New York State Dismisses Radiation Threat From Gas Drilling Cuttings

New York State Dismisses Radiation Threat From Gas Drilling Cuttings.

New York State Dismisses Radiation Threat From Gas Drilling Cuttings Print
Tuesday, 10 May 2011
Written by Peter Mantius
Drill cuttings. Photo: drillingcontractor.org

Drill cuttings. Photo: drillingcontractor.org

As they prepare final rules for high-volume hydrofracking of natural gas wells in New York, state environmental regulators are brushing aside warnings from scientists and public health organizations that radioactive drill cuttings from Marcellus Shale wells pose serious environmental risks.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation already allows three western New York landfills operated by Casella Waste Systems to import Marcellus well cuttings from Pennsylvania. And a landfill owned and operated by Steuben County is poised to become New York’s fourth cuttings importer, also with the DEC’s blessing.

“This stuff is so innocuous that under law and regulation and good environmental practice, it could be [buried] at the drill site,” Scott Foti, a DEC official, testified in January. “It could be left right there.”

The DEC expects an exponential increase in drill cuttings after the agency begins granting permits for high-volume hydrofracking of horizontal Marcellus Shale wells in New York, possibly as soon as this fall. Foti said the agency is weighing whether to allow drillers the option of disposing of cuttings at municipal landfills or at well sites.

Both those options alarms scientists, public health officials and environmental activists, who note that the Marcellus tends to be rich in naturally occurring radioactive material, or NORM.

Conrad Volz. Photo: Protectingourwaters.wordpress.com

Conrad Volz. Photo: Protectingourwaters.wordpress.com

“That’s not appropriate,” said Conrad Volz, an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health. “I don’t have a problem with cuttings from lots of other shale formations, but the Marcellus is unique. It’s highly enriched in radium isotopes and thorium. Cuttings from horizontal wells in the Marcellus should be taken to low-level radiological waste disposal sites.”

Volz noted that radiation levels in the Marcellus formation may vary widely from region to region and even from well to well within neighborhoods. For that reason alone, he said, each batch of cuttings should be tested before choosing a disposal option.

That is the stance the New York State Conference of Environmental Health Directors took in a December 2009 letter to the DEC, which said:

“The idea that NORM is not a problem with drill cuttings is based on two samples. This is clearly not sufficient. Since the major disposal option is burial at local landfills, NORM sampling should be done for each batch of drill cuttings prior to transport and disposal, at least until a large-scale sampling program establishes the safety of such materials.”

Instead of following that advice, the DEC has chosen to generalize based on a handful of samples, most of which were gathered and analyzed by a contractor hired by Casella, the disposal company.

The agency has acknowledged conducting its own tests on rock samples from two vertical Marcellus wells drilled in Western New York. Gamma ray spectrography analysis of rocks from those two wells revealed “essentially background values” for NORM, according to the DEC’s 2009 draft of rules for high-volume hydrofracking.

The agency plans to release a new version of the drilling rules this summer or fall. After it holds public hearings and makes the rules final, it plans to begin issuing horizontal Marcellus well permits promptly.

In order to clarify whether the agency has conducted other tests beyond the two wells mentioned in its 2009 draft of drilling rules, DCBureau.org asked the agency to specify the exact total number of Marcellus wells it had tested.

Agency officials took three weeks to respond and then declined to provide a specific number. Instead, they wrote in an email that the agency was “satisfied with the breadth and objectivity of the sampling” and believed that disposal of Marcellus cuttings in municipal landfills “does not pose an environmental concern.”

The DEC’s conclusion, the email said, “is based on analysis performed on Marcellus Shale rock samples from the New York State Museum collection and from the known properties of shale formations.” The email went on to cite a “comprehensive study” conducted for Casella by CoPhysics Corp., which “further supported the DEC position” that Marcellus cuttings are harmless.

The CoPhysics report has been sharply criticized by Volz and other scientists for weaknesses in its methodology, it relatively small sample size and its failure to report test results for alpha and beta emissions as well as gamma emissions.

Both the DEC and CoPhysics tests relied on measurements of gamma ray emissions. Volz called the decision to test exclusively for gamma rays “ridiculous” in light of the fact that the main threat in Marcellus cuttings is radium, an alpha-particle emitter. Alpha particles make up 96 percent of the radiation emitted by radium, while gamma rays make up only 4 percent.

“To look for radium, you have to test for alpha,” said Marvin Resnikov, senior associate at Radioactive Waste Management Associates in New York City. “CoPhysics tested for gamma, not alpha.”

Stephen Penningroth, executive director of the Community Science Institute in Ithaca, N.Y., a state-licensed water tester, agreed with Volz and Resnikov. “The low gamma readings may be correct,” Penningroth said. “But the other part of the problem is alpha and beta, and that’s where the NORM is.”

While Geiger counters detect gamma rays effectively, they’re not much use picking up alpha particle emissions, which travel only a few centimeters and may be blocked by thin clothing or even layers of dead skin.

But alpha-emitting materials are very dangerous when they are ingested as liquids or breathed in with dust in the air.

“When alpha-emitters get in the body, they can set up business next to cells and bombard them with nuclei,” Volz said. The main dangers from NORM-contaminated drill cuttings are dust, radon and any water that leaches away from them after they are buried.

The DEC confirmed that the Marcellus Shale in New York tends to have dangerous levels of NORM when it tested the brine from all 12 of the state’s conventional Marcellus wells in 2008 and 2009. It found levels of Radium 226, a dangerous alpha-emitter, to be far above allowable limits for drinking water (5 picocuries/liter) or for release into the environment (60 picocuries/liter). The DEC’s readings for Radium 226 in brine from four of the tested wells exceeded 10,000 picocuries/liter.

Radium 226 has a half-life of about 1,600 years and decays into radon gas, the world’s second leading cause of lung cancer. Only smoking causes more.

That’s why Dr. Earl Robinson, a pulmonologist from Elmira, and others who live near to the Chemung County landfill were upset to learn Marcellus drilling wastes from Pennsylvania were being dumped near their homes.

New England Waste Services of New York, a unit of Casella that operates the Chemung Landfill under a 25-year, $90-million contract, began accepting Marcellus wastes from Pennsylvania early last year, even before notifying the DEC.

Robinson leads a citizens group that has mounted a legal challenge to Casella’s authority to bring radioactive waste into a landfill that is not licensed to handle it. An administrative law judge at the DEC heard evidence last summer, but he is still considering the matter — seven months after an attorney for Casella filed a motion for an expedited ruling.

As the months have ticked by without a ruling, the Chemung Landfill and other Casella-operated New York State landfills in Painted Post and Angelica have continued to import Marcellus cuttings from Pennsylvania.

Several months ago, Steuben County began to consider accepting Marcellus cuttings at its municipal landfill.

Vince Spagnoletti, the county’s public works commissioner, said that he studied the environmental issues carefully and decided to recommend that county officials vote to accept between 10,000 and 15,000 tons of Pennsylvania cuttings a year– two or three dump trucks a day — beginning later this summer. That vote could come in June, he added.

That volume of cuttings would generate more than $300,000 in fees for the county, Spagnoletti said in a recent interview. And the county might eventually triple that volume, he said.

Casella has no involvement in the Steuben initiative, though Spagnoletti said he has drawn on data and advice from two contractors hired by Casella, CoPhysics and Barton & Loguidice of Syracuse.

The CoPhysics report was introduced in the Chemung Landfill case and is public record. A study by Barton & Loguidice, a follow-up to the CoPhysics report that has not been made part of the public record, is based on the samplings taken for the CoPhysics report.

CoPhysics analyzed drill cuttings taken from four Marcellus wells in Bradford and Tioga counties in Pennsylvania, cuttings transported to Casella’s Chemung, Painted Post and Angelica landfills, and “local background soil and rock” from the same three Casella landfills.

The CoPhysics report concluded that “rock cuttings from the gas drilling operations, as sampled during this project, have radionuclide levels that do not pose any environmental health problem even if they were deposited in areas accessible by the general public. Therefore, they are certainly acceptable for landfill disposal.”

At a public hearing Feb. 3, several Steuben County residents expressed skepticism about the conclusion. They also took issue with the DEC’s (and Spagnoletti’s) willingness to accept them at face value despite the fact that they were paid for by Casella, which stands to gain financially from a conclusion the cuttings are harmless.

At an public meeting in Steuben County on January 11, Foti acknowledged that questions might be raised about reliance on data from potentially biased private sources, but he dismissed the concern, saying:

“There were some people who were concerned about this technique of a company who has an interest in the outcome being involved in paying for the samples,” Foti testified.  “We’ll, I’ve got to tell you, it’s very, very routine. …I do trust the data.”

Foti also wrote a Feb. 14 letter to Spagnoletti that said the DEC had determined that disposal of Marcellus drill cuttings in non-hazardous-waste landfills “is consistent with regulatory requirements and the protection of the environment.”

That finding was based on the DEC’s conclusion that for purposes of regulation, Marcellus drill cuttings were neither “hazardous waste” nor “industrial waste” nor “radioactive waste,” Foti explained.

Cuttings are neither hazardous nor industrial waste because statutes exempt wastes from natural gas development from those categories, no matter how contaminated. Neither can the drill cuttings be regulated as “radioactive waste,” he said, because NORM is exempt from the definition of radioactive waste unless it has been “processed and concentrated.”

The DEC confirmed in its recent email that it had concluded that the drill cuttings are never “processed and concentrated” and therefore do not fall under the regulatory definition of radioactive waste.

Three expert witnesses in the Chemung Landfill case — Volz, Resnikov and Tony Ingraffea, a Cornell University professor of rock fracture mechanics — disputed that interpretation of the regulation. But as long as the Chemung Landfill case remains stalled within the DEC, the agency’s interpretation holds.

“The DEC plays with regulations. They’re not charged with looking after public health. They’re not trying to prevent disease,” said Volz, who plans to leave the University of Pittsburgh to write a book on the environmental costs of extracting oil and natural gas worldwide.

The DEC’s interpretation that Marcellus drill cuttings cannot be regulated as radioactive waste because they are not “processed and concentrated” raises questions about the agency’s authority to regulate Marcellus brine, a confirmed health risk that is no more “processed and concentrated” than the cuttings.

In fact, the DEC has downplayed the results of its own tests of Marcellus brine, even as other agencies have expressed alarm about them.

For example, the New York City Department of Environmental Protection said the data “raise serious issues for public health.” The city’s top environmental officer, Steven W. Lawitts, wrote the DEC in 2009, saying the agency was obliged to do further testing. “Such an analysis must be completed before any activity that is likely to generate radioactive waste can move forward.” The DEC rejected that advice, saying it would wait and see the results of actual drilling in the New York Marcellus.

The regulatory loopholes that restrain the DEC from taking a more rigorous look at waste from Marcellus gas wells have drawn the attention of two members of the New York General Assembly.

Assemblyman Alan Maisel (D-Brooklyn) has introduced a bill that would place a moratorium on the importation from other states of all Marcellus wastes, both liquid and solid, until the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports on the public health effects of high-volume hydrofracking. There is no companion bill in the state Senate.

Meanwhile, Assemblyman Robert Sweeney (D-Lindenhurst), the chair of the Assembly’s Environmental Conservation Committee, is sponsoring a bill that would remove the oil and natural gas industries’ special exemption from the regulation as hazardous waste. A similar bill has been introduced in the state Senate.

“There is no compelling reason why waste produced from oil and natural gas activities that meets the definition of hazardous waste, should not be subject to the same laws regarding generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal as other hazardous wastes,” Sweeney said in a memo explaining the bill’s purpose.

DEC officials declined to comment on the Maisel and Sweeney bills, saying the agency does not take a position on pending legislation. Yet the DEC drafts and actively sponsors bills that it favors, such as this year’s proposed overhaul of the state’s water withdrawal rules.

Although the controversy over Marcellus drill cuttings has focused on NORM, some environmental advocates raise concerns about other potentially hazardous substances that may be headed to the landfills with the solid waste.

In his testimony before Steuben legislators Jan. 11, Foti described cuttings as dry rock chips that were less radioactive than the marble counters in his kitchen at home.

But in his Feb. 14 letter to Spagnoletti, he acknowledged that ground-up rock cuttings emerge from natural gas wells in a slurry of rocks and drilling mud, which is added to facilitate drilling and the removal of cuttings. That mixture is saturated with naturally-occurring brine.

A microscopic view of Drill cuttings of shale and sand. Photo: Wikicommons / Mudgineer

A microscopic view of Drill cuttings of shale and sand. Photo: Wikicommons / Mudgineer

A dewatering process removes most of the liquids, and the remaining rocky residue is then bulked up with sawdust in preparation for disposal.

But municipal landfills are permitted to accept the cuttings even if they contain up to 20 percent liquids.

Kate Bartholomew, the chair of the Schuyler County Environmental Management Council in Watkins Glen, N.Y., said she was concerned about the residual drilling mud and brine disposed of with the cuttings.

In horizontal wells such as those used to tap the Marcellus Shale, drillers use an oil-based mud that includes potentially dangerous chemicals, she noted. While some batches of the rock-liquid mix may be innocuous, she said, others may be so contaminated that they belong in landfills specially licensed to handle hazardous waste or radioactive waste.

How gas drilling contaminates your food – Sustainable food – Salon.com

How gas drilling contaminates your food – Sustainable food – Salon.com.

How gas drilling contaminates your food

We know the controversial fracking process hurts our water supply — but it’s also affecting the things we eat

CS Report of Gas Lease Termination Workshop

May 18, 2011

Landowners dispute gas lease extensions

Seminar details tactics energy companies use to extend leases beyond original durations

By CATHERINE WILDE
Staff Reporter
cwilde@cortlandstandard.net
Energy companies are employing more and more tactics to extend expiring natural gas leases, landowners learned at an informational meeting Tuesday.
County Clerk Elizabeth Larkin told a crowd of about 60 that she is rejecting hundreds of lease extension documents gas companies are attempting to file, because they lack the landowners’ signatures.
Whether the sought after extensions are valid, remains to be seen as many landowners are arguing that they do not want their leases extended.
Larkin said she will continue to reject the extensions.
“If you’re going to convey an interest in real property, real property law says that the landowner has to acknowledge the lease, has to sign the lease,” Larkin said.
But the lease extensions continue to flow into the office without the landowners’ signatures.
Larkin was part of a three-member informational panel at the Cortland County Office Building auditorium. Onondaga Nation Lawyer Joe Heath and a Virgil landowner Mike Bosetti, who successfully terminated his lease, also sat on the panel.
Some residents were surprised by what they heard, unaware until the meeting that their gas leases may not simply expire at the end of the term, and may actually provide loopholes where landowners are trapped into leases they wish to end.
One such loophole occurs when residents, seeking to terminate their leases, contact the gas companies and actually open a window for the gas companies to then extend their leases.
According to the state general obligations law, which governs how gas leases are terminated, the landowner must notify all gas companies with an interest in the land, within 30 days after a lease termination date, calling for the lease to end. But doing so opens a 30-day window for the gas company to file an affidavit in the county clerk’s office stating the lease is not terminated.
The news that a lease could be so easily extended by gas companies, came as a surprise to Homer resident Patricia Martinez de la Vega Mansilla.
Mansilla said she is trying to get out of a lease on her property that she recently acquired. Since Mansilla is not the original landowner, she had to contact the gas company with a copy of her deed to show she is the person to contact regarding the lease.
Mansilla has since responded to a “force majeure” letter to contest the company’s claim the lease is extended, but now she worries the lease will not end in December as she hopes.
“I didn’t realize they could file an affidavit with no conditions, to automatically extend the lease,” Mansilla said.
Mansilla will wait until the lease ends at the end of the year and hopes to have a legal opinion by then about whether she should send the letter within the 30-day timeframe.
Heath is awaiting an opinion from the state Attorney General about the best way to end gas leases.
“We are trying to get an opinion from the Attorney General whether it is safe to do nothing when the lease is over, or whether or not they have to take that risk,” Heath said after the meeting.
Heath detailed a list of what he calls fraudulent practices on the part of gas companies that he has brought to the attention of the state Attorney General in an attempt to get laws written that would protect landowners.
Heath pointed to the tactics gas company representatives, known as ‘landmen’, use when trying to get leases signed. For example, landmen will deny that the process of hydraulic fracturing, the method of injecting high quantities of chemically-treated water into the shale to extract gas, can increase the radioactivity of groundwater, even though that has been documented to occur, he said.
Heath also pointed to force majeure letters which the gas companies are sending out to landowners to effectively extend their leases, saying these letters are, in the opinion of many lawyers, not valid.
The force majeure letters contend that the moratorium placed on high volume hydraulic fracturing last year and endorsed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo this year, was a force outside the industry’s control that effectively ceased gas exploration. Therefore, the companies argue for a right to extend leases beyond their agreed upon termination dates.
Most in the audience Tuesday had received such letters.
Binghamton residents Jack and Sonja Stanbro, who own leased land in Cortland County, left Tuesday’s seminar planning to send a reply contesting the force majeure letter they received.
“As far as I’m concerned, we don’t have a lease because they never paid us,” Jack Stanbro said, adding Chesapeake promised him $3,000 an acre before the moratorium went into effect but he was never paid.
The Stanbros said if sending the letter through the proper channels does not end the lease, they may have to seek legal counsel.
Town of Caroline resident Edie Spaulding came to the seminar to learn more about her options for ending a lease. Spaulding said she has received a delay rental check, a check that comes close to the lease termination date that, when cashed, automatically extends the lease.
The sum is considerable, over $4,000, she said.
“Those checks will not be cashed,” Spaulding said, adding she wants “out of” the lease because her property is in the Ithaca watershed.
Heath said landowners must respond to force majeure letters, and he urges people to understand their leases are “complicated legal documents that don’t necessarily end when the date says they do.”
Heath directed people to the website for the local group Gas Drilling Awareness for Cortland County: https://gdacc.wordpress.com, which defines examples of standard lease terminology and also provides sample letters for people to use when responding to gas companies.
Bosetti said he was surprised to hear of so many different issues landowners have been faced with.

http://cortlandstandard.net/articles/05182011n.html

First Person Report from PA

This is from an email sent to me by a friend in Sullivan Co, PA. She has given me permission to post it her. Sullivan Co sits at Bradford Co’s souther border. My friend lives near Dushore which is right near the border and works in Towanda. She did not lease her 5 acres but her neighbor did. Drilling began there last fall and shortly thereafter, methane showed up in my friend’s water. Fracking has not begun yet.

Here is her email:

Sorry about taking so long to get back to you.

My class that does all the talking is only 6 students. One of them is the wife of a man who supervises the well completion– which is what we’re told went wrong at Canton – the well head. (personally I suspect that they ran into a vein of gas that was much stronger than the well cap could handle but they’re not going to say this to the public. That’s the only reason I can see that they would stop all “wellhead completion actions” until they figured out what went wrong. As far as I know, they haven’t returned to the “well head” completions yet). She’s the one that told us they were stuffing paper products from the local minimart down the wellhead to get the gusher to slow down — thus my tweak that they didn’t have a back up plan for such a situation. And I wonder if they have any back up plans at all? She also said that her spouse has worked for years with the drilling going on in Texas and was transferred up to PA because of his know-how; however, he can’t move up the supervisory ladder because he doesn’t have a degree! Instead he is working under some newcomer who has a degree in HISTORY (!) that they hired as supervisor and her spouse is training him. She also said that most of the rig workers don’t know what they’re doing and are guessing at how to go about the drilling. One well, she said, was put in backwards – as in the hole was to grow smaller as it went deeper but they were drilling so it widened instead. Nice, huh. She said men are being injured all the time at the well sites because it is such physically demanding work. She also said that she has 3 children and her spouse insists that they use only bought water! She has the most to tell but I’m guessing that her spouse won’t allow her to talk publicly. I was surprised she shared this much.

Another student (an older man who is retraining since his company closed down) said that in his area where there’s lots of wells going in, he & his friends (hunters who have lived there for all their lives) noticed that there was absolutely no wildlife around last fall. He said at some point, he could hear an audible grrrrrr that felt like the sound of an earthquake deep in the ground under his house. We figured the animals felt that too and took to higher ground. (this is part of my theory about my pond fish dying from the impact of the drilling sounds within the ground – we’re talking 24/7 for at least 6 weeks for just one drilling session – there’s no escape from it while it’s happening and the sounds go right through the walls of your home. I live 2000 feet away from the drilling & there’s a woods between us and the pad yet our house resounded with the sounds for the entire time even with the windows closed.)This is no small production as they’d like you to believe. It’s the greed of military-like industry backed by outlandish amounts of money.

A student from fall semester scared me (another older man) by saying that when they frack near your home, the house will shake from the explosions so strongly that things will fall off the walls.

One girl mentioned that she had been stalked by a Mexican who figured out that she was the last one to close up at her job in the evening — she quit her job.

Another one said that they were building “man camps” near her (Sayre area) just to house the workers who will be coming. I don’t think they’ve even seriously begun yet and the rains are slowing them down for which I’m grateful. She also said that her home is surrounded by drilling pads and lately she’s noticed that their water smells – which she’s never noticed before. She was getting pretty scared about it. There are already people in Wyalusing with class action suits because their water has been destroyed.

I’m noting that as they re-create the roads around here so that it can handle the impending increase in truck traffic (I can now hear the trucks on 87 which I could never hear before), they are building them up so high that the shoulders are incredibly steep. One swerve to get away from an oncoming truck (& these trucks are driven by newly licensed CDL drivers which they are churning out like flies on shit), and my car will be irreparably damaged – if not rolled over – because the inclines are so steep and the sides of our mountain roads are all about steep hills (and curves). I’ve never been cautious of the sides of the roads before and now, even having the road to myself, I’m hypervigilant. The railings that are in place were sufficient for the minor traffic but there’s no where near enough for the heightened roads, lack of shoulders and steep hillsides. They haven’t even repaired the railing that was taken out last fall when a water truck couldn’t make the S curve and went down over the bank.

My neighbor came home one day and called the police because he and his wife were driving around a serious curve on 87 and witnessed 2 water trucks (these are massively long) driving by them in the opposite direction at breakneck speed which almost tipped over on them! My neighbor has been driving trucks for years (not affiliated with this gas industry), and he knows when they are driving too fast and what they look like when they’re about to tip. He was really seriously pissed.

It’s so disgusting on so many levels, I can only absorb so much at a time. They’re polluting our air and our water, tearing down mountains to erect gas compressor stations (NOISE – coming soon), flattening trees to make way for their 4 acre pads, scattering holding ponds for toxic wastes (?) throughout the back woods (what happens to the wildlife that drinks from them?) — destroying the peace with constant sounds (thunderous rigs, planes & helicopters), chasing the wildlife out of their homes & hitting them on the roads (deer all the time), chewing away at the earth to get gravel for their pads, gashing through the mountains for their pipelines, making driving anywhere a concern for one’s life, destroying the normal roads and constantly we are held up in traffic due to construction. Getting in and out of Towanda (due to the bridge bottleneck) during peak hours is a long wait. Just to get in and out of town yesterday, I had to take back roads all around the light. I imagine once the rains settle down, the gray dust covering the sides of the roads – from the continuous Mac trucks taking gravel to the pads – will be nauseating to view. So much for the by-the-road wildflowers that were so gorgeous to view throughout the season.

Oh, and this too — the influx of newcomers is changing the entire essence of community. Everywhere I go when I’m in Towanda, I’m seeing these tough-looking young guys with tatoos. I’m sure they’re the workers brought here from Texas and other states. They look to me like the type that could do some violence under the influence… oh and there’s drugs coming through with them. Of course. I’ve already seen several young people at public places who looked like they were near death’s door literally. It’s the inner city come to the country.

All this for economic growth? ! Then why are there men near retirement age enrolled at Lackawanna because they lost their jobs and can’t get anything without a freakin degree! And every time I hear someone spout “responsible well drilling” as the answer, I want to throttle them. It doesn’t exist at this pace — no way.

It’s so indescribable that the “natural” gas companies get away with it – singing their songs of wealth – because no one who hasn’t been there can consciously grasp the complete devastation until they are in it. This is why I’m sending out everything that’s happening around here — I really want people to have their eyes open when it sets its sights on your area. I’ve never in my life witnessed something so all-encompassingly evil though I know this kind of selfish consumptive razing been going on all over the world and now it’s literally reached my back yard. It certainly has opened my heart to the pain in our world in ways that I wouldn’t have been able to feel otherwise BUT I’ve always known the world is getting weakened by our doings and that’s exactly why I hid myself in the mountains. Now, I too, like the wildlife, am being pushed out, killed off, and dehumanized. It’s very hard to be joyful about life or to respect us as Americans right now. I have to hold my fire of fierce opposition within me just to get through the days (and distract myself with animal rescue). This is how bad it is now – just a little over a year into this travesty – and they haven’t dug in yet. They’re just getting warmed up! Think about that.

Gas Drilling Turning Quiet Tourist Destination into Industrial Town | SolveClimate News

Gas Drilling Turning Quiet Tourist Destination into Industrial Town | SolveClimate News.

Gas Drilling Turning Quiet Tourist Destination into Industrial Town

‘While we’re drilling wells there are going to be a whole lot of trucks going past your house. And you’re not going to like that,’ says an industry insider

By Elizabeth McGowan, SolveClimate News

May 19, 2011
A natural gas drilling rigGas drilling rig/Credit: Ari Moore

Editor’s Note: SolveClimate News reporter Elizabeth McGowan traveled to Northeastern Pennsylvania in late March to find out how the gas drilling boom is affecting the landscape and the people who call it home. This is the sixth in a multi-part series. (Read parts one , two, three, four and five).

MONTROSE, Pa.—Lynn Senick’s cozy clapboard house is just steps away from state Highway 29, which basically serves as Montrose’s Main Street.

Founded as a center for abolitionists in 1824 — its lore claims it harbored escaping slaves on the Underground Railroad — the county seat has a New England-quaint feel with a prominent town green bookended by a handsome county courthouse and a welcoming library.

Even though Montrose is nowhere near the beaten track, diligent and dedicated organizers put the town on the local map by drawing flocks of visitors to popular annual events such as the Fourth of July parade and festivals celebrating the apple and blueberry harvests, as well as the production of wine and chocolate.

Senick, who educates the public about hydraulic fracturing via an online forum she launched three years ago, is also affiliated with a local group called the Montrose Restoration Committee.

Committee volunteers have played off the success of Montrose’s signature happenings by focusing on attracting and retaining an organic restaurant, book shop, health food store and farmers market. Several years prior, members of the organization had noticed their county’s natural resources, hard by the New York State border, were attracting a different type of resident.

Vibrant young people intent on making their living off the land had started to migrate to this area with the nickname “Endless Mountains” that reflects its continuous up and down geography.

North-South Interstate 81, which roughly bisects the county, is the sole major highway, and the recent arrivals recognized their land and freshwater needs could be easily met in a county with a mere 43,000 people rattling around in 800 square miles. The largest population centers are Wilkes-Barre and Scranton, to the south, and Binghamton, N.Y., to the north.

Recognizing this influx, Susan Griffis McNamara started stocking organic seeds and other affiliated paraphernalia for these small-scale growers at the hardware store side of her business that has been in the family for four generations. Other merchants followed suit.

Now, however, Senick, McNamara and other committee members fear narrow rural roadways clogged with the never-ending grind of drilling-related trucks, and landscapes marred with gas wells, will be a turnoff to tourists and artisan farmers.

“I don’t think this is going to be the quiet little tourist destination we thought it could be,” says Senick, who works at the local food bank. “This is going to become an industrial town.”

While she knows that some property owners will no doubt make money from their oil leases, she wonders how the have-nots she encounters daily will hang on as landlords realize they can raise their rent prices and offer accommodations to well-paid, out-of-town specialists employed by the gas exploration and drilling companies.

“Not everybody always got along here, but this was a stable community,” Senick says. “But this has fractured our community. It has really tossed everybody’s future into the air.”

Forced Pooling: When Landowners Can’t Say No to Drilling – ProPublica

Forced Pooling: When Landowners Can’t Say No to Drilling – ProPublica.

Gas Drilling Companies Hold Data Needed by Researchers to Assess Risk to Water Quality – ProPublica

Gas Drilling Companies Hold Data Needed by Researchers to Assess Risk to Water Quality – ProPublica.\

Gas Drilling Companies Hold Data Needed by Researchers to Assess Risk to Water Quality

.

Photo by Abrahm Lustgarten/ProPublica

For years the natural gas drilling industry has decried the lack of data that could prove—or disprove—that drilling can cause drinking water contamination. Only baseline data, they said, could show without a doubt that water was clean before drilling began.

The absence of baseline data was one of the most serious criticisms leveled at a group of Duke researchers last week when they published the first peer-reviewed study linking drilling to methane contamination in water supplies.

That study—which found that methane concentrations in drinking water increased dramatically with proximity to gas wells—contained “no baseline information whatsoever,” wrote Chris Tucker, a spokesman for the industry group Energy in Depth, in a statement debunking the study.

Now it turns out that some of that data does exist. It just wasn’t available to the Duke researchers, or to the public.

Ever since high-profile water contamination cases were linked to drilling in Dimock, Pa. in late 2008, drilling companies themselves have been diligently collecting water samples from private wells before they drill, according to several industry consultants who have been working with the data. While Pennsylvania regulations now suggest pre-testing water wells within 1,000 feet of a planned gas well, companies including Chesapeake Energy, Shell and Atlas have been compiling samples from a much larger radius – up to 4,000 feet from every well. The result is one of the largest collections of pre-drilling water samples in the country.

“The industry is sitting on hundreds of thousands of pre and post drilling data sets,” said Robert Jackson, one of the Duke scientists who authored the study, published May 9 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Jackson relied on 68 samples for his study. “I asked them for the data and they wouldn’t share it.”

The water tests could help settle the contentious debate over the environmental risks of drilling, particularly the invasive part of the process called hydraulic fracturing, where millions of gallons of toxic chemicals and water are pumped underground to fracture rock. Residents from Wyoming to Pennsylvania fear that the chemicals will seep into aquifers and pollute water supplies, and in some cases they complain it already has. But the lack of scientific research on the issue – including a dearth of baseline water samples – has hindered efforts by government and regulators to understand the risks.

The industry has two reasons to collect the data: To get to the bottom of water contamination problems, and to protect itself when people complain that drilling harmed their drinking water.

“Unless you have the baseline before the analysis you can argue until the sky turns green,” said Anthony Gorody, a geochemist who often works for the energy industry. “The only real way to address this without anybody bitching and moaning is by doing this before and after.”

Chesapeake Energy alone has tested thousands of private water supplies in the Marcellus Shale, and the company says its findings demonstrate that much of the water was contaminated before drilling began.

“Water quality testing… has shown numerous issues with local groundwater,” wrote the company’s spokesman, Jim Gipson, in an email to ProPublica. “One out of four water sources have detectable levels of methane present… and about one in four fail one or more EPA drinking water standards.”

Gipson declined to elaborate on the findings or share Chesapeake’s test results, making it difficult to verify whether the companies had, indeed, found the water was contaminated before drilling began. But he did note that Pennsylvania does not regulate water quality in private wells and that water sampling is typically not done by homeowners.

“This fact substantially explains why many of these pre-existing issues have not been previously identified or resolved by landowners,” he wrote.

It is also unclear whether Pennsylvania state environment officials – who declined to answer questions for this story – have been allowed to review the industry data or are using it when they investigate drilling accidents in the state.

That leaves open questions about who will see the water data, whether it has been verified by independent labs, and how it might be useful in the public debate. The Environmental Protection Agency’s study of hydraulic fracturing is due to be completed next year, and the Department of Energy recently appointed a review panel to assess the risks of drilling.

Energy in Depth’s Tucker and others expect the industry will eventually make its data public.

“There has been talk about releasing it and putting it in the public domain,” said Fred Baldassare, a former Pennsylvania environment official and expert on underground gas migration who now consults for the industry. Baldassare said the drilling companies were concerned that releasing water test results could affect property values for residents and amounted to a violation of their privacy. “How do you identify these points while maintaining some confidentiality?”

Jackson said the data should be made available now to independent researchers and to agencies investigating the hydraulic fracturing process. But even without the data, he stands behind his study. The Duke report said that the link between drilling activity and water degradation was clear, and said the contaminants could be migrating through manmade underground fractures, or, more likely, were coming from cracks in the well structure itself. The researchers said the wells they analyzed had been hydraulically fractured, but that more study of that process was needed to understand whether fracturing might be causing the contamination. No indicators of fracturing fluids were found in the samples.

Jackson likened the questions about drilling risk to those about the link between smoking and lung cancer.

“In an ideal study you follow people through their lives. You take measurements on them in their lungs as they start smoking and as you grow old. That’s what you need to prove cause and effect,” he said. “But instead they asked: ‘If you smoke, did you get lung cancer?’ That doesn’t prove that smoking is the cause, but it’s a pretty good step.

“That’s all we did here. If you live near a gas well are you more likely to have methane contamination? That answer is yes. It’s not proof, but it’s a good first step.”

New PA Regulation on Water Testing

Am I caught in a time warp or something?  While not affecting the
large possible database prior to Feb. 5, 2011, it should be available
from then on and end the malarkey, thanks to the new Chap 78 Rules &
Regs:

http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol41/41-6/239.html

§ 78.52. Predrilling or prealteration survey.
(d) An operator electing to preserve its defenses under section
208(d)(1) of the act shall provide a copy of the results of the survey
to the Department and the landowner or water purveyor within 10-
business days of receipt of the results. Test results not received by
the Department within 10 business days may not be used to preserve the
operator’s defenses under section 208(d)(1) of the act.

(e) The report describing the results of the survey must contain the
following information:

(1) The location of the water supply and the name of the surface
landowner or water purveyor.

(2) The date of the survey, and the name of the certified laboratory
and the person who conducted the survey.

(3) A description of where and how the sample was collected.

(4) A description of the type and age, if known, of the water supply,
and treatment, if any.

(5) The name of the well operator, name and number of well to be
drilled and permit number if known.

(6) The results of the laboratory analysis.

Local businesses fighting LPG storage – YNN, Your News Now

Local businesses fighting LPG storage – YNN, Your News Now.

Local businesses fighting LPG storage

By: Bill Mich

Business owners around Seneca Lake thrive on the tourism that comes to the Finger Lakes Region. However, many believe the tourism business is in jeopardy with a proposal to store liquid petroleum gas underground in the region. As our Bill Mich tells us, some owners are now coming together to present a united front against the local gas storage.

BURDETT, N.Y. — It was standing room only at the Damiani Wine Cellars. The mission, to bring as many people together as possible to fight the proposed underground storage of liquid petroleum gas near Seneca Lake.”We are going up against a multi-billion dollar corporation that has very deep pockets and we need to show a united front and let them know that this is not right for this area,” said concerned local resident Joseph Campbell.

That corporation is Inergy, the energy storage company that wants to store over two million barrels of LPG in underground salt caverns. The company has presented their facts to the public and say their operation is safe and won’t bring any negative effects to the region. But some residents and business owners just aren’t buying it.

“The best laid plans of engineers go awry and that impacts all of us here,” said co-owner of Damiani Wine Cellars, Lou Damiani.

The potential for hazardous leaks, explosions, and constant noise and light pollution from the industry have local business owners worried about the area’s tourism.

“By some tourist magazines, the number one lake tourist spot in the world, in the world, and what do we want to do? We want to make it the industrial hub of north east gas distribution? That’s going to help us? I don’t think so,” Damiani said.

By presenting a united front, owners think they can make a difference. They have collected nearly 1,200 petition signatures and hired a lawyer to fight the storage company. Keeping things the way they are is the ultimate goal.

“It is a place that people enjoy because of it serenity and its pure waters and that’s what everybody wants to keep,” said Seneca Sailing Adventures Owner Terry Stewart.

The group will hold another public information meeting detailing their concerns of the proposed gas storage Wednesday night at the Glenora Wine Cellars.

Susquehanna River Sentinel: Susquehanna is Most Endangered River in America

Susquehanna River Sentinel: Susquehanna is Most Endangered River in America.

Poll: New Yorkers evenly split on hydrofracking | Press & Sun-Bulletin | pressconnects.com

Poll: New Yorkers evenly split on hydrofracking | Press & Sun-Bulletin | pressconnects.com.