Geologist says pipeline threatens Monroe springs
By Tina Alvey REGISTER-HERALD REPORTER
UNION — Monroe County has always been known for its abundance of natural springs.
According to a 2009 comprehensive plan, by the early part of the 20th century at least 13 resorts had developed around some of the more famed Monroe springs — Red Sulphur, Salt Sulphur and Sweet Springs among them. But Peters Mountain, running along the county’s southeastern border, received special recognition in the plan for containing thousands of springs and, thus, being the source of most of Monroe’s drinking water.
Not surprisingly, much of the organized opposition to the route under consideration for a natural gas pipeline that will cut through the county centers on the perceived threat it poses to the pristine springs of Peters Mountain.
According to geologist Rick Eades, who lives and teaches in Monroe County, one of the routes now on the drawing board for the Mountain Valley Pipeline has the potential to foul Peters Mountain springs that serve the farming community of Gap Mills and Union, the county seat and largest population hub. But, Eades said, it is likely that those springs flow from a single 1.2-mile wide karst conduit that also carries water to the mountain’s other springs.
Beginning in the 1930s, flow testing of a sampling of those springs has shown great stability, suggesting to the geologist that Peters Mountain is “like one giant reservoir,” he said. During a Wednesday evening presentation before the Monroe County Commission, Eades said measurements have shown that 1.5 million gallons of water flows through those springs every day.
And a proposed route for the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) — which will stretch 294 miles from Wetzel County, W.Va., to Pittsylvania County, Va., — runs right across the top of Peters Mountain.
Eades noted that while the bottom layers of the mountain are porous limestone, the summit is Tuscarora sandstone, a formation that reaches to an estimated depth of 120 feet from the mountain’s crest. “It’s the hardest rock in West Virginia,” he said.
Because the pipeline needs a level surface to traverse, the top of Peters Mountain will have to be blasted flat before additional blasts clear the 9-by-9-foot trench in which the pipe will rest in a gravel bed, Eades said.
“It’s the same as mountaintop removal,” he told the commission. “They’ll have to blast maybe 30 to 40 feet deep. It’ll take a lot of explosives.”
In addition to shattering the silica of the sandstone into minute particles that will inevitably filter down the mountainside, the blasting also will result in fractures through the underlying rock layers, Eades said. Thus, not only will potential contaminants be released, but the network of fractures will provide a pathway through which the resulting acidic runoff can eventually join the soft water flowing through the mountain’s limestone base.
“Eight billion gallons of water a year can be put at risk by this (pipeline project),” Eades warned. “You go from no risk (under current conditions) to one of the biggest risks you could imagine.”
The acidic water runoff could also have a detrimental effect on the pipeline itself, Eades said, explaining that as the water flows through the pipe trench, it will cause corrosion which could result in leakage.
“You’re adding up a lot of risk factors,” he said. “If it ever does leak, where does it go? Into the limestone.”
Eades asserted, “This is the most challenging portion of the pipeline’s path in the state.”
Further complicating the necessary blasting, if the Peters Mountain route is taken, is the complex rock folds in the Tuscarora. Rather than being arranged in orderly, flat strata, the sandstone was crumpled and folded back on itself during the millennia it took to form, and the resulting tangle makes it difficult for engineers to determine how the rock will fall and fracture when blasting charges are set off, Eades said.
And if the substrate is weakened in places by unpredictable fracturing, it will settle unevenly, potentially destabilizing the pipeline’s trench and the pipe it contains.
“They’re up against an inconceivable geologic challenge,” Eades said of the engineers working on this section of the MVP. “If the engineering company thinks they can do this, they must be magicians.”
Studies of the challenges posed by the proposed pipeline route — including the interconnection of the Monroe County springs — are still under way, according to the EQT Corporation which is partnered with NextEra US Gas Assets, LLC, in developing the Mountain Valley Pipeline.
“We are aware of the karst topography that exists along the proposed and alternative routes, and we respect the potential issues related to construction in these areas,” EQT’s corporate communications director Natalie A. Cox wrote in an e-mail responding to a Register-Herald inquiry.
“Karst topography exists in most areas of the country, with thousands of miles of transmission pipelines safely constructed through those areas,” Cox wrote.
“We have hired Draper Aden Associates as our third-party expert to study karst features along the (MVP) route, and they are currently investigating and evaluating underground springs in the potential karst areas. Draper will help us map out the areas of potential concern — and from there, a modification to the route may be proposed or site-specific construction techniques may be suggested and employed.”
Cox also wrote that EQT will have a contingency plan in place once construction on the pipeline begins “to help us respond to unforeseen karst issues during construction.” She continued, “As part of our process, underground springs are certainly one of the natural resources that we intend to evaluate and protect.”
Cox referenced an information-gathering process that included public meetings hosted by MVP developers in communities along the pipeline’s path, as well as land surveys that are still continuing.
“From day one of this project, Mountain Valley Pipeline has been committed to identifying a proposed route that has the least overall impact on landowners, the environment and cultural resources,” she wrote. “We have spent the last several months meeting with thousands of stakeholders in communities along the proposed route to hear their concerns and carefully consider the thoughtful feedback they’ve offered.
“We are currently in the process of gaining access to landowner properties to conduct land survey activities, which are an integral step in the process of evaluating proposed and alternative routes. This process includes an evaluation of the topography for constructability and an evaluation of environmental, historical and cultural resources.”
The Monroe County Commission earlier this month sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) requesting a 90-day extension on the “scoping period” connected with the MVP project. The “scoping” includes such issues as the anticipated environmental impact of the project and strategies to minimize or eliminate that impact.
Unless the extension is granted, the deadline for public comments on the MVP proposal is June 16. Comments may be filed online by going to www.ferc.gov and referencing project PF15-3-000.
romaincrisis
2087
dailybridgerton
tangentwithtanner
discoholicmusic
kianamaiart