Porter Ranch residents suffer consequences from spike in Aliso Canyon gas extraction six years after the blowout

After sneaking backstage while attending the 2019 California Democratic Convention in San Francisco, Porter Ranch resident and Aliso Canyon advocate Jane Fowler was able to approach Gov. Gavin Newsom about shutting down the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility. “We have got to get that thing shut down,” said Newsom in a video recorded by the Food and Water Watch. “I’m working on it.” Newsom also mentioned in the video that shutting down the gas facility was “at the top of our agenda,” while adding they “can’t just be flippant about it.” Contrary to his statements, gas withdrawals from the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility are up by 4755% since Newsom was elected, according to data collected from the California Public Utilities Commission by the Food and Water Watch in 2021. Aliso Canyon was the site of the nation's largest-ever uncontrolled natural gas leak in 2015 and Porter Ranch residents are still experiencing health issues six years after the blowout. “I feel like my life has been taken from me,” Fowler said. “When you’re not feeling well everyday or five days a week or two days a week and you don’t know which day it’s going to be, it affects your life.” Fowler said she is selling her home, but at 62 years old, starting a new life somewhere else may end up being difficult. “I know at 61 you can do anything, but I’m also a 62-year-old that has been physically, mentally, emotionally, psychologically and neurologically harmed,” Fowler said. Fowler, along with many other Porter Ranch residents, reported having headaches, bloody noses, nausea and rashes. Residents also claim to experience a “brain fog,” a term used for certain symptoms that can affect your ability to think clearly. According to WebMD, you may feel confused, disoriented or find it hard to focus and put your thoughts into words. “I couldn’t even make a grocery list,” said Porter Ranch resident and founding member of the Aliso Moms Alliance, Lori Aivazian. “I’d wake up in the morning and sit up in bed and have to think about how to put each foot down on the floor.” Last month, Southern California Gas Company and its parent company, Sempra Energy, agreed to pay $1.8 billion to settle claims from more than 35,000 plaintiffs affected by the gas leak. A settlement has not yet been reached because it requires 97% of the plaintiffs to accept it in order for it to be finalized. Matt Pakucko, the president of the nonprofit organization Save Porter Ranch, said each of the plaintiffs would receive around $28,000 after attorney fees and expenses. “Does $28,000 cover [the medical expenses] for the rest of our lives being health monitored because of the ongoing issues?” Pakucko asked. “It doesn’t even come close.”

History of the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility blowout

On Oct. 23, 2015, gas spewed out of the Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility and released nearly 100,000 tonnes of natural gas into the air along with toxic chemicals, forcing thousands of San Fernando Valley residents out of their homes before the leak was capped four months later. The root cause analysis that was released in 2019 by Blade Energy Partners, the company hired by SoCalGas to investigate the site of the leak, determined that the cause of the blowout was a rupture of a well casing due to microbial corrosion from the outside resulting from contact with groundwater. It also said there were more than 60 casing leaks at Aliso Canyon going back to the 1970s, but no failure investigations were conducted by SoCalGas. In order to kill the well, SoCalGas had to drill a relief well, according to the report. Patricia Oliver, an attorney who represents the residents of Porter Ranch who were affected by the gas leak, said SoCalGas did not do so until Dec. 4, 2015 —.

Oliver also mentioned that by drilling the relief well in December, the peak level of gas has already leveled off. This means SoCalGas decided to plug the leak nearly two months after the gas leak was at its peak.

“How much time is going on while you're contributing to climate change, creating a public health nightmare, forcing relocations of schools and homes, yet plan B doesn't start until Dec. 4?” Oliver said. Following the blowout, then-Gov. Jerry Brown declared the situation an emergency and in his last two years in office, which were the first two years after the blowout, Aliso Canyon saw minimal usage. According to Alexandra Nagy, California director for the national grassroots advocate organization Food & Water Watch and Food and Water Action, SoCalGas continued to lobby and succeeded in justifying looser regulations after Newsom was elected. “The change between Aliso's use post blowout comparing Brown and Newsom is a very significant increase,” Nagy said. “It's about a 4,755% increase.”

Authorities’ response to the situation

In 2019, Newsom said he wanted to fast track the expedited shutdown of Aliso Canyon and possibly close the facility faster than the 10-year timeline proposed by Brown in 2017. Despite Newsom’s commitment to close the facility, data shows that SoCalGas withdrew from Aliso Canyon for 60 days during the winter 2020-2021 season, and 54 days over the winter 2019-2020 season — a combined total of 38 billion cubic feet. This compares to eight days of withdrawals for winter seasons 2016- 2017 and 2017-2018 with a combined 1.19 billion cubic feet, according to research from the Food and Water Watch. Nagy said the increased usage of Aliso Canyon is a direct result of the CPUC weakening the withdrawal protocols and regulations that removed using the facility as a “last resort.” This essentially gives SoCalGas unrestricted access to withdraw from the facility as the company sees fit. As a result, the data Nagy collected showed that in addition to a large increase in gas withdrawn from Aliso Canyon, the facility is often used as “an asset of first resort, supplying more than half of the total gas withdrawn regionally on any given day.” According to a Los Angeles Times article, the CPUC relaxed restrictions placed on the facility because of concerns of high energy prices and supply shortages. In an email with Terrie Prosper, director of the CPUC’s news and outreach office, she said Aliso Canyon may only be used for withdrawals if certain conditions are met. These conditions include withdrawing from the facility if it is above 70% of its maximum allowable inventory, and if there is an identifiable risk of gas curtailments created by an emergency condition that would impact public health and could be mitigated by withdrawals from Aliso Canyon. Prosper also said that the CPUC may update the withdrawal protocol if it determines that a modification of the month-end minimum inventory requirements is necessary. In addition to more gas withdrawals, the CPUC hasissued a proposal and an alternate proposals that call forto increasingincrease the amount of natural gas stored in Aliso Canyon. The current gas storage limit at the facility is 34 billion cubic feet. The firstinitial proposal would increase the amount to 68.6 cubic feet, according to a press release from the CPUC. The secondCommissioner Martha Guzman Aceves’ alternate proposal would increase the storage capacity to 41 billion cubic feet. Both proposals will be considered at the CPUC’s voting meeting on Nov. 4, 2021. “It’s just a huge slap in the face to this whole process and effort of getting the facility shut down,” Nagy said. “We’ve seen what it looks like to operate this facility at a minimal use and not only have they allowed withdrawals to expand, but they’re going to increase the size of the field too.” The leak itself happened on Oct. 23, 2015, and it emitted about 100,000 metric tons of methane into the Porter Ranch area, state regulators said. Although the SoCalGas website says methane is “non-toxic and creates no hazard when inhaled,” Oliver said she finds that statement interesting considering the fact that methane is listed on the U.S. inventory as being a toxic chemical. SoCalGas also said if large quantities of methane are present to displace air, “lack of oxygen may result in suffocation.”