Environmental officials are working around the clock to curb the potential dangers posed by the impact of acid mine drainage in the Witwatersrand mining area, government news agency BuaNews reported on Monday.

Acid [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 13 June 2011

Environmental officials are working around the clock to curb the potential dangers posed by the impact of acid mine drainage in the Witwatersrand mining area, government news agency BuaNews reported on Monday.

Acid mine water overflowing from an old mine shaft on the Black Reef Incline, near Rand Uranium's treatment pond, 30 January 2010.

An expert team appointed by Cabinet to advise the interministerial committee on the dangers of acid mine drainage to Gauteng warned earlier this year of the need to avert an impending crisis.

The team, drawn from the Council for Geosciences and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), among others, identified various risk categories, including the contamination of surface and ground water required for agricultural and human consumption.

Their recommendations were housed in an acid mine drainage report.

According to a statement issued by the Department of Water Affairs this week, “important progress” had been made by the state in implementing the immediate and short-term actions recommended in the acid mine drainage report.

BuaNews reported that Water Affairs Minister Edna Molewa had also tasked state-owned Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority to oversee installation of pumps to extract water from the mines to onsite treatment plants and construction of an on-site mine water treatment plant in each basin.

There will also be an installation of infrastructure to convey treated water to nearby watercourses and the facilitation of the best model, which shall be proposed to the Department of Water Affairs, for the operations of the pumping stations and treatment works.

Treasury had made a budget allocation of R225-million in the next three years towards the design and building of an acid mine water treatment facility, five million rand of which would be spent on a five-year plan to deal with acid mine drainage.

The statement said recent “collaborative efforts” between the department and Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority had resulted in an investigation of existing mine water treatment infrastructure in the western and central basin mining areas, and of potential institutional arrangements with the mining companies that were active in these basins.

“The Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority, by way of tender protocol, appointed a professional service provider to provide an intensive appraisal of the available infrastructure and to formulate appropriate engineering options to adequately resolve the acid mine drainage problem,” said the department.

The highest priority is being given to the development of solutions to reduce, if not eradicate, the surface decant of acid mine drainage in the West Rand area.

Also of high priority was the development of measures focused on ensuring that underground mine water levels in the central basin of the mines did not reach the environmental critical level, which would pose a threat.

The department said pumps for the central basin had been procured and were set to be delivered by the end of July.

Other engineering requirements in terms of construction and electrical infrastructure would follow.

In the eastern basin, the department was awaiting final announcements by the liquidators that were administering the Aurora Mining Company.

“The situation is being closely monitored and, if no real solution is provided, government intervention will be unavoidable,” the department added.

Source: Bua News

Climate change will have major impacts on the availability of water for growing food and on crop productivity in the decades to come, warns a new FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 09 June 2011

Climate change will have major impacts on the availability of water for growing food and on crop productivity in the decades to come, warns a new FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations] report.

Loss of glaciers will eventually impact the amount of surface water available for agriculture

‘Climate Change, Water, and Food Security’ is a comprehensive survey of existing scientific knowledge on the anticipated consequences of climate change for water use in agriculture.

These include reductions in river runoff and aquifer recharges in the Mediterranean and the semi-arid areas of the Americas, Australia and southern Africa — regions that are already water-stressed. In Asia, large areas of irrigated land that rely on snowmelt and mountain glaciers for water will also be affected, while heavily populated river deltas are at risk from a combination of reduced water flows, increased salinity, and rising sea levels.

Additional impacts described in the report:

An acceleration of the world’s hydrological cycle is anticipated as rising temperatures increase the rate of evaporation from land and sea. Rainfall will increase in the tropics and higher latitudes, but decrease in already dry semi-arid to mid-arid latitudes and in the interior of large continents. A greater frequency in droughts and floods will need to be planned for but already, water scarce areas of the world are expected to become drier and hotter.

Even though estimates of groundwater recharge under climate change cannot be made with any certainty, the increasing frequency of drought can be expected to encourage further development of available groundwater to buffer the production risk for farmers.

And the loss of glaciers – which support around 40 percent of the world’s irrigation — will eventually impact the amount of surface water available for agriculture in key producing basins

Increased temperatures will lengthen the growing season in northern temperate zones but will reduce the length almost everywhere else. Coupled with increased rates of evapotranspiration this will cause the yield potential and water productivity of crops to decline.

“Both the livelihoods of rural communities as well as the food security of city populations are at risk,” said FAO Assistant Director General for Natural Resources, Alexander Mueller. “But the rural poor, who are the most vulnerable, are likely to be disproportionately affected.”

Responding to the challenge

FAO’s report also looks at actions that can be taken by national policymakers, regional and local watershed authorities, and individual farmers to respond to these new challenges.

One key area requiring attention is improving the ability of countries to implement effective systems for ‘water accounting’ – the thorough measurement of water supplies, transfers, and transactions in order to inform decisions about how water resources  can be managed and used under increasing variability.

“Water accounting in most developing countries is very limited, and allocation procedures are non existent, ad hoc, or poorly developed,” the report says. “Helping developing countries acquire good water accounting practices and developing robust and flexible water allocations systems will be a first priority.”

At the farm level, growers can change their cropping patterns to allow earlier or later planting, reducing their water use and optimizing irrigation. Yields and productivity can be improved by shifting to soil moisture conservation practices, including zero- and minimum tillage. Planting deep-rooted crops would allow farmers to better exploit available soil moisture.

Mixed agroforestry systems also hold promise. These systems both sequester carbon and also offer additional benefits such as shade that reduces ground temperatures and evaporation, added wind protection, and improved soil conservation and water retention.

However, FAO’s report also stresses that small-scale producers in developing countries will face an uphill struggle in adopting such strategies.

“Farm size and access to capital set the limits for the scope and extent of adaptation and change at farm level,” it warns, noting that already today many developing world farms produce yields far below their agro-climatic potential.

Zooming in on hotspots

FAO also warns that far too little is known about how climate change impacts on water for agriculture will play out at the regional and sub-regional level, and where farmers will be most at risk.

“Greater precision and focus is needed to understand the nature, scope and location of climate change impacts on developing country water resources for agriculture,” the report says, adding: “Mapping vulnerability is a key task at national and regional levels.”

Source: FAO

Methane leaks are contaminating drinking water near shale gas drilling sites in the eastern United States, scientists said on Tuesday, placing a further question mark over this fast-growing energy source.

Shale gas carries [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 11 May 2011

Methane leaks are contaminating drinking water near shale gas drilling sites in the eastern United States, scientists said on Tuesday, placing a further question mark over this fast-growing energy source.

Shale gas carries a greater carbon footprint than oil, coal and conventional gas, using current extraction techniques

Scientists tested water samples taken from 68 private wells in five counties in Pennsylvania and New York to explore accusations that “hydro-fracking” – a contested technique to extract shale gas – contaminated groundwater.

Methane was found in 85 percent of the samples, and at sites within a kilometre of active hydraulic-fracturing operations, levels were 17 times higher than in wells far from such operations, said the study by researchers at Duke University in North Carolina.

“In these rural areas, almost everybody has a well. They are using the groundwater for some purpose – they are using it for drinking, for their livestock, for agriculture,” lead author Stephen Osborn told AFP.

However, little is known about the health impacts of consuming methane in drinking water.

“We were surprised, and we have spoken with many health officials,” he said.

“There is really no literature that addresses that particular issue – the physiological response – is methane really non-reactive in the body? What are the effects of consuming high concentrations of methane?”

The paper found no evidence of contamination from the chemicals used to fracture the rock or from “produced” water – the wastewater that emerges from the wells after the shale has been fractured.

Shale gas is found in dense sedimentary rock which is fractured by large volumes of water, sand and chemicals that are piped in horizontally at very high pressure.

After the fracturing, large amounts of water return to the surface within a few days, along with significant amounts of methane, which comprises the bulk of the shale gas.

The gas is enjoying a boom in North America and Europe, buoyed by high prices and fears over the political risks of imported fossil fuels.

Opponents say the technique is environmentally destructive because the methane can contaminate groundwater and, if leaked to the air, add to the greenhouse effect.

“Definitely natural gas is cleaner than coal but if you do it without regulation or without careful monitoring, you might harm the environment,” said co-author Avner Vengosh, also of Duke University.

“There is no really comprehensive oversight of what is going on. There is not enough scientific research,” he added.

“We are just revealing something that should have been revealed long ago before the boom took place. In some places it might be too late.”

The study, published on Monday in the peer-reviewed journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), said the methane sampled near the fracking sites had an isotopic fingerprint that pointed to its source.

Water from wells farther from the gas sites had lower levels of methane and a different isotopic signature.

As a gas, methane is flammable and can cause suffocation.

In April, scientists from New York’s Cornell University found that current extraction techniques meant that shale gas carried a greater carbon footprint than oil, coal and conventional gas over at least a 20-year period.

According to the US Department of Energy, total domestic production of natural gas will grow by 20 percent by 2035. Shale gas alone will increase its share of production from 16 percent in 2009 to 45 percent in 2035.

- Sapa-AFP

At the World Economic Forum on Africa in Cape Town, Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs of South Africa Edna Molewa, Chairman of Nestlé and Chairman of the Water Resources Group Peter Brabeck-Letmathe announced [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 05 May 2011

At the World Economic Forum on Africa in Cape Town, Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs of South Africa Edna Molewa, Chairman of Nestlé and Chairman of the Water Resources Group Peter Brabeck-Letmathe announced today a Declaration of Partnership.

Water demand is expected to rise by 52% within 30 years while supply is sharply declining

Recognizing the critical role that water plays as a catalyst for both economic growth and social development, the Department of Water Affairs (DWA) of South Africa forges a partnership with the Water Resources Group (WRG), an influential public-private global network on water supported by the World Economic Forum and the International Finance Corporation.

This new public-private group, chaired by the director-general of the DWA, will oversee the activities of a partnership called “South Africa Strategic Water Partners Network” to address critical water issues in South Africa: water conservation, demand management and developing more sustainable management of groundwater resources.

“This new partnership between the Government of South Africa and the Water Resources Group will help identify how South Africa’s plans for growth can be met with the water it has safely available. The foresight and leadership of Minister Molewa in this regard should be applauded” remarked Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, Chairman of Nestlé and Chairman of the Water Resources Group.

In South Africa, water demand is expected to rise by 52% within the next 30 years while the supply of water is sharply declining. If current trends of leakage from aged and poorly maintained municipal infrastructure and the loss of wetlands persist, this growth in demand will intensify competition for water resources across all sectors of the economy (agriculture, energy industry and domestic).

Should status quo in management practices remain, a gap of 17% between water demand and supply is forecast by 2030. This gap will have serious social and political implications and strongly impact South Africa’s plans for economic growth.

“The Water Resources Group partnership will enable South Africa to access best practice economics, projects and policies in water management from public, private and civil society sectors around the world, enabling officials to field-test and replicate actions for implementation domestically,” explained Dominic Waughray, Senior Director, Head of Environmental Initiatives at the World Economic Forum, and member of the Water Resources Group.

The group will focus on key areas:

• Water conservation and demand management: increasing water use efficiency (in agriculture, industry and households) and reducing leakage from distribution networks (municipal and others, including irrigation)
• Diversifying the water mix: increasing the reuse of effluent and desalination (sea water and acid mine drainage), and developing more sustainable management of groundwater resources, in particular for rural areas

The partnership will deliver two primary outputs: first, it will assist the Department of Water Affairs (DWA) in developing sector strategies (agriculture, energy, industry) related to the key areas. Each sector strategy will:

• Identify a pipeline of potential projects and access its collective potential to close the water volume gap if implementation takes place
• Identify challenges for project replication
• Recommend a strategy to overcome challenges, including incentives for widespread adoption and contributions by each stakeholder to enable replication

Second, the partnership will provide expert support to help the NEPAD Business Foundation (NBF) consult with domestic stakeholders and design these pilot projects. Expertise provided from the WRG network will help NBF to:

• Develop joint public-private expert collaborations to structure and take forward the pilot projects
• Highlight the DWA-WRG partnership at COP 17 in Durban as a practical example of what South Africa is doing to manage its water security and adapt to climate change

Clear government ownership of the process is crucial to success and the inclusion of domestic public and private stakeholders. To this end, a public-private expert leadership group, chaired by the director-general of the DWA, will be formed to oversee the work. This new group will formally be called the “South Africa Strategic Water Partners Network”. Stakeholders to be invited will include:

• Department of Water Affairs (chairperson: the director-general)
• Industry (key economic sectors such as food/beverage, mining and metals, energy)
• Other governmental departments (national treasury, national planning commission, local government)
• Development finance institutions (Development Bank of Southern Africa, Industrial Development Corporation, International Finance Corporation)
• Business organizations (NEPAD Business Foundation (NBF), Business Unity South Africa (BUSA), Business Leadership South Africa (BLSA), National Business Initiative (NBI)
• Civil society organizations (including WWF South Africa)
• Multilateral and bilateral development agencies working in South Africa
• A senior representative of WRG

Key partners of the WRG include The Coca-Cola Company, International Finance Corporation, Nestlé, PepsiCo, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and Veolia Environment.

The Water Resources Group (WRG) is a public-private platform for collaboration. It mobilizes stakeholders from the public and private sector, civil society, centres of academic expertise and financing institutions to engage in fact-based, analytical approaches and coalition building initiatives that help governments to catalyse sustainable water sector transformation in support of their economic growth plans.

WRG engages with those governments who invite it to work on a comprehensive water sector reform strategy and then it provides a public-private approach to support them.

Source: World Economic Forum

Cape Town is located in a water scarce region with a high demand and usage during the summer months.

It is not legal to send rainwater via a gully to sewer

“The City’s [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 13 April 2011

Cape Town is located in a water scarce region with a high demand and usage during the summer months.

It is not legal to send rainwater via a gully to sewer

“The City’s amended Water By-Law, promulgated on 18 February 2011, provides an opportunity for the City to be pro-active and introduce water conservation and demand management measures to ensure sustainability of the water supply to its consumers,” says the City’s Director for Water and Sanitation, Philemon Mashoko.

All requirements of the Water By-law must be complied with as from the promulgation date.

One of the most important changes to the by-law is that a Certificate of Compliance of water installations must be obtained and submitted to the City upon the transfer of any property to a new owner. This applies to domestic, commercial and industrial properties and includes sectional title units.

A suitably qualified and accredited plumber in terms of the South African Qualifications Authority, must certify that:

• the hot water cylinder complies with SANS 10252 and 10254
• the water meter registers
• there are no water leaks on the property
• water pipes and terminal fittings are correctly fixed in position
• no stormwater is discharged into the sewerage system
• there is no cross connection between the potable supply and any grey water or groundwater system which may be installed

The conveyancer, on behalf of the seller/owner, needs to submit the completed and signed form via e-mail to CertificateOfCompliance@capetown.gov.za. The system will not delay the issuing of rates and taxes clearances by the municipality.

For more information call Danie Klopper on 021 590 1488 or click here and look under the ‘policies, laws and by-laws’ tab to view the amended Water By-laws and Certificate of Compliance document.

Source: City of Cape Town

In its desperate efforts to battle chronic water shortages, Jordan, one of the world’s 10 driest countries, is mulling “unconventional” and “environmentally unfriendly” plans, experts say.

The plan is to provide the capital [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 06 April 2011

In its desperate efforts to battle chronic water shortages, Jordan, one of the world’s 10 driest countries, is mulling “unconventional” and “environmentally unfriendly” plans, experts say.

The plan is to provide the capital Amman with water for 50 years.

The challenge is huge for this tiny country where desert covers 92% of the territory and the population of 6.3 million is growing.

Critics said the government’s efforts to manage the country’s limited water resources and generate new ones are being hindered by a strategy which at best is chaotic.

Jordan is tapping into the ancient southern Disi aquifer, despite concerns about high levels of radiation, while studies are underway to build a controversial canal from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea.

“Unconventional projects, like Disi for example, are environmentally unfriendly,” said water expert Dureid Mahasneh, a former Jordan Valley Authority chief.

Radiation

The $990m project seeks to extract 100 million cubic metres of water a year from the 300 000-year-old Disi aquifer, 325km south of Amman, officials said.

The plan is to provide the capital Amman with water for 50 years, said water ministry official Bassam Saleh, who is in charge of the project that was launched in 2008 and is due to be completed in 2012.

A 2008 study by Duke University in the US, shows that Disi’s water has 20 times more radiation than is considered safe, with radium content that could trigger cancers.

“Our research shows that the Disi aquifer is heavily contaminated with radium,” according to the study done by the Durham, North Carolina team which tested 37 pumping wells in the aquifer.

“Disi water should not be touched. How can you go for a non-renewable water resource that is contaminated with radiation and needs treatment?” Mahasneh said.

But the government has brushed aside such concerns.

“We know there is radiation in Disi because it is underground water but we will treat it by diluting it with an equal amount of water from other sources,” said Saleh.

Major pumping effort

Jordan University professor Elias Salameh agreed. “The radioactivity can be treated, and it is not a complicated matter.”

Munqeth Mehyar, of the Jordanian-Israeli-Palestinian non-governmental group Friends of the Earth Middle East (FoEME), warned against abusing the water resource.

“If we over pump the Disi water, we will suffer from problems like sinkholes for example. And there are no studies that tell you for sure how long the aquifer water would last,” he said.

Jordan has also agreed in principle to build, along with its Palestinian and Israeli neighbours, a $4bn pipeline from the Red Sea to refill the rapidly shrinking Dead Sea.

But the world’s lowest and saltiest body of water lies below the Red Sea and the pipeline must cross higher land in order to reach it – a project that will entail a major pumping effort.

A desalination plant would also be built to remove the salt and provide 200 million cubic metres of potable water to Jordan each year.

“This project is worrisome. It will cause indescribable damage,” Mehyar warned.

Challenge

A feasibility study is being carried out by the World Bank but environmentalists fear that an influx of seawater could undermine the Dead Sea’s fragile ecosystem.

The degradation of the Dead Sea began in the 1960s when Israel, Jordan and Syria began to divert water from the Jordan River – the Dead Sea’s main supplier.

Over the years 95% of the river’s flow has been diverted by the three neighbours for agricultural and industrial use, with Israel alone diverts more than 60% of it, according to FoEME.

The impact on the Dead Sea has been compounded by a drop in groundwater levels as rainwater from surrounding mountains dissolved salt deposits that had previously plugged access to underground caverns.

Industrial and tourist operations around the shores of the lake exacerbate the situation.

“We ask the government to keep an open mind while examining the plan,” said Mehyar.

The government acknowledges the project will be a challenge.

Water mismanagement

“Six studies on the Red-Dead plan’s impact on the environment are currently being conducted,” said Fayez Batainah, who heads the project at the water ministry. “We are coordinating and cooperating with the World Bank and all concerned sides.”

But Mahasneh said the authorities did not have a comprehensive strategy.

“There is chaos in the country’s water polices. We do not have a real strategy and efficient water management, and the current plans did not consider what independent experts think or say,” he said.

“The country for example is still cultivating crops that consume a lot of water. We should import these crops and save our water,” he said, singling out tomatoes and bananas.

More than 60% of Jordan’s annual water consumption of 900 million cubic metres goes to agriculture, which contributes 3.6% to gross domestic product, according to official figures.

“We have water… but we suffer from massive water mismanagement,” Mehyar said.

According to him, around 48% of pumped water supplies are lost annually due to worn-out pipes and theft.

“We need very firm decisions to deal with such problems. If we save this lost water, our situation will improve a lot. We do not even have a comprehensive study about the water situation in Jordan,” Mehyar said.

Jordan’s population is expanding by 3.5% a year and every drop of water is needed.

Years of below-average rainfall have created a shortfall of 500 million cubic metres a year, and the country forecasts it will need 1.6 billion cubic metres of water a year by 2015.

- Sapa

By: Jeremy Westgarth-Taylor – pioneer of Water Rhapsody Conservation Systems

The points in the letter below will be raised by Jeremy Westgarth-Taylor in a meeting with Shell scheduled for 16:00 on 25 March 2011 [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 24 March 2011

By: Jeremy Westgarth-Taylor – pioneer of Water Rhapsody Conservation Systems

The points in the letter below will be raised by Jeremy Westgarth-Taylor in a meeting with Shell scheduled for 16:00 on 25 March 2011 at  Sports Science Centre in Newlands, Cape Town

Dear Shell, I have done a study of other frackers, and I see no difference between you and others elsewhere worldwide, what with the lack of transparency and downright lies.

Millions of litres of water are needed for fracking - per drilling site.

Fracking in our Karoo is not something that we simply don’t want.  We are not going to have it.  It will not go ahead if nothing else because of the strength of our consumerism.  This is not Nigeria where Shell can simply do what Shell pleases.

You and your minions Golder have promised us a lot of things during our meetings, the answers to questions which have not been answered and at best have been obfuscated.  Are you lying or simply being economical with the truth in these examples?

For instance; when asked about the toxic compounds that you intend to introduce into the earth, after drillings have been completed, to start your fracking process your Adam Dodson said in one or more meetings:

1.     One of the chemicals used in fracking is also used in ice cream.
2.     The chemicals were something which you would report in the EMP proposal – (which is not there).
3.     The Chemicals are of proprietary nature and could not expose them.
4.     Could not tell us because the geology differs in every area from place to place.

Clearly and succinctly answer which of these is the correct answer. And let us know whether diesel is one of the ingredients. Why don’t you give us the list of all the possible ingredients for this purpose?

We read in the newspapers conflicting things and on the basis of the conflicting items we need some answers.

You say that PASA (Petroleum Agency of South Africa) exempted you from submitting exact site proposals. You have even given chapter and verse of the act (MPRDA 2002).  This Claim has been dispelled by Graaff-Rienet attorney Derek Light who said that PASA had no authority to exempt anyone from the provisions of the act. This is a question of integrity. You do not have exemption because PASA deny having given you exemption. Were you lying when you made this claim? Derek has the letter from the CEO of PASA stating that ‘no exemptions made, including Shell’

Source of water:  You are on record as having said that “we will not compete with farmers over water”. There is only enough water in the Karoo to sustain farmers. What if you find water below 300 metres?  Will you then say that it is fine to use this water because we are not competing with farmers, even though it may lower the water table or directly affect the aquifers closer to the surface?  You cannot say this is not going to happen because there is no research on the inter-relationship between the aquifers, and such research would take 5 years.

Question:
1.     Do you deny that you intend using the Karoo’s Groundwater?
2.     Do you as you stated intend to drill up to eleven kilometres for water?  If so:
a.     What is the quality of the water at that level?
b.     Does this water resemble the salinity of sea water?
c.      How much of this water will become artesian, and for the sake of those who don’t understand this term, this simply means water that rises to the surface.  After all, this is the case at Kuruman which is not so far away.
3.     Do you intend using AMD water in your drilling and fracking process as stated to parliament by Jennifer Marot of PASA?
4.     What in short do you know of the water below 300 metres in the Great Karoo?  Nobody else seems to know anything at all.
5.     Can you guaranty that if you find water below 300 metres that this water will not pollute either groundwater or surface water, and if you are not able to guaranty that, what guaranties are you offering for reparation for damage done?  No guaranties will be good enough as reparation because once water is polluted the damage is not worth any amount of money.  Water is priceless in the Karoo.

Why, when you declare that your environmental impacts on your drilling activities will be “low”, as stated in your EMP, will you not name the characteristic chemicals in your drilling and fracking process? Surely we need the ingredients for anyone, government or policing body, to check up on you?

I now refer to one of your advertisements in the newspaper.  How much did you pay for this drivel and propaganda? (page 12 Argus Tuesday March 15 2011.)

Allay fears:

You are dealing with poor communities in the Karoo.  Communities will not have money to go to court to prove claims from your fracking activities. In my opinion you and your minion Golder are guilty of lies of the worst kind.

To allay our concerns, and after all I think we have caught you out lying at every intersection over this application: the courts are very expensive in South Africa.  You have also spent a lot of money on these applications and are by all appearances hell bent on turning South Africa into another Nigeria. Are you prepared to put say a billion Rand into trust for these communities to use in the event of likely claims before proceeding with any fracking work whatsoever?  Will you fight each and every case after people have died from the carcinogens and any other poisonous malaise in your fracking process, or will you need them to prove ‘direct negative impact’ as a result of your operations, and I ask you who is going to get this right against Shell?

Many uses of the gas has been postulated, carting it to market, firing up gas fired power stations etc.

In the unlikely event that you do get it right to do your fracking all over the 90 000 square kilometers of the Karoo:

1.     What do you intend doing with the gas?
2.     Why is this gas better than coal in terms of its total carbon emissions?  There is no science to support lower carbon emissions.
3.     What are you going to do with the condensate?

Let it be on the record right now that there is at present not one single borehole polluted with hydrocarbons in the Great Karoo.  If anyone should be presented with ethane, methane, propane, butane, or benzene in their boreholes, or any other hydrocarbons for that matter, are you first going to ask them to prove it or will you accept responsibility?

A question for Tony Curtis (once a South African):  You now live in Quebec where a moratorium has been placed on fracking. You have been asked this question before and you could not provide an affirmative answer. “Can you 100% guaranty our environment will not be contaminated by Shell?” previously you could not provide this, and after all your propaganda bought in the newspapers, are you now able to provide this guaranty?

Are Shell looking into sustainable and renewable energy sources such as sun and wind power rather than – environmentally hazardous and air polluting – energy augmentation schemes? We would welcome that, and after all you have already invested in Solar projects elsewhere in the world, so why not here?

Finally: What is it going to take for you and your whole team to go and do your fracking somewhere else? Is it going to take for South Africa to boycott all Shell service stations with protesters on the road outside each and every station?

Why not bow out now before you deepen the drivel holes of spin and lies that you have spun around your fracking proposals?

By: PC Baker

I am sure that many of you have seen and read a lot about this proposed programme; it has been well reported in the press as well as on the news [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 07 March 2011

By: PC Baker

I am sure that many of you have seen and read a lot about this proposed programme; it has been well reported in the press as well as on the news services. Johan Rupert, a Karooster himself has joined the forces mobilizing against this operation which has given the campaign a big boost….”Rupert vs. Shell”.

Support the cause. Get your T-shirt (click on image)

There have been public meetings held throughout the Karoo and in PE as well as Cape Town. The momentum is increasing to force Shell to abandon this exploration and possible drilling.

But why should we be against something which will bring clean natural gas into our energy grid and jobs to our people in the Karoo, the most destitute and hopeless in the country? Surely it can only be a good thing for all concerned?

The facts of the matter are unfortunately contrary to popular belief  and the notion of gas being clean, and an environmentally safe energy source is not anywhere near the truth.

In order to get to the potentially gas bearing layers deep within the bowels of the earth’s crust, wells must be drilled down to levels between 2  and 5 kilometres! That’s very deep and these wells therefore have to pass through the water bearing strata of rock or aquifers; both farmers and villagers in the Karoo depend on these aquifers for their drinking and farming water. The Karoo is a desert and water is one of our most precious resources. As the planet earth gets warmer and warmer, we are expecting to see an average temperature increase in the Karoo of 6-7deg C over the next 50 years. More heat: more evaporation from surface water reserves; plain and simple. Ground water will become a more and more important commodity to look after if we and our children are to survive.

Now going back to the drilling; it is very complicated and a highly technical operation involving the pumping of enormous quantities of water, measured in cubic kilometres… trillions of litre quantities! And that water will be not only taken from our underground reserves but will be mixed with a bunch of chemicals which you thought were only seen in brown bottles with a big skull  and cross bones on the label; things like benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylene, ethylene glycol (antifreeze), diesel fuel, naphthalene (moth balls) compounds, boric acid, arsenic, poly nuclear organic hydrocarbons, only to name a few of the some 500 chemicals used  (Shell calls them ”additives” only, so be careful when you see that term.) and this mix of poison  and your water will then be pumped down the well under huge unimaginable pressure in a process called “fracking” which is supposed to cause the natural gas held in the layers of shale, to be released and permitted to be pumped up to the surface.

When you look at the depths involved to get to the gas and the chemical poisons required to release the gas and the human  and mechanical error factors (the BP oil blow out in the Gulf of Mexico  was a combination of the two!), and the fact that the gas is invisible and has no smell or colour, certainly anyone can see that the Karoo would be insane not to oppose the application by Shell to explore (even the act of sinking exploratory wells is as dangerous to the environment as the actual pumping of gas, if it is found in commercially viable quantities) for gas in the Karoo.

And then you have the not so insignificant matter of disposing of billions of litres of highly contaminated water. Can we send it to Royal Dutch Shell in Holland? Not on your life baby shoes; it will be stored in large plastic lined cement sedimentation ponds right in our Karoo, to evaporate the volatile chemicals into the atmosphere, so that we can inhale them into our lungs. It might make our Karoo smell like a college chemistry lab. And nothing lasts forever in the relentless Karoo sun, so the lining of the ponds will certainly crack and leak into the ground and contaminate surface water supplies. And never mind the risk of those flash floods in the Karoo. It only gets worse!

If you are concerned please register on the Fracking website www.fractual.co.za

The stark and harsh reality of acid mine drainage (AMD) is laid bare in a report by the Department of Water Affairs.

Episodes of AMD decant are contaminating Tweelopiesspruit. Photo: Alistair-Clacherty

The document [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 20 February 2011

The stark and harsh reality of acid mine drainage (AMD) is laid bare in a report by the Department of Water Affairs.

Episodes of AMD decant are contaminating Tweelopiesspruit. Photo: Alistair-Clacherty

The document includes the findings of an interministerial committee team of experts on AMD, assembled in September to investigate the issue.

“Urgent reduction of water ingress into mine voids remained a high priority,” it says.

The department would neither confirm nor deny ownership of the document.

The document proposes various interventions for three areas: the West Rand (Western Basin), central Johannesburg (Central Basin) and the East Rand (Eastern Basin).

It also notes that recent heavy rain and resultant flooding in Gauteng raised concerns that these conditions would lead to more water flowing into mines and worsening AMD in the province.

“The recent occurrence of flooding is in essence a matter separate to that of AMD; however, cognisance must be taken that flood water has potential to enter mine workings and also increase AMD.”

The document points out that water in mine workings is an important environmental concern.

“As mine water levels rise, it contaminates ground water. Further rises lead to decant (overflow) of the polluted water into surface streams, releasing water directly to mine openings,” it says.

Turning to the Western Basin, the report says the AMD flow rate during the dry season was either absent or of relatively small volumes, typically averaging two megalitres, or 2000000l, a day. But during the wet season, such as in December, this rose to 15.5 megalitres per day, on average.

It says that after heavy rains last month, the decant further increased to an average of 30 megalitres. This is in addition to 12 megalitres of partially treated mine water a day, making for a total of 42 megalitres a day.

“These episodes of AMD decant are contaminating … Tweelopies Spruit and Blaauwbank Spruit (which both flow north into the Crocodile River system).

“Western Basin subsurface mine water is considered to be flowing via underground paths to the Wonderfontein Spruit, a river which feeds into the Vaal River.”

On the Central Basin, the document says previous evidence shows the rate of water rise ranged from 30cm a day in the dry season to 90cm a day in the wet season (averaging about 55cm a day).

“Presently the water level is at 508m below surface and there is no surface decant of AMD,” the report says.

“The latest results indicate the rate of rise fluctuates between 0.37m and 0.47m per day,” it adds.

“Despite the recent high rainfall, there is a slower rise than expected, which is possibly due to delayed ingression or a more extensive network of lateral mine workings at the 500m (below surface) level, which is absorbing the ingress of water.”

The report has the following to say about the Eastern Basin: “As with the Central Basin, there is no surface decant of AMD … and the current subsurface mine water level is approximately 700m below surface.

“Recent rainfall has boosted the rate of rise to around 0.4m per day (about seven times the rate during dryer conditions).

“At the prevailing rate, mine water can flood the pump station in as little as 16 days unless the Grootvlei Mine seriously increases pumping output.

“According to information at the department’s disposal, Grootvlei Mine is in the process of increasing pumping capacity.”

Anthony Turton, a critic of the government’s handling of the issue, said the report seemed reasonable. “I see nothing here that speaks of a cover-up. Nothing mind bogglingly new either, but no cover-up.”

By: Lucky Biyase
Source: Business Live

Shell, Sasol and Bundu are names of companies that are going through application processes to drill exploration holes very deep into the ground in the Karoo in search of water and gas.

Millions [...]]]> Posted by: Saving Water SA (Cape Town, South Africa) – partnered with Water Rhapsody conservation systems – 07 February 2011

Shell, Sasol and Bundu are names of companies that are going through application processes to drill exploration holes very deep into the ground in the Karoo in search of water and gas.

Millions of litres of water are needed for fracking - per drilling site.

Shell has opened up a can of worms with their public participation meetings, and there are too many questions that have been unanswered; though the questions have been asked of them directly.

To drill explorative holes, and to look for water at limitless depths, Shell has applied for an EMP (Environmental Management Plan). I am not aware of how deep existing boreholes go down to get water for farming purposes, but all of the farmers say that there is just enough water for them to exist in that harsh environment.  Other hydro-geologists say that there is no more water for any purposes whatsoever in the Karoo.

At the outset, it must be stressed that the problems relating to “chemical fracking” are all about water.

How much water is needed by Shell for drilling and fracking? Shell and the others need millions of litres of water per drilling site, but nobody is willing to say how many drilling sites there are in their proposals, nor how many millions of litres are needed per drilling site.

Will Shell compete with farmers for water? If there is a finite volume in the fossil aquifer, and Shell is to extract more water than before, it is only logical that there will be less water than before. The process may go ahead without any research as to the re-charge of the aquifer. A full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) should be done to find these facts out.

What will the exploration process do to the aquifer/s in the Karoo? Nobody has drilled any exploration holes as deep as the holes that Shell plans to do.  Shell is prepared to drill up to eleven thousand metres below the surface, some ten thousand metres below sea level to get water. This water could very well be the salinity of sea water (nobody knows), and might be under huge pressure and become artesian which means that sea water could be gushing out to the surface.  At best, saline water will infiltrate the aquifers and create conduits for mixing of the aquifers.

Once exploration is over and the fracking for gas begins, what are the chemicals used to mix with sand and saline water to start the fracking process? Shell persistently refuses to answer this question. They have though made some ludicrous statement about one of them being the same as chemical used to make ice cream. What is more likely, and the reason for their secrecy, is toluene (poisonous hydrocarbons); and other hazardous mixtures and compounds that would normally be compulsory by law to cart away by specialist contractors.  These contractors need to dump these in special places that cannot pollute groundwater. These self same chemicals, legally classified “hazardous” would be pumped into deep holes in the Karoo by explorers looking for gas.

Who cleans up after Shell and others have extracted all of the gas, and moved on? Shell refuses to give any guarantees, whether pecuniary or other, to provide for a cleanup process. We have ample mining disasters in this country that we are not able to fix in a satisfactory and sustainable manner. AMD (Acid Mine Drainage) is an excellent example of this, and this too relates to water.  Several coal and gold mining companies that were listed companies, mined out the merchandise, closed down their operations and abandoned the mines.  Within some years, the rising water has reached the surface.  This water contains strong sulphuric acid with a pH of less than 3, contains Radon Iridium and Uranium, as well as cyanide. The risen water has polluted rivers all around Gauteng and Mpumalanga. The health and safety of the rivers is the job of the Department of Water Affairs (DWA) to fix, and this is a government department, which means that it is the taxpayer that pays for the cleanup, not the mining company. This is patently unfair.

What is Shell planning to do with the gas? Burn it and make electricity on site or near the gas fields. Get ready for this picture. Gas turbine factory type buildings, chimneys and security lights dotted all over the Karoo, until the gas runs out. This process of course will spew further tons of CO2 in the atmosphere. Remember that South Africa is already the highest per capita polluter of the atmosphere from power stations in the world!

Are there any sustainably viable options for the area? Yes lots! There is more than a half million square kilometres of land space for clean energy sources.  This includes the great Karoo, Little Karoo, the Kalahari, where photovoltaic panel farms could be created in a clean but scattered basis, at a far less expensive rate. On one square kilometre one can provide more than 200 megawatts of power.  To give you some idea of that amount of power: this is 200 000 kilowatt hours for say an average of 10 hours. Three hundred of these scattered around the country should provide enough clean energy for the whole of the needs of our country including motorized transport, domestic needs as well as industry and commerce.  Add in a few large wind generators, and for cloudy days, we would have plentiful energy to be able to close all of our carbon dioxide making coal fired power stations, not to mention the troublesome nuclear powered stations – present and planned.

The one thing about South Africa is we have lots of space for this clean technology. What we don’t have is the will. The will is held by a government that owns the power stations and the monopoly of power generation supply.

We need to stop Shell and anyone else that wants to potentially damage our land.  We need at the same time to embark on a new generation of power supply as well.

What we need most of all though is water!