Though expensive studies will surely be done, this seems to be a rather straightforward situation where the continual charging and discharging of a natural underground storage area will eventually result in some leakage, which could be disastrous to the homes above.
Just not a good idea.
Editorial: Safety first for underground gas storage plan
It may work for SMUD and for property owners, but a big question needs answering
Published 12:00 am PST Thursday, February 7, 2008
The potential benefit of having a natural gas storage facility near Sacramento capable of holding 7.5 billion cubic feet of gas is indisputable. Such a facility would mean that the ratepayers for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, the primary customer for all that gas, would have up to a 90-day supply of a clean burning fuel on hand to generate electricity.
SMUD would be able to buy gas when it's cheap and store it locally, making it available for use when gas prices go sky high. The facility also would provide SMUD with crucial backup if something disrupted the 1,000 mile pipeline the utility relies upon now for its natural gas supplies.
But there's a question that must be thoroughly investigated before any plan goes forward: Is the proposed storage facility safe?
Sacramento Natural Gas Storage is seeking permission to store gas in the depleted Florin gas field, a geological formation of permeable sandstone 3,800 feet below the surface of a residential neighborhood in south Sacramento. Opponents, including Sacramento City Councilman Kevin McCarty, who represents the Avondale-Glen Elder neighborhood under which the natural gas would be stored, think the scheme is dangerous. Despite safeguards, the critics fear the gas would eventually find its way to the surface and leak into houses, exposing residents to poisonous fumes and the risk of explosions and fires. One expert consulted by The Bee concurred.
