Federal Jury Awards $4.2 Million to Families with Water Polluted by Gas Drilling

Two Dimock, Pa., families who declined a Marcellus Shale gas driller's offer in 2012 to settle their claims of water contamination were awarded $4.24 million Thursday by a federal jury.

The verdict in U.S. District Court in Scranton was a blow to Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., which had maintained that its drilling was not responsible for the elevated level of methane in the families' water wells.

The eight-member jury found that Cabot's drilling was negligent and created a nuisance for the families of Scott Ely and Monica Marta-Ely and Ray and Victoria Hubert. It awarded the Elys $2.75 million and the Huberts $1.49 million.

In 2009, more than 40 Dimock residents sued Cabot, claiming that the Houston gas producer's rush to drill the Marcellus Shale had polluted their wells.

All but the Elys and Huberts settled in 2012 after tests showed wells contained elevated levels of methane, but none of the chemicals associated with gas drilling.

Read more at Philly.com


Interview of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the Water Pollution Case

Cabot Oil & Gas company was found by a federal jury to be responsible for contaminating two couples’ wells in Dimock, Pennsylvania.

Listen to Susan Arbetter interview Leslie Lewis and Elisabeth Radow, the co-counsels for the plaintiffs, about the case at the Capitol Pressroom online (advance the tape slider to 22:10 minutes to begin).

EPA Confirms that Fracking Poses a Risk to Drinking Water - TAKE ACTION

Thursday, June 4, 2015

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, the EPA released a study that confirms that fracking poses a risk to drinking water sources.

Fracking is inherently dirty and dangerous. In a review of its records, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection found that 234 private drinking water wells had been contaminated by drilling and fracking. In Colorado, more than 340 leaks or spills that contaminated groundwater have been reported. In New Mexico, state records document 743 such instances. These examples offer just a glimpse of the dangers posed by dirty fracking.  

In response, Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune released the following statement:

“The EPA's water quality study confirms what millions of Americans already know - that dirty oil and gas fracking contaminates drinking water.

“Unfortunately, the EPA chose to leave many critical questions unanswered. For example, the study did not look at this issue under the lens of public health and ignored numerous threats that fracking poses to drinking water. The EPA must conduct a comprehensive study that results in action to protect public health.

“Instead of blindly allowing destructive fracking to continue in our communities, we should extend statewide fracking bans, like the one in New York, and moratoriums, like the one in Maryland, that will keep dirty, climate-polluting fossil fuels like fracked gas in the ground and invest in truly clean, renewable sources of energy that don’t come with the threat of poisoned drinking water and climate disaster.”

Contact: Jonathon Berman, jonathon.berman@sierraclub.org

~   ~   ~   ~

Tell the EPA to Protect Our 

Drinking Water From Fracking

The EPA released a long-awaited study about fracking impacts on drinking water. The oil and gas industry cheered the results because of its skewed methodology and the pro-industry spin that accompanied its release.

While the study did acknowledge what existing scientific data and countless personal experiences have already shown – that fracking does indeed contaminate groundwater resources – its headline and conclusion misleadingly assert that we shouldn't be worried about fracking impacting drinking water.

The study falls far short of the level of scrutiny and government oversight needed to protect the health and safety of the many millions of Americans living in watersheds impacted by fracking — nearly 10 million within one mile of a fracked well, according to the study.

TAKE ACTION: Click Here to tell EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy that the American people deserve better.

Image: Ray Kemble outside US EPA holding contaminated water from Dimock, PA.

Anti-Fracking Law: Public Comments Move Amherst Town Board to Revise

Planning Board to review draft of anti-fracking law

The Town Board during its meeting on Monday directed the Planning Board to review a draft local law that would ban hydraulic fracturing, also known as “fracking,” in Amherst.

Fracking is the process of drilling and injecting fluid into the ground at high pressure in order to fracture shale rocks and release the natural gas inside. People who oppose the practice believe it poses many dangers to the environment and could result in health risks to residents.

During a public comment period, Rita Yelda, a member of the community group Amherst Against Fracking, said the draft, created by the Town Attorney’s Office, lacks strength because it doesn’t cite the proper definitions of hydraulic fracturing.

Several residents following Yelda reiterated the importance of creating strong legislation that bans hydrofracking and its wastes in the Town of Amherst.

Following the comments from the public, Deputy Supervisor Guy Marlette said the reason it was put on the board’s meeting agenda was to allow the Town Board to review it first to vet any issues, such as the ones that were addressed by residents.

Following the Town Attorney’s Office working with the Planning Board to possibly amend the draft, a public hearing will be held to allow further community input on the revised version.

Marlette added that although it has been about 13 months since the Town Board directed the Town Attorney’s Office to draft a law banning fracking in the town, it was not an excessive time period.

“Our intent is to pass a law and have all of the definitions in place for a strong law,” Marlette said.

Read the full report at the Amherst Bee

For earlier reports on the dangers of fracking waste, Click Here.

FRACKING NEWS

Families sick from fracking exposure turn to concerned scientists | The Inquirer

Like people in other regions transformed by the shale energy boom, residents of Washington County, Pennsylvania have complained of headaches, nosebleeds and skin rashes. But because there are no comprehensive studies about the health impacts of natural gas drilling, it's hard to determine if their problems are linked to the gas wells and other production facilities that have sprung up around them.

A group of scientists from Pennsylvania and neighboring states have stepped in to fill this gap by forming a nonprofit—apparently the first of its kind in the United States—that provides free health consultations to local families near drilling sites. Instead of waiting years or even decades for long-term studies to emerge, the Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project (SWPA-EHP) is using the best available science to help people deal with their ailments.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection—which oversees the oil and gas industry—has no ongoing or planned health studies, though it is researching air and water quality at certain sites. None of the hundreds of millions of dollars in impact fees the state has collected from the industry since 2011 has gone to state or local health departments.

A governor-appointed commission recommended in 2011 that a health registry be created to track Pennsylvanians living near drilling sites. But no registry has been established. In June, the news organization StateImpact Pennsylvania reported that two former employees of the health department were told to avoid talking about Marcellus shale activity, and to stop returning phone calls from people concerned about drilling impacts.

Read the full report here.

Major Scientific Document Shows Why New York Fracking Moratorium Is Imperative | EcoWatch

Many New Yorkers continue to rally and push for a statewide fracking moratorium. In this vein, Concerned Health Professionals of New York (CHPNY) released a major resource to the public, including public officials, researchers and journalists—the Compendium of Scientific, Medical and Media Findings Demonstrating Risks and Harms of Fracking.

“This compilation of findings brings together data from many fields of study and reveals the diversity of the problems with fracking—from increased flood risks to increased crime risks, from earthquakes to methane leaks,” said Sandra Steingraber, PhD. “What this multitude of threats all has in common is the ability to harm public health. That’s our message to Governor Cuomo and Acting Health Commissioner Zucker.”

As mounting evidence continues to find more costs than benefits to fracking, the compendium explains the motivation for compiling and making public the scientific, medical and media findings:
Despite this emerging body of knowledge, industry secrecy and government inaction continue to thwart scientific inquiry, leaving many potential problems—especially cumulative, long-term risks—unidentified, unmonitored and largely unexplored.

This problem is compounded by non-disclosure agreements, sealed court records and legal settlements that prevent families (and their doctors) from discussing injuries. As a result, no comprehensive inventory of human hazards yet exists.

The compendium covers in detail 15 dangers, risks and associated trends created by the fracking process.

In light of these findings, referenced with more than 300 citations, and remaining fundamental data gaps, CHPNY considers a fracking moratorium “the only appropriate and ethical course of action while scientific and medical knowledge on the impacts of fracking continues to emerge.”

The full report is here.

The compendium of dangers is current through June 30, 2014  and is available to download here.

EPA Draft Fracking Wastewater Guidance Suggests Closer Scrutiny for Treatment Plants | DeSmog

One of the most intractable problems related to fracking is that each well drilled creates millions of gallons of radioactive and toxic wastewater.

For the past several years, the Environmental Protection Agency has faced enormous public pressure to ensure this dangerous waste stops ending up dumped in rivers or causing contamination in other ways.

But the drilling boom has proceeded at such an accelerated pace in the United States that regulators have struggled to keep up, to control or even track where the oil and gas industry is disposing of this radioactive waste. As a consequence, hundreds of millions of gallons of partially treated waste have ended up in the rivers from which millions of Americans get their drinking water.

An internal draft EPA document leaked to DeSmog gives a small window into how, after a full decade since the start of the drilling boom, the agency is responding.

The document, dated March 7, 2014, is titled “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permitting and Pretreatment for Shale Gas Extraction Wastewaters: Frequently Asked Questions.”
It's revealing for what it shows about how EPA staff are taking the hazards of fracking wastewater more seriously — and also how little things have changed.

The document, intended as a guide for local regulators on how the Clean Water Act should be interpreted and applied, is impressive in many ways.

The EPA's new draft document now lists almost two dozen individual substances — like benzene, radium, and arsenic — that it says have been found at high enough levels in shale wastewater to cause concern. By contrast, the 2011 version focused mostly on the high levels of salts found in the waste.

The new document also explains that the substances it lists are not the only potential pollutants that must be removed before water can be considered fully treated and ready to enter rivers and streams. It explains that each treatment plant can only take wastewater once regulators are satisfied that they know what is actually in it.

Read the full report here.

Download the draft EPA document here.

GAO Report: Drinking Water at Risk from Underground Fracking Waste Injection | EcoWatch 

According to U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), this study was conducted because:

Every day in the U.S. at least 2 billion gallons of fluids are injected into more than 172,000 wells to enhance oil and gas production, or to dispose of fluids brought to the surface during the extraction of oil and gas resources. These wells are subject to regulation to protect drinking water sources under EPA’s UIC class II program and approved state class II programs. Because much of the population relies on underground sources for drinking water, these wells have raised concerns about the safety of the nation’s drinking water.

“The federal government’s watchdog (GAO) is saying what communities across the country have known for years: fracking is putting Americans at risk,” said Amy Mall, senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council. ”From drinking water contamination to man-made earthquakes, the reckless way oil and gas companies deal with their waste is a big problem. Outdated rules and insufficient enforcement are largely to blame. EPA needs to rein in this industry run amok.”

Read the full report here.

Fracking’s methane problem: Study finds new, unconventional wells leak more than old ones | Salon

Controversial new research identifies defects in Pennsylvania's gas wells

Fracking in Pennsylvania’s natural gas-rich Marcellus shale has a major methane problem, a new study finds. Analyzing the data from more than 75,000 state inspections going back to 2000, a team of four researchers concluded that gas wells are leaking the chemical, a potent greenhouse gas with a long-term effect on global warming greater even than CO2′s, at an alarming rate.

The research, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was led by Cornell University’s Anthony Ingraffea, a vocal opponent of fracking. The leaks, according to the study, might be due to problems in the wells’ cement casings. Basically, explained Ingraffea, “Something is coming out of it that shouldn’t, in a place that it shouldn’t.”

The crux of his findings, via the Associated Press:

• Overall, older wells — those drilled before 2009 — had a leak rate of about 1 percent. Most were traditional wells, drilling straight down. Unconventional wells — those drilled horizontally and commonly referred to as fracking — didn’t come on the scene until 2006 and quickly took over.

• Newer traditional wells drilled after 2009 had a leak rate of about 2 percent; the rate for unconventional wells was about 6 percent, the study found.

• The leak rate reached as high as nearly 10 percent horizontally drilled wells for before and after 2009 in the northeastern part of the state, where drilling is hot and heavy.

The full report is here.

The significance, abstract and link to the paper by Ingraffea et al. published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is here.

Public Hearing: County Ban on Fracking & Its Waste

FINAL Public Hearing: Tuesday, December 3rd, 4:00 pm in County Legislature Chambers on the Fourth Floor of Old County Hall at 92 Franklin St., Buffalo.

Please attend to protect Erie County air, land, and water from fracking and its toxic waste.

LINK to Event Information is Here.

Energy Debate: Shale vs. Renewable

On Tuesday, November 19, from 12 noon to 1 PM on Buffalo's WUFO-AM 1080
radio, host Jim Anderson will interview Chris Faulkner, CEO of Breitling Oil and Gas.

The privately-held Dallas Texas based company extracts oil and gas from North Dakota's Bakken Shale, Texas' Eagle Ford Shale, the Marcellus Shale, and several other shale plays.

Accompanying Jim Anderson will be:

• Lynda Schneekoth, Chair, Sierra Club-Niagara Group
• Robert Ciesielski, Chair, Sierra Club-Niagara Group's Energy Committee
• Rita Yelda, Organizer, Food and Water Watch
• Charley Bowman, Chair, Renewable Energy Task Force of the WNY Peace Center.

Listeners with questions/comments can call: 716-837-1112
Folks outside WUFO's range can listen to the debate Online at:http://streema.com/radios/WUFO

FORUM: Shale Gas Potential in NY State [Update: 10.26]

[Click image to enlarge]

Printable Posters are Here

Map to the Presentation at Cornell University is Here

UPDATE - 10.26.2013: How much Shale Gas could be Produced in NY State?
Video - Chip Northrup interviewed on Capital Tonight 

Exerting Local Authority over Shale Gas Development

UB Geography Colloquium Series presents:

Susan Christopherson .
Professor, Dept. of City and Regional Planning,
Cornell University

A Vote of ‘No Confidence’? 
Why Local Governments Take Action in Response to Shale Gas Development

Friday, October 4, 2013, 3:15p.m.
WILKESON 145H (inside GIAL Computing Lab), UB North Campus, Amherst [Map]

Why has a local response to high volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF) shale gas development emerged?  To understand why many New York communities have moved to exercise local authority or “home rule” over natural gas development, we examine how they came to understand (1) the risks attendant to HVHF, and (2) their strategic and regulatory options.  An answer to these questions looks at the concerns that have framed the public discussion, and at how key local actors evaluated industry and state government willingness or capacity to address those concerns. 

BIO:  Susan Christopherson is an economic geographer whose research and teaching focus on economic development, urban labor markets, and location patterns in service industries, particularly media industries. Her research includes both international and U.S.-policy-oriented projects. Her international research includes studies in Canada, Mexico, China, Germany, and Jordan as well as multi-country studies. In the past three years she has completed studies on advanced manufacturing in New York’s Southern Tier, the photonics industry in Rochester, the role of universities and colleges in revitalizing the upstate New York economy, and production trends affecting media industries in New York City. She has written more than 50 articles and 25 policy reports on topics in economic geography and economic development. Her current projects include studies of phoenix industries in old industrial regions and a comprehensive economic impact analysis of natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale in New York and Pennsylvania. Christopherson received her Ph.D. from the University of California-Berkeley.

Light refreshments will be served.

For more info on the Colloquium Series, contact Marion Werner <wernerm@buffalo.edu>.
 
THIS EVENT Co-SPONSORED by the GEOGRAPHY GRADUATE STUDENT ASSOCIATION (GGSA).

Fracking Forum – Impacts on Environment, Health and Society

Join panelists, Rita Yelda, Sarah Buckley, David Kowalski, and Robert Cieselski, who will present talks and answer questions about diverse issues surrounding shale gas extraction and high volume hydrofracking.

• WHEN: March 21, 2013, 7:00pm-9:00pm

• WHERE: Prendergast Library, 509 Cherry St., Jamestown [Map]

Becky Nystrom – Moderator
Sarah Buckley – Fracking Basics (the process of fracking, from wellpad to pipeline)   
David Kowalski – Environmental and Health Issues (an analysis of industry-made arguments vs. other studies and evidence)   
Robert Cieselski – Leasing and Legal Issues (signing considerations, Compulsory Integration, landowner rights, flipping, impacts on mortgages, insurance) and Renewable Alternatives to Shale Gas
Rita Yelda – Fracking in New York State (what has occurred the last four years and where we are at now)

For speaker bio's and links to articles about fracking, click here.

Should U.S. Expand Fracking to Export Shale Gas?

Critics cite need for information on impacts of expanded shale gas production on human health, communities, environment and domestic prices.   

Doctors Urge U.S. to Block Gas Export Terminals
By Jon Hurdle

More than 100 physicians urged the Obama administration on Thursday not to approve the construction of liquefied natural gas [LNG] export terminals until more is known about the health effects of hydraulic fracturing, the drilling process that has opened the way for a big increase in domestic gas production.

Until policymakers and public health officials determine whether fracking is dangerous to human health, they argue, the government should not allow the development of the 15 new export terminals that have been proposed by the gas industry. The government has so far approved one export terminal, proposed by Cheniere Energy, in Louisiana.

The demand for exports has risen from a recent boom in domestic production resulting from the use of fracking in combination with horizontal drilling, which has allowed the industry to exploit vast shale gas reserves at an affordable cost. Energy companies are also lured by sharply higher natural gas prices overseas.

Link to the full article at the New York Times Green Blog.

Why Policymakers and the Public Need Fair Disclosure Before Exports of Fracked Gas Start
By Craig Segall, Staff Attorney, Sierra Club Environmental Law Program.

Exporting American Liquefied Natural Gas [LNG] to the world market would spur unconventional natural gas production across the country, increasing pollution and disrupting landscapes and communities. Deciding whether to move forward is among the most pressing environmental and energy policy decisions facing the nation. Yet, as the Department of Energy (DOE) considers whether to greenlight gas exports of as much as 45% of current U.S. gas production — more gas than the entire domestic power industry burns in a year — it has refused to disclose, or even acknowledge, the environmental consequences of its decisions.

Gas exports would transform the energy landscape and communities across the country. We owe ourselves an open national conversation to test whether they are in the public interest. We need to look before we leap.

Download the Sierra Club report here (44 page PDF).

Should UB Sponsor a Shale Gas Institute?

~ By David Kowalski ~

The University at Buffalo (UB) has now entered into the controversial area of unconventional shale-gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing ('fracking') by sponsoring a newly-created "Shale Resources and Society Institute" (SRSI).

Last week, SRSI released their first study, which is entitled "Environmental Impacts During Shale Gas Drilling: Causes, Impacts and Remedies". The authors stated strong conclusions, which were included in a UB news release (May 15, 2012), and subsequently made for some sensational newspaper headlines. However, others who have since examined the study indicated that the authors' conclusions are biased and not supported by the data (see below).

And that's not all. Initial examination of the background of the study's authors indicated close ties with the gas drilling industry. Also, the UB news release claim that the report was "peer-reviewed" was incorrect. Subsequently, UB retracted that claim in a revised press release. Then one of the so-called peer-reviewers distanced himself from the SRSI study. Finally, the authors did not disclose their funding sources. All of these issues made shale gas and fracking sensitive topics at UB, as documented in a post last week.

Shown below are excerpts of new reports with a link to each full report. These articles start with an editorial letter by me, and continue with detailed analyses of the SRSI report by others, which together provide independent views of flaws and industry-bias in the SRSI study and lead one to question the wisdom of UB sponsorship.
 
Shale study harms UB’s reputation, By David Kowalski, Letter to The Buffalo News, May 24, 2012
But the fact that all three authors have ties to the energy industry raises concern about conflicts of interest. Their report and undisclosed funding sources only reinforce that concern and harm the university. 

They claimed that the decline [in environmental violations per gas well] was evidence for improved industry operations and state regulations. However, the authors completely ignored the fact that, as more wells were drilled over time, the total number of environmental violations increased by threefold. 

It is a shame that this study was done under the aegis of UB. The university should protect its reputation and re-evaluate its sponsorship of the Shale Resources and Society Institute.  

UB report on 'fracking' draws fire of watchdog, By David Robinson, The Buffalo News -- Front page story, May 25, 2012
A Buffalo-based corporate accountability research group Thursday criticized as "seriously flawed and biased" last week's study from the University at Buffalo that said stronger regulation was leading to an improved safety record among drillers in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale.

The new report from the Public Accountability Initiative disputed the conclusions of the study by UB's new Shale Resources and Society Institute, which reported that the rate of environmental violations -- both major and minor -- were declining at Pennsylvania's Marcellus wells.

"The evidence does not support the notion that fracking is becoming any safer," the new study said.

"While masquerading as independent, academic research, the report's errors all point in the direction of heavy pro-industry bias and spin," the Public Accountability Initiative study said.  

Critics question shale gas researcher, schools, By Kevin Begos, Associated Press, May 25, 2012

 A well-known expert on the natural gas boom is again facing criticism over his ties to industry and a lack of transparency in how he presents work to the public, fueling debates over research that's been published by major universities.

Timothy Considine was lead author on a shale gas report recently issued by the University at Buffalo and a previous report from Penn State University. Critics say both reports presented research in misleading ways and failed to fully disclose funding sources.

Considine, now at the University of Wyoming, has gotten funding from industry groups such as the Marcellus Shale Coalition, the Wyoming Mining Association, the American Iron and Steel Institute, and the American Petroleum Institute.

On Thursday, the Public Accountability Initiative, a Buffalo nonprofit, issued a critique of the UB study.

The University at Buffalo also said the report "was not funded or commissioned by external sources." But Considine told The Associated Press in an email that the University of Wyoming paid him and two other lead authors.

 

Martha McCluskey, a University at Buffalo law professor who was on an ethics committee there, said the new shale institute appears not to meet disclosure provisions and hasn't gone through the standard process for faculty approval and vetting of new centers and initiatives to preserve academic integrity.  

UB Pulls SRSI Website, By the Public Accountability Initiative, May 25, 2012 (updated May 26, 2012)

The University at Buffalo Shale Resources and Society Institute (SRSI), the subject of the analysis we released yesterday, has password-protected its website as of this morning. Notably, the SUNY Fredonia Shale Resources Institute also pulled its website recently after negative attention from Artvoice. 

The Public Accountability Initiative saved copies of most of the SRSI’s web pages.

Update (5/26): The SRSI site is accessible again, and UB has issued a statement regarding the SRSI report.

FRACKING News

• Vermont poised to be first state to outlaw fracking - Reuters

• Amherst Bans Fracking Fluids at Town Facility - WNY Media

• Couple denied mortgage because of gas drilling - WTAE News

• New Rules are Needed to Protect Our Health and Environment from Contaminated Wastewater - National Resources Defense Council

• Grisanti and Fracking - By Rita Yelda, WNY Drilling Defense

• A People's Hearing on FRACKING - June 2, 2012

• SUNY Shale Institute Funder Fracked by SEC Probe - By Buck Quigley, Artvoice

• EPA Fracking Study Announcement Was Delayed By Wyoming Officials - By Mead Gruver

Clean Energy Tops List of Environmental 'Super Bills' for 2012

Green Super Bills Designed to Invigorate NY’s Solar Industry and Create Jobs, Close Hazardous Waste Loophole for Fracking, Cut Climate Pollution

Albany - Nine New York environmental groups today released their annual slate of “Super Bills” for 2012. Green priorities for the State Legislature include measures designed to bolster economic development while addressing New York’s highest profile environmental challenges, including expanding the use of solar energy, cutting the pollution that is changing our climate and protecting the state’s waters and communities from gas drilling by means of “fracking” by closing a loophole that exempts the oil and gas industry from responsibly treating drilling waste. The groups also announced this year’s Earth Day Lobby Day will be held on April 25.

“New York’s leaders tell us they support cleaner and more sustainable energy. And elected officials say they will act responsibly before opening the floodgates to fracking in the Marcellus Shale,” said Dave Gahl, Deputy Director, Environmental Advocates of New York. “We’re calling on the Legislature to pass the 2012 Super Bills and send a message—New York is open for business—clean, safe business that creates new jobs, holds industry accountable and benefits our communities with clean air and safe water.”

“Citizens Campaign for the Environment urges the Legislature and Governor Cuomo to stand up for clean air, clean water, job creation and a strong economy by enacting the 2012 Super Bills,” said Adrienne Esposito, Executive Director.

The 2012 Green Super Bills are:

Solar Industry Development & Jobs Act (A.9149 - Englebright) would create thousands of new solar jobs and jumpstart investment in New York’s growing solar energy industry by requiring state utilities and energy service companies to supply an increasing percentage of their electricity from solar, ultimately resulting in 5000 MW on the grid by 2026—enough to power more than 500,000 homes and reduce as much carbon pollution as taking nearly three million cars off the road.

Global Warming Pollution Cap (A.5346 - Sweeney / S.2742-B - Avella*) would require that climate-altering pollution from all sources is cut by 80 percent by the year 2050. These are the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that scientists say will help us avert the worst impacts of climate change. *These bills will be amended to match.

Hazardous Waste Loophole (A.7013 - Sweeney / S.4616 - Avella) would end special exemptions that allow the gas industry to circumvent requirements for hazardous waste disposal. This bill would update state law so that all waste resulting from gas drilling that meets the definition of hazardous waste be treated as such and subject to all regulations related to its generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal. Thanks to the leadership of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Environmental Conservation Committee Chair Robert Sweeney, the Assembly acted to close the loophole by passing this Super Bill on February 13 by wide margins.

The True Cost of America's Gas Rush

In an effort to promote drilling, the gas industry has repeatedly stated that hydraulic fracturing ('fracking') is safe, without acknowledging that the current technology is new and unconventional. The wealthy industry influences popular opinion through TV and press ads that promote shale-gas drilling, touting only the economic benefits. 

But what about the costs incurred when unconventional drilling occurs close to places where people live and farm? How does shale-gas drilling and fracking affect the well-being of homeowners and rural communities? How does this chemical-laced and water-intensive process affect the quality and quantity of their drinking water? What will become of the toxic and radioactive wastewater? Are there risks to human health, now or in the future?

You can read all you want about the costs of the gas rush, but there is nothing like seeing with your own eyes and hearing from affected people about the impacts of unconventional shale-gas drilling. 

The video below is an investigative report on shale-gas drilling in Pennsylvania communities, where drilling has been going on for over 3 years. Please watch it and share this link - j.mp/TrueCostOfGas - with your friends.

 

Recent reports about shale-gas drilling: 

• Safe Water for Families with Wells Polluted after Gas Drilling 
•  Gas Industry Gave Campaigns Big Bucks to Back Hydrofracking in NY State

For more reports about shale-gas drilling and fracking, click here.

Free Movie on 'Fracking' in Niagara Falls

Millions of gallons of toxic wastewater from gas drilling using the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing (hydrofracking or 'fracking') will be heading to Niagara Falls every day if permitted by the NY state government.

To learn more about fracking and what's in the wastewater, see the award-winning documentary film 'GASLAND' at the Niagara Falls Library Auditorium [see MAP here] at 6pm on February 15th and on February 21st . Q&A session with Rita Yelda and others will follow. It's FREE! Invite your friends.

 [Click image to enlarge]

Watch this brief TV News report: Could fracking waste water go to Falls?

For articles on treating fracking waste at Niagara Falls, click here.

For more stories about fracking, click here.

Activists and EPA Deliver Safe Water to Families with Wells Polluted after Gas Drilling

 EPA found toxic chemicals that pose health concerns

Residents of Dimock Pennsylvania were not warned of possible risks to their well water in 2008 when they were asked to lease their land for gas drilling and hydrofracking in the Marcellus Shale.

Soon after Cabot Oil & Gas began drilling the gas wells in 2008, Dimock res­i­dents began expe­ri­enc­ing severe prob­lems with their well water. Water became yellow, cloudy and contained a flammable gas. The most attention-getting prob­lem hap­pened on New Years Day in 2009, when one water well exploded with great force, moving a concrete slab weighing thousands of pounds. The explosion was caused by high-level gas contamination, presumably ignited by a spark from the water pump. Fortunately, the damage occurred outside the home and there were no injuries. Several other water wells also exploded, and nine others were found with so much gas that one homeowner was told to open a window when taking a bath. Propublica reported on these stories, calling Dimock "ground-zero" for drilling in the Marcellus Shale.

Fif­teen fam­i­lies with con­t­a­m­i­nated well water filed a fed­eral law­suit against Cabot Oil & Gas in 2009. The com­pany insisted, without any evidence, that the methane in Dimock water wells occurred nat­u­rally through biological processes near the surface, like rotting plants (later, scientists identified shale gas as the contaminant). Under Gov. Ren­dell, the Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) took action and fined Cabot for the gas migra­tion inci­dents, barred it from further drilling in the com­mu­nity, and ordered it to pay for a pipeline to bring­ safe drinking water to Dimock res­i­dents. Cabot did not put in a water pipeline, but agreed to pay for tem­po­rary water sup­plies, which involved bottled water and also truck deliveries of bulk water.

In May 2011, Dimock resident-turned-activist, Craig Sautner (photo below), told a crowd of about 200 at Corning West High School in New York, “I’ve been abused by the gas industry like you wouldn't believe” during his three-year ordeal.

Sautner holding a sample of his family's well water - AP

Mr. Sautner closed his remarks in New York’s Southern Tier with an ominous warning: “On the ride up here, I saw what beautiful country you have here. Don't let [the gas industry] ruin it on you.”

In January 2011, under administration of a new governor, Tom Cor­bett, Cabot Oil & Gas asked the DEP for approval to stop the water deliv­er­ies by the end of Novem­ber. Cabot installed water filters in the homes and said Dimock’s water was safe to drink. The DEP agreed to reverse its ear­lier rul­ings, deciding that Cabot had ful­filled the water agree­ment. Sautner and other residents said the filtered water is undrinkable. Still, as of December 1, 2011, Cabot cut off water delivery to the affected Dimock families.

For three years after 2008, the affected Dimock families lived without safe tap water from their wells. They were dependent on water from Cabot Oil & Gas, the shale-gas fracking company that polluted their well water. They now had no water.

Anti-fracking groups and concerned citizens from Pennsylvania and New York joined together to help get water to Dimock. On December 6th, 2011, clean, New York water was delivered to eleven families in Dimcok. Actor/activist Mark Ruffalo who lives in a Catskill region where land is leased for gas drilling, and a hydro-geologist representing Dimock residents in a lawsuit against Cabot, as well as others spoke at a rally outside the home of a Dimock resident. Below is a video of a news report on that event:

See another video of the rally here.

Subsequently, after prodding by Dimock residents and activists, federal environmental regulators reopened their investigation of Dimock water wells. A tanker of water from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency arrived in Dimock on January 20, 2012. This will be a regular delivery to four homes as the EPA investigates the impact of natural gas drilling on Dimock's drinking water.

EPA toxicologist found four households’ well water contaminated with arsenic and other hazardous substances “at levels that present a public health concern” (data of Cabot and PADEP). Some of these “are not naturally found in the environment,” EPA officials said, and may have been released by drilling activities. Among the toxic substances found in the well water were:

• Arsenic, classified by the US government and World Health Organization as a known human carcinogen, an element sometimes found in “elevated concentrations” in groundwater because of drilling;
• Barium, a common constituent of drilling fluids; long-term ingestion at high levels can cause kidney damage;
• Phthalates, a synthetic plastic chemical and probable human carcinogen, according to EPA;
• Glycol compounds common in drilling fluids and associated with damage to kidneys, the nervous system, lungs, heart, testicular damage and anemia;
• Manganese, an naturally occurring element that can damage the nervous system at high levels;
• Phenol, found in some drilling fluids; at high levels can cause irregular heartbeat, liver damage and skin burns;
• Sodium, compounds found in some drilling fluids, at high levels can cause high blood pressure.

Federal officials said that although the investigation has not been completed, they have concluded, based on samplings to date (by Cabot and PADEP), that a “chronic health risk exists” for the wells in question.

The EPA will conduct its own sampling of 61 water wells in Dimock after reviewing data collected by the state, Cabot Oil & Gas and other firms raised concerns about groundwater contamination connected to Cabot's expansive drilling operations in the area.

The water deliveries were met by families and drilling critics rallying in support of the EPA's actions who accused state regulators of failing to help them and enabling bad practices by the industry. "The EPA's stated policy is to step in where states have failed to enforce," filmmaker Josh Fox said, "which means the state of Pennsylvania and Gov. Tom Corbett has failed in its obligation to protect the citizens of Pennsylvania."

Niagara Falls sees profits in fracking waste, while critics see another Love Canal

 A public meeting will be held on Thursday, October 27.

The city of Niagara Falls is home to world-famous waterfalls as well as to a well-known, hazardous-waste disaster that occurred in the Love Canal neighborhood.

The Niagara Falls Water Board is exploring the possibility of cleaning up chemically-tainted wastewater derived from unconventional gas drilling using the process of horizontal, hydraulic fracturing, also called hydrofracking or simply fracking. However, critics are concerned that the treatment may not remove all of the hazardous waste and that the discharge would pollute the Niagara River and Lake Ontario, which are sources of drinking water.

The Niagara Falls Water Board (NFWB), encouraged by a feasibility study by an outside group, seeks to increase profits by making use of their industrial waste treatment facility, which is currently underutilized. The Board stated that "...treating wastewater from Marcellus Shale would provide the NFWB with a significant opportunity to increase revenues, provide financial stability to our organization and stabilize our rate structure over the long term, all to the benefit of NFWB ratepayers."

At a public meeting on September 22, citizens recalled the hazardous waste contamination at Love Canal in Niagara Falls, and indicated that the Water Board's new venture could be another environmental disaster in the making. Fracking wastewater includes not only chemicals added by the drilling industry, but also brine and well as toxic and radioactive chemicals extracted from the shale. In general, treatment facilities are not equipped to remove all of these chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic. 

Lois Gibbs, a resident of Love Canal in the 1970's, led successfully the battle to convince NY state officials, the U.S. government and the public that hazardous chemicals buried nearby were causing health problems and birth defects. 

In an interview about the Water Board's new venture, Gibbs wondered if city officials would ever learn. “They’re moving away from the chemical industry because the chemical industry is moving away from them, and it’s time to start a new economy,” Gibbs said by phone Thursday from Falls Church, Va., where she’s executive director of the Center for Health, Environment and Justice. “And the new economy is certainly not taking chemical waste.”

“We should be learning from past mistakes instead of risking our water so we can accept New York state’s hydrofracking waste,” said Rita Yelda, an organizer for Food and Water Watch, an environmental advocacy group. Yelda and a coalition of local opponents sent questions to the Niagara Falls Water Board, and attended a Board meeting on October 20th seeking answers about the potential environmental impacts, possible impacts on human health, and other issues. The Board has yet to provide answers to those questions. A TV interview with Rita Yelda is here.

New York, which is currently under a drilling moratorium, is not the only possible source of fracking wastewater. The gas drilling industry in Pennsylvania, which has been heavily engaged in fracking since 2008, has polluted rivers by passing wastewater through sewage and industrial treatment plants and is now looking for new disposal sites. Disposal of wastewater from Pennsylvania at the Buffalo sewage treatment plant occurred earlier but is no longer permitted.

Richard Roll, the director of technical and regulatory services at the Water Board, said "Since we do have a unique kind of wastewater treatment plant that's very much under-loaded, we're looking into the possibility that, with the addition of other treatment processes, maybe our plant would be much more amenable to accepting this waste than your typical municipal biological plant."

A recent report indicated that the Niagara Falls Water Board is poised to accept fracking wastewater from Pennsylvania, Ohio and New York for treatment and discharge into the Niagara River. The Board has hired a public relations firm to promote the venture and has apparently been working with the Cuomo administration to develop a massive transportation plan.

The Niagara River flows into Lake Ontario, the source of drinking water for millions of people in the U.S. and Canada. Their drinking water could be at risk if the Niagara Falls Water Board moves forward with its plans. The Council of Canadians, a social and environmental justice organization, sent a letter to the Niagara Falls Water Board concluding that "Given the significant risk posed to the Great Lakes by this proposal, we ask that you scrap it in order to protect the Great Lakes Basin for current and future generations."

Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicated that it will develop standards for disposing wastewater from the shale-gas drilling process. The EPA stated that many treatment plants are not properly equipped to treat such wastewater, and indicated that it would consider standards required to be met before water can be sent to a treatment facility. The rules will be proposed by 2014. If passed, the rules would be among the first federal regulations directed at potential water contamination by fracking waste.
 
The Niagara Falls Water Board will hold a public meeting on Thursday, October 27th at 5pm in the Water Treatment Plant, 5815 Buffalo Ave, Niagara Falls, NY [MAP]. Concerned citizens are encouraged to attend. Those who wish to speak should sign up before the meeting.

Scientists find Shale Gas in Drinking Water near Industrial Drilling Sites

First scientific study of its kind -- Gas industry refuses to share data
The gas industry justifies the benefits of extracting shale gas by drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in terms of providing energy, economic stimulation and jobs. Also, some landowners have benefited by earning income from gas leases and royalties.

However, other landowners claim that, subsequent to nearby drilling and fracking, their drinking-well water became contaminated by flammable gas. Gas industry representatives dismiss the claim that fracking might make drinking water flammable.

Lighting water on fire "is a parlor trick that really has nothing to do with hydraulic fracturing," said Jim Smith, a spokesman for the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York State in a Wall Street Journal report. Instead, he said, it's caused by naturally-occurring methane that gets into some water supplies regardless of whether there's nearby drilling.

Despite such gas industry claims, there was no scientific evidence as to whether or not contamination of drinking water with natural gas is linked to nearby drilling and fracking. But there is now.

Scientists at Duke University measured the dissolved gas levels in 60 drinking water wells in the Marcellus and Utica shale drilling areas in northeastern Pennsylvania and southern NY state. In a paper published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, they reported that water samples taken closest to the gas wells had an average of 17 times higher than the methane levels detected in water samples taken further from active drilling. The maximum level was 58 times higher (see graph, below). Methane is the major component of natural gas. The average methane level detected was in the range of "action levels for hazard mitigation" recommended by the U.S. Office of the Interior (graph, large gray rectangle), and many water wells had levels far above that range.

Methane in well water is both a safety and health hazard. The gas escapes from water at the tap, the shower head, the washing machine and into the air of homes, where it can become flammable and even explosive. Methane can also cause headaches, nausea, brain damage and, at very high levels, death by suffocation. Potentially dangerous levels of methane were found in well water near drilling sites in northeastern Pennsylvania.
Some Pennsylvania homeowners whose wells became contaminated after nearby drilling and fracking had demonstrated earlier that their well water contains flammable gas.

At recent presentations on shale drilling and hydraulic fracturing sponsored by the Geology Department at the University at Buffalo, some of which are now available online, several speakers representing the gas drilling industry stated emphatically that the ability to light well water on fire is due to biogenic methane, i.e., methane produced on the surface of the ground by bacteria (e.g. gas from swamps, bogs, rotting plants).

Industry representatives also claimed that flammable water is not due to thermogenic methane, i.e., methane produced deep underground in the shale millions of years ago from decomposition of buried organic matter at high temperature and pressure.

But neither of these gas industry claims are backed by scientific studies on the water wells in Pennsylvania. So which type of methane is responsible for the high concentrations in drinking-well water? Is it biogenic methane present at the surface, or thermogenic methane present deep underground in the shale?