Health concerns of ‘fracking’ drawing increased attention: EPA conducting studies on health effects
March 4, 2012
Health concerns of ‘fracking’ drawing increased attention: EPA conducting studies on health effects.
Radon in Natural Gas from Marcellus Shale By Marvin Resnikoff, Radioactive Waste Management Associates
January 10, 2012 2 Comments
Marcellus_Radon (application/pdf Object).
Radon in Natural Gas from Marcellus Shale
By Marvin Resnikoff, Radioactive Waste Management Associates
Executive Summary*
January 10, 2012
A significant public health hazard associated with drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus
Shale formation must be seriously investigated by the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC). This hazard is from radioactive radon gas and the
potential for large numbers of lung cancer among natural gas customers. This issue,
which has been ignored in the DEC’s Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement, must be addressed in a revised Impact Statement and before DEC issues any
drilling permits.
Unlike present sources for natural gas, located in Texas and Louisiana, the Marcellus
Shale is considerably closer to New York consumers. In addition, the radioactive levels
at the wellheads in New York are higher than the national average for natural gas wells
throughout the US.
In this paper Radioactive Waste Management Associates calculates the wellhead
concentrations of radon in natural gas from Marcellus Shale, the time to transit to
consumers, particularly New York City residents, and the potential health effects of
releasing radon, especially in the smaller living quarters found in urban areas.
It is well known that radon (radon-222) is present in natural gas.1 Published reports by R
H Johnson of the US Environmental Protection Agency2 and C V Gogolak of the US
Department of Energy3 also address this issue. Radon is present in natural gas from
Marcellus Shale at much higher concentrations than natural gas from wells in Louisiana
and Texas.
Since radon is a decay product of radium-226, to calculate radon levels it is necessary to
know the concentrations of radium-226, Based on a USGS study4 and gamma ray logs
(also known as GAPI logs) that we have examined, the radium concentrations in the
* Great appreciation for the excellent assistance of Minard Hamilton, RWMA Associate
1 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Toxicological Profile for Ionizing Radiation and
U.S. National Research Council, Health, Risks of Radon and Other Internally Deposited Alpha-Emitters:
BEIR IV (National Academy Press, 1988)
2 Johnson,R.H. et al, “Assessment of Potential Radiological Health Effects from Radon in Natural Gas,”
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-520-73-004, November 1973.
3 Gogolak, C.V., “Review of 222 Rn in Natural Gas Produced from Unconventional Sources,” Department
of Energy, DOE/EML-385, November 1980
4
J.S. Leventhal, J.G. Crock, and M.J. Malcolm, Geochemistry of trace elements in Devonian shales of the
Appalachian Basin, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 81-778, 1981
Radon in Natural from Marcellus Shale Page 2
Marvin Resnikoff, Ph.D. RWMA
Marcellus Shale is 8 to 32 times background. This compares to an average radium-226 in
surface soil in New York State of 0.81 picoCuries per gram (pCi/g)5
Using this range of radium concentrations and a simple Fortran program that simulates
the production of radon in the well bore, and transit to the wellhead, we calculate a range
of radon concentrations at the wellhead between 36.9 picoCuries per liter (pCi/L) to 2576
pCi/L.
These wellhead concentrations in Marcellus shale are up to 70 times the average in
natural gas wells throughout the U.S. The average was calculated by R.H.Johnson of the
US Environmental Protection Agency in 1973 (pre-fracking) to be 37 pCi/L6 to a
maximum of 1450 pCi/L.
In addition, the distance to New York State apartments and homes from the Marcellus
formation is 400 miles and sometimes less. This contrasts with the distance from the
Gulf Coast and other formations which is 1800 miles. At 10 mph movement in the
pipeline, natural gas containing the radioactive gas, radon, which has a half-life of 3.8
days, will have three times the radon concentrations than natural gas originating at the
Gulf Coast., everything else being equal, which it is not..
Being an inert gas, radon will not be destroyed when natural gas is burned in a kitchen
stove.
We have examined published dilution factors and factored in numbers for average urban
apartments where the dilution factor and the number of air exchanges per hour are less
than those of non-urban dwellings. This analysis implies that the radon concentrations in
New York City and urban apartments is greater than the national average.
We assume a figure of 11.9 million residents affected. This figure is calculated in the
following manner: Based on US Department of Energy figures our calculations assume
4.4 million gas stoves in New York State. This figure is multiplied by 2.69 persons per
household to determine the number of residents affected: this number equals 11.9 million.
We calculate the number of excess lung cancer deaths for New York State. Our results:
the potential number of fatal lung cancer deaths due to radon in natural gas from the
Marcellus shale range from 1,182 to 30,448.
This is an additional number of lung cancer deaths due to radon from Marcellus Shale
over deaths from natural radon already impacting New York State homes and their
residents.
5 Myrick, T. E., et al. 1981. State Background Radiation Levels: Results of Measurements Taken During
1975-1979, ORNL/TM-7343, Oak Ridge, Tenn..
6 Johnson, Op cit.
The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement produced by the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation needs to be revised to take into account
this public health and environmental hazard. In the entire 1400 page statement there is
only one sentence containing the word “radon” and no consideration of this significant
public health hazard.
Further, NYDEC needs to independently calculate and measure radon at the wellhead
from the Marcellus Shale formation in presently operating wells before issuing drilling
permits in New York State. The present RDSGEIS should be withdrawn.
Health Effects of Shale Gas Extraction: 2nd Annual Conference Videos
November 23, 2011
2011 Presentation Videos | 2nd Annual Conference: Health Effects of Shale Gas Extraction.
Below are links to the videos of the presentations from the 2011 conference where permission was given to record them. These are shown in the order in which they were given:
- Donald S. Burke, MD – “Welcome Message and Introduction to the Marcellus Shale”
- Bernard D. Goldstein, MD – “Public Health, Sustainability and the Marcellus Shale”
- Allen Robinson, PhD – “Regional air pollution emissions from the development and production of Marcellus Shale”
- Adam Law, MD – “Endocrine and Metabolic Disruption”
- Charles Werntz, DO, MPH – “Worker Health Concerns in Marcellus Shale Work”
- William Burket, CFPS – “Industry Safety Initiatives and Community Emergency Preparedness”
- Simona Perry, PhD – ” ‘It’s like we’re losing our love’: Documenting and Evaluating Social Change in Bradford County, PA during the Marcellus Shale Gas Boom (2009-2011)”
- Kathy Brasier, PhD – “Community Impacts of Natural Gas Development in the Marcellus Shale: A Research Summary”
- Tom Biksey, MPH – “A Risk Assessment of Fracing Fluid Flowback Water from an Operation in an Asian Pacific Setting”
- Myron Arnowitt, MPH – “Review of the Citizens Marcellus Shale Commission board report”
- Robert Boulware; Joe Osborne, JD; and Raina Rippel – “Research Needs Panel”
Cortland County Not Ready For Hydro-Fracking
August 18, 2011
Cortland County Not Ready For Hydro-Fracking
Last Edited: 2011-08-18 08:20:06 Story ID: 4151
Cortland County health officials say the county is woefully unprepared to handle the impacts of Hydro fracking.
On Tuesday night the county natural gas task force met to talk about the health issues that may arise as a result of increased natural gas drilling activities in New York.
While most of the concerns raised in connection with hydro fracking center around water, including protection of drinking water supplies and managing the waste water that is used in fracking. Local health officials say they are more concerned about impacts on air quality.
Deputy County public health director M.J Uttech says studies from other States including Texas and Colorado have shown residents are much more susceptible to changes in air quality before water becomes an issue, especially children.
Uttech says the county and the region are not equipped to conduct the air monitoring that will be required with the increased natural gas exploration.
Uttech says the county will likely have to add staff to the health department in order to respond to the wave of environmental complaints that will filed related to the gas drilling activities.
Among other health issues raised at the meeting are the expected impacts from the increased number of people that will come into the area as part of the drilling camps. Uttech says this presents a different set of problems including increased crime, new diseases, higher housing costs, and stress to the communities established way of life.
At this point the State is continuing to review the rules governing hydro fracking, the amended rules are expected out next year, when complete the state may begin issuing drilling permits.
NYS Assembly Hearings on Health Impacts of Hydrofracking–May 26, 2011
July 29, 2011
https://gdacc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/5-26-11-encon-health-transcript-hydrofracking.doc
Attached is the transcript of the May 26th NYS Assembly Public Hearings. You can get a DVD set of the hearings by mailing a check for $10 (in the memo line write “for DVD of May 26th public hearing on health and hydrofracking”) to Office of Public Information, Room 202, Legislative Office Building, Albany, NY 12248.
There were also 863pp of written testimony submitted and this is also available through the Office of Public Information. However, they aren’t on electronic file, just hard copy. You can get that copied for 25 cents a page by contacting Robin Marilla at 518-455-4218. It can take up to a month, but some of that information may be useful for tyour SGEIS comments.
More on the SGEIS and health issues in a future email…
However, in brief, the revised SGEIS fails to protect human health. (http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/75370.html). Search the document for key words, like endocrine disruptors, or names, like Theo Colborn or Robert Howarth.
–As with the previous draft SGEIS, there is no chapter dedicated to human health. Busy medical professionals must go through over 1000 pages to try to gather health info, so chances are they won’t. Some of the information is incorrect, incomplete or outdated and the conclusions based on their information therefore wrong (eg, radioactivity, waste, chemicals…)
–No Health Impact Assessment was done.
–There is no mechanism for tracking human health impacts and assessing risk.
–Cumulative impacts on individuals, communities, the state are not addressed.
–There is no provision to protect vulnerable populations.
–The complete list of determinants of human health are not covered in the SGEIS, nor are the stressors on human health.
–There is no regard for the Precautionary Principle.
–etc…
Larysa
New Report Reveals Toxic Air Near Natural Gas Operations 7/12/11
July 12, 2011
New Report Reveals Toxic Air Near Natural Gas Operations
Citizen Samples Confirm Neighboring Communities at Risk
FOR RELEASE 7/12/11
Contact:
Denny Larson, Global Community Monitor, 415-845-4705
Josh Joswick, San Juan Citizens Alliance, 970-259-3583
Shirley McNall, San Juan County, NM Residents Worried About Our Health, 505-334-6534
Paul Light, Battlement Concerned Citizens, 970-285-7791
New Report Reveals Toxic Air Near Natural Gas Operations
Citizen Samples Confirm Neighboring Communities at Risk
El Cerrito, CA– Citizen sampling of air quality near natural gas production facilities has identified highly unsafe levels of toxic chemicals near homes, playgrounds, schools and community centers in Colorado and New Mexico. A new report issued by Global Community Monitor, GASSED! Citizen Investigation of Toxic Air Pollution from Natural Gas Development, details the air sampling results, environmental and public health threats with living amid the natural gas boom.
A coalition of environmental and community based organizations in Colorado and New Mexico collected nine air samples that were analyzed by a certified lab. The lab detected a total of 22 toxic chemicals in the air samples, including four known carcinogens, as well as toxins known to damage the nervous system and respiratory irritants. The chemicals detected ranged from 3 to 3,000 times higher than what is considered safe by state and federal agencies. Sampling was conducted in the San Juan Basin area of Colorado and New Mexico, as well as Garfield County in western Colorado.
“Carcinogenic chemicals like benzene and acrylonitrile should not be in the air we breathe – and certainly not at these potentially harmful levels,” said Dr. Mark Chernaik, scientist. “These results suggest neighboring communities are not being protected and their long-term health is being put at risk.”
“My husband, pets, and I have experienced respiratory and other health related problems during the twelve years we have lived on Cow Canyon Road in La Plata County, Colorado. We believe these health issues are related to the air quality in our neighborhood and in the area,” said Jeri L. Montgomery, neighbor of natural gas development. Through the course of the pilot study, neighbors of natural gas production facilities documented chemical odors and sampled the air. Neighbors have appealed to local, state and national government agencies to investigate their air quality complaints, to limited recourse.
“We are very concerned about the total disregard for the health and welfare of the people “existing” near the sickening toxic oil and gas industry dumps located in neighborhoods such as the land farm on Crouch Mesa and the waste disposal facility in Bloomfield that are permitted and approved by the State of New Mexico and Federal EPA,” said Shirley McNall, member of San Juan County, NM Residents Worried About Our Health.
“Experts and agencies recognize more air monitoring is needed, but it’s not happening,” said Paul Light, co-chair of the Battlement Concerned Citizens. “Rather than wait for the government, we used the Bucket Brigade to collect much-needed air quality information.”
The community and environmental groups in the San Juan Basin and western Colorado worked with Global Community Monitor, which trains community members living near industrial operations to run their own “Bucket Brigade” to sample their air. The Bucket Brigade has been used in 27 countries internationally. The bucket uses EPA methods for testing and an independent lab for air sample analysis.
Complaints about air quality have also surfaced in other states around the country, including West Virginia, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wyoming. Little information exists to educate and inform citizens about the chemicals being stored, emitted into the air, ground or water in close proximity to their homes. “People are getting gassed, and they don’t even know what is coming at them. The air monitoring provides crucial information in understanding what families are being exposed to on a day-to-day basis,” said Denny Larson of Global Community Monitor.
Federal loopholes in the Clean Air Act allow major corporations to circumvent basic protections that put public health first. US EPA is currently drafting new regulations to control and monitor air pollution from natural gas development. Congress is debating new legislation, such as the Bringing Reductions to Energies Air Born Toxic Health Effects (BREATHE) Act.
As regulation moves forward, GASSED! states that solutions are possible. The natural gas industry should invest in pollution controls to increase efficiency and reduce the amount of chemicals in the air. The report also calls for mandatory air monitoring at all natural gas operations and disclosure of chemicals used in the process to local residents.
In addition, the proximity of neighbors and wells is often too close. The report recommends a minimum quarter mile buffer zone between homes, schools and natural gas operations. This is similar to regulations enacted by Tulare County, CA on pesticide spray and St. Charles Parish, LA on industrial development. The report further states, “As the natural gas industry continues to grow, so will the number of families neighboring and affected by the emissions. Industry and government leaders have a unique opportunity to address public health and environmental issues. For coexistence between communities and gas industry to be possible, chemical exposure has to be immediately addressed.”
The full report can be downloaded at: Gassed! Full Report
Download the Appendix:
Complete Air Samples Results Spreadsheet
Full Air Sample Data Interpretation Letter from Mark Chernaik, Phd
—
GDACC 
