Friday, October 24, 2014




Advertise with us

Pro/Con: Should flaring be common practice?

By Sara Sneath
March 16, 2014 at 10:02 p.m.
Updated March 16, 2014 at 10:17 p.m.

A gas flare burns at sunset at an oil well site off  North Country Road 0294 and Farm-to-Market Road 2067 near Cheapside. If operated properly, flares burn up to 98 percent of the gases vented to them and prevent harmful emissions, said Joe Hubbard, Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 spokesman.

Flares 30 to 300 feet tall emit flames above the Texas prairie, much like candles on a birthday cake - only instead of burning wax and string, flares burn highly toxic chemicals.

If operated properly, flares burn up to 98 percent of the gases vented to them and prevent harmful emissions, said Joe Hubbard, Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 spokesman.

Flares will be an important part of how industry deals with waste gases from process vents and to control emissions from upsets and emergencies for years to come, Hubbard said.

If operated properly, flares are an efficient way of preventing air pollution, he said.

But some question whether flares are being operated and monitored correctly, making what should be a safety device evidence that Texas' air pollution regulation and enforcement is inadequate.

Should flaring be common practice?

Pro: Flaring is safe way to prevent harmful air pollution

Con: Flaring is not properly monitored and releases harmful pollutants into the air

SHARE

Comments


Powered By AdvocateDigitalMedia