Dawne Sohn – 6/4/15

This page was last updated on June 9, 2015.

Proposed Shell plant would damage environment; Dawne Sohn; Beaver County Times; June 4, 2015.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Beaver is the nicest town in this area. Sadly, Shell has set its destructive sights here. Their cracker plant signals the end of Beaver’s uniqueness. Always in operation, the lighting of a 780-acre plant would destroy the night skies and the daily use of 20 million gallons of water point to serious environmental issues. No one even knows what a ‘fairly good-sized noise buffer’ is.”

[RWC] Ms. Sohn seems to have a short memory, apparently forgetting what stood on this property until last year. From the 1930s until 2014, this property was the home of a zinc smelter, the largest in the U.S. at least as recently as the 1990s. In the interest of disclosure, I was fortunate to work at the smelter for three summers in the 1970s. St. Joe Minerals owned the facility at the time.

From mining through smelting, zinc production is a very dirty process even at its best. On top of that, this smelter had its own coal-fired power plant to help feed its huge electricity consumption. Those of us old enough – and Ms. Sohn is in this age group – remember the hillside across Route 18 from the smelter once was barren, made that way by the smelter’s air pollution. Eventually that pollution got under control and the vegetation returned.

From the drilling through refining, processing natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs) is a zillion (hyperbole alert) times cleaner than zinc production, especially when we’re talking a brand new refinery. Gas, NGLs, and refinery products that escape the process or are consumed by it represent lost profit, giving Shell a huge financial incentive to maximize energy efficiency and minimize pollution. Nothing is perfect, however.

Regarding “destroy[ing] the night skies,” the smelter also operated 24x7x365. Further, does Ms. Sohn not see the lighting directly across the river from Beaver in Center Township from the shopping centers from Wal-Mart to the Beaver Valley Mall?

Regarding the “the daily use of 20 million gallons of water point to serious environmental issues,” here’s something from the BCT: “The facility would draw approximately 20 million gallons of water a day from the Ohio River, about 80 percent of which would evaporate as clean steam during processing. The rest would be treated to remove impurities and tested to make sure it meets water-quality standards before being returned to the river, the company says.” For comparison, the Bruce Mansfield Power Station down river consumes about 70 million gallons of water per day.

“Shell’s ‘best interest’ statements are patronizing to the intelligence of all residents. I doubt any of those quoted in a recent Times story are vying for homes within view of the lights, noise, dirt, traffic, air and water pollution that come with the plant. Jeff Krafve, general manager, saying that Shell wants to strengthen the community and be viewed with pride, like the Steelers, is an insulting P.R. statement. Ken Conley, construction manager, assures us that trucks will stop for school buses. Trivial canned statements don’t make people feel safe and delighted to live by a cracker plant.

“Shell’s arrival is horrifying. Environmental destruction is already evident and the plant is still a ‘proposal.’ Unfortunately for our future, people who protest this destructive plant are like butterflies fluttering to stop a herd of elephants. If Shell wants it, Shell is going to take it and damage the environment forever. Residents need to sit on their porches and walk around and think if they want to lose this peaceful life. Because, if Shell moves into the neighborhood, those pleasant walks along River Road are nevermore.”

[RWC] River Road is on the other side of the Ohio River and the vast majority is upriver of the plant property, just like it was when the smelter occupied the property.

It appears Ms. Sohn has lived and worked (a teacher) in Moon Township – nowhere near the subject property – for many years. It would be interesting to know what set off this hyperbole-laden rant.

A lefty commenter on the BCT website wrote, “The bigger problem is the 100 or more fracking gas wells needed to feed the cracker. Even with strict supervision, these will pose a danger to our waters.” That’s not what the EPA says. Here’s an excerpt from “EPA: Fracking Doesn’t Pose ‘Widespread, Systemic’ Danger to Drinking Water” in Mother Jones, a lefty publication:

“The Environmental Protection Agency today [6/4/2015] released a long-awaited draft report on the impact of fracking on drinking water supplies. The analysis, which drew on peer-reviewed studies as well as state and federal databases, found that activities associated with fracking do ‘have the potential to impact drinking water resources.’ But it concluded that in the United States, these impacts have been few and far between.”

“The report identifies several possible areas of concern … However, the report says, ‘We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources.’

“The report considered not only the hydraulic fracturing action itself, but all of the water-related steps necessary to drill, from acquiring water to disposing of it.”