

Details of Inergy's plans for the former New York State Electric and Gas Corp. property include building an underground storage facility for propane and butane on part of a 576-acre parcel near routes 14 and 14A in the Town of Reading, a 14-acre brine pond on a steep slope above Seneca Lake, six-track railroad siding and a truck loading station.

Hagen said in an e-mail that Inergy "is aware of the concerns of the public and areas of focus that would be required to be included in the EIS. (Inergy) believes that the EIS provides the information required by the DEC's scoping document and does respond to the concerns of public commenters."

In November, the DEC said that because of the potentially adverse impact the LPG storage project may have on the environment, it would require an environmental impact statement based on a review process adopted by the DEC in 1992.

But in February, because of public comments on the project, the DEC revised the information required in the statement to cover issues not found in the 1992 document. Inergy then included the additional material in the statement.

Those revisions include:

* Analysis of the historic seismic activity and potential impact on the storage operation and the brine pond.

* Review of the use of the rail line crossing the Watkins Glen gorge.

* Analysis of the lighting, noise and aesthetic concerns with the facility's surface components.

* Evaluation of public safety concerns.

* Review on the stability of the brine pond and methods to lessen its potential impact on surface and ground water.

The DEC is reviewing Inergy's 165-page filing.

If the environmental statement is accepted, it will be made available for public inspection. If not, the DEC will require corrections or additional information before releasing it to the public.

The document will then be subject to a 30-day public comment period and copies will be available at the Reading Town Hall and at the DEC's Avon office.

Hagen said Inergy plans to hold a public information session on the project from 6 to 9 p.m. April 13 at the Watkins Glen Community Center in Clute Memorial Park.

Technical and industry experts will be on hand to provide information. Hagen said the meeting's purpose is to address community concerns and correct any misperceptions about the project.

The following evening, the Schuyler County-based citizens' group Gas Free Seneca is sponsoring a public forum on the project.

It is scheduled for 7 p.m. April 14 at Watkins Glen High School, and the group has its own line-up of technical and environmental experts.

With the potential to affect all aspects of life in the region, the topic is one that everyone should be as well educated about as possible, Gas Free Seneca said in statement.

"We're concerned about the area that is known for the lakes, the countryside and years and years of promoting agriculture, tourism and wineries becoming an industrial center for liquid propane gas storage," said Joseph Campbell, a group member.

Gas Free Seneca also is concerned about the possibility of the brine used in the underground storage process leaching from the storage caverns into Seneca Lake.

"How do we know the liquid propane won't do the same," Campbell said.

"The plans also call for a lined pond on the hillside to hold the brine and cutting into the hillside to build an earthen berm to contain the brine. What happens if the berm fails and the brine gets into the lake?"

In 2008, Inergy bought the U.S. Salt plant outside Watkins Glen to build "an integrated gas storage and transportation hub in the Northeast." And in February, New York's Public Services Commission approved the $65 million sale of the Seneca Lake storage facility and two related pipelines that were formerly owned by NYSEG to Inergy affiliates Arlington Storage Co. and Inergy Midstream.

Inergy wants to convert the property into a storage operation that will operate in conjunction with a similar facility in Bath. Inergy also owns natural gas storage facilities in Tioga and Steuben counties.
http://www.theithacajournal.com/article ... vances-DEC

Gas Free Seneca
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Matt
President
President
Posts: 13374
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:01 pm
Camera Model: Olympus OMD EM-1 m1, m2; Panasonic GM5, Osmo Pocket
Location: Rochester, NY
Contact:

I take it this is more of an anti-development issue than an environmental one down there?

NG storage isn't much of an environmental issue with modern facilities (other than them being abandoned).
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
Posts: 2740
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:01 pm
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Location: Lodi

The brine pond is a major concern. I need to read more about the other impacts.
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Matt
President
President
Posts: 13374
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:01 pm
Camera Model: Olympus OMD EM-1 m1, m2; Panasonic GM5, Osmo Pocket
Location: Rochester, NY
Contact:

depends on what constitutes the "brine"
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
Posts: 2740
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:01 pm
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Location: Lodi

Opposition grows to gas facility

WATKINS GLEN—A panel of professionals and residents raised economic and environmental concerns, Thursday, April 14, about the proposed $40 million gas storage and transfer facility in Reading.
The meeting was held one day after the project’s parent company Inergy, LLC held a meeting of its own. Inergy wants to store propane and butane in two underground salt caverns. The overriding concerns expressed Thursday were about the environmental impact of the project and the impact of industrialization on the Finger Lakes overall. Around 300 people attended the forum.
John Halfman, Hobart and William Smith Professor, spoke about the salt levels of Seneca Lake. He explained currently Seneca Lake has the highest salinity level of all the finger lakes: just over 80 parts per million compared to 15 to 35 parts per million for the rest of the Finger Lakes.
Halfman said he has looked at streams feeding into Seneca Lake, but that does not account for the high levels. He explained the lake does cut through a rock salt bed. He added he believes the salt is coming up from the bottom of the lake, from the salt rock layer. Halfman said the lake’s salt levels started going up about 100 years ago, when companies also started mining for salt in the area. Halfman added the salt levels peaked in the 1960s and 1970s and have decreased since then.
Halfman said use of the salt caverns might push out more salt into the lake, or possibly the gas. He also suggested Inergy pay for a study to done about the salt levels if they are sure there is no problem.
Thomas Shelley, retired Cornell University environmental health, safety, and hazardous materials expert, explained people do make mistakes so there is no guaranteeing any project will be free of accidents or spills. Jack Ossont, representative for the Committee to Preserve the Finger Lakes, showed a few videos of worse case scenarios where train cars with gas exploded. He added these instances are very rare. Shelley listed a number of spills and leaks that happened in Watkins Glen from the late 1990s and early 2000s. He said Walter Hang, creator of Toxics Targeting, compiled the list.
Karen Edelstein, geographic information systems consultant, provided maps she created that show the proximity of the project to existing pipeline infrastructure and 115 storage wells in northern Schuyler County. The project would hook into the pipeline near the proposed location.
The final speaker was Yvonne Taylor, who owns property on Seneca Lake, almost opposite of the proposed project. She said Inergy Midstream Vice President Bill Moler said the company was our neighbor. However, upon asking each of the representatives, Taylor said none live in Schuyler County and most live outside of the state.
“I stand here as your neighbor,” she said. Taylor added at the end of her segment, “This is your call to action.”
Some of the speakers also tried to link this proposed project to the Marcellus Shale drilling industry. However, Bill Moler, senior vice president of Inergy Midstream, explained at the previous meeting that Inergy does not drill for natural gas. It is only an energy storage and transportation company.
http://www.observer-review.com/news.php?viewStory=2194
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
Posts: 2740
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:01 pm
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Location: Lodi

But Inergy has nothing to do with Marcellus Shale drilling:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/pla ... 5891229001

:shrug:
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Matt
President
President
Posts: 13374
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:01 pm
Camera Model: Olympus OMD EM-1 m1, m2; Panasonic GM5, Osmo Pocket
Location: Rochester, NY
Contact:

Ok, I read up on this. It seems to me like the environmental concerns are a bit unfounded and paranoid (this is coming from an environmentalist ;) ), but the major consensus of concerns I see from the opposition is well... the degradation of scenic beauty (from the plant itself as well as the traffic it would bring). I wholeheartedly agree. :up:
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
Posts: 2740
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:01 pm
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Location: Lodi

It's not just aesthetics, though of course that is a huge concern for me. There are concerns about the integrity of the brine ponds, as well as the storage areas themselves. I'd rather be paranoid than sorry that I didn't ask questions after the fact. I have zero faith that Inergy has our best interests at heart.
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
Post Reply