2
0

Southern California: massive gas leak


 invite response                
2015 Dec 24, 12:25pm   11,751 views  16 comments

by justme   ➕follow (1)   💰tip   ignore  

www.youtube.com/embed/exfJ8VPQDTY

After more than two months of leaking at an underground storage facility in Southern California, this event is finally getting attention in the MSM. But as usual, the explanation and level of detail is sorely lacking. However, the following article in a free weekly from LA seems to have a good level of detail.

Note that it is not the storage facility itself that is leaking, but rather some of the piping leading down to it. This important detail seems to have escaped the attention of a large number of dimwits that call themselves journalists.

Furthermore, the free weekly uncovered that a safety valve that was installed in 1954, and last inspected in 1976, was removed in 1979, although the gas company thought it was still in place.

http://www.laweekly.com/news/what-went-wrong-at-porter-ranch-6405804

QUOTE:

Gas is now leaking through a hole in the 7-inch casing at 470 feet down to the bottom of the outer casing at 990 feet, and out through the rock to the surface.

...

Gas leaks are not uncommon, and it took a couple weeks for this one to become news. When Anderle heard about it, in early November, she pulled up the well record on a state website. The file dates back to when the well was drilled in 1953. As she looked it over, she zeroed in on a piece of equipment 8,451 feet underground called a sub-surface safety valve.

If it were working properly, the gas company would be able to shut down the well. The fact that they hadn't meant, to her, that it must be broken. The records indicated that it had not been inspected since 1976.

"That's almost 40 years," she says. "It's a long time to leave it in the well."

As weeks went by and further efforts to stop the leak failed, it became clear that the company was dealing with an unprecedented catastrophe.

On Dec. 15, the Weekly interviewed Rodger Schwecke, a SoCalGas executive who is helping to coordinate the response to the leak. Asked about the safety valve, he said it wasn't damaged. It actually wasn't there.

"We removed that valve in 1979," he said.

He pointed out that the valve was old at that time and leaking. It also was not easy to find a new part, so the company opted not to replace it. If SS-25 were a "critical" well — that is, one within 100 feet of a road or a park, or within 300 feet of a home — then a safety valve would be required. But it was not a critical well, so it was not required.

ENDQUOTE

Comments 1 - 16 of 16        Search these comments

1   justme   2015 Dec 24, 12:32pm  

ADDENDUM: The hole in the pipe is only 470 ft from the surface. The outer casing ends at 970ft below ground, and this is where the gas escapes outside the pipe, into the rock formation and eventually leaks up to the surface.

2   Tenpoundbass   2015 Dec 24, 2:51pm  

In the amount of time it took to write that article I could have fixed it.

3   John Bailo   2015 Dec 24, 3:16pm  

The press is peppered with anti-natural gas FUD like this.

Lots of astroturfers push this into the feeds.

Same with anti-hydrogen propaganda

4   Booger   2015 Dec 24, 4:01pm  

Why do they have to wait until the spring to fix it?

5   Tenpoundbass   2015 Dec 24, 4:25pm  

Booger says

Why do they have to wait until the spring to fix it?

We've got too much of the stuff.
And it will make one hell of a Satellite composite nestle in the Global Warming report.

6   justme   2015 Dec 25, 12:45am  

Ironman says

Gas is escaping through a ruptured pipe more than 8,000 feet underground,

The above statement, which comes from the Zerohedge article, is patently wrong. Zerohedge simply got this story completely wrong. That's why I used the LAweekly reference and not Zerohedge.

CORRECT EXPLANATION:

The infographic imported into the ZH article is misleading to the extreme. The leak is due to a hole in the inner pipe at a depth of only 470ft from the surface. The natgas then fills the outer pipe (casing), and escapes into the rock formation at a depth of 990ft, because the outer casing ENDS at that depth. It is not the reservoir itself that is "leaking" some 9000ft below the surface. What is leaking is the pipe near the surface, not the reservoir itself.

The reason for drilling the misnamed "relief well" all the way down to the reservoir is because it is seen as the only method to plug the pipe at the source. Should there not be a controllable valve at that depth, to block flow from reservoir into the pipe, you might ask? Yes, indeed. There was a valve at 8451ft from 1956 to 1979, but after the valve was inspected in 1976, it was then removed in 1979 due to old age, AND NOT REPLACED.

THAT is the problem, and THAT is the reason for having to drill down to 9000ft to insert a concrete plug at the source.

VERY MISLEADING INFOGRAPHIC FOLLOWS, it does not even show where the leak is, only 470ft below the surface:

7   justme   2015 Dec 25, 1:22am  

My motivation for posting this thread was (a) to publicize an event that was not getting enough publicity (b) to find and publicize the correct analysis of the event, given massive misreporting of the event in the MSM (c) to illustrate how MSM often get the facts wrong and (d) illustrate that natgas infrastructure is still fragile, 5 years after the devastating pipeline explosion in San Bruno (bordering San Franscisco) in 2010.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion

The culprit in the Oct 2015 Aliso Canyon natgas leak, SoCalGas, had proposed in 2014 a 5.5% rate increase and a 7 year program to check each well for corrosion. Not soon enough, as we can see.

QUOTE (LA Weekly):
The corporate culture of SoCalGas is nothing if not deliberate. And so, in 2014, the company proposed a methodical effort to check each well for corrosion. It would take about seven years and cost tens of millions of dollars. The plan was part of a request to the Public Utilities Commission to increase customers' monthly gas bills by 5.5 percent. The alternative was to fix leaks only as they occurred, which one executive warned could be dangerous and lead to "major situational or media incidents."

8   justme   2015 Dec 25, 1:39am  

John Bailo says

The press is peppered with anti-natural gas FUD like this.

Dude, the leak is a minor disaster. Correctly reporting a minor disaster is not to spread FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) about natgas. Yes, people with scientific and analytic capability are indeed out to counteract your ongoing hydrogen fairy-tale and misinformation campaign, but this leak and reporting on it has exactly NOTHING to do with that.

9   justme   2015 Dec 25, 10:10am  

Ironman, I find it iron-ic that you are repeating the errant statement that came from MSM via zerohedge, and then mis-attributing it by putting my name above it with no further attribution.

Ironman says

Only you can get so anal and split hairs and worry about the "depth" of the leak instead of worrying about the damage to the area from the "ACTUAL" gas leaking...

Whoa, dude. Not understanding the problem is always a significant first step in coming up with the wrong solution. Correctly informing everyone about where the leak is actually occurring is highly important. Of course the air pollution and greenhouse-effect is what we are the most concerned about. Then why is SoCalGas going to be drilling for months a service well (relief well is a bit of a misnomer, but such is industry terminology) all the way down? Which will take "until spring" to finish? Could it be that SoCalGas really should try to plug the leak at 470 ft to stop the flow sooner, while at the same time drilling down to 8400+ feet to plug the pipe also at that level?

Without the facts, the public cannot have an informed opinion. And they cannot raise pertinent questions like the one I just raised. I thought this would be obvious, but I guess I overestimated you. The devil is always in the details.

Don't be so enamored with attempting to make *me* look bad that you completely miss the big picture.

10   FortWayne   2015 Dec 25, 1:00pm  

There is one in Porter Ranch too near Los Angeles. People are running from that neighborhood.

11   lostand confused   2015 Dec 25, 1:29pm  

FortWayne says

There is one in Porter Ranch too near Los Angeles. People are running from that neighborhood

Isn't that where they have a lot of wildfires? Hmm a gas leak and wildfire-scary!!

12   postbubblesuccess   2015 Dec 25, 3:51pm  

Most of the people running from Porter Ranch are descent, hard working, people fleeing or have already fled from what was once a gorgeous, prosperous, suburb of LA. It was the heart of American aerospace technology from the 40's to the late 70's. Many WWII vets settled there after the war. Then came the liberal immigration laws, the apt buildings, crime, etc... And those very people who built up that area moved out, took their talent and educated families with them and left before watching it crumble into the third world septic tank that it is today. So sad, but so common all across the country.

13   zzyzzx   2015 Dec 25, 6:34pm  

Has anyone blamed this on Howard Stern's farts yet?

15   NoYes   2015 Dec 25, 7:03pm  

WoW.....for a while now I thought you guys were talking about me....so relieved....so to speak. Very sensitive on this subject

16   komputodo   2015 Dec 25, 10:08pm  

This guy could live there incognito:

Pork company fires 400-pound Pennsylvania man for farting too much, masking scent of meat.

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions