Three years after methane and toxic gases began spewing from an underground storage site in Aliso Canyon, sickening thousands of residents of the Porter Ranch community in northern Los Angeles County, the Gas Co. has removed from operation nearly half its wells after state inspections determined they were no longer safe, according to records obtained by this newspaper.

Of the 114 wells used by Southern California Gas for the injection and withdrawal of natural gas that once supplied 11 million Southern Californians, 51 were taken out of operation since the leak and were isolated from the working wells, while three others were permanently sealed.

Only 60 wells passed new inspection protocols implemented after the worst gas leak in U.S. history made headlines for months, according to an emailed response from Don Drysdale, spokesman for the California Department of Conservation, the state agency overseeing the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR).

Failed wells, less use

Despite the high number of failed wells, DOGGR and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) granted SoCal Gas permission to reopen after repairs were made and new monitoring techniques were employed but at a greatly reduced rate, only about 40 percent of its peak storage as compared to pre-leak capacity.

The Aliso Canyon natural gas field sprung a massive leak from well SS-25 on Oct. 23, 2015 that was finally plugged on Feb. 18, 2016, not before thousands of people complained of nausea, nosebleeds and other ailments while being forced to leave their homes and live in motels for months.

As of Oct. 5, 2018, the Gas Co. had injected the maximum amount of gas allowed by the two agencies — about 34 billion cubic feet of gas — into the underground working wells. DOGGR has declared that the reintroduction of natural gas into the well field is safe.

A letter from CPUC Executive Director Alice Stebbins to SoCal Gas says post-leak storage was necessary in order to meet the gas demand of customers in the summer of 2018 and the upcoming 2018-2019 winter, when colder temperatures could prompt more Southern California homeowners to turn on the heat.

Gas was withdrawn on Jan 24 and Jan. 25, 2017 (very small amounts) and during several days the weeks of Nov. 20 2017, Feb. 19 and Feb. 27, 2018, according to DOGGR and CPUC records.

At the end of November, the Gas Co. withdrew a total of 181 million cubic feet per day. In one week in February, it took out a total of 723 million, records indicate.

On Feb. 19, 2018, after withdrawing 297 million cubic feet in one day, more than half the gas used in Southern California was supplied by SoCal Gas from its four well fields and of that, half came from Aliso Canyon, said Christine Detz, SoCal Gas spokeswoman in an emailed response.

Southern California Gas and its parent, Sempra Energy, have refused to grant any interviews on the topic after nearly two weeks of repeated requests. The company provided select answers to a list of emailed questions on Thursday.

Previous leaks, lawsuits from first responders who say they were sickened from the fumes, combined with the agencies allowing the reopening of the facility and its diminished importance over the last three years have raised questions about whether SoCal Gas should continue operating the gas storage facility on a hillside less than a mile from a community of 30,000 located in the San Fernando Valley.

This has occurred while the state agencies continue their investigation into the cause of the gas leak. A report on the accidental release that lasted four months is due in mid-2019, according to DOGGR, 3 1/2 years after the leak.

“I am appalled. It is an obvious manipulation to drag out a conclusion that shouldn’t take this long,” said Craig Galanti, a Porter Ranch resident who lives one-half mile from the gas storage facility’s entrance.

“Yet, they put people at risk (by allowing more gas storage) of a potential failure without knowing the root cause.”

Samples show safe levels

Safety concerns claimed by residents are disputed by state agencies, who say methane is not harmful. However, associated gases can have short-term and long-term effects on public health.

Sulfur compounds, which produce a “rotten egg smell”, known as tert-butyl mercaptan and tetrahydrothiophene have strong odors but do not cause eye irritation or respiratory problems, according to state officials.

Odorants placed in natural gas is what caused residents’ headaches and nausea, non-lasting health effects, according to air samples and conclusions from the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

In some samples, however, hydrogen sulfide was recorded higher than levels at which there would be no effects.

At the Porter Ranch Estates on Nov. 12, 2015, the air sample contained 183 parts per billion of hydrogen sulfide, well above the safe level set by the state of 30 ppb for acute or short-term exposures.

Benzene, a compound that causes cancer in humans, is a more serious matter.

Samples showed benzene levels the highest of any other similar compound and “closely approached the corresponding acute (safe level),” the OEHHA reported.

Air sampling from the South Coast Air Quality Management District said benzene levels in Porter Ranch were within the range typically seen throughout Southern California. The additional cancer risks from the gas leak were estimated at 2-in-one million for a six-month exposure, mostly due to benzene.

On March 3, 2016, different samples from a SoCal Gas test showed an estimated cancer risk from benzene at less than 4-in-one million.

Is Aliso Canyon needed?

Putting aside potential safety reasons, some say the facility is no longer needed since it hasn’t served the public in three years with a few exceptions. Detz said the facility has been put on a tight leash by the CPUC, which calls it “an asset of last resort.”

One of the biggest users of natural gas is electric power plants.

SoCalGas has said natural gas is needed to keep power plants humming as a bridge fuel, while the state moves toward a power grid fueled by 100 percent renewable energy, such as wind, solar and geothermal, driven by the passage of Senate Bill 100 this year, a measure requiring the change to carbon-free power by 2045.

A Union of Concerned Scientists report from August said the state can mothball 28 of its natural gas plants and not dim a single light.

That’s because California has a glut of power plants, 89 within the California Independent System Operator territory.

“There’s more than two dozen natural gas plants that are dead weight on the system and not necessary to keep the lights on,” said Laura Wisland, co-author and senior energy manager at UCS in a prepared statement.

In addition, more homes are being built with electric water heaters, electric stoves and appliance — without gas lines.

By not using fossil fuels, it will reduce the state’s carbon emissions, which add to the collection of greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere that contribute to global climate change, a greenhouse effect that is making heat waves longer, raising sea levels and strengthening hurricanes.

“Natural gas is often referred to as a bridge fuel,” said Evan Gillespie, western region director for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign. “We have crossed that bridge. With SB 100, we now need to think of the orderly process of dismantling the bridge.”

Gillespie said it will take “a decade or two” to get to all renewable energy. He’d like to see state regulators tamp down the storage and usage of natural gas from the controversial gas field and not build new gas-powered electricity plants.

A directive from the CPUC orders the Gas Co. to “determine the feasibility of minimizing or eliminating the use of the Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility …” according to a letter from CPUC chief Alice Stebbins dated July 2, 2018 to Southern California Gas Co.

Detz refused to comment nor supply an expert from the Gas Co. to answer questions regarding plans for future production levels at Aliso Canyon or the CPUC’s directive.

“If you were to remove the political pressure the Gas Co. is putting on the state and other actors, we could in short order draw down our dependence on that facility. We could incrementally scale it down,” Gillespie said.