Oh, Dear, Dear Readers, you are going to love this. You will laugh.
On NGI’s Shale Daily you will see where an “Industry Advocate Calls Barnett Report a ‘Hoax'” The report to which this “industry advocate” refers is the Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations report that, based on dispersion modeling, recommends a one mile setback from school for natural gas facilities. Ed Ireland calls this report a “Hoax.”
Some of the assertions Ireland makes about the report:
- the lab and instruments used were not qualified to test for carbon disulfide
- intellectually dishonest
- based on a discredited study
- They weren’t certified to test for it; the equipment wasn’t certified to test for it
- the document they are holding is essentially “a hoax.”
Oh, Ed, you are so funneh. You even put this silliness on the front page of your website.
From: Deborah Rogers
Date: March 2, 2011 3:58:26 PM CST
Cc: email@example.com, Libby Willis
Subject: Shale Daily Article
To whom it may concern,
I read with interest your article on the Ft. Worth League of Neighborhoods report. To my knowledge, no one contacted the League of Neighborhoods for comment on your piece. I will correct Dr. Ireland’s errors now as I am the liaison to the FWISD on this report.
Firstly, Dr. Ireland refers to this report as a study. It was never intended to be a study as is clearly stated in the report. The League was charged to look at available data. This data came from multiple sources including the BSEEC’s own TITAN Engineering study done by and for industry.
I noticed that the reporter failed completely to mention that one of the models upon which we based our setback recommendations came from data collected by TITAN. In fact, this information was conspicuously absent from the article. Either the BSEEC stands by its ambient air data in the TITAN study or they do not. To refer to our report as a hoax is to refer to the BSEEC data as a hoax as well.
Secondly, there appears to be a false impression that the data used in the FWISD report came from a long ago report by Wolf Eagle Environmental (2009). It did not.
Further, Dr. Ireland states that the City of Ft. Worth issued a report on the data used for the FWISD. They did not. He is referring to the first set of data on toxic air emissions in Ft. Worth which came out in 2009. High levels of various sulfur compounds including carbon disulfide were detected then as well but should not be confused with data in our report.
Dr. Ireland goes on to make the outlandish statement that we used an unidentified model. We did not. It is specifically cited in the report that we used AerMod, the model suggested by EPA. Further, Dr. Ireland attended a public meeting on February 17 where he asked which software we used. Dr. Sattler told him that it was AerMod, so his comments are utterly disingenuous.
This article is full of innuendo and misinformation. I am sure that your reputation lies on presenting facts rather than fiction and propaganda. Having said that, Dr. Ireland’s rebuttal is exceptionally weak which is of interest in itself.
I hope this clarifies the situation.
UPDATE: I have to use my favorite quote from “Cold Mountain”
“That man is so full of manure we could plant him and grow another one!” ~Ruby