Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group Updates December
4, 2013
To view photographs, please sign up for newsletter at: westmcg@gmail.com
* For articles and updates or to just vent, visit us on facebook;
* To view permanent documents, past updates,
reports, general information and meeting information
http://westmorelandmarcellus.blogspot.com/
* Our email address: westmcg@gmail.com
*
To discuss candidates: http://www.facebook.com/groups/VoteProEarth/
* To contact your state
legislator:
For the email address, click on the envelope
under the photo
* For information on PA state gas legislation
and local control: http://pajustpowers.org/aboutthebills.html-
WMCG
Thank You
* Thank you to contributors to our Updates: Debbie Borowiec, Lou
Pochet, Ron Gulla, Marian Szmyd, Bob Donnan, Gloria Forouzan, Elizabeth Donahue,
and Bob Schmetzer.
I have not yet
received links to the Duquesne Seminar or the League of Women Voters Seminar on
fracking—both were videotaped. If anyone has this information, please forward
it to me to share with the group.
Donations- Our
Sincere Thanks For Your Support!
The
Paluselli family
Jan
Kiefer
Mary
Steisslinger
Wanda
and Joe Guthrie
Lou and Dorothy Pochet for donating to group
printing costs.
Joe
and Judy Evans for printing costs of fracking tri-folds.
Jan
and Jack Milburn for donating to group printing costs.
Harriet
Ellenberger for donating to group printing costs.
Calendar
*** WMCG Steering Committee Meeting We meet the second Tuesday of every month at
7:30 PM in Greensburg. Email Jan for
directions. All are very welcome to attend.
Volunteers Needed!!
Flyercise-This is a good way to
work to protect your family from fracking and get exercise.
Flyering helps to
inform your area. If you want to
distribute information on fracking in your neighborhood, WMCG and the Mt
Watershed have handouts for you. Some rural areas are best reached by car and
flyers can be put in paper boxes (not mailboxes) or in doors. Please contact Jan if you would like to help.
Meetings are also good venues for distributing flyers as well—church meetings,
political, parent groups, etc. If you can only pass out fifteen, that reaches
fifteen people who may not have been informed.
***Volunteers Needed
to Map Frack Pits- Skytruth
You Can Support a Public
Health Study By John Hopkins At Home At Your Computer
Volunteers Needed: Crowd sourcing Project to Map Fracking in
Pennsylvania for a Public
Health Study and National Mapping Initiative
(You are given a window to examine by Skytruth. . Your job
is to Click on all the frack pits you see in that square and the data will be
processed by Skytruth. jan)
More information to follow in next weeks UPdates
Who: SkyTruth
What: FrackFinder PA - Project Moor Frog is crowd sourcing
(using the public to help do the work) project that needs cyber-volunteers to
find fracking ponds on aerial photographs.
Where: Online at frack.skytruth.org/frackfinder
Why: Data produced by
the crowd will be complied into series of maps identifying the location of
fracking ponds in Pennsylvania, and support a public health study with partners
at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
SkyTruth will be launching the second phase of
a crowd sourcing project to map the impact of unconventional drilling and
hydraulic fracturing using aerial imagery. We need your help to engage even
more volunteers so that, state by state, we can build a nationwide, multi-year
map of fracking.
FrackFinder
is a web-based tool that presents cyber-volunteers, or skytruthers, with aerial
photos of permitted or active drilling sites, and asks users to perform a
simple image analysis task. In this phase of the project, we are asking volunteers to find all the fracking ponds at Marcellus
Shale drilling sites in PA. Learn more about our first FrackFinder project
here.
We are doing this work to support
a public health study with our partners at the Bloomberg School of Public
Health at Johns Hopkins. Additionally, we have arranged to have a reporter from
Wired magazine (a tech magazine with an audience of 3 million) cover the launch
of the effort, which we are calling FrackFinder PA – Project Moor Frog.
We are asking for your help to
promote this sky truthing project as we get nearer to the launch. Please feel
free to contact me if you would like to learn more and to coordinate efforts to
engage the public in this effort to produce a nationwide, multi-year map of the
impacts of fracking.
David Manthos: Outreach
& Communications Director http://frack.skytruth.org/frackfinder
Office: 304-885-4581 | Cell:
240-385-6423 |
david.manthos@skytruth.org”
Take Action!!
***As always letters to the editor are
important and one of the best ways to share information with the public. Pick
any frack topic and get it in the public eye.***
The
following petitions and actions are active.
***Wetlands and
Streams –Unlimited Impacts
From PA Forest
Coalition
“This is big. It
almost went under the radar -- It would allow virtually unlimited impacts to
wetlands and streams from "temporary" (up to 2 years) activities that
currently need an Individual Permit.
The PADEP has
proposed to modify and reissue Chapter 105 General Permit 8.
Public comments on
this proposal are being accepted until 10 January 2014.
Comments can be emailed to:
RA-GP8Comments@pa.gov
For USPS :
Kenneth
Murin, Chief
Division of
Wetlands, Encroachments, and Training
PADEP Bureau
of Waterways Engineering and Wetlands
P.O. Box 8460
Harrisburg,
PA 17105-8460
Below are some
"talking points" to help you get started on you message.
Feel free to modify
or tailor the comments for your own use.
Please circulate them as widely as possible.
TALKING POINTS -
· The proposed modification of GP-8 is
contrary to the goals of environmental protection that the PADEP is supposed to
uphold.
· It represents a veiled attempt to
create an umbrella General Permit that can authorize virtually unlimited
impacts to wetlands and streams from a wide range of disparate activities
apparently associated with oil and gas operations, but which could be utilized
by other enterprises as well.
· The proposed modification inappropriately
expands the scope of covered activities.
· While GP-8 currently authorizes only
temporary road crossings, the proposed GP-8 would also authorize temporary
electric and telephone lines, water lines, and other pipelines as large as 24
inches in diameter carrying undefined “pollutional materials”
· The proposed changes would allow
"temporary testing and monitoring activities" that conceivably could
encompass full-scale exploratory gas well projects.
IT GETS
WORSE:
· The proposed GP-8 sets minimal or no
limitations on the length or area of streams and wetlands that can be impacted
"temporarily" (up to 2 years)
· Sets no special restrictions on its use
or eligibility in Special Protection (EV or HQ) waters,
· Provides no mechanism to assure full
restoration of disturbed wetlands and streams, and
· Severely restricts transparency and
public oversight.
Happy
holidays to the industry; humbug to our environment?
Don’t
let it happen. Act now
R. Martin Coordinator
***Thank Attorney
General Kathleen Kane For Protecting Pennsylvanians
From
Penn Environment
“For
once, I think the gas drilling industry is a little scared.
Why? Because Attorney
General Kathleen Kane is taking concrete steps to rein in a fracking company
for their egregious illegal pollution.
In response, the drillers launched an all-out attack on the
Attorney General in efforts to send a message to other elected officials who
are willing to hold polluters accountable that they will be targeted.
But we aren’t afraid. We’re proud. And elected officials who
stand up and do the right thing for our environment should be too. They should
know that there are so many Pennsylvanians out there cheering them on.
Will you tell the Attorney General that you support her
efforts to stand up to the frackers?
Earlier
this fall, the Attorney General filed
criminal charges against XTO Energy for releasing illegal fracking wastewater
in northern Pennsylvania--more than 50,000 gallons laced with toxic
chemicals. The pollution flowed over a
local farmland and into a nearby pristine stream that feeds the Susquehanna
River. A grand jury announced that
evidence made it appear that similar discharges had previously—and most likely
illegally--been made at the site.
XTO has responded by using the same tactics
that the fracking companies have used to try and stifle all their
critics—whether concerned citizens, academics or whistle blowers. This includes
running ads criticizing the Attorney General’s actions in local newspapers, and
launching an all-out PR campaign against the Attorney General’s office.
With so few advocates at the state and federal level who are
willing to stand up against the frackers, we need to defend those who are
standing up for every day Pennsylvanians like you and me.
Join me
in telling the Attorney General that you support her efforts and will have her
back, or that of any other elected official who’s willing to put our environment
first. I hope you’ll help me encourage
our Attorney General Kathleen Kane to continue to stand strong in the face of
this barrage.
Sincerely,
David Masur,
PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center Director”
***Floating Toxic
Frack Wastewater Down Our Rivers?
From Earthworks
Coal
barge passing Heinz Field in Pittsburgh, PA, on the Ohio River. Photo: Brian
Young
“Fracking
creates millions of gallons of wastewater that's laden with toxic and sometimes
radioactive chemicals.
Now, the
Coast Guard is considering allowing fracking waste to be shipped on barges down
the Ohio River.
A special oil &
gas industry loophole in national environmental law exempts its waste. The
result? Fracking's hazardous waste is magically called nonhazardous, even though it can contain heavy metals or
benzene.
So if
fracking waste is sent down our rivers it won't be governed by the same
safeguards as other toxics. It will be treated as nonhazardous.
Unfortunately,
spills are almost inevitable -- two 2013 barge accidents have already caused
serious oil spills. And when spills occur, they will contaminate the drinking
water of the 3 million people who get their water from the Ohio River.”
TAKE ACTION: Tell the Coast
Guard to keep fracking waste off our rivers!
***And from Delaware Riverkeepers
Letter to Coast Guard –Don’t ship
frack Waste on Barges
“Here is
a link to our webpage where you can file a letter to the Coast Guard on their
proposal to allow frack wastewater to be shipped by barge in bulk on the
Nation’s rivers: http://www.delawareriverkeeper.org/act-now/urgent-details.aspx?Id=154
This
link allows you to use different ways to submit a letter—you can use a sample
we have prepared or write your own in the space provided and opt for DRN to
mail it in for you or you can print it out to mail yourself or click on the
link to the government portal to submit.
You
can also submit directly through the link in the alert below. Talking points
are provided in the alert.
Getting LOTS of letters on the record is VERY important for
this proposed action. We need to show that there is great public interest in
order to get them to not take the “quick and dirty route” to approve this, as
explained below. Numbers mean a lot so please feel free to send this alert or
the link above to other lists or feel free to use any of the info or text we
have provided, making it your own and send that out. We need to get people from
across the nation to send in comments to show that this proposal is fraught
with controversy. The deadline is short—Nov. 29.
Delaware Riverkeeper Network is
also preparing a sign-on letter for organizations to sign on to. If you are a
member of a group that may want to sign on to a more detailed letter about
this, please let me know by sending an email to tracy@delawareriverkeeper.org
and I will send you the sign-on letter in a few days.
Thank
you!
Tracy
WMCG Signed On To The Following Letter Against Waste on
Barges
From Delaware
Riverkeepers
Docket
Management Facility (M-30)
U.S.
Department of Transportation,
West
Building Ground Floor
Room
W12-140
1200
New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington,
D.C. 20590-0001
Re:
Docket Number USCG -2013-0915
I
request the Coast Guard not approve the proposed policy letter to permit shale
gas extraction wastewater to be carried on the Nation’s rivers, including the
Delaware River. I submit these comments
because I have deep interest in the protection of our rivers from pollution and
consider the transport by barge in bulk of this wastewater to be a risk we
cannot afford.
Millions
of people drink water from these rivers.
In Pennsylvania, for instance, where shale gas extraction is speeding
forward in the Marcellus, 6.2 million people get their drinking water from the
Susquehanna River, 3 million from the Ohio River Basin, and 17 million people
rely on the Delaware River. A spill or
accident can easily become a drinking water catastrophe and the cumulative
impacts of spills, emissions, and traffic on the nation’s public health and
environment, including natural ecosystems, fish and aquatic life, are huge
considering the toxic and radioactive make-up if this wastewater.
I am
asking you to not approve this proposed policy letter because:
Toxic
and radioactive materials don’t belong on our rivers; the risk of contamination
and degradation of water quality and natural values is too great.
The
proprietary information about frack chemicals in the wastewater can be kept
secret from the public, keeping people in the dark about what is being
transported.
The
waiver provision is a gaping loophole that will allow the proposed conditions
to be avoided.
Testing
for radioactivity and chemical analysis “may” be required but should be
mandatory in all circumstances; ongoing monitoring for radioactivity or
chemical release is not required but should be.
The
venting provisions for tanks refer to worker safety which is important but
should also be designed to measure and control emissions that could impact the
public, wildlife and the environment.
How
the approval to a barge owner will be implemented is too vague and puts needed
regulatory enforcement and oversight at arm’s length.
Environmental
analysis for the Coast Guard’s “categorical exclusion” is minimal and effective
public participation is stymied.
Secondary
impacts, upstream and downstream effects of this proposal should be included in
a robust environmental analysis to include the extraction, production, and
ground or pipeline transport of the wastewater to barge locations as well as
the impacts from storage, processing or “disposal” of this waste at its
temporary and/or final destination. Alternatives
to the barge carriage should also be analyzed.
The
public participation process is deeply flawed due to a very short 30 day
comment period (that is further reduced by holidays and a 3 day system shutdown
at the website portal where comments were to be submitted), due to the lack of
any public discussion of input from other agencies that have relevant
responsibilities, and due to the opaque administrative procedure utilized that
avoids a more participatory and transparent rulemaking process.
For
these reasons, and more, I request you do not approve this policy letter, that
you not proceed with a categorical exclusion under NEPA for this activity, and
that you extend the public comment period to 120 days so that the public can be
given needed time to provide information on the record and to influence your
decision.”
PA gas industry puts endangered animals at
risk
***Tell State
Reps. to Vote NO on bills that gut protections for endangered and threatened species
` “The Pennsylvania gas
industry just can’t stand any limits on its activities, even when land, air,
water, and fish and wildlife are at stake. In 2012, they tried to gut municipal
rights to keep gas facilities away from homes, schools, and farms. Now they
want to hamstring public agencies that protect threatened, endangered, and rare
species.
Drilling
(and mining) interests claim that by following science and the law, the PA Fish
and Boat Commission and the PA Game Commission make it hard to develop dirty
energy projects.
Bills
that could be voted on as early as this week would undermine the independence of these public agencies to implement
Pennsylvania's endangered species laws. For decades, they’ve run programs to
protect species like the osprey, great egret, bog turtle, and wild trout, and
they’ve succeeded in protecting habitat and bringing wildlife back from the
brink.
House Bill 1576 and Senate Bill 1047 would make it much harder for the
Fish and Boat and Game Commissions to protect species. All proposals to
list species would be subject to a lengthy review—not by scientists or wildlife
advocates, but by political appointees. The bills would also force the agencies
to figure out how to save species harmed by development—not the company that
actually caused the damage.
TAKE ACTION: Tell your representatives that you oppose HB 1576 and SB 1047 and
want them to vote NO when the bills come to the floor.
Thank you! Nadia Steinzor, Eastern Program Coordinator.
***
Safeguard Federal Lands from Pro-Fracking Legislation!
“Our nation's public lands belong to
all Americans, but pro-fracking members of Congress have introduced legislation
to let states decide how the oil and gas industry will drill and frack our
national forests, wildlife refuges, and public lands. Congress may soon vote on
this terrible bill, H.R. 2728, which
would turn control of dirty and dangerous fracking and drilling on our federal
lands over to the states. “
***Tell FERC---Stop Rubber-Stamping Frack Pipelines
On
September 29, Steven Jensen, a farmer in North Dakota, discovered a massive
865,000-gallon fracked oil spill in a wheat field on his land. The spill, which
is one of the largest inland oil-pipeline accidents in the United States ever,
may have gone on for weeks unnoticed before it was discovered.
The
spill in North Dakota is not an isolated incident. Every week there are news
reports about pipeline leaks and explosions that contaminate our land and water
and sometimes kill. But instead of fixing its crumbling infrastructure, the oil
and gas industry has embarked on a reckless spending spree. It wants to
build thousands of miles of new pipelines so that it can frack America and make
us dependent on dirty fossil fuels for decades to come.
We have to speak out now to stop it. My
petition, which is to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, says the
following:
America
doesn’t need endless pipelines and related infrastructure that impact local
communities and that choke off the development of clean, renewable energy
supplies. It is time for FERC to put down its rubber stamp and place a
moratorium on new fracking and oil- and gas-related infrastructure projects.
Tell the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Stop approving
oil and gas infrastructure.
Private
land is seized by eminent domain. Dangerous and polluting compressor stations
are constructed in the middle of residential neighborhoods. One gas pipeline is
slated to cut through the Gateway National Recreation Area. And now there’s a
plan to build another large and potentially explosive pipeline near a nuclear
reactor in one of the most densely populated areas of the country.
How
can this happen? Isn’t anyone looking out for the public’s safety and welfare?
That "someone" should be FERC, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission. It’s supposed to consider “public convenience and
necessity” before permitting projects like these. But it’s fallen down on the
job. Instead of critically examining all the impacts associated with oil and
gas infrastructure, it’s become a rubber stamp for an industry that has shown
that it doesn’t give a damn about the health and safety of the American people.
Tell FERC that America doesn’t need endless
pipelines and related infrastructure that impact local communities and choke
off the development of clean, renewable energy supplies.
Will you join me and add your name to my petition to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to demand that it stop approving oil
and gas infrastructure?
Thank you for your
support.
Jill Wiener
***
Fossil Free Pittsburgh Petition
“ The campaign: City of Pittsburgh:
Invest in Thrive-ability - Divest from Fossil Fuel. Add your name to this fossil fuel
divestment campaign.
The divestment movement is
catching on like wildfire, and with good reason: If it is wrong to wreck the
climate, then it is wrong to profit from that wreckage. We believe that
educational and religious institutions, city and state governments, and other
institutions that serve the public good should divest from fossil fuels.
Every name that is added builds momentum
around the divestment effort and makes it more likely for us to win. “
Frack Links
***To
sign up for notifications of activity and violations for your area:
*** List of the Harmed--There are now
over 1600 residents of Pennsylvania who have placed their names on the list of
the harmed when they became sick after fracking began in their area. http://pennsylvaniaallianceforcleanwaterandair.wordpress.com/the-list/
***New Penn
Environment Video
PennEnvironment, along with the federal
organization, EnvironmentAmerica, released a new video exposé on fracking.
You can find the video on
PennEnvironment's
website, www.PennEnvironment.org, and also here:
Narrated
by Martin Sheen and filmed on location in Pennsylvania, the piece will allow
public television viewers to hear from:
· A Pennsylvania family whose well water
was contaminated and granddaughter became ill after fracking operations
commenced nearby;
· Dr. Poune Saberi, who has examined
health data from nearby residents and workers and believes that the numerous,
documented cases of residents becoming ill near drilling operations are likely
"the tip of the iceberg;" and
· Lou Allstadt, former Executive Vice
President of Mobil, explaining why he now sees fracking as inherently fraught
with environmental destruction.
The
segment has the potential to reach up to 60 million households this year. In addition, we have <http://youtu.be/ljHCJfkZ308> a shorter
commercial-length version of the video that is being rolled out to other networks
like CNN and MSNBC starting this month.
***Pipeline/Eminent
Domain Factsheet-Handout
Food and Water Watch
***Frackademia
Handout-Industry’s influence on Education:
***Orange You
A'Peelin'? Guide to PA Fracking Permit Appeals
You can print this booklet off the site.
***Video-- Dr
Ingraffea Speaks at Butler Community College
Published on Nov 22,
2013
The science of shale gas: The latest evidence on leaky
wells, methane emissions, and implications for policy. A.R. Ingraffea Ph.D,
P.E.; M.T. Wells, Ph.D, Cornell University; R. Santoro, R. Shonkoff, Ph.D,
Physicians, Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy, Inc. Butler Community
College, Butler Pa, November 21, 2013.
The latest evidence on leaky Gas wells.
Fracking News
1.Westmoreland
County—Your Air is Being Fouled
26 New Compressor
Stations and Processing plants in Westmoreland since 2008
DEP’s
Aggregation Allows ALL Stations to escape
tougher pollution regs
“More than 450 natural gas compressor
stations and processing plants have been built in Pennsylvania since 2008, when
Marcellus Shale gas development kicked into another, higher gear.
Collectively, the rapidly multiplying facilities emit
tens of thousands of tons of pollutants a year. And the growing emissions
load may eventually lead to poorer air quality, according to environmental
organizations.
Despite
that emissions load, none of those Marcellus gas facilities are grouped
together for permitting purposes by the state and labeled a "major
source" of pollution -- a Clean Air Act designation that could require
more extensive, and expensive, emission controls.
"There
are a lot of shale gas sources right now with emissions just below the
100-ton-per-year 'major source' threshold," said James Duffy, an attorney
with the Clean Air Council. "They're treated as minor sources. But put
together, they are major sources and the people living next to them are
receiving major doses of pollution. They should demand a remedy. And that would
be emissions reductions befitting a major source."
However
remedies are hard to come by, in part because of how DEP regulators apply
emissions aggregation rules.
Two
years ago, the Clean Air Council appealed a state decision to grant individual
permits to a Marcellus Shale gas
production facility and 10 gas compressor stations linked to it by pipelines,
all in Washington County. Collectively those 11 facilities, all owned by
MarkWest Liberty Midstream LLC, can emit more than 900 tons of nitrogen oxides
a year -- or more than three times the amount emitted by U.S. Steel's Edgar
Thomson steel mill in Braddock, which is designated a major source.
Together
those MarkWest facilities also can emit more than 200 tons per year of carbon
monoxide and 180 tons per year of volatile organic compounds -- pollutant
emission totals well above the "major source" limit
But the
CAC in September agreed to settle its state Environmental Hearing Board appeal
because MarkWest completed a new pipeline in July to another processing
facility in Majorsville, W.Va., just across the Pennsylvania state line.
Because of the new pipeline -- which links to the 10
compressor stations plus five more also built by MarkWest -- Mr. Duffy said the
CAC could no longer meet the adjacency part of the aggregation test.
"Aggregation rules provide a great deal of
discretion to permitting authorities," said Joseph Minott, executive
director of the CAC. "And states are not taking aggregation seriously,"
he said. "It's something that the EPA should be looking at."
In
response to questions, Ms. Kasianowitz, DEP spokesman, said in an email that
the DEP has done aggregation analysis on
many shale gas facilities, but so far no bundling of facilities has been
categorized as a major source. She said the department issued two
aggregation rulings for facilities in the northwestern part of the state.
Neither of those cases resulted in a major source determination, and the gas
companies are appealing both.
Mr. Osborne said the state has aggregated
few facilities and designated none of those a major source. "The
reason," he said, "is the DEP's policies are not as rigorous as they
ought to be or as federal policy."
The
impact of all those emissions from growing numbers of Marcellus Shale gas
compressor stations and processing facilities is masked by a steep decline in
nitrogen oxide emissions from other point sources like steel mills, factories
and power plants that have either closed or switched fuel from coal to natural
gas, Mr. Osborne said.
"We're not getting the improvements we
should expect to see in our air quality because oil and gas emissions are
hiding that progress," he said.
According
to the DEP, point source emissions of nitrogen oxides declined from 235,485
tons in 2008 to 192,275 tons in 2011. The emissions from shale gas facilities
accounted for 16,542 tons of that 2011 total, or 8.6 percent. During that same
four-year period, the number of shale gas compressor stations in the state
increased from 42 to 347, a jump of 305 facilities.
Since
2011, 157 additional Marcellus Shale gas compressor stations and processing
plants have been built in Pennsylvania, each with the potential to add tons of
nitrogen oxides to the air. If each of
those compressor stations emitted 95 tons of nitrogen oxides a year, like eight
of the 10 MarkWest compressors in Washington County that were the focus of the
CAC appeal, they'd add almost 15,000 tons of nitrogen oxides annually,
boosting the still-growing gas industry's share of NOx emissions.
Seventy-one
of those compressor stations and processing plants are in Greene and Washington
counties, south and upwind from Allegheny County.
George
Jugovic, president and CEO of Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, a statewide
environmental organization, and a former regional director for the DEP during
the Rendell administration, said the right question to ask is not what is
aggregation but rather whether the existing state rule protects air quality.
"Aggregation
is a legal issue that's really beside the point. What's important for a
non-attainment area is how the air can be cleaned up as quickly as
possible," said Mr. Jugovic.
"If
we start backsliding on air quality because of all these new compressor
stations and all the ones that are still to be built, that won't be good.
Someone needs to be monitoring these sites and the state monitoring system is
not set up to do that, especially in rural areas."
The DEP
has not found unhealthy air pollution levels during three short-term monitoring
studies conducted near Marcellus Shale gas operations at various locations in
the state in recent years. But GASP criticized those studies as limited in
scope and improperly designed, and for failure to consider long-term exposure
risks and cumulative health impacts from airborne particle levels and
ground-level ozone formation.
According
to the EPA, even short-term exposure to nitrogen oxides can impair respiratory
health, causing throat and lung inflammation and exacerbating asthma. It can
also lead to higher concentrations of airborne particulate matter.
But early signs that emissions from
Marcellus Shale operations are already degrading regional air quality may be
showing up at the Allegheny County Health Department's air quality monitor in
South Fayette, said Jim Thompson, the county's air quality program
director.
The monitor, on the
southwestern edge of the county, is near the myriad shale gas facilities in
Washington County, according to Mr. Thompson, and its measurements of
ground-level ozone, formed from NOx emissions and a component of unhealthy
smog, have been creeping up. "It's downwind from the MarkWest facilities
in Houston. We can't say yet, for sure, if it's a significant trend, but it's
something we have our eye on," Mr. Thompson said.
The Houston processing plant
emits pollutants from several gas heaters, seven 30,000-gallon gas storage
tanks, a truck-loading operation and several refining facilities. It operates
under "general permits" issued by DEP, including those issued two
years ago that were the object of the Clean Air Council appeal.”
By Don Hopey, Post Gazette
Read more:
http://www.post-gazette.com/state/2013/10/06/Marcellus-gas-facilities-near-to-one-another-or-even-linked-are-evaluated-individually-for-pollution/stories/201310060050#ixzz2mKH9Jn5w
2. Pipelines Coming
to SW PA And that
Means Compressor Stations, Processing
Plants, and Tons of Pollution
Comment from Group member: “PAY ATTENTION, PEOPLE! There are FIVE
PIPELINES slated to converge in the SW/W PA area. They are interstate pipelines. That
means we will likely be headed for eminent domain and large processing plants
and compressor stations in the area.
No
one is paying attention to this and it’s making me crazy! If we stop the
pipelines, we can cripple the industry.
Most of these pipelines, even the ones that cross state lines, will not
be reviewed by FERC. Natural gas and all the wet gases are not
covered by FERC, so in PA the only
review will be an erosion and sediment control plan by the DEP. The
landmen will, and are, threatening landowners with eminent domain even though
they have no right to do so. Ignorant landowners just go ahead and sign
thinking that it’s inevitable.”
Advanced pipeline projects
(Please link to the marticle to view the map. Jan)
“Five pipeline projects are
scheduled to come online by 2015 and will connect western Pennsylvania’s
natural gas and natural gas liquids, including ethane, with already-established
infrastructure elsewhere.
The
projects include: Sunoco Logistics’ Mariner West, which will take ethane up to
petrochemical plants in Sarnia, Canada; Sunoco’s Mariner East, designed to take
propane and eventually ethane to the Marcus Hook facility in Philadelphia to be
shipped to market; Appalachia to Texas Express (ATEX), built to transport
ethane to petrochemical plants in Mont Belvieu, Texas; Bluegrass, which will take
mixed natural gas liquids to facilities in Louisiana and Texas; and a project
by MarkWest Energy Partners and Kinder Morgan Inc. that will transport mixed
liquids to Mont Belvieu.
The five
pipelines together are anticipated to take an estimated 710,000 barrels per day
of natural gas and liquids to Canada, the East Coast and the Gulf Coast. Each
pipeline will also have the capability of expanding capacity in the future.
In particular, the Gulf, where the petrochemical industry is
well-established and chemical companies are expanding facilities to accept more
of the feedstock originating from the Marcellus and Utica shales, has two huge
advantages over western Pennsylvania: experience and pre-built infrastructure.
MarkWest is looking to capitalize off this
and is directly involved with four of
the five pipeline projects: Mariner West, Mariner East and ATEX are all slated
to start at MarkWest’s Houston, Pa., processing facility, where ethane is
stripped out of the gas stream, while the company is also teaming with
Kinder Morgan to build a pipeline that would move mixed natural gas and liquids
from Eastern Ohio to Mont Belvieu.
“Longer-term,
the Gulf Coast has unparalleled NGL infrastructure,” said Kevin Hawkins,
investor relations manager for MarkWest Energy.
“There are six or seven world-class olefin petrochemical
crackers to go in service between now and 2017 or 2018. The Gulf Coast is still
the domestic leader with petrochemicals.”
One of
the companies expanding ethane manufacturing in that region is Dow Chemical.
The firm uses the oil equivalent of 850,000 barrels a day in its manufacturing,
said Peter Molinaro, vice president and senior advisor on government affairs
for the company, and is building its new capacity in the Gulf where it already
has heavy investment.
“Like
anything else in commodities there is only so much that can be built, and the
chemical industry has overbuilt in the past,” he said at a recent energy and
manufacturing symposium in Pittsburgh.
New crackers and cracker expansions are underway
along the Gulf in anticipation of the increased supply. Chevron, he noted,
already has permits for a cracker in Texas, and Dow and Exxon are in the
permitting process. “They are all neck and neck in the race,” he said. (Shell, meanwhile, is still in the
exploratory phase for the Beaver County site, trying to decide whether it will
build a cracker there).
It’s a solution and
dilemma, he said, since pipelines and associated pipelines can be built in 18
to 24 months, while an ethane plant can take four to six years.
“Supply will outstrip
demand for some time,” he said.
The pipelines are coming online
because the ethane and the liquids have to go somewhere, said Matt Curry,
director of business development for Range Resources. He wouldn’t comment on whether
Range has any commitments with Shell for the proposed cracker, but said the
company would love to see the project built.
“There
are no ethane users in the area,” he said, adding the region is constrained
with limited options. Producers need to remove ethane from the gas stream or
else the gas can exceed distribution pipeline specifications, and as more
ethane-rich gas is produced, the liquid needs a home.
If Shell doesn’t move forward
with its project, it doesn’t mean the region will be without a cracker since
there are other projects in the works to build smaller-scale crackers in West
Virginia. This includes Aither Chemical’s plans to build a catalytic ethane
cracker in West Virginia’s Kanawha Valley. However, without a world-scale
project, it’s unclear if the petrochemical industry will set down the roots in
the region that economic development groups want to see.
The
Pittsburgh Regional Alliance, which is working to ensure Shell does indeed
build here, declined comment for this story, citing nondisclosure agreements
with the oil company. Earlier this year, PRA President Dewitt Peart noted that
even if Shell doesn’t build, the raw material doesn’t go away and other
companies would be interested in the Beaver County site. As Range’s Curry
noted, the ethane has to go somewhere.”
3. Deer Attracted
to Drill Sites
(According to the Game Commission, there has been no
testing of deer in Pa for heavy metals, chemicals or radioactivity, even near known
spill areas or leaking frack pits. WVA has done testing where the waste was
dumped in forestland; in Pa we have accessible frack pits, spills and
leaks. The PA Game Commission apparently
considers it a non-issue. jan )
Hunters
have long known deer love salt. In Pennsylvania it’s illegal to put out salt
licks to try to attract deer. But there are still salty spots deer find on
their own.
One of those places can be gas-drilling
sites. The brine water that comes back up after fracking (known as flowback)
can be as much as 10 times saltier than seawater. It can also contain heavy
metals and radioactive materials.
The DEP acknowledges
that brine spills large and small do occur, and they have not studied its
impacts to wildlife.
Pennsylvania
Game Commission spokesman Travis Lau says they haven’t studied gas drilling’s
impact on deer either, but anecdotally, brine is not much of an issue.
U.S.
Forest Service soil scientist, Mary Beth Adams, has studied deer’s attraction
to the salt left behind in the soil at reclaimed drilling sites in West Virginia, which has less stringent
regulations related to flowback. She recently spoke with StateImpact
Pennsylvania about her research.
Note: this interview has been edited for length and clarity
Q:
What do we know in terms of how this affects the food system?
A:
There’s relatively little research in general on the effects of natural gas
development. I’m not familiar with much research on the effects of wildlife or
even on vegetation. It simply hasn’t been done. The pace of development is
outpacing the research.
Q:
What kind of work do you do?
A:
The Forest Service manages land. I’m part of the research division. I do
research to help people understand how ecosystems work, how they behave when
they’re stressed, and how to manage them better for a variety of uses.
The
research I described here was based on our experience on the Fernow
Experimental Forest, which is a research forest. A conventional gas well was developed on the
Fernow, and we looked at the impacts after the development of the gas well.
Q:
What did you find? There was a lot of dead vegetation, right? Was flowback
sprayed on it?
A:
Right. In West Virginia it is permissible to apply flowback fluids to the land
as long as they meet state regulations. [Note: this is illegal in Pennsylvania]
You actually get a permit to do that. But the permit standard is a
concentration standard, not a dose standard.
So
for example, you can get a brief whiff of hydrogen sulfide and that’s not going
to be toxic to you as a human being. But if you are exposed to a huge amount of
it, even if the concentration’s the same, it’s more dangerous. It’s like
medicine.
What
we found was the concentration standard did not protect the forest vegetation.
What happened was too much [flowback fluid] was applied on too small an area.
And it was mostly the salts –calcium and sodium chloride– that negatively
affected the vegetation. It was affected first through immediate contact, but
then by uptake and also the physiological function of the trees.
Q:
Can you describe what you found with deer populations near gas development?
A:
Deer have a requirement as they come out in spring in early summer; they need
more minerals. The deer are attracted to natural minerals sources, like salt.
In this case, where the
flowback pond had been there were salts near the surface and they were leaching
out in a small spring. So the deer were attracted to it. It brings the deer in
from a great distance around, and it concentrates them.
Q:
So if they’re eating salt, that doesn’t sound too concerning. Could there be an issue with the quality of
the venison?
A: It depends on what else is in there. The salts
themselves — sodium and calcium chloride– are part of the salt blocks people
put out to attract deer. We all eat sodium chloride in our meals.
But there are other
constituents that are probably associated with those salts. The deer may be
ingesting those as well– the heavy metals and the radionuclides. We don’t know. There’s been so little
work done on what’s in there. And then how it moves through the ecosystem.
Maybe it all leaches out quickly. Probably it doesn’t. But we don’t know that.
Q:
So for avid hunters, is this something they should be aware of?
A: It would be really good if the Food and
Drug Administration or somebody who does public health research could look at
this. It would be relatively easy to do some simple [sampling]. But the states
are not going to have the funding to do that, and I’m not aware the federal
government is doing that.
Q:
Anything else?
A:
Just that the gas boom has moved so quickly, [and] the research is way far
behind the development of the resource. We do this over and over again. We find
something that’s wonderful– usually related to energy– and we just rush ahead
without thinking about what the impacts are. We did it with coal, we’ve done it
with oil, we’re doing it with gas, we did it with nuclear.
It
would be nice if humans were a little less impetuous and that we would actually
think about what might be the potential impacts and do some research before we
run away with it, but I think it’s probably human nature.
http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2013/11/26/why-deer-can-be-attracted-to-gas-drilling-sites/?fb_action_ids=253571331464279&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B250750775080652%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.recommends%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D
4. Six-State Study
Confirms- Job Numbers Exaggerated by Fracking Industry
“Drilling in the six states that span the
Marcellus and Utica Shale formations has produced far fewer new jobs than the
industry and its supporters claim, according to a report released by the Multi-State
Shale Research Collaborative, a group of state-level research organizations
tracking the impacts of shale drilling.
“Industry supporters have exaggerated the
jobs impact in order to minimize or avoid altogether taxation, regulation and
even careful examination of shale drilling,” said Frank Mauro, executive
director of the Fiscal Policy Institute in New York.
Shale
drilling has created jobs, particularly in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and
cushioned some drilling-intensive areas in those states from the worst effects
of the Great Recession and the weak recovery. As this report documents,
however, the number of shale jobs created is
far below industry claims and remains a small share of overall employment.
“Shale drilling has made little
difference in job growth in any of the six states we studied,” said Stephen
Herzenberg, executive director of the Keystone Research Center in
Pennsylvania. “We know this because we
now have data on what happened, not what industry supporters hoped would
happen.”
Recent
trends are consistent with the boom and bust pattern that has characterized
extractive industries for decades. It also points to the need for state and
local policymakers to collaborate to enact policies that serve the public
interest.
“West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio have
a long history with the ‘resource curse’ of coal and oil extraction that has
provided wealth for a few but left a legacy of environmental degradation and
poverty in their wake,” said Herzenberg. “Pennsylvania and its neighbors
must not repeat the mistakes of the past.”
Key findings
from the new report include:
*Between 2005 and 2012, fewer
than four new direct shale-related jobs have been created for each new well
drilled, much less than estimates as high as 31 direct jobs per well in
some industry-financed studies.
* Region-wide, shale-related
employment accounts for just one out of every 795 jobs. By contrast, education and health sectors
account for one out of every six jobs.
* Job growth in the industry has been greatest (as a share
of total employment) in West Virginia. Still, shale-related employment is less
than one percent of total West Virginia employment and less than half a percent of total employment in all the other states.
* Many of the core
extraction jobs existed before the emergence of hydrofracking.
Together, Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia had 38
percent of all producing wells in the country in 1990 and 32 percent in 2000.
Some counties with a long history of mineral extraction have
experienced a shift in employment from coal to shale extraction.
* Industry employment projections have been overstated.
Some industry supporters have equated “new hires” with “new jobs”
and attributed ancillary job figures to shale drilling even when they have
nothing to do with drilling.
* Industry-funded studies have used questionable assumption
in economic modeling to inflate the
number of jobs created in related supply chain industries (indirect jobs)
as well as those created by the spending of income earned from the industry or
its suppliers (induced jobs).
* Drilling is highly sensitive
to price fluctuations, which means that job gains may not be lasting.
* In some counties, employment gains have been reversed as
drilling activity shifted to more lucrative oil shale fields in Ohio and North
Dakota.
Direct shale-related employment across the six-state
Marcellus/Utica region fell over the last 12 months for which there are
data—the first quarter 2012 to the first quarter 2013.
“While
shale development has been important to West Virginia’s ongoing economic
recovery, it is less than one percent of the state’s employment mix,” said Ted
Boettner, executive director of the West Virginia Center on Budget &
Policy. “This means policymakers need to make the important public investments
in higher education and workforce development that will diversify our economy
and make it stronger over the long-term.”
“To paraphrase John Kennedy, policymakers approaching shale
issues should ‘ask not what you can do for your gas company, ask what you can
do for your state,’” said Mauro
http://ecowatch.com/2013/11/21/study-confirms-job-exaggerated-by-fracking-industry/
Appalachian Pipeline That Runs Under Mon River (Bob Donnan)
5. Pipeline Extension
Project Through PA and Into Delaware
“Nov 21 - The Brooke County Commission
agreed to allow crews with Sunoco Pipeline to survey 29 acres. The company is
investigating the possibility of building a pipeline to transport liquid
petroleum from Harrison County through the Northern Panhandle across
Pennsylvania and into Delaware.
A South Huntingdon, Pa., family has filed a suit against Sunoco in
Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court in an effort to prevent the company from
obtaining right of way through their property by eminent domain.”
http://www.theintelligencer.net/page/content.detail/id/592429/County-Approached-on-Pipeline-Extension-Project.html?nav=510
***Pipeline/Eminent Domain Factsheet-Handout
Food and Water Watch
6. Frackademia
Factsheet
The Selling Out of Higher Education
Food and Water Watch
An extensive review
of research projects funded by “Big Oil” companies revealed insufficient
academic control by universities, a lack of peer review and undue industry
influence in choosing research proposals. Not surprisingly, many oil and
gas industry-funded academics are promoting shale gas development through the
controversial practice of fracking.
Moreover, the industry has been providing funding
for studies, professorships and capital improvements and is now looking to
expand even further by undertaking fracking on an increasing number of college
campuses. This can cause health and environmental risks for students and the
surrounding community, and also calls into question the objectivity of findings
from these institutions.
There are multiple well-documented
examples of pro-fracking studies where the source of funding was not disclosed
or authors have professional connections to the oil/ gas industry that were
unknown prior to publication. Such incidents have led Cary Nelson, past president of the American Association of University
Professors, to call the lack of disclosure in industry-sponsored shale gas
research “troubling.”
For example, Timothy Considine, a former
Penn State professor, current director of the University of Wyoming’s Center
for Energy Economics & Public Policy and president of Natural Resource
Economics, Inc., is a notorious figure
in the world of frackademia, often at the center of controversy with his many
pro-fracking studies. Considine was lead author of a 2009 Penn State study that
predicted a 30 percent decline in drilling if a new severance tax on fracking
and drilling was implemented in Pennsylvania.
The
study was cited in debate around the tax proposal, which ultimately failed.
After Considine issued a second study in 2010, a group called both reports into question, citing inflated job
estimates and the absence of sponsorship information. Subsequently, the dean of the Penn State College of Earth and
Mineral Sciences retracted the original version of the study, acknowledging
that it was funded by the Marcellus Shale Coalition, a pro-industry group
comprising nearly every major fracking company. He called the omission of the
sponsor a “clear error.”
Just as
the Marcellus Shale Coalition funded Considine’s controversial Penn State
studies, in 2011 MIT released The Future
of Natural Gas, a study funded by BP and Shell, among others, that concluded
unsurprisingly that natural gas was a “bridge to a low-carbon future.”
For the handout:
Penn
State Bias on Shale Industry Addressed by Bob Donnan
Slide from my
Power Point presentation to the Pittsburgh Press Club a couple years ago while
on a 3-member panel with Katie Klaber and Vidic. An audience member told me
afterwards that Katie got more nervous the
longer I presented
Frackademia to Study
North Texas Fracking Earthquakes
“In 2009, I started
writing about how closely the fracking industry resembles the tobacco industry.
They use the same playbook and even trade players. And the fracking industry
has its very own version of Joe Camel. Source Watch has chronicled many
Frackademia scandals in the U.S.
Now NBC5 tells us
that Frackademia, TCU’s Energy
Institute, will team up with what has been called the most corrupt of the
corrupt regulatory agencies in Texas, the Texas Railroad Commission (RRC), to
study the cause of the most recent outbreak of earthquakes in North Texas.”
7. 25, 000 Workers Exposed to Silica
“At least
1.7 million US workers are exposed to respirable crystalline silica each year,
according to NIOSH. But, NIOSH has also
written because there are no surveillance data, the problem is probably greater
than this number suggests. Almost
certainly undercounted in these estimates is the extent of workers exposed to
respirable crystalline silica in hydraulic fracturing operations – a recent
estimate suggests that silica exposures may affect at least 25,000 fracking
industry workers, more than 60% of whom may now be excessively exposed.”
8. DEP Emails Obtained by PA Open Records
Published by JesseWhite
MarkWest says the emission of black
plumes of thick smoke are a normal part of their operations
“Mark
West Liberty Midsterm and Resources, LLC(MarkWest), Houston
Gas Plant, ChartiersTownship, Washington County:
On July14, MarkWest brought a new de-ethanizer on-line,
resulting in several visible emission episodes of thick black smoke. DEP
received numerous complaints and inspected the facility on July 15 and July 16
and observed no opacity violations since the events were sporadic. MarkWest
attributes the visible emissions to the flaring of natural gas liquids and
stated that the unit is operating as designed,
that the public was never at risk and it will continue to work with DEP to
evaluate the issue and take the necessary steps to minimize the potential of
similar events. “
http://www.scribd.com/doc/184874909/Emails-from-PA-DEP-relating-to-Wastewater-Impoundments-in-Washington-County-PA
9. Fracking-Friendly Bills Flourish as Industry Donations Skyrocket 231%
"A wave of legislation friendly to the
fracking industry in the House of Representative appears to be following
skyrocketing donations from the fossil fuel industry. A Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington report this week reveals that from 2004 to 2012, oil and gas industry contributions to Congressional campaigns climbed
231 % in fracking states and districts. Several
bills passed in Congress this week suggest these contributions are paying off.
In a landslide 252 to 165 vote, the
GOP-controlled House rammed through the fracking industry friendly HR 1900 on
Thursday that would fast-track pipeline construction if signed into law. It follows
two other bills passed in the House earlier this week that would make it easier
to get fast permits for oil and gas drilling on federal lands and roll back
federal fracking regulations.
While none of
these bills is expected to advance in the Senate, critics charge they
nonetheless reveal a Congress hijacked by the fracking industry. "This week, House Majority Leadership
showed that they’ll sacrifice just about anything for the oil and gas industry,
whether it’s the hunters and fishermen who enjoy using our public lands,
parents trying to protect their children from the health impacts of fracking,
even the rights of property owners along proposed gas pipeline projects,"
said Earthjustice Senior Legislative Representative Jessica Ennis."
Targeted Congressmen
Bankrolled by the Fracking Industry-
80% To
Republican Candidates
By Molly Redden Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
“The growing fracking industry is “yielding
gushers” of campaign donations for congressional candidates — particularly
Republicans from districts with fracking activity — according to a new
report from the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in
Washington.
The report, “Natural Cash: How
the Fracking Industry Fuels Congress,” examines 2004 to 2012. In that time,
contributions from companies that operate fracturing wells and fracking-related
industry groups rose 180 percent, from $4.3 million nine years ago to about $12
million in the last election cycle.
These donations are flowing to
members of Congress at a time when some legislators are trying to increase
regulation of fracking. The most serious of these legislative efforts
is the FRAC Act. Introduced in 2009, the act would require EPA
regulation of the industry and would force
fracking companies to disclose the chemicals that they inject under high
pressure into the ground. Both the House
and Senate versions of the bill are stalled in committee.
“So far, the industry has successfully
fended off almost all federal regulation of fracking,” CREW’s reports. The
biggest increase in donations from the fracking industry came between 2010 and
2012, when Congress was particularly active on fracking issues.
Candidates from districts where fracking is
concentrated — CREW identifies 94 such districts — experienced the biggest
windfall. The industry’s political
contributions to those candidates rose 231 percent, from $2.1 million to $6.9
million. That’s nearly twice the increase in their contributions to senators
and members of Congress from districts without any fracking activity. CREW identified
ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Chesapeake Energy as the industry’s three largest
donors.
Rep.
Joe Barton (R-Texas) was head and shoulders above his fellow candidates in
donations from the fracking industry. Barton accepted more than half a million
dollars — $100,000 more than any other candidate. In the past, he chaired the
House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and he sponsored legislation in 2005 to
exempt the fracking industry from the Safe Drinking Water Act. A version of
that bill became law and prevented the EPA from exercising key oversight over
fracking activity.
Republicans in
general benefited from the industry’s largesse far more than Democrats. “Nearly 80 % of fracking industry
contributions to congressional candidates went to Republicans,” the report
notes. Republican candidates from fracking districts saw their donations from
this sector go up 268 %. According to the report, only six of the top 50
recipients of fracking industry contributions among current members were
Democrats.” Only one Democrat — Sen.
Mary Landrieu of Louisiana — cracked the top 10 list of fracking money
recipients.”
See: http://grist.org/climate-energy/these-members-of-congress-are-bankrolled-by-the-fracking-industry/
10. Exposure to Air Pollution During Pregnancy Linked to Infant Heart Defects
(You will recognize some of the listed air toxins as those
used and emitted in the fracking process. Jan)
Children’s
congenital heart defects may be associated with their mothers’ exposure to
specific mixtures of environmental toxins during pregnancy, according to
research presented this week at the American Heart Association’s Scientific
Sessions 2013.
Congenital heart defects occur
when the heart or blood vessels near the heart don’t develop normally before
birth. Defects may be caused by chromosomal abnormalities, but the cause is
unknown in most cases.
Congenital heart defect rates have gradually decreased in Canada since
2006, about the time the government tightened regulations to reduce industrial
air emissions. The heart defect decreases were mainly associated with heart
defects resulting in holes between the upper and lower heart chambers and
malformations of the cardiac outflow tracts, Ngwezi said.
Researchers examined
patterns of congenital heart defects incidence and presence of environmental
toxins in Alberta, Canada. The ongoing research seeks to determine if pregnant
women’s proximity to organic compounds and metals emitted in the air impacts
the risk of heart defects in their children.
“Although still in the early stage, this
research suggests some chemical emissions—particularly, industrial air
emissions—may be linked to heart abnormalities that develop while the heart is
forming in the womb,” said lead researcher Deliwe P. Ngwezi, M.D., a Ph.D.,
student and research fellow in pediatric cardiology at the University of
Alberta in Canada.
The study is based
on congenital heart defects diagnosed between 2004 and 2011 and chemical
emissions recorded by a Canadian agency tracking pollutants.
Researchers
looked at three chemical categories, but only one group showed a strong
correlation with rates of congenital heart defects. The group of chemicals consists of a
mixture of organic compounds and metals: benzene, butadiene, carbon disulphide,
chloroform, ethylene oxide, hexachlorobenzene, tetrachloroethane, methanol,
sulphur dioxide, toluene, lead, mercury and cadmium.
This study, she
said, should draw attention to the increasing evidence about the impact of
environmental pollution on birth defects.
Visit EcoWatch’s
HEhttp://ecowatch.com/2013/11/20/air-pollution-pregnancy-heart-defects/
11. Duke Study finds Radioactive Hot spots in PA Tributaries- Indiana County
Discharge Levels 200
X above background
(Another article on the Blacklick study, jan)
Radioactive waste discharged into rivers from shale gas operations in
Pennsylvania exceed regulatory thresholds and pose an environmental risk, according
to a study released by Duke University.
The peer-reviewed
study, published in Environmental Science
and Technology, found that radium levels of sediment samples collected in
Blacklick Creek downstream from a treatment plant in Western Pennsylvania were
200 times greater than samples upstream and background sediments. The levels
exceed thresholds for radioactive waste disposal and pose “potential
environmental risks of radium bioaccumulation in localized areas of shale gas
wastewater disposal.” The samples were
collected downstream from discharges from the Josephine Brine Treatment
Facility, in Indiana County, which treats wastewater from oil and gas drilling.
Waste from oil/gas drilling is exempt from both federal hazardous waste
handling and disposal regulations and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Oversight is left
up to states, including New York and Pennsylvania, which have no standards or
protocol to test drilling waste for radioactive material. The Duke
study is sure to heat up a debate in both states over health risks from
extracting shale gas through fracking. Researchers attempting to clarify the
issues face a tall task due to a lack of public records and disclosure about
chemicals used and waste produced. The Duke study is one in a small but growing
field attempting to quantifying environmental hazards of shale gas development
— a key requisite for gauging health risks. It will likely take years if not
decades for answers that carry the weight of science, and even those will
likely be debatable without mandatory disclosure requirements for the industry.
Currently, at least
five landfills in upstate New York accept drilling waste from Pennsylvania
drilling operators. Landfill waste includes cuttings and mud from well
drilling. Although it’s different from the effluent discharged into streams, it
also tends to include high levels of radium.
The DEP tested water
downstream of some wastewater treatment plants in late 2010, and found levels
to be at or below background. Tests by the Pittsburgh Water & Sewer
Authority also showed no excessive readings at intakes to its treatment plant
on the Allegheny River near Aspinwall. But other studies, including one by the
USGS, showed that radioactive levels tend to correspond with shale gas waste,
and that tends to fluctuates depending
on operators production and disposal schedules.
The following is from a SGR post
on Feb. 2, 2013, which is relevant in light of the Duke study:
A report by the USGS in 2011 found that high radium levels correspond
with saltiness and total dissolved solids (TDS), all of which are
characteristic properties of waste from Devonian shales, including the
Marcellus and Utica formations underlying parts of New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Maryland. TDS is a measure of concentration of
salts and other impurities dissolved in water. They are not visible to the
naked eye, and they are flags for water problems apart from radioactivity.
Concerns over hot
fracking waste are not new, and they are not limited to Pennsylvania. While
reporting for Gannett, I uncovered a 2008
memo from the New York State Department of Health to the Department of
Environmental Conservation warning of the dangers of radioactive flowback. The
memo, unreleased to the public, referenced an analysis of wastewater samples by
state health officials that found levels of radium-226, and related alpha and
beta radiation up to 10,000 times higher than drinking water standards. Based
on that finding, the Health Department urged the DEC to design a testing
protocol to ensure hot drilling waste is handled and disposed of properly. “The
issues raised are not trivial but are also not insurmountable,” the memo
concluded. “Many can be addressed using common engineering controls and
industry best practices.”
That is reassuring,
to a degree. But what are “best practices,” exactly, and how effective are they
if they are optional? For now, they are left to the discretion of operators who
assure us that all is being handled properly, and to private waste plant
operators who echo these reassurances.”
By Tom Wilber, Shale Gas Review
http://lcconcernedcitizens.org/archives/2541
12. Does Homeland Security Think Fracktivists are Terrorists?
According to
comments made by Mark Grawe, chief operating officer at EagleRidge Energy,
Denton, TX, residents who object to his company’s reckless operations way too close to their homes, schools and parks
are terrorists worthy of inclusion on the Department of Homeland Security’s
watch list. Grawe attended a home owners association meeting in Mansfield, TX
where EagleRidge has drilled and fracked several wells
very close to a neighborhood, schools and playgrounds. He appeared at the meeting with a police officer in tow. When a
resident asked if the officer was for his protection, Grawe talked about a
Barnett Shale Energy Education Council meeting he attended where his industry
peers advised him to take security with him to community meetings because
“they” have been to meetings where “it escalated.”
Grawe went on to
tell the Mansfield residents that some people in Denton are “preaching” civil
disobedience and that they are on “the watch list” but
not his watch list. When another resident asked whose watch
list, Grawe said “Homeland Security.”
It’s shocking to
think that young families, pregnant women and retirees who don’t want to live
next to a heavy industrial plant that will decrease their property value,
diminish their quality of life and emit hazardous air pollutants that compromise their health would be considered terrorists. But what is
more shocking is that Grawe supposedly has inside information about who is on
the DHS watch list.
If you saw Gasland Part II, you will remember that retired Air Force
officer Virginia Cody was a victim of domestic spying by the DHS.
James Powers,
Pennsylvania Homeland Security director contracted with an anti-terrorism
contractor, Institute of Terrorism Research and Response (ITRR), to spy on
gas drilling opponents. ITRR intercepted communications and
tracked group members and their affiliations.
Virginia Cody was
a member of Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition, a public
awareness group, which is the same kind of group as Denton’s
Drilling Awareness Group. Powers mistakenly sent an email to Cody that made it clear the DHS was supporting the
oil and gas industry in trying to squelch opposition.
At the center of the controversy is an e-mail written by the director
of the state Homeland Security Office that seemed to take sides in the
Marcellus Shale gas-drilling debate.
“We want to continue providing
this support to the Marcellus Shale Formation natural gas stakeholders while
not feeding those groups fomenting dissent against those same companies,” James
F. Powers Jr. wrote in a Sept. 5 e-mail to Virginia Cody, an antidrilling
activist in Northeastern Pennsylvania. Philly.com, Rendell’s office releases content of
all bulletins on planned protests
Like Denton’s
Drilling Awareness Group, Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition members are not
radicals nor do they participate in any illegal activities. Yet they were
listed on intelligence bulletins as security threats right along with Al-Qaeda
operatives.
Equally shocking
was the revelation that the Pennsylvania
Department of Homeland Security had distributed those bulletins to local police
chiefs, state, federal and private intelligence agencies, and the security
directors of the natural gas companies, as well as industry groups and PR
firms.
13. WVA Gas Plant Catches Fire
(Wet gas (as opposed to dry gas) frequently
is found in W VA and western PA necessitating the stripping away of propane,
butane and ethane. Jan)
The Blue
Racer Midstream plant facility in Natrium, W Va remains completely shut down
after part of it caught fire Sept. 21. "The plant will not restart until
an emergency siren system is in place…" About 25 residents in the Kent
area north of the plant were evacuated as a safety precaution.
Wet Marcellus and Utica shale gas
travels to the plant, and the ethane, butane, propane and other natural gas
liquids are stripped away from the dry methane gas so all the products can be
marketed individually. Upon separation
from the gas stream, the propane and butane are kept in tanks on the Natrium
site to be marketed. This cannot be done with ethane because of the product's
volatility, so Dominion currently ships much of this product for cracking along
the Gulf Coast or in Canada.”
Donations
We are very appreciative
of donations to our group.
With your help, we have handed out thousands of flyers
on the health and environmental effects of fracking, sponsored numerous public
meetings, and provided information to citizens and officials countywide. If you
would like to support our efforts:
Checks to
our group should be made out to the Thomas
Merton Center/Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group. And in the Reminder line
please write- Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group. The reason for this
is that we are one project of 12 at Thomas Merton. You can send your check to:
Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group, PO Box 1040, Latrobe, PA, 15650. Or you can give the check
or cash to Lou Pochet or Jan Milburn.
To make a contribution to our
group using a credit card, go
to www.thomasmertoncenter.org. Look for the contribute
button, then scroll down the list of organizations to direct money to. We are
listed as the Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group.
Please
be sure to write Westmoreland Marcellus
Citizens’ Group on the bottom of your check so that WMCG receives the
funding, since we are just one project of many of the Thomas Merton Center. You
can also give your donation to any member of the steering committee.
Westmoreland Marcellus Citizen’s Group—Mission Statement
WMCG
is a project of the Thomas Merton Society
To raise the public’s general awareness and
understanding of the impacts of Marcellus drilling on the natural environment,
health, and long-term economies of local communities.
Officers:
President-Jan Milburn
Treasurer and Thomas Merton liason-Lou Pochet
Secretary-Ron Nordstrom
Facebook Coordinator-Elizabeth Nordstrom
Blogsite –April Jackman
Science Subcommittee-Dr. Cynthia Walter
To receive our news updates, please email
jan at westmcg@gmail.com
To remove your name from our list please put
“remove name from list’ in the subject line
