State of emergency in California

[mr friendly guy]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35244634

California state of emergency over methane leak
9 hours ago

The governor of California has declared a state of emergency in a suburb of Los Angeles over the leaking of methane gas from an underground storage field.
Jerry Brown ordered "all necessary and viable actions" be taken to stop it.
More than 2,000 families have been moved from their homes and many people have reported feeling ill because of the leakage, which began in October.
It stems from a vast underground storage field in Porter Ranch, on the outskirts of Los Angeles.
Gas is spewing into the atmosphere at a rate so fast that the well now accounts for about a quarter of the state's total emissions of methane - an extremely potent greenhouse gas.
The well is situated in a mountainous area more than a mile away from residential areas, but residents have complained of health effects like headaches, nausea, vomiting and trouble breathing.

What has been the fallout?

Methane - the main component of natural gas - is a very strong greenhouse gas, capable of trapping solar radiation in the atmosphere.
It belongs to a category of gases called short-lived climate pollutants.
While methane and other short-lived pollutants remain in the atmosphere for a relatively short time compared to other gases, the California Air Resources Board says that "when measured in terms of how they heat the atmosphere, their impacts can be tens, hundreds, or even thousands of times greater than that of carbon dioxide".
The BBC's Matt McGrath says the large amounts of powerful gas that are leaking could have a significant impact on climate change.
Residents have been complaining of nausea, headaches and other symptoms, but the utility company says that "scientists agree natural gas is not toxic and that its odorant is harmless at the minute levels at which it is added to natural gas".
Health officials in the area have said the long-term effects of being exposed to the gas are unknown.
The utility company is providing temporary accommodation or funds for the displaced residents, and several thousand people in Porter Ranch have been relocated while the gas continues to leak and repairs take place.
But, according to CBS News, only 2,200 families have been relocated even though 6,500 have applied for help.
"You have kids going to school outside their neighbourhoods, families that are living in hotels" says Paula Cracium, president of the Porter Ranch Neighborhood Council. "The longer this goes on the more stress there is."
When and how did the leak start?

A broken injection-well pipe about 500 ft (152.4m) below the surface is believed to be the culprit behind the leak, reports say. Pipes like this are used by utility companies to insert gas into the ground for storage until a later time when it can be withdrawn and sold for use.
It is not known why the pipe ruptured.
The facility, a depleted oil field, was acquired by Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) decades ago for use as a natural storage facility for gas piped in from as far away as Canada, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Using former oil fields as storage for natural gas is quite common in the US. The US Energy Information Administration says that "most existing natural gas storage in the United States is in depleted natural gas or oil fields that are close to consumption centers," like the large metropolitan Los Angeles area.
Why hasn't it been fixed?

Repair work has been slow due to the nature of the leak.
SoCal Gas has tried to plug the leak on several occasions, according to the LA Times. Their first attempt was foiled by ice formations that prevented a cocktail of chemicals and mud from reaching the leak point. Another seven attempts failed because the upwards pressure of the leaking gas was greater than the pressure that they could use to push the mud-chemical cocktail into the earth.
Engineers then began to worry that if they applied any more pressure, they may damage the pipes further and worsen the leak.
The new plan is to drill two new "relief wells" that would use less-obstructed and bigger piping to insert the mud-chemical cocktail into the system far below the point at which the pipe is believed to have ruptured. But the company says that this plan could take months and would not be completed until February or March.
In the meantime, the company is installing large mesh screens around the leak site to try and hinder the oily mist from spraying down on the community.
"The stain of this disaster is going to be felt for quite some time," Ms Cracium says.

[Adam Reynolds]

Is it just me or is this virtually identical to Deepwater Horizon? At least the part about trying to cap it.

[Joun_Lord]

This reminds me a bit of the massive spill here in Mountaineerland a few years back especially the part of nobody knowing what the long term health consequences of the chemicals being leaked were.

I'm betting Republican'ts will try to act like there is no problem with having the EPA operate with a shoe string budget and being politically hamstrung just like they did then. That or actually blame the EPA for having too many regulations as the cause of this mess, again like some did in WV.

Politically whining about Republicans who forgot the being conservative used to mean being for conservation aside, I hope nobody is seriously hurt by this. Thankfully there had been nothing but minor illness and no reported (so far) long term health problems associated with the leak here, hopefully the same happens to the poor bastards there.

[Simon_Jester]

Methane is lighter than air, so when you release a huge amount of it it blows upwards and will tend to rise out of the immediate area. This would tend to reduce the health consequences quite a bit, although that doesn't mean there won't be any.

Most dangerous pollutants are either heavier than air or in roughly the same density class.

[madd0ct0r]

indeed, if this was a carbon dioixde tank from one of the proposed CCS systems it'd be a blanket of death along the ground. Still. poisonous gases being emitted that fast will still diffuse out and be carried about by air currents, including downwards.

Plus the non-trivial risk of boom.

[Joun_Lord]

Methane is lighter than air, so when you release a huge amount of it it blows upwards and will tend to rise out of the immediate area. This would tend to reduce the health consequences quite a bit, although that doesn't mean there won't be any.

Most dangerous pollutants are either heavier than air or in roughly the same density class.

From their mention of "oily mist" spraying downward it sounds like maybe the methane is mixed with something else (or possibly in a non-gaseous state, I dunno if thats plausible) rather then pure and possibly heaver then air.

Could be just from the sheer amount being leaked that not all of it can dilute into the atmosphere fast enough to not be a risk to people on the ground but that pure wild non-scientifical speculation on my part.

[madd0ct0r]

old oil field mixed with groundwater.

[Dartzap]

Crikey, between that underground fire getting close to a nuke dump in Missouroi and this, it's been a bit rubbish for the environment and everyone around 'em for the new year.

[Zeropoint]

I'd rant about the folly of continuing to rely on fossil fuels, but the used car I just had to buy to replace my old one . . . is gas powered.

[Elheru Aran]

I'd rant about the folly of continuing to rely on fossil fuels, but the used car I just had to buy to replace my old one . . . is gas powered.

And they're going to be, for probably at least the next decade. That's not going to change anytime soon as long as fuel prices remain under 5 bucks a gallon in the US. When they start topping that-- maybe it'll take as long as 8 or 10 bucks a gallon-- then you'll start seeing a very serious switch to alternative fuels.

More likely you'll see alternative fuels becoming slowly more common-- but not *greatly* common, think like seeing vintage cars on the road. You see one every now and then, it's not that unusual, but it doesn't happen all that often, does it? And then when the crisis hits...

[Borgholio]

I'd rant about the folly of continuing to rely on fossil fuels, but the used car I just had to buy to replace my old one . . . is gas powered.

Don't feel bad. I just try to make an improvement every time I upgrade. With the exception of the first car I ever had (early 80's Honda Accord), I got more fuel efficient with each generation. It makes no sense to break your wallet trying to be green...just do your best. In my case, I went from an 80's Honda Accord to a 1973 Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser with a 455 cubic inch V-8, to a late 80's Ford F-150 to a 2004 Ford Focus to a 2013 Toyota Prius. My lease is almost up so I'm shopping for my next car which is going to be either a 2016 Prius, 2017 Prius Plug-in, 2016 Chevy Volt, or a Tesla Model 3. Any one of those choices will result in less gas being burnt and more time running on clean electricity.

If money is really an issue, then just get a cheap Civic, Corolla, or a Sentra. They won't break your wallet and quite frankly, getting a car that gets 40+ MPG is still a far sight better than a lifted pickup truck that screams "I have a tiny penis and I choose to get 5 miles per gallon to compensate for it"

[Zeropoint]

I'd like to drive something compact, nimble, and fuel-efficient. I have a problem with that, though, because I'm 6'4" tall and long in the torso. Nothing "compact" and few things that pass for "full size" these days FIT me. I'm not going to drive in a car where my head hits the headliner just to save some gas money.

[Borgholio]

That's not hard to do really. Even compact cars have adjustable seats. Some of them are quite comfy for taller people...just gotta shop around.

[Zeropoint]

That's easy to say when you're not the tall one. I've tried on SUVs that I nope'd out of because my head hit the headliner.

[fordlltwm]

I'm 6'2 and can easily find non headliner bashing positions in most euro cars, which I'm lead to believe are smaller than american cars, can you not incline the seat back / lower the seat (as I discovered I could in my 307 while looking for the incline adjustment)?

[SpottedKitty]

can you not incline the seat back / lower the seat (as I discovered I could in my 307 while looking for the incline adjustment)?

As I discovered waytoomany years ago when changing from driving lessons from my uncle to driving lessons from my dad (both a few inches shorter than I am), if you can tilt the seat back enough for comfortable headroom, and still hold the steering wheel securely, you were much too close to the steering wheel. There are limits in what you can adjust and still sit and drive safely and comfortably.

FWIW, the last time I was shopping around for a new car, I only ruled one out because my head was brushing the roof with the seat adjusted to its limit. All UK models, I think.

[Simon_Jester]

I have a thought about thread naming conventions.

When I hear "State of emergency in California," I assume there is some disaster that affects the entire state. Such as a statewide drought, or a massive wave of mudslides, or fires, that affect communities throughout the state.

So it just occurred to me, and I'd never thought about it before, that if I were to post something like this, I would say "state of emergency in Los Angeles," which would convey that this is a localized disaster occurring in a specific place.

Does that make sense, or is this coffee-hasn't-kicked-in-yet logic?

[Darmalus]

I have a thought about thread naming conventions.

When I hear "State of emergency in California," I assume there is some disaster that affects the entire state. Such as a statewide drought, or a massive wave of mudslides, or fires, that affect communities throughout the state.

So it just occurred to me, and I'd never thought about it before, that if I were to post something like this, I would say "state of emergency in Los Angeles," which would convey that this is a localized disaster occurring in a specific place.

Does that make sense, or is this coffee-hasn't-kicked-in-yet logic?

Perfect sense. It's not even a state of emergency in Los Angeles, its a state of emergency in the suburb of Porter Ranch. But no one has heard of Porter Ranch and headlines gotta sell, so it got inflated by a few orders of magnitude.

[Simon_Jester]

Right.

Well, using Los Angeles would be logical, as noted so that someone knows where it is. There's probably multiple towns of Porter Ranch in the US anyway; it's hardly a weird name.

"Emergency in Los Angeles" would be even better than "State of Emergency in Los Angeles."

Although if Governor Brown has declared a state of emergency, then he has, and that's that.