Study says Wyoming needs better management of coal-bed methane
Associated Press
GILLETTE -- Wyoming's failure to come up with comprehensive regulations
controlling coal-bed methane development may be to blame for friction
between landowners and energy companies, a new study by University of
Wyoming researchers suggests.
That same regulatory failure also plays a role in Montana's move to
enact coal-bed methane water regulations that could curtail production
in Wyoming, says the study by the University of Wyoming's Ruckelshaus
Institute of Environment and Natural Resources.
"Strongly held disagreements and difficulties about CBM development
generally, and water management specifically, have gotten to the point
that, at the very least, continued growth in CBM production may be
under some threat," the study states.
Wyoming has so far only captured 5 percent of its estimated $140
billion in coal-bed methane reserves, the study states. Production
dropped by 5 percent from 2003 to 2004 "due to difficulties in managing
and disposing of CBM water," according to the study.
Coal-bed methane production often involves pumping huge quantities of
groundwater to relieve pressure that holds the gas in coal seams. Some
ranchers and conservationists have complained about wasting water by
pumping and about poor water quality.
Gov. Dave Freudenthal's administration and some in the energy industry
were less than enthusiastic about the study's conclusions.
Lara Azar, spokeswoman for Freudenthal, said the study appears to have
succeeded in gathering and combining a lot of different points of view.
"It's clear that there isn't a silver bullet to deal with some of these
issues, but there's potential for looking further into the viability of
some of the ideas presented," Azar said.
Among the ideas suggested in the study are giving state regulatory
agencies shared, or "overarching" authority over coal-bed methane
matters, and the creation of a "CBM" coordinator as the one authority
responsible for the state's management of the industry.
Gene George, a Casper geologist, reviewed the study. He has worked
closely with coal-bed methane development since it started in the
Powder River Basin along the Montana-Wyoming border.
"Some of the things they pointed out are valid points that need to be
addressed," George said. "It was done by people who are good people but
don't have real practical knowledge of the subjects. So some of the
recommendations won't work in the real, practical aspects of what we're
doing."
George said state and federal agencies involved in regulating the
industry are already working hard to coordinate their efforts and share
information. He said he views the study as a "committee" approach to
problems that the experts still have not found answers to.
George also said issues regarding coal-bed methane water management
seem to be blown out of proportion.
"I don't see that we have a huge problem with water. We're getting
permits, we're meeting water quality, and we're protecting
agriculture," George said. "There are many, many good things happening
with the water that do benefit a lot of people."
Organizers and researchers behind the Ruckelshaus study say that
recognizing problems with the CBM industry is only a small portion of
the document. And they say it's used to introduce detailed facts and
potential solutions.
"Blood pressure is pretty high in all corners," said Harold Bergman,
director of the Ruckelshaus Institute. "There's no experience out there
that would have foretold, clearly, what the consequences (of coal-bed
methane development) would be. Now there's been a fair amount of good
experience, and now is the time to take a deep breath and figure out
how we're going to move forward and do it better."
.
|
