Big Oil's Wall: Pollution Mitigation Or Greenwashing?

Oil and gas companies are building walls around their operations to mitigate the impact of their activities on the environment and local communities. These walls are designed to reduce noise, block floodlights, and minimize dust clouds, especially during the multimonth period of drilling and hydraulic fracturing. In addition, oil companies are also implementing measures to protect their operations from the effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels and extreme weather events. However, critics argue that these measures are counterproductive and do not address the root cause of climate change. Oil and gas drilling has been associated with negative impacts on wildlands and communities, including pollution, climate change, wildlife disruption, and damage to public lands.

Oil and gas companies are building walls to minimise noise

Oil and gas companies are increasingly building walls to minimise noise and other impacts of their operations on nearby residents. Noise is one of the most common complaints from people living close to oil and gas operations, and it can have significant negative health impacts, including stress, sleep disturbance, elevated blood pressure, and heart disease.

In areas such as Colorado, where oil and gas drilling is expanding into communities, companies are erecting new styles of walls around drilling and fracking sites. These walls, made of earthen-coloured fabric on steel frames up to 32 feet high and 800 feet long, help to shield industrial machinery and reduce noise levels. They also partially block the glare of floodlights and dust clouds during the drilling process.

Previously, oil and gas companies tried to mitigate noise by stacking hay bales and shipping containers around engines, which could reduce noise by 20 to 30 decibels. However, as drilling expands closer to residential areas, more effective measures are needed. The new walls help companies meet Colorado's noise limits, which are 55-80 decibels during the day and 50-75 decibels at night, measured 350 feet from the source.

Oil and gas companies often conduct noise surveys before and after operations to comply with state limits. Noise-reducing walls have been shown to decrease noise-related complaints from residents. For example, in the Liberty Ranch development in Mead, a resident living near an oil and gas operation reported that he "hasn't heard a thing" after a wall was put up.

In addition to noise reduction, these walls can also help to minimise the impact of construction and protect wildlife habitats. However, some residents view the walls as an eyesore and prefer larger buffer zones between their communities and drilling operations.

The walls are also used to shield industrial machinery

Oil and gas companies are building walls to mitigate the impact of their operations on the environment and communities. These walls are made of earthen-coloured fabric on steel frames and can be up to 32 feet high and 800 feet long. They are designed to shield industrial machinery and equipment from the view of nearby residents and to reduce noise levels.

The walls are an attempt to minimise the impact of oil and gas extraction on communities and the environment. This impact includes noise pollution, air pollution, damaged landscapes, and disruption to wildlife and their habitats. For example, loud noises, human movement, and vehicle traffic from drilling operations can disrupt animal communication, breeding, and nesting. Power lines, well pads, fences, and roads can also fragment animal habitats.

In addition to the negative impact on wildlife, oil and gas operations can also affect people living nearby. For example, residents near drilling sites may experience noise pollution, with one resident describing the noise of a nearby fracking operation as "very noisy, like an airplane taking off". Oil and gas operations can also impact the experience of visitors to public lands, who may not expect to see oil tanks, power poles, noisy compressors, and busy roads.

The walls built by oil and gas companies aim to mitigate these impacts by reducing noise levels and blocking the view of industrial machinery. Previously, companies tried to reduce noise levels by stacking hay bales and shipping containers around engines, but these methods were less effective than the new walls.

While the walls may help to reduce the impact of oil and gas operations on communities and the environment, they do not address the underlying issue of fossil fuel extraction and its contribution to climate change. To truly mitigate the impacts of the oil and gas industry, a transition to renewable energy sources and a reduction in fossil fuel drilling on public lands may be necessary.

Oil companies are altering plans to remain in production

Oil companies are altering their plans to remain in production, despite the environmental and social consequences. The oil industry has a long history of denying and spreading disinformation about climate change, and even today, companies are slow to move away from fossil fuels.

In the 1950s, oil companies began researching the effects of pollution on the environment, and by the 1950s and 1960s, industry scientists were raising concerns about the impacts of oil on the climate. However, instead of addressing these concerns, oil companies chose to deny and downplay the problem. For example, in 1959, Shell acknowledged that burning fossil fuels released 2.5 billion tons of carbon annually, but the paper's author, Dr. M. A. Matthews, employed doubt to cast uncertainty on the suggested climatic threats. This tactic of spreading doubt and distrust of scientific facts became a common strategy for the oil industry.

It was not until the late 1990s and early 2000s that big oil companies began to publicly acknowledge the scientific consensus on climate change. However, their concessions were characterized by a resistance to government regulation and a preference for voluntary, market-based solutions. For instance, Shell claimed that it would combat climate change by continuing to produce oil and gas to fuel economic growth and technological innovation. Exxon also claimed that technology would reduce the risks posed by climate change, rather than committing to reducing carbon emissions.

Today, oil companies are facing challenges to their production and profitability. The Biden Administration has pointed fingers at the industry for stockpiling permits and not increasing production, while the industry blames the Administration's hostile policies. Oil companies are also facing challenges due to manpower and material shortages, as well as the lingering effects of the pandemic, which crushed oil demand in 2020 and led to some companies going out of business. Additionally, there is rising opposition to oil and gas drilling in communities across the United States, with concerns about noise, pollution, and the impact on the environment and local communities.

Despite these challenges, oil companies are altering their plans to remain in production. This includes seeking government support and protection, such as fast-tracked funding for seawalls to protect their facilities from the impacts of climate change. Oil companies are also expanding their operations into new communities, using innovative walls to minimize the impact of drilling and fracking on residents. While these walls may help to reduce noise and block dust clouds, they are not a long-term solution to the environmental and social consequences of oil production. As the world moves towards cleaner energy sources, oil companies will need to make more significant changes to remain in production.

Oil drilling has a serious impact on wildlands and communities

One example of the impact of oil drilling on wildlands is the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline, which would carry natural gas from West Virginia through Virginia and into North Carolina. The pipeline threatens to destroy old-growth forests, family farms, and scenic landscapes along its 370-mile route. It would also run parallel to the Appalachian Trail, a beloved hiking destination, and could have lasting negative effects on the health of forests, wildlands, and waters in the area.

Oil drilling can also have significant consequences for communities. In California, for example, more than one-third of the state's oil fields have been burned by historic wildfires, which were exacerbated by the emissions from oil drilling. The infrastructure and pollution associated with oil drilling can also be a nuisance for nearby residents, with noise, traffic, and unsightly walls or other structures.

In addition to the direct impacts on wildlands and communities, oil drilling can also have indirect effects. For example, the extraction of fossil fuels can lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate change. This, in turn, can lead to more frequent and severe extreme weather events, which can have devastating effects on both wildlands and communities.

To address the impacts of oil drilling, it is crucial to reduce fossil fuel development, especially on public lands. A transition to responsible renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, can help preserve the environment and communities while still fulfilling our energy needs. Additionally, better management of public lands can ensure that they are part of the solution to climate change, rather than contributing to the problem.

Oil companies are taking preventive measures to control pollution risks

In addition to seawalls, oil and gas companies are also building giant walls around drilling and fracking sites to mitigate their impact on nearby communities. These walls are designed to reduce noise, block floodlights, and minimize dust clouds during the drilling process. While some residents appreciate the reduction in noise, others view the walls as an eyesore and a symbol of the oil industry's destruction of the environment.

To protect their operations from pollution risks, oil and gas companies are encouraged to adopt a proactive risk management approach. This includes implementing inspection and maintenance programs to identify potential pollution sources and address issues before they become full-blown problems. For example, saltwater tanks at oilfield production sites are susceptible to lightning strikes, which can lead to spills and fires. By installing lightning protection and following proper installation procedures, companies can reduce the risk of accidents and minimize potential harm to the surrounding community and environment.

Another key aspect of pollution risk management in the oil and gas industry is the maintenance of aging pipelines and equipment. Regular preventive maintenance can help companies control pollution risks and respond more effectively to severe weather events and natural disasters. This proactive approach can also reduce the likelihood of oil spills and gas leaks, which can have significant environmental and community impacts.

Overall, while oil companies are taking some preventive measures to control pollution risks, there is a ongoing debate about the effectiveness and ethical implications of these actions. To truly address the issue, a transition to responsible renewable energy sources is necessary, along with a commitment to reducing carbon emissions and mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Frequently asked questions