Northside Sun Praises John McGowan for Outsmarting Environmentalists

Maybe I have to do a double-take, but I could've sworn I saw John McGowan's name and picture in the dictionary next to insanity.

I wouldn't go that far, golden, but he is a tad obsessed with winning this regardless of what actual experts say. He just keeps morphing the plan.

I just can't get over that Wyatt is conveniently leaving out the parts that will shock his audience.

It's funny to see him lay out the political strategy, though. Same thing he did when they were all pushing the Better Jackson PAC to get a compliant Crisler elected. Of course, that whole mess helped defeat him.

There's a lot hubris on display, that's for sure.

The really crazy parts is that "the environmentalists" are probably not their hurdle. Places like Monticello, New Orleans and other places downstream affected by McGowan's dream project are the ones who will probably send this thing packing the fastest.

But these guys won't take no for an answer. Meantime, we're going to have another flood with no kind of flood control while they keep scheming, and donating to campaigns and backroom maneuvering to get this the "locally preferred plan" to hold us hostage. When that flood happens, and we have nothing in place, guess whose fault that is going to be?

People who won't take no for an answer and try to buy their development plan into reality.

I wonder if a majority of people in Hinds and Rankin counties want their tax dollars going to something that they can't enjoy.

I'd say no.

You're probably right, Iron. That's why the *whole* story needs to be put out, rather than the project press releases that Emmerich is calling a "column."

I'm still stunned people the the Sun seriously. All I ever knew it as was that paper that kids always had their pictures in way back in the day.

Donna,

Now that you have certified me an TEXAS oilman, can you recommend me for membership in the Houston Petroleum Club?

John McGowan

I'd be happy to, Mr. McGowan.

Want to send me the application? ;-)

P.S. Aren't you an oilman from Texas?

You do have a history of bumping heads with environmentalists, though, huh?

The Texas lawsuit brought by the Sierra Club, it seems, that I just linked indicates that you've been at odds with environmental groups in the past:

2. Cedar Point's Operations
5

Cedar Point is a Mississippi corporation that owns and operates an oil and gas well and associated facilities in the Cedar Point field ("the field"), which is located in Galveston Bay in Chambers County, Texas.3 John McGowan ("McGowan"), Cedar Point's principal shareholder, purchased the field from Chevron Corporation ("Chevron") on July 1, 1989. At that time, the field contained twenty-two abandoned wells and three producing wells. McGowan shut down the producing wells approximately one month after he purchased the field. On January 1, 1991, McGowan transferred the field to Cedar Point.4 Later that year, Cedar Point drilled its first well since acquiring the field: state well 1876.5 Cedar Point began producing oil and gas from this well on September 10, 1991.
6

Cedar Point began to discharge produced water into Galveston Bay at approximately the same time that it began production from state well 1876. This discharge continued through the trial of this action in May 1994, except that the discharge was temporarily suspended between April and August of 1992. Throughout this period, the average daily discharge ranged between 500 to 1200 barrels per day.6 Cedar Point's produced water contained, inter alia, barium, benzene, zinc, chlorides, sulfate, bicarbonate, ammonia, naphthalene, phenolic, radium, oil and grease. Cedar Point disposed of its produced water in the following manner: (1) the oil, gas, and water mixture produced from state well 1876 was piped to a platform in Galveston Bay for the first phase of separation; (2) after the initial separation, the remaining mixture was then piped to shore where more oil was separated in a series of tanks; (3) the produced water was then transferred to settling pits so that some constituents could settle out of the water; and (4) the remaining produced water was drained out of the pits and discharged through a pipe over the bulkhead into Galveston Bay.7

3. The Permits
7

Between August 1971 and July 1989, Chevron discharged produced water from the onshore separating facility pursuant to a permit issued by the Texas Railroad Commission ("the Railroad Commission"). This permit set limitations only on the oil and grease content of the produced water that was being discharged. After McGowan purchased the field, the Railroad Commission transferred Chevron's Commission permit to McGowan. The letter from the Railroad Commission authorizing this transfer stated that a permit from the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") may be required for the discharge of produced water under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES"). David Russell ("Russell"), who reviewed the transferred permit for McGowan, testified that he did not read this sentence in the letter; however, he did review Chevron's files, which did not reveal any NPDES permit or NPDES permit application in the twenty-year period of Chevron's ownership of the field. Based on this review, Russell did not apply for a NPDES permit for McGowan at that time.

The USACE Vicksburg District is known in the environmental consulting world as one of the more lax districts in the nation. If they are concluding that they will not permit any form of this proposed project, then IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Get over it and find another financial endeavor.

I assure you that you are making your consultants very happy though; they continue to take your money for a proposed project that they already know will never ever come to fruition. Easy money....