chevron-visual impact_final report

8/12/2019 CHEVRON-Visual Impact_Final Report

1/38

1

Visual Impacts of Natural Gas Drilling

in the Marcellus Shale Region

Cornell University, Dept. of City and Regional Planning: CRP 3072 Land Use,

Environmental Planning, and Urban Design Workshop

Fall 2010

Sarita Rose Upadhyay

Min Bu

Contact:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/38

2

Introduction

This report looks at the ways in which natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale impacts the

natural landscape in Pennsylvania. The visual impacts of natural gas drilling are an important

concern for residents and visitors of high-frequency drilling areas, both due to aesthetics and to

impacts on property values and other industries, such as tourism. This report is designed toprovide readers with a better understanding of the overall visual impact on an area affected by

natural gas drilling. The primary focus will be on the aesthetic impact of drilling pads during all

stages of drilling, both during the day and at night. The report will also focus on the indirect

visual impacts of drilling, such as workers dwellings, water impoundments, and trucking. Next,

it will look at the concentration and density of drilling sites in the landscape, aerial visual

impacts, and the significance of the impacts. The findings will be applied to New York State,

where natural gas drilling is expected to occur within the next decade. Three dimensional

modeling will be used to show the effects of potential gas drilling in Ithaca, NY. Lastly, the

report will discuss current and possible methods of mitigating visual impacts, and will provide

some conclusions and recommendations.

This report is not intended to persuade readers to have any particular opinion on the visual

impacts of drilling. It is intended only to show the various ways in which natural gas drilling has

a visual impact on the landscape. All photos in the report were taken in Bradford County,

Pennsylvania between October 2009 and December 2010, unless otherwise specified or sourced.


3/38

3

Description of Drilling Processes

The drilling process most commonly used in the Marcellus Shale is hydraulic fracturing(hydrofracturing). Hydrofracturing is the process of creating fissures or fractures in the shale

formation. These are formed by pumping the fracturing fluid into a wellbore at a rate that

increases the downward pressure to a high enough value to exceed the fracture gradient of theshale. This allows natural gas to flow. The following outlines the steps in the drilling process:

Company Gains Access to Land

The property-owner must sign into a lease agreement with a natural gas drilling company. The

land owner is generally given a signing bonus and is promised a percentage in royalties from gas

profit. The company then chooses a site for the drilling pad.

Drilling Pad is Created and Wells are Drilled

The drilling pad is constructed on the property-owners land. Generally, land is cleared and about

eighteen inches of gravel are laid down on the pad. One or more wells are drilled into the ground.

Gas extraction in the Marcellus Shale region requires both vertical and horizontal drilling. A well

is first bore vertically, and then, using specialized tools, the drilling operator turns and drills

horizontally. Once drilling is complete, a drill string is extracted and a steel pipe is inserted into

the well bore. To keep the pipe in place, cement is pumped around the outside of the pipe.


4/38

4

Hydraulic Fracturing

Large quantities of fracturing fluids are pumped down the well at extremely high pressure. This

fractures the shale and releases natural gas. Fracturing fluids consist of water mixed with sand

and some chemicals. Extensive machinery is required for this process. Equipment needed for the

process includes a slurry blender, one or more high pressure, high volume fracturing pumps anda monitoring unit. Fracturing tanks, high pressure treating iron, a chemical additive unit (used to

accurately monitor chemical addition), low pressure pipes and gauges are associated equipment.

In addition, trucks carrying water are also needed, as are trucks or other facilities to capture any

backflow of water. Other trailers and facilities are also present at hydrofracturing sites.

Site production and restoration

Once hydraulic fracturing has been completed, the well will produce natural gas. Sometime

during production, the drilling company is obligated to restore the well pad. Site restoration


5/38


6/38

6

Visual Impacts of Drilling

Direct Visual Impacts

Visual Impacts from Varying Distances in Bradford County, PA

To gauge the visual impact of drilling rigs both close-up and in the landscape, photos of adrilling rig were taken from a variety of distances. The following map shows the photos taken of

drilling rig W27, with each of the rings representing a half mile. The numbers correspond to

specific photographs.

The following photos correspond to numbers in the previous diagram.


7/38

7

Photo 005

Distance: 3.5 miles

Photo 003

Distance: 3.0 miles


8/38

8

Photo 022

Distance: 2.0 miles

Photo 008

Distance: 1.3 miles


9/38

9

Photo 028

Distance: 1.0 mile

Photo 011

Distance: 0.5 miles


10/38

10

Photo 011

Distance: 1,000 feet


11/38

11

The same technique was repeated with a different drilling rig in Bradford County, PA. The

following photos show that drilling site from various distances.

Distance: 2.0 miles

Distance: 1.0 mile


12/38

12

Distance: 0.5 miles

Distance: 1,000 feet


13/38

13

Example of Drilling Sites in Bradford County, PA

The following section is a brief description of three drilling lots in Bradford County,Pennsylvania. Each of these lots is at a different stage in the drilling process, from active drilling

site to restored site.

In New York State, the Department of Environmental Conservation only grants environmentalpermits if certain policy documents are completed. One of these documents is titled Assessingand Mitigating Visual Impacts. Each of the drilling sites will include criteria for the New York

State Environmental Quality Review Visual EAF Addendum. This demonstrates how the visual

impacts of site would be reported under New York State law.

Site 1: Restored drilling site between East Smithfield and Springfield, Bradford County

Visibility:- Not visible from parcel of land dedicated to public use or natural man-made scenic qualities- Not visible from county park, natural land mark, or any transportation corridor of high

exposure.

- Visible from local road from -3 mile

- Seasonal visibility due to the nearby corn field, which is a natural screening- Surrounding environment can be described as agricultural.

- Mild hilly regions nearby

- Visually similar project within 1 mile radius.- Activity: a few local farmers households travel to and from work / Daily

- Involved in recreational activities: a few local famers households with young children/HolidaysWeekends.- Routing travel by residents: Few/Seasonally


14/38

14

- Traffic volume: on this recovered site, assume the nearby local road within the view shed

generate 1 car every 10 min, we can reasonable expect 52416 cars every year, being exposed to

the feature of this facility.

Site 2: Drilling Site in Process of Restoration, Bradford County, PA

Visibility:

-Not visible from parcel of land dedicated to public use or natural man-made scenic qualities

-Not visible from county park, natural land mark, or any transportation corridor of highexposure.-Visible from local road from -1 mile.

-The facility is located at underdeveloped lot, near sedimentation pond and wind turbines.

-The surrounding environment can be described as essentially underdeveloped. Since the drillingpad is on the uphill. It creates more exposure toward the downhill traffic. The evaporation pound

on site increases the drilling site visibility.

- There are visually similar project within 1 mile radius.- On this site in the process of recovery, assume the nearby local road generate 1 car every 5 min

(wider view shed to nearby roads, we can reasonable expect 104832 cars every year, being

exposed to the feature of this facility.

- Activity: Travel to and from work: famer households/ DailyInvolved in recreational activities: No observed/very few, seasonally.

Routing travel by residents: Weekly

The active drilling site would generate a lot more traffic from vehicles that helps to transportmaterial and equipment. We are not sure if the exposure to these cars counts as the sites visual

impact to the general public.


15/38

15

Site 3: Active Drilling Rig

The facility has lower visibility due to the surrounding forest. The deciduous vegetation aroundthe site is a good seasonal visual barrier. For this site, audio impact from the compressor is a

more salient concern.

Visibility:-The site is only visible from a few nearby local and county roads.

-Not visible from county park, natural land mark, or any transportation corridor of high

exposure.

-The surrounding environment is generally essentially undeveloped.-There are similar objects within 1-3 miles. But this site is one of the most active drilling

locations from what we have observed.-The annual number of viewers is expected to be 52416 with a reasonable assumption of 1 car

every 10 min for local residents.-The nearby local road generate outstanding amount of traffic, which is a peril for road

maintenance.

Activity: Travel to and from work: famer households/ Daily- Few instances the site is involved in recreational activity:

- Routine travel by residents: for the nearby housing unit/Daily

Nighttime Impacts


16/38

16

The impact of drilling rigs and equipment at nighttime is significantly different than the daytime

effects. Well pads are lit up by overhead lighting, as shown in the photographs below. Lights are

frequently directed horizontally, across the drilling pad.


17/38

17

One additional issue is open flaring, which is used to test well production after drilling hydraulic

fracturing has been completed. A photo of flaring, taken from the web-sitewww.marcellus-

shale.us,is shown below.

Indirect Visual Impacts

There are a number of visual impacts that are generated outside of the actual drilling process.

This section will outline some of these impacts, seen in Bradford County, PA.

Trucking

Many trucks are needed to transport water, waste, and equipment to and from drilling sites. Onroads leading to drilling sites, one truck passes approximately every ten to thirty seconds.
http://www.marcellus-shale.us/http://www.marcellus-shale.us/http://www.marcellus-shale.us/http://www.marcellus-shale.us/http://www.marcellus-shale.us/http://www.marcellus-shale.us/


18/38

18

Freshwater Impoundments

Because hydro-fracking requires so much water, companies often store water nearby in

impoundment sites. Impoundments are generally lined with plastic tarp coating. The water in

these impoundments is freshwater that will be used for hydrofracturing.


19/38

19

Water WithdrawalDrilling companies procure the water they need for hydraulic fracturing from water withdrawal

sites. These sites come under the jurisdiction of various commissions, depending on the location.The high volume of truck traffic at the sites can create visual impacts.


20/38

20

Equipment Storage

Drilling companies store their equipment, including trucks, in equipment storage sites. These areoften times on old drilling pads that have been repurposed.


21/38

21

CampgroundsThere has been an influx of workers into the Marcellus Shale area due to natural gas drilling. As

many of the workers are temporary, they frequently stay in temporary housing. In BradfordCounty, campgrounds for workers are a solution for housing problems.


22/38

22


23/38

23

Related Industrial Operations

Drilling service companies are setting up operations throughout the region. Many of these

operations have similar visual impacts to drilling pads and are often industrial.


24/38

24

Comparisons of Visual Impacts

This section is designed to provide comparisons of natural gas drilling visual impacts and visual

impacts caused by other already-existing manmade features of the landscape.

Windmills

These windmills, located on Armenia Mountain, Bradford County, PA, provide a comparison ofvisual impacts with drilling facilities.


25/38

25

Cell towers

These towers, which provide signal for cellular telephones, provide a comparison of visual

impacts with drilling facilities.


26/38

26

Drilling Pad Density

One issue for residents and visitors in the Marcellus Shale region is the density of well pads in

their area. Many people want to know how frequently they can expect to see drilling facilities in

a particular area. Because there are not maps that provide locations of drilling in Pennsylvania,

figures showing pad density are generally estimates.

Washington County Aerial Mapping

Because part of Washington Countys aerial imagery on Google Earth was updated in July 2010,

drilling sites and water impoundments are visible on the map. The following maps show aerial

impacts of drilling and were also used to estimate the size of drilling pads and water

impoundments. It should be noted that the maps are not completely up-to-date and do not reflect

the current number of drilling rigs or impoundments in Washington County.

The following map of Washington County shows identifiable drilling pads, restored drilling

pads, and water impoundments.

Drilling pad

Restored Pad

Water impoundment


27/38

27

The following section of Washington County had a high volume of drilling impact. Each yellow

box represents four square miles.

A closer shot shows a high impact area in more detail. Here the yellow boxes each represent 1square mile.


28/38

28

The following shows the aerial impact of a drilling pad from a distance of 40,000 feet.



29/38

29




30/38

30


The following shows the aerial impact of a drilling pad up close.


31/38

31

Bradford County Data

Bradford County has published data and maps on drilling activity within the county. These mapsshow the density of drilling activity. It is important to point out that data only captures activity

recorded during the week of October 4 or 8, 2010 and may not reflect previous or current

activity.


32/38

32

Modeling Visual Impacts in New York State

Ithaca, NY Three Dimensional Modeling Project

Views from Route 13 near Cayuga Heights and view from Libe Slope Cornell Campus are

considered very important viewpoints in Ithaca. We have chosen the above two viewpoints forour hypothetical modeling. For the purpose of this study, we have designated the forested area

Cayuga Inlet to the west be the potential drilling sites. 3D modeling has been completed

assuming drilling rid height of 85 Ft and surrounding forest height of 60 Ft. The following

images show the Cayuga Heights view shed:


33/38

33

The image below shows how the drilling rigs would appear to viewer from Cayuga Heights.


34/38

34

The following images show the Ithaca view shed:

The image below shows how the drilling rig might appear to viewers standing from Libe Slope.

This modeling in Ithaca is only a preliminary study with little information given regarding the

natural resource allocation in the area. When visual impact of drilling activity is being assessed,

by NY Zoning Law and Practice Report, we suggest to look the following factors: the magnitudeor degree of the impact (major or minor), and the scope or extent of the impact (regional or

local). Priority evaluation looks at the resource commitment (irreversible v. reversible), the

planning commitment (pre-design v. during design), the control jurisdiction (outside agent v.project agent), and the control capacity (future v. current). With that in mind, the City of Ithaca is

intent upon appropriately guiding land use in southwest Ithaca to benefit the community as a

whole, take advantage of the areas assets to accommodate primarily non-residentialdevelopment that will contribute to the Citys revenue stream.


35/38

35

Mitigation or Reduction of Visual Impacts

Site RestorationSite restoration is the most effective measure of mitigating visual impacts. As described in

Drilling Stages, drilling pads are restored to their original habitat after the drilling and

hydraulic fracturing stages are completed. This is the best way to reduce adverse visual impactsof natural gas drilling within the landscape. The following photos show features of a restoredwell pad.


36/38

36

The following aerial photo shows the size reduction of the original drilling pad.

Original Pad Size = ~88,350 sq. ft.

Restored Pad Size = 15, 450 sq. ft.

Drilling Pad Mitigation Techniques

There are strategies that landowners and companies may use to mitigate adverse visual impactsof natural gas drilling.

Professional mitigation strategies:

1. Screening w-24, w-3 004 top soil screening2. Relocation3. Camouflage/disguise4. Low profile5. Downsizing6. Alternate technologies7. Non-specular materials8. Lighting


37/38

37

Under optimal circumstances, a project can be sited in a location which precludes the possibility

of having an aesthetic resource within its view shed. Sensitive design can also eliminate the

impact on significant resources. For drilling companies, the top considerations of site locationsare:

1. Geotechnical: weather drilling at specific site

2. Stream water, and wetland3. Lease availability and surrounding residents,4. Proximity to public park and gathering locations and

5. Fishing and boating.

Given the low density of many communities within the Marcellus Shale region, the direct visual

impact is not a priority consideration for the drilling activity. The geotechnical information on a

given site is the absolute determinant of drilling location. Other leasing information, water

way/sources make much more tangible influence on the effect of economic feasibility of localland and civilians.

The main source of the sound pollution is only a short-term activity: the compressor is a

temporary structure that will last about 21-25 days. With given limitations of considerations onthe effect of visual and audio impact, there are still small tactics that can be implemented toalleviate the visual impact of surrounding households.

The most feasible tactics for hydrocrack drilling in PA includes: screening, low profile,camouflage, and subtle lightening change. Visual impact is more noticeable when the drilling

rigs break the skyline. Light pollution on the nearby residential units is also problematic although

the companies claim that they have received no compliant.

Light containment can be improved in the following ways:

1. Use night lighting only when necessary. Use only the amount of lighting required.2. Direct the light downward, instead of horizontally. This will prevent light pollution from

effecting nearby households.

3. When possible, retrofit or replace all existing fixtures of poor quality. In all cases, the goal isto use fixtures that control the light well, minimizing glare, light trespass, light pollution,and energy usage.

4. Use low pressure sodium (LPS) light sources whenever possible. LPS lamp is one of themost energy-efficient light sources.


38/38

Conclusions and RecommendationsThe following observations are important for consideration:

- Light and noise pollution is a potential problem for nearby households or visitors, butonly has serious impacts within a small radius of distance.

- Many of the most salient visual impacts caused by drilling result from indirect impactsand not from the well pad themselves.

- Although restoration significantly reduces adverse visual impacts, the timeline forrestoration varies significantly.

The following recommendations are important for consideration:- Nighttime visual impacts are best addressed by avoiding uplighting or horizontal light

and casting light onto private properties. It is most effective to point lights downward.

- Visual impacts are most effectively addressed at the siting and design phase. However,drilling visual impact mitigation is more often conducted after siting due to itsinconsequential importance relative to other geotechnical considerations.

chevron-visual impact_final report

Documents