FracTracker in the news and press releases

FracTracker Alliance

Op Ed – So what’s the rush to drill for gas?

/by

Reposted from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (August 17, 2011)

A seasoned environmental health professional looks at the Marcellus Shale
By Bernard D. Goldstein, M.D.

Haven’t we learned anything from our past mistakes?

Public health and the environment have been my life since 1966. I have been a U.S. Public Health Service officer stationed in Los Angeles, our most polluted city; an assistant administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during the Reagan administration; and the director of an academic environmental health program in New Jersey, arguably our most polluted state.

Before the Marcellus Shale issue, I believed we had learned from past mistakes to approach potential environmental health risks intelligently. But now I’m not so sure.

Let me start by saying I’m in favor of extracting Marcellus Shale gas — but not yet. For reasons that include air quality and global climate change, natural gas is a better energy source than coal. At the risk of offending my environmentalist friends, I don’t believe that conservation measures combined with alternative energy sources will eliminate our need for fossil fuels within the next few decades.

I also agree it is in our national interest to decrease our reliance on fossil fuel imports. The gulf oil commission recently supported a return to drilling in the Gulf of Mexico because if we do not get this oil, Cubans, Venezuela or China will. But unless the Canadians can horizontally fracture under Lake Erie, the gas in the Marcellus Shale is ours for the taking.

The Marcellus Shale’s fixed location and limited amount of gas provides many reasons to go about it thoughtfully. Whenever we begin, we still will have at least the same amount of gas extracted over the same duration of time. In contrast, delaying allows us to prepare for three certainties…  Read more

FracTracker Alliance

Groundwater Contamination Debate

/by


The Debate: Can the process of hydraulically fracturing underground natural gas wells contaminate groundwater?

Industry Position:  There has never been a documented case of groundwater contamination due to hydraulic fracturing; the process occurs thousands of feet below drinking water aquifers. Therefore, the chemicals used in the fracturing process pose no threat to drinking water.

Opposition Position:  It can and has contributed to pollution of underground drinking water sources.

The Data:  Previous lawsuits from landowners were settled by the industry and the data kept private for various litigation reasons. A U.S. EPA report now indicates that hydraulic fracturing has been linked to at least one case of drinking water contamination in West Virginia in 1987 and could feasibly contribute to future problems.

Future Obligations:  Some improved regulations and protections have been put in place since 1987, but the risk still exists if natural gas drilling is done hastily or if abandoned wells exist nearby. Once pollutants are introduced into underground water aquifers they are very difficult to remove, so significant care and review must be taken if drilling is going to continue. The EPA report further supports the need for increased government and industry transparency across the board. It should also be stated that a large-scale health impact assessment is needed to comprehensively determine the risk that the entire natural gas drilling operation poses to public health.

Compiled by: Samantha Malone, MPH, CPH – Communications Specialist, Center for Healthy Environments and Communities (CHEC), Environmental and Occupational Health (EOH) department, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health (GSPH); and Doctoral Student, GSPH

Matt Kelso, BA

Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission Report Released

/by

Yesterday, the Governor’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission, lead by Lieutenant Governor Jim Cawley, released a 137 report of their recommendations, which is available at the Post-Gazette website. The Commission, composed of industry and state government officials, came up with almost a hundred recommendations, including some controversial items such as a drilling “impact fee”, as well as forced pooling.

Take a look at the document linked above, and let us know what you think about it.

Matt Kelso, BA

Paid Marcellus Programming to Play in West Virginia

/by

Who doesn’t love a good half hour commercial? But it’s not just for OxiClean and musical compilations of 70’s disco tunes anymore–the West Virginia Oil and Natural Gas Association is getting in on the act too.

In addition to the half hour weekly episode of “Inside Shale”, in which callers ask questions of industry insiders, there will be a “Marcellus Minute” that airs 10 to 20 times per day. Both programs are scheduled to launch on 49 radio stations throughout West Virginia.

Talking about the Marcellus Shale on the radio is certainly not off limits, but the industry sponsored call in show does sound questionable, in that the format mimics a news format, and it could be confused as such.  It’s a shame that the industry didn’t push for actual moderated discussions, with guests arguing from a variety of perspectives.  That is something that there’s a real need for, not just in West Virginia, but wherever shale gas extraction is occurring.

There are real impacts of drilling.  Some people are giddy with prospective royalty checks.  Others are bitter with the presence of compressors, condensers, and fouled water wells on property that they own, but not the mineral rights for.  There’s a lot to talk about, and communities that might be affected by the industry deserve to hear both sides.

Update from US EPA on Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Matt Kelso, BA

EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study to Include Sites in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale

/by

As a part of its study on potential effects of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has selected seven sites to study in two distinct categories, three of which are in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale.

The EPA will conduct five retrospective case studies nationwide, two of which are from Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale, including one site in Washington County, and another in Susquehanna and Bradford Counties. The other three retrospective case studies, in which water contamination is either confirmed or suspected include one site each from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota, the Barnett Shale in Texas, and the Raton Basin in Colorado.

The other two sites are considered prospective, where the EPA will monitor the hydraulic fracturing process at future drill sites. As with the retrospective sites, one of the prospective sites is a Marcellus Shale well in Washington County, PA, while the other is from the Haynesville Shale in Louisiana.

Guest Author

Press Release: CPNY – Attorney General’s Lawsuit Recognizes Dangers of Fracking

/by

AG’s Action Compels Feds to Protect Public Health

WATKINS GLEN, NY – A lawsuit by New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman toforce the federal government to conduct a full environmental impact study of natural gasdrilling is a recognition of the considerable risks posed by hydraulic fracking, say membersof the grassroots Coalition to Protect New York.

“It’s regrettable that our attorney general has to go to court to force the federal governmentto do what it’s required to do under current law – protect the health and safety of itscitizens,” said Jack Ossont, spokesman for CPNY, which opposes the destructive process offracking. “We have no doubt that any rational, independent analysis of fracking will clearlyshow that the dangers far outweigh any short-term economic gains, which will benefit onlya very few anyway.”

Yesterday, Schneiderman filed a lawsuit against the federal government for its failure tocommit to a full environmental review of proposed regulations that would allow drillingfor shale gas – including the harmful technique known as fracking – in the Delaware RiverBasin.

The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to conduct a full reviewof actions that may cause significant environmental impacts. But, ignoring this law, theDelaware River Basin Commission– with the approval of its supporting federal agenciesincluding the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency –proposed regulations allowing gas development in the Basin without undertaking any suchreview.

The proposed regulations allow high-volume hydraulic fracturing combined withhorizontal drilling (fracking) within the Basin. Fracking has been proven to pose graverisks to the environment, health, and communities. It involves the withdrawal of largevolumes of water from creeks and streams, frequent contamination of drinking watersupplies, the generation of millions of gallons of toxic waste that has to go somewhere,increased noise, dust and air pollution, and potential harms to community infrastructureand character from increased industrial activity.

“We want to thank the attorney general and all the groups involved in this matter, for pushing for an environmental impact study on fracking that should have beendone long ago,” said Ossont.

Kevin Bunger, a member of CPNY, said the attorney general’s lawsuit should allow for a full,independent, peer-reviewed study of the impacts of fracking.

“It’s irresponsible that we’ve allowed fracking to take place throughout the Northeastwithout any non-industry-funded, comprehensive analysis of its impacts on theenvironment and human health,” he said. “Of course, it hasn’t been done because a multi-state, multi-institutional, large-scale study would prove what we already know from avast array of evidence: that fracking contaminates drinking water and leads to wide-scale,probably irreversible pollution.”

CPNY members’ awareness of the destructive effects of fracking is also behind the group’sopposition to a landmark water withdrawal bill (S3798) now under consideration inthe state senate that would give away billions of gallons of New York’s waters to largeindustrial users, including the methane gas industry which requires vast amounts of waterfor its fracking operations. The assembly has already passed its version of the bill.

“There is considerable pressure on our elected officials to open our state to widespread,unregulated fracking,” said Ossont. “It’s up to the citizens of New York to tell our senatorsand representatives to do the right thing: stop and consider all the impacts. We’re beingtold that the methane gas beneath our feet presents a golden opportunity for our state andour country. But it’s fool’s gold. Fracking would ruin our environment and literally destroyour way of life.”

Contact: Jack Ossont, Coalition to Protect New York, (607) 243-7262

FracTracker Alliance

New Report: In the Shadow of the Marcellus Boom

/by

 

Just last week, PennEnvironment released a new study, In the Shadow of the Marcellus Boom, at press conferences in Scranton and Pittsburgh, plus a national teleconference. The report looks at the proximity of schools, hospitals and day care facilities to permitted Marcellus Shale gas wells. Their aim was to demonstrate the risks of shale gas extraction to vulnerable populations. Press release.

Below is a map of the day care, school and hospital facilities located within 2 miles of a permitted Marcellus well site:

 

Instructions:

  • Use the legend to toggle the information displayed on the map on or off.
  • Select an area of interest using the zoom bar in the lower-left corner plus the hand tool to pan, or use the zoom selection tool.
  • To obtain information about any point on the map, select the “i” tool in the gray toolbar and click on a point of interest. Click again within the dialog box to drill down and see more details for each point.
  • You can toggle between terrain, satellite, and street view with the buttons on the lower right of the map.
Matt Kelso, BA

Bradford County Blowout Frustrates Officials

/by
Towanda Creek, Bradford County, PA
On April 19, a well being hydraulically fractured by Chesapeake Energy suffered a blowout, or a loss of control of the wellhead, releasing thousands of gallons of hydraulic fracturing fluid onto the ground and into nearby Towanda Creek. Actions by officials at the county, state, and federal levels show some frustration with the drilling operator over this incident.

Chairman of the Bradford County Commissioners Mark W. Smith wrote an open letter to Governor Tom Corbett, in which he addresses the perfunctory well permitting process, well water spoilage and declining property values. He also points out the strains that the industry places on the local communities:
I continue to see our county, townships, and boroughs struggle with complex issues of development with no financial or logistical support from the Commonwealth. Emergency responders, volunteers, state and local police and dispatchers are working at a break neck pace to respond to immense traffic accident increases, well site accidents, and other related issues.
At the state level, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has already issued violations for the incident, as well as demanding explanations of certain aspects of the massive leak and spill. Chief among those is why Chesapeake elected to bring in well control specialists Boots and Coots, which took 12 hours to arrive on the scene, when there were other well control specialists available much closer. (For some dramatic well disaster footage, see Boots and Coots’ promotional video.)
The US Environmental Protection Agency is also getting involved, demanding complete information about the incident in this open letter to Chesapeake CEO Aubrey McClendon. EPA Regional Administrator Shawn M. Garvin explains the twofold nature of request:
We want a complete accounting of operations at the site to determine our next steps in this incident and to help prevent future releases of this kind.
Chesapeake Energy officials are also concerned, suspending all post-drilling activities in the Marcellus, including hydraulic fracturing, until the nature of the spill is fully undestood. The linked article gives no indication of a time frame for that review.
In 2010, Bradford County had 280 Marcellus Shale violations issued, with 386 Marcellus wells drilled in the same period. That works out to an average of three violations issued for every four wells drilled in the county.
Oil and gas violations in Bradford County, PA in 2010. Please click the gray compass rose and double carat (^) to hide those menus.
Matt Kelso, BA

DEP Calls on Natural Gas Drillers to Stop Giving Treatment Facilities Wastewater

/by

Reposted from the Department of Environmental Protection website:

HARRISBURG — At the direction of Governor Tom Corbett, acting Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Michael Krancer today called on all Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling operators to cease by May 19 delivering wastewater from shale gas extraction to 15 facilities that currently accept it under special provisions of last year’s Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) regulations.

“While the prior administration allowed certain facilities to continue to take this wastewater, conditions have changed since the implementation of the TDS regulations,” Krancer said. “We now have more definitive scientific data, improved technology and increased voluntary wastewater recycling by industry. We used to have 27 grandfathered facilities; but over the last year, many have voluntarily decided to stop taking the wastewater and we are now down to only 15. More than half of those facilities are now up for permit renewal. Now is the time to take action to end this practice.”

Read the full article»

Below is a snapshot creating by John Detwiler using FracTracker’s DataTool. It shows the wastewater treatment facilities mentioned in DEP’s ‘voluntary’ advisory of April 19, 2011. The larger the star, the greater the facility’s permitted wastewater flow (mgd).

To close the legend on the left, click the compass.

FracTracker Alliance

Cornell study assessed climate change impact of natural gas drilling

/by
Archived

This page has been archived. It is provided here for historical purposes.

We at the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities would like to congratulate and recognize the incredible efforts of our colleagues at Cornell University for their recent research study published in Climate Change Letters, entitled “Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations.” Led by Dr. Robert Howarth, the study sought to determine the effect that natural gas drilling in shale formations has on the atmosphere over a 20-year period.*

Methane gas, the major component of natural gas, has been promoted by some entities as a greener energy alternative than the use of coal because it burns cleaner. Results of this recent Cornell study, however, indicate that the methane emissions that result from the natural gas industry may result in a greater greenhouse gas footprint than other forms of energy extraction.  This is partially due to the fact that methane is a very potent greenhouse gas.

From a researcher’s perspective, accurate and up-to-date data regarding the amount of methane gas that escapes during the life cycle of natural gas drilling is difficult to access – if it exists at all. To better-understand how natural gas drilling in shale formations will affect public health and the environment, especially as this industry develops, we must continue to conduct peer-reviewed research like the most recent Cornell study. Full Report

* A criticism of this study has been the shorter, 20-year time span they used to analyze the data. This approach was taken because methane does not stay in the atmosphere as long as other greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.