Methane and other harmful gases can be emitted from ventilation pipes on oil and gas wells. This flare and drifting smoke came out of a well site near Artesia, New Mexico. Photograph by Nadav Soroker/Searchlight New Mexico
Diana Tittle, a member of the board of Sierra County Public-Interest Journalism Project, was the editor of the Sierra County Sun, the Citizen's precursor. A former resident of Truth or Consequences who now lives part-time in northern New Mexico, she spent her 42-year professional career in Cleveland, Ohio, where she worked as a newspaper reporter, magazine writer and editor, book author and publisher and publishing consultant. She is the recipient of a Cleveland Arts Prize for Literature.
The Searchlight story and Capital and Main story appear to have a difference of opinion on self reporting. Searchlight’s research shows flaring and venting that go unreported and Capital and Main claim the reporting is accurate. In my past reporting on air quality pollution (Iowa), the EPA permits required the companies to install devices on stacks that capture emissions data, i.e., particulate, quantity, and what chemicals are being emitted. Therefore onsite monitoring is not necessary, because the devices are doing it. But I guess the companies can remove the devices. In Iowa, the government air quality inspectors only inspected each company about once every five years. But they too, as it seems NM air quality inspectors do, look at the monthly self-reports. In Iowa, the reports were fudged too. And the companies payed paltry fines compared to the many millions they made while exceeding emissions standards.
The taxpayer should not have to pay the salaries of many many inspectors to make these companies comply. Foolproof devices that capture air emissions data and massive fines for having devices that don’t work would be one solution. The devices should be hooked to automatic read outs that cannot be faked by company self-reporters. Industry should pay for this, not the taxpayers.
The Searchlight story and Capital and Main story appear to have a difference of opinion on self reporting. Searchlight’s research shows flaring and venting that go unreported and Capital and Main claim the reporting is accurate. In my past reporting on air quality pollution (Iowa), the EPA permits required the companies to install devices on stacks that capture emissions data, i.e., particulate, quantity, and what chemicals are being emitted. Therefore onsite monitoring is not necessary, because the devices are doing it. But I guess the companies can remove the devices. In Iowa, the government air quality inspectors only inspected each company about once every five years. But they too, as it seems NM air quality inspectors do, look at the monthly self-reports. In Iowa, the reports were fudged too. And the companies payed paltry fines compared to the many millions they made while exceeding emissions standards.
The taxpayer should not have to pay the salaries of many many inspectors to make these companies comply. Foolproof devices that capture air emissions data and massive fines for having devices that don’t work would be one solution. The devices should be hooked to automatic read outs that cannot be faked by company self-reporters. Industry should pay for this, not the taxpayers.