The Bakken Boom Goes Bust With No Money to Clean up the Mess

Desmog, by Justin Mikulka, August 8, 2020
Northwestern ND Aerial Photos  Credit: NDDOT Photos, CC PDM 1.0

More than a decade ago, fracking took off in the Bakken shale of North Dakota and Montana, but the oil rush that followed has resulted in major environmental damage, risky oil transportation without regulation, pipeline permitting issues, and failure to produce profits.

Now, after all of that, the Bakken oil field appears moving toward terminal decline, with the public poised to cover the bill to clean up the mess caused by its ill-fated boom.
Historical Bakken oil production. Energy Information Administration

In 2008, the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) estimated that the Bakken region held between 3 and 4.3 billion barrels of “undiscovered, technically recoverable oil,” starting a modern-day oil rush.

This oil was technically recoverable due to the recent success with horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking) of oil and gas-rich shale, which allowed hydrocarbons trapped in the rock to be pumped out of reservoirs previously unreachable by conventional oil drilling technology.

The industry celebrated the discovery of oil in the middle of North America but realized it also posed a problem. A major oil boom requires infrastructure — such as housing for workers, facilities to process the oil and natural gas, and pipelines to carry the products to market — and the Bakken simply didn’t have such infrastructure. North Dakota is a long way from most U.S. refineries and deepwater ports. Its shale definitely held oil and gas, but the area was not prepared to deal with these hydrocarbons once they came out of the ground.

Most of the supporting infrastructure was never built — or was built haphazardly — resulting in risks to the public that include industry spills, air and water pollution, and dangerous trains carrying volatile oil out of the Bakken and through their communities. With industry insiders recently commenting that the Bakken region is likely past peak oil production, that infrastructure probably never will be built.

Embed from Getty Images

Meanwhile, the petro-friendly government of North Dakota has failed to regulate the industry when money was plentiful during the boom, leaving the state with a financial and environmental mess and no way to fund its cleanup during the bust.

Haste Makes Waste: Booms Move Faster Than Regulations

After the USGS announced the discovery of oil in the Bakken, the oil and gas industry moved fast, with both the industry and state and federal regulators ignoring whether what amounted to essentially new methods of extracting and transporting large amounts of oil called for new rules and protections.

The Bakken’s big increase in oil production quickly exceeded its existing pipeline capacity, leading producers to turn to trucks to move their oil out of the fields. But as the Globe and Mail reported in 2013, this stop-gap solution wasn’t working well: “The trucking frenzy was chewing up roads, driving accident rates to record highs and infuriating local residents.”

The industry could have restricted production until new pipelines and processing equipment were built but instead moved to rail as the next transportation option. High oil prices motivated drillers to get the oil out of the ground and to customers as fast as possible. Moving oil by rail was essentially unregulated and would not require the permits, large investment, or lead times required for pipelines, leading to the Bakken oil-by-rail boom.

Moving large amounts of this light volatile oil on trains had never been done before — but there was no new regulatory oversight of the process. Without proper oversight, the industry loaded the Bakken’s volatile oil into rail tank cars originally designed to carry products like corn oil. That’s despite the National Transportation Safety Board warning that these tank cars were not safe to move flammable liquids like Bakken crude oil.

The industry waved away these warnings. July 6, 2013 marked the first major derailment of a Bakken oil train, resulting in a massive explosion, 47 deaths, and the destruction of much of downtown Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. Bakken “bomb trains” (as train operators called them) continued to derail, creating large oil spills and often catching fire and burning for days. Regulators have still failed to address the known risks for oil trains in the U.S. and Canada. 

Fracking for oil also resulted in large volumes of natural gas coming out of the same wells as the oil, further contributing to the financial troubles of shale producers. However, with no infrastructure in place to process or carry away that gas, the industry chose to either leave it mixed in with the oil loaded onto trains (making it more volatile and dangerous) or simply burn (flare) or release (vent) the potent greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.

More than a decade after the Bakken boom started, North Dakota was flaring 23 percent of the gas produced via fracking — making a mockery of the state’s flaring regulations. In July, The New York Times detailed the environmental devastation caused by flaring in the oil fields of Iraq, where they flare about half of the gas as opposed to the quarter of the gas that North Dakota has flared.

Also in July, researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles and University of Southern California published research that found pregnant women exposed to high levels of flaring at oil and gas production sites in Texas have 50 percent higher odds of premature birth when compared to mothers with no exposure to flaring.

Flare from an oil well in the Permian region of Texas. Credit: © 2020 Justin Hamel

Another major blindspot for the industry and regulators has been the radioactive waste produced during fracking. When the industry did finally acknowledge this issue in North Dakota, its first move was to try to relax regulations to make it easier to dump radioactive waste in landfills — a practice that is contaminating communities across the country.

In 2016, a study from Duke University found “thousands of oil and gas industry wastewater spills in North Dakota have caused ‘widespread’ contamination from radioactive materials…”

The fracking boom in North Dakota has resulted in widespread environmental damage and is worsening the climate crisis, given its high flaring levels, methane emissions, and, of course, production of oil and gas. As major Bakken producers go bankrupt and continue to lose money while the oil field goes bust, who will pay to clean up the mess?

Like most oil-producing states, North Dakota had the opportunity to require oil and gas producers to put up money in the form of bonding which would be designated to properly clean up and cap oil and gas wells once they were finished producing. Unfortunately, the state didn’t put that precaution in place, and now bankrupt companies are starting to walk away from their wells.

It’s starting to become out of control, and we want to rein this in,” Bruce Hicks, Assistant Director of the North Dakota Oil and Gas Division, said last year about companies abandoning oil and gas wells.

The state recently decided to use $66 million in federal funds designated for coronavirus relief to begin cleaning up wells the oil industry has abandoned — costs that the industry should be covering, according to the law, but that are now shifted to the public.

The Bakken boom made a lot of money for a select few oil and gas executives and Wall Street financiers. But as the boom fades, taxpayers and nearby residents have to deal with the financial and environmental damage the industry will leave behind.

Bakken’s Best Days Are a Thing of the Past

As DeSmog reporting has revealed, shale producers have not been profitable for the past decade, even though they have drilled and fracked most of the best available shale oil deposits. While the prolific Permian region in Texas and New Mexico still has some of the best “tier one” core acreage for oil production left, that isn’t the case in the Bakken.

In June, oil and gas industry analysts at Wood MacKenzie highlighted this discrepancy in remaining core acreage between the Permian and the Bakken. According to Wood MacKenzie, the top quarter of remaining oil well inventory in the Permian would result in over 8,000 new wells. For the Bakken, however, the analysts put that number at 333 wells.

This difference is why John Hess, CEO of major Bakken producer Hess Corporation, predicted in January that Bakken production would soon peak.

The drop in oil demand due to the pandemic has hit the industry as a whole, but the Bakken was already in decline, with the best producing wells a thing of the past well before the novel coronavirus reached U.S. shores.

In September 2019, The Wall Street Journal reported on the dismal outlook for Hess Corporation’s oil wells, noting last year: “This year’s wells generated an average of about 82,000 barrels of oil in their first five months, 12 percent below wells that began producing in 2018 and 16 percent below 2017 wells.”

Legal Reviews of Pipelines Potentially Causing Shutdowns

Even when the industry did try to construct oilfield infrastructure in the Bakken, its rush to build and manage pipelines hasn’t always worked out well. Legal challenges to two major Bakken pipelines, one old, one new, may shut down both of them soon.

The controversial Dakota Access pipeline (DAPL) is facing a potential shutdown after a judge ruled that the Army Corps of Engineers did not properly address oil spill risks and now must complete a full environmental review, which could result in a long-term shutdown of the pipeline while the Corps completes the study. Energy Transfer, DAPL‘s owner, appealed that ruling, and a subsequent court decision has allowed the pipeline to remain in operation while the legal battle over the environmental impact study continues.

At the same time, the Tesoro High Plains pipeline — in operation since 1953 — is facing a shutdown because it failed to renew an agreement with Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation landowners on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, meaning the pipeline’s owner, Marathon, now is trespassing on that land.

These pipelines together ship more than one-third of the oil out of the Bakken, and if they are shut down, Bakken oil producers likely would turn to rail again to move their oil. However, rail is significantly more expensive than pipelines and not economically viable at current low oil prices.

However, at current production levels, existing pipelines (other than the two in question) and current long-term rail contracts can likely handle most of the Bakken’s oil production, especially as the region becomes less attractive to investors.

Energy consulting group ESAI Energy recently released a new report on U.S. pipelines, with analyst Elisabeth Murphy concluding, “An uncertain outcome for Dakota Access will have knock-on effects for the Bakken, such as capital being diverted to other basins that have better access to markets.”

The ESAI analysis also concludes that the Bakken will decline by approximately 270,000 barrels per day on an annual basis in 2020 and by a further 65,000 barrels per day in 2021.

With declining total production and new wells producing less than the past, Bakken producers are facing rising debts without the means to pay them back.

End of the Unconventional Bakken Boom

Oil produced by fracking is called “unconventional oil” due to the new technologies used to extract it from shale. However, it is unconventional in other ways as well. One, it has never been profitable. Another is a change in the boom-and-bust cycle, which has been a part of the oil industry since its inception in the U.S. in the 1850s.

Traditionally the boom-and-bust cycle for conventional oil production was tied to the price of oil. Low prices caused busts. This was true of the shale oil industry in 2014 when oil prices crashed. However, the industry returned to record production after that.

Williston "Rockin' the Bakken" marketing slogan
Screen shot of a marketing slogan for Bakken oil and gas development. Source: https://willistondevelopment.com

But it’s different this time. Unlike conventional oil fields, shale field production declines much more quickly. While shale producers could retreat to the top-producing acreage during the 2014 bust, most of that acreage is now gone.

The shale industry is faced with trying to come back from a historic downturn in which even the companies that don’t go bankrupt are saddled with crippling debts. That’s because for most of the past decade, shale companies borrowed more money than they made producing fracked oil and gas, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

All of the evidence strongly suggest that the Bakken is an oil field on the decline. Its best acreage has been depleted and the economics of the remaining acreage don’t pan out these days.

Reviewing the economics of the Bakken, investment site Seeking Alpha recently concluded that the “Bakken Will Never Be The Same Again.”

Seeking Alpha was purely commenting on the economics of oil production in the Bakken. However, the same could be said about the water, air, and land in the Bakken. Shale companies polluted the environment and are now walking away from the damage — leaving the cleanup bill to the public. It is a tried-and-true approach for industries in resource extraction. Privatize the profits and socialize the losses.

Hess Corporation CEO John Hess knows more about the economics of the Bakken than most people. In February Reuters reported, “Hess plans to use cash flow from the Bakken to invest in longer-term offshore investments.” A major Bakken producer is apparently no longer viewing the region as a good long-term investment.

From here, the outlook only gets worse for the Bakken.

Main Image: Northwestern ND Aerial Photos  Credit: NDDOT PhotosCC PDM 1.0 

Solano County Election begins in September! Here’s your checklist for Election MONTH…

I know there must be a few of you out there like me. I never voted by mail before!

Roger Straw, The Benicia Independent

This year, most everyone will be voting by mail.  With all the talk about Trump trying to hobble the Post Office, I got to thinking we should be ready to vote by mail, AND… ready do it early!

So here’s our election calendar.

Your ballot will arrive by mail in late September.

Below is all you need to know, directly from the Solano County Registrar of Voters page, including an excellent 3-minute video and lots of detailed information to follow.

Voting Options and Information for November 3, 2020

In an effort to reduce the impact of the Coronavirus spread, the Solano County Registrar of Voters is preparing several voting options that voters should be aware of.  Please check this site often as information will be updated closer to the election.  Last updated August 1, 2020.

VIDEO: Check out the options you have for voting safely this Election Day

No Contact Voting:
As an option to in-person voting, all voters can vote without contact with our staff or office.

All voters will be mailed a vote-by-mail ballot for the November 3, 2020 election.  Ballots will be automatically mailed at the end of September, and voters have the following options to return ballots:

  Ballot Drop-Off:
Starting October 5 (29 days) – 14 Drop-Off locations are available – click for location and hours (drop box is inside an office building).
 Curbside Drop Off Curbside Drop-Off:
Starting October 29 (5 days) – 8 Curbside drop-off locations are available [NOTE: in nearby cities, but NONE IN BENICIA]click for locations and hours. (stay in your car, hand ballot to pollworkers)
 Vote at Polls Election Day Drop-Off:
Election Day November 3 (1 day) – 100 poll place drop-off locations are available – click for locations – all locations are 7am to 8pm.

Your ballot packet will provide all the options for returning your vote by mail ballot.  All postage is paid by the Registrar of Voters Office for voters mailing ballots back to our office.  Voters do not have to vote this ballot, and can still choose to vote in-person using one of the options listed below.  Other alternatives include:

Alternatively voters can Download a Ballot (Available Late-September)- print your ballot at home, and mail it, fax it, or drop it off at a drop-off location. This service is available to any voter without a special request and can be used up to and including on election day provided the ballot is returned to us post-marked by election day.
If you change your mind, you can still vote at your assigned polling place on Election Day.

Limited Contact Voting:

 Curbside Voting  At your assigned poll place, all voters can request to vote “Curb-Side” from the comfort of your vehicle. Look for the blue cone outside of your polling place, and call the number listed on the cone. Pollworkers will come out to your car with your ballot and will securely deposit it for you.
This same curb-side option is available if you want to drop off your vote by mail ballot. It may be preferable for you to remain in your vehicle and we support that option.

In-Person Voting:

 Vote at the polls Traditional poll place voting will be available in November.  Your assigned location will be provided in the mail towards the end of September.  Depending on health issues, the number of locations may need to be reduced in November, which may cause for additional time to vote.

COVID-19 INFO:
Pollworkers and Staff:
All poll workers will be required to wear masks and shields, additionally the Registrar of Voters will provide gloves, hand sanitizer, and disinfecting wipes.  Pollworkers will be trained on the proper use of this equipment and how to follow the procedures outlined for each workspace.

Voters:
Voters will be required to wear face coverings per the state law requiring such in public places.  Face coverings will be provided to any voter needing one.  Hand Sanitizer and disposable pens will be provided to all voters as well.   Voters without face coverings will be encouraged to vote from the safety of their vehicles, or when the pollworkers can clear the area for the safety of other voters.
We encourage all citizens to follow the mandated health requirements to help protect our staff and community partners. Without our staff and volunteers we cannot successfully execute an election!   Please help us minimize the risk to those helping to administer your voting rights!

Update Your Signature

  All vote by mail ballots are to be signed by the voter.  This signature must match your signature used when you registered to vote.  If you would like to update your signature,
Please fill out this form, and return it to our office.  We will update your signature based on the information provided.

All Election and voter services are available by phone or online:

707-784-6675; or elections@solanocounty.com
To visit us in-person, please: Request an appointment

Solano County COVID cases now over 4,000 with 40 deaths


[Note that Solano County publishes a DAILY update, and displays past weeks and months in epidemic curve charts.  However, the curve charts do not display an accurate number of cases for the most recent days, as there is a lag time in receiving test results.  This methodology is accurate in a way, but it misleads the public by consistently displaying a recent downward curve which is often corrected upward on a later date. For a complete archive of day by day data, see my Excel ARCHIVE – R.S.]

Friday, August 7: 70 new cases in 1 day,
1 new death. 
Since the outbreak started: 4,029 cases, 40 deaths.

Compare previous report, Thursday August 6:Summary

  • Solano County reported 70 new cases overnight, total of 4,029 cases since the outbreak started.  Over the last 2 weeks, Solano reported 900 new cases, an average of 64 per day.
  • Deaths – 1 new death today, another of our elders, total of 40 deaths.
  • Active cases – Solano reported 6 more ACTIVE cases today, total of 198.  Note that only 37 of these 198 people are hospitalized, so there are a lot of infected folks out among us, hopefully quarantined.  One wonders… is the County equipped to contact trace so many infected persons?  (See SF Chronicle report on contact tracing in Bay Area – “Solano County did not respond”.)
  • Hospitalizations2 fewer currently hospitalized persons today, total of 37.  However, the total number hospitalized since the outbreak started increased by 3, totaling 174.  Evidently more folks were discharged than the number of new admissions.  (The County no longer reports Total Hospitalized, but I can add the new hospitalization numbers in the Age Group report – see below.)  Again now for two straight weeks, the County offers no information about availability of ICU beds and ventilators.
  • Testing 433 residents were tested  today, total of 54,843.  We still have a long way to go: only 12.2% of Solano County’s 447,643 residents (2019) have been tested.

Percent Positive Test Rate

Solano County reported today’s 7-day percent positive test rate increased each day this week, from 5.3% on Monday to 6.5% today.  (The chart may be misleading – see NOTE at top of this page.)  The County posted a high of 9.3% two weeks ago on July 22.  CONTEXT: California’s 7-day positivity rate has been falling, and is reported at 5.7% today, significantly lower than Solano County’s 6.6% Health officials and news reports focus on percent positive test rates as one of the best metrics for measuring the spread of the virus.

By Age Group

  • Youth 17 and under – 7 new cases again today, total of 399 cases. No new hospitalizations, only 2 hospitalizations since the outbreak began, and no deathsI continue to raise an alarm for Solano’s youth.  It is clear that youth are catching the disease, and it seems too many youth are ignoring social distancing orders!  Cases among Solano youth have increased to 10% of the 4,029 total confirmed cases.
  • Persons 18-49 years of age – 42 new cases today, total of 2,470 cases.  This age group is 41% of the County population, but represents over 61% of the 4,029 total cases, by far the highest percentage of all age groups.  The County reported no new hospitalizations in this age group today, total of 48 hospitalized since the outbreak began.  No new deaths among this age group, total of 3 deaths.  This young to middle age group is very active, many provide essential services among us, and are likely spreading the virus!
  • Persons 50-64 years of age – 13 new cases today, total of 763 cases.  This age group represents just under 19% of the 4,029 total cases.  The County reported 1 new hospitalization in this age group today, total of 55 hospitalized since the outbreak began.  No new deaths among this age group, total of 4 deaths.
  • Persons 65 years or older – 8 new cases today, total of 396 cases.  This age group represents nearly 10% of the 4,029 total cases2 new hospitalizations today, total of 69 hospitalized since the outbreak began.  1 new death in this age group today, total of 33.  In this older age group, over 17% of cases required hospitalization at one time, a substantially higher percentage than in the lower age groups.  This group accounts for 33 of the 40 deaths, or 82.5%.

City Data

  • Benicia added 1 new case today, total of 93 cases.
  • Dixon added 9 new cases today, total of 220 cases.
  • Fairfield added 23 new cases today, total of 1,306.
  • Rio Vista remained steady today, total of 29 cases.
  • Suisun City added 7 new cases today, total of 310 cases.
  • Vacaville added 15 new cases today, total of 690 cases.
  • Vallejo added 15 new cases today, total of 1,369 cases.
  • Unincorporated areas – Unincorporated areas remained steady today, total of 12 cases.

Race / Ethnicity

The County report on race / ethnicity includes case numbers, hospitalizations, deaths and Solano population statistics.  There are also tabs showing a calculated rate per 100,000 by race/ethnicity for each of these boxes.  This information is discouragingly similar to national reports that indicate worse outcomes among black and brown Americans.  As of today:

  • White Americans are 39% of the population in Solano County, but only account for 22% of cases, 23% of hospitalizations and 25% of deaths.
  • Black Americans are 14% of Solano’s population, and account for 13% of cases, but 22% of hospitalizations, and 28% of deaths.
  • Latinx Americans are 26% of Solano’s population, but account for 27% of cases, 31% of hospitalizations, and 22% of deaths.
  • Asian Americans are 14% of Solano’s population, and account for 9% of cases and 13% of hospitalizations, but 17% of deaths.

Much more…

The County’s new and improved Coronavirus Dashboard is full of much more information, too extensive to cover here on a daily basis.  The Benicia Independent will continue to summarize daily and highlight a report or two.  Check out the Dashboard at https://doitgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=055f81e9fe154da5860257e3f2489d67.

Solano and other Bay Area Counties – detailed tracking of status on State COVID watchlist

[NOTE: Details on Solano County below.]

Coronavirus:  How close are Bay Area counties to coming off state monitoring list?

Santa Clara and San Mateo are nearing the threshold

Vallejo Times-Herald, by Evan Webeck and Harriet Rowan, 8/6/20

It’s been close to a month since Gov. Gavin Newsom announced additional restrictions for counties on the state’s COVID-19 monitoring list. In that time, the list has grown to encompass every county in the Bay Area and over 90% of the state’s population.

Is there anywhere in the Bay Area close to escaping the list? We’re tracking the metrics county-by-county below, using data compiled by this news organization. Currently, hospitalizations are trending in the right direction in most of the region, but there isn’t one county that meets the per-capita case threshold necessary to come off the list, according to our calculations.

San Mateo County, with a rate of 12.5 cases per 10,000 residents over the past two weeks, is closest to falling below the state threshold of 10, followed by Santa Clara County, with a per-capita rate of 13.9 per 10,000.

The California Department of Public Health uses six criterion to determine if there is elevated disease transmission, increasing hospitalizations or limited hospital capacity in a county.

  1. Testing rate: Below 1.5 per 1,000 population per day over past 7 days
  2. Case rate: Above 10 per 10,000 population over the past 14 days
  3. Positivity rate: 8% or higher over past 7 days if 14-day case rate is less than 10 but higher than 2.5 per 10,000
  4. Hospitalizations: Increase of 10% or more in 3-day average vs. previous 3 days
  5. ICU capacity: 20% or less beds available
  6. Ventilator capacity: 25% or less ventilators available

Falling out of line with any one of the six metrics for three days lands a county on the list. To come off, a county has to meet all six markers for three straight days.

Under the most recent health order, counties on the monitoring list for three days are also forced to close gyms, personal-care services, nonessential offices, places of worship and malls in addition to the statewide closures of bars, indoor dining and other indoor entertainment. To be eligible to open schools for in-person learning, a county must be off the list for 14 days.

Note: CDPH uses a 7-day lag when tracking its data, while this news organization compiles the most up-to-date data from county health departments. Recently discovered underreporting of tests and cases could skew the data. Because of the faulty data, CDPH has temporarily paused adding or subtracting counties from the monitoring list. There is no standardized number of ICUs and ventilators per county publicly available, so that data is not included below.

Alameda

population: 1.67 million

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 15.7 (+6.6% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 3.7%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 194.3 (-2.5% since previous 3-day period)

Contra Costa

population: 1.15 million

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 15.3 (-14.5% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 12.32%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 98.3 (-5.7% since previous 3-day period)

Marin

population: 263,000

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 31.0 (-43.7% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 15.86%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 23.3 (-10.4% since previous 3-day period)

Napa

population: 140,000

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 21.5 (+22.9% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 11.24%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 8.3 (-28.8% since previous 3-day period)

San Francisco

population: 884,000

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 19.7 (+22.9% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 2.96%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 93 (-9.4% since previous 3-day period)

San Mateo

population: 775,000

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 12.5 (-11% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 7.16%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 55.7 (-0.1% since previous 3-day period)

Santa Clara

population: 1.95 million

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 13.9 (-4.9% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 7.48%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 175.7 (-5.7% since previous 3-day period)

Solano

population: 441,000

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 19.3 (-21.5% since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 15.33%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 45.3 (+7.1% since previous 3-day period)

Sonoma

population: 501,000

Cases per 10,000 (past 14 days): 19.8 (+27.3 since previous 14-day period)

Positivity rate (past 7 days): 12.42%

Hospitalizations (past 3 days, average): 41.7 (-5.2% since previous 3-day period)

For safe and healthy communities…