Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group Updates
February 20, 2014
* 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, the Pollocks, Marian Szmyd, Bob Donnan, Gloria Forouzan, Elizabeth
Donahue, April Jackman, and Bob Schmetzer.
Calendar
*** WMCG Meeting We meet the second Tuesday of every month at
7:30 PM in Greensburg- next meeting March 11.
Email Jan for directions. All are very welcome to attend.
***Feb 28 Public /Town Hall- Injection wells,
earthquakes, toxic frack waste impoundments, and a Community bill of Rights.
Youngstown, Ohio. Videos and Presentations at the
Unitarian Church 1105
Elm St 7-9pm
TAKE Action!!
***Letters to the editor are important
and one of the best ways to share
information with the
public. ***
Everyone Must Do This To
Have An Impact
EQB Comments
Many of us braved the cold to testify at hearings in
Indiana and Washington PA. Others attended hearings in other parts of the
state. The industry is out in full force. They have paid employees at every
hearing-actually they have the same people sometimes reading the same
statements at every hearing. It is up to us, to you, to speak for the air and
water quality and property values that we feel need to be protected. My award
for most unbelievable comment of the night goes to the representative from
Dogwood Energy who said that the regs should be established without the input
of citizens’ groups. So
apparently the democratic process to drillers means only the industry speaks
and they write their own rules.
We have more wells going
in every day. I receive, on average, a call a week from a distraught area
resident whose neighbor sold out to the industry. PA doesn't have a moratorium
as do more cautious states, so these regs are critical. Zoning can help to
restrict the placement of gas operations but not the "how they operate
aspect”. If fracking occurs anywhere near you, these are the regulations that
govern much of that process, that, for example, allow a toxic frack pit near
your home or school or radioactive drill cuttings to be stored or buried on
site.
The PA oil/gas regs were never meant to
regulate fracking. They were written for shallow gas wells and do not protect
the public. Below are links to comments. You can rephrase and add your thoughts
to send in a statement of your concerns. jan
To view what other people wrote thus far: http://www.irrc.state.pa.us/full_list.aspx?IRRCNo=3042&type=1
To view what we presented:
Online Comments
The public is being invited to submit comments to the EQB regarding the
proposed rulemaking by March 14. Along with their comments, people can submit a one-page
summary of their comments to the EQB. Comments, including the one page summary,
may be submitted to EQB by accessing the EQB’s Online Public Comment System at http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/RegComments.
Written Comments
Written comments and summaries should
be mailed to Environmental Quality Board, P.O. Box 8477, Harrisburg, PA
17105-8477.
The summaries and a formal
comment and response document will be distributed to the EQB and available
publicly prior to the meeting when the final rulemaking will be considered.
Email Comments
Online
and email comments must also be received by the EQB on or before March 14.
If an acknowledgement of comments submitted online
or by email is not received by the sender within two business days, the
comments should be re-sent to the EQB to ensure receipt.
To view materials for the
proposed regulation, visit www.dep.state.pa.us and click
the “Proposed Oil and Gas Regulations” button.
Petitions to DEP To Ban Frack Pits:
***1. Petition From Penn
Environment
Here
in Pennsylvania, fracking is one of the biggest threats to our communities and
our environment. In 2012 alone, the fracking
industry created 1.2 billion gallons of fracking wastewater--laced with
cancer-causing chemicals, contaminated with radioactivity, and polluted with
heavy metals.
This
toxic waste sits in exposed pits, which often leaches into our rivers and contaminates
our air.
It's
both disgusting and frightening.
The DEP is taking public comment
right now on a proposal to manage this fracking waste. This is our best chance
to end this dangerous practice and limit fracking's damage.
Submit
your comment right now to tell the DEP: Ban all fracking waste pits today.
When a wastewater pit caught fire
in Hopewell Township, flames shot 100 feet into the air and block smoke spread
across the countryside. It was so bad that days later, nearby residents still
couldn’t stay in their homes.
With
stories like this, you would think these toxic sites would have already been
banned. Leaks from pits can contaminate drinking water supplies, and
evaporation of these chemicals threatens our air quality. The pollutants pose risks for acute and
chronic health impacts, from dizziness to rashes and even cancer.
There's
no way to get around it: These pits are dangerous.
We need thousands of
Pennsylvanians telling the DEP to ban them all.
Take
action now to ban all toxic and dangerous fracking waste pits in Pennsylvania.
Sincerely,
David
Masur
PennEnvironment
Research & Policy Center Director
PS.
If you have friends or family who are concerned about fracking, please forward
this to them. We need to get 10,000 comments in to the DEP by the end of the
comment period if we’re going to ban all fracking waste pits.
***2. Petition by Ron to Ban Frack Pits To the DEP Environmental
Quality Board
Hello
everyone,
Frack pits are a source of toxic
waste-waters and cancer causing agents and pollute our environment through
leakage, spillage, and evaporation of toxic VOCs, thus contaminating water,
soil, and the air we breathe.
Frack
pits are a danger to animal, plant, and human life and have no place in our
Commonwealth.
In
place of the frack pit, all gas operators should be required to use some form
of a closed loop system for waste storage.
We,
the undersigned, demand an end to the open impoundment or frack pit and demand
PA place the health and welfare of its citizens above all other interests.
That's why I created a petition
to PA DEP's Environmental Quality Board, which says:
"
This petition will be forwarded to the PA DEP's Environmental Quality Board
that is accepting comments on proposed regulations and will demand an end to
open impoundments or frack pits as they are commonly known. "
Will you sign my petition? Click here to add your name:
Thanks!
Ron Slabe
***WESA Public
Radio
from Briget Shields
WESA Pittsburgh's public radio is
having their listener drive now. Instead
of renewing my membership I have sent this statement. I think it would help if
others vocalize our mission to divest in anyone promoting the fossil fuel
industry. Here is my pledge
comment. Don't know if they will print
it in the comment section I posted it in but wanted to share in hopes others
will relay the message. You can promote your own organization and put it in
your own words but while the membership drive is going on is a good time to let
them know we are not happy with the Range Resource ads we are constantly
hearing.
I
have always supported public broadcasting. BUT....there is a well fire in Greene
County where people are being exposed to toxic fumes, 300,000 people in WV
living with contaminated water from chemicals used in the fossil fuel industry
including fracking , hundreds of people without any water for over 5 years
because of the fracking industry in SWPA thousands in PA. Are you reporting
this? NO. Imagine my surprise when I hear many times a day your station
promoting the very industry that is the cause of this destruction.
Instead
I am giving my membership dollars to those organizations that promote clean
renewable energy and those that work to educate the public to stop the toxic
fossil fuel industry like: Shalefield
Stories, Marcellus Protest, PennEnvironment, Sierra Club, The Thomas Merton
Center.
Public broadcasting like all media outlets is
failing us.
Briget
shields
WESA Facebook page
***Petition to Protect Deer Lake Park Allegheny County
Please
sign the CREDO petition to stop the fracking of Allegheny County’s Deer Lake
Park. You and over 3,500 others are making a difference. Your voices are being heard on the Allegheny
County Council.
In order to keep you informed of
events, as they are about to unfold in the County Council, I ask that you take
the time to visit the Protect Our Parks web page.
By signing up at Protect Our Parks you’ll
provide POP with the ability to mobilize Allegheny County residents who’ve
already signed the CREDO petition. I hope you can do this today!
In the coming weeks, the
Allegheny County Executive, Rich Fitzgerald intends to present legislation to
the County Council that would enable the leasing of gas rights in Deer Lakes
Park to notorious drilling operator, Range Resources - the only driller to
submit a proposal to the County.
We certainly appreciate the
support of non-county residents as well. I invite you to sign on to the Protect
Our Parks page too! However, the County
Council has stated that they will give greater weight to the opinions of the
citizens of Allegheny County. It looks
like it will be a very close vote. If
you live outside of the county and have friends and/or family in Allegheny
County, I hope that you will reach out to them and ask them to sign up with
Protect Our Parks.
Widely
circulating the Protect Our Parks link on social media is also very much
appreciated.
I am depending upon you to help put a stop to
the fracking of our county parks.
I do hope you will continue to be a part of
this effort. Please, go to the Protect
Our Parks link today - sign up and, together, we’ll protect our parks!
Sincerely,
Douglas Shields
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania http:
P.S. Be sure to visit the PROTECT OUR PARKS homepage! http://www.protectparks.org
State Groups Oppose Fracking Our State
Forests.
From Clean Water Action
As
you are probably aware during Corbett's budget address he proposed balancing
the budget by over turning the moratorium on new gas drilling leases for state
parks and forests.
Please
find attached an organizational sign on letter we are working on with several
other groups. The letter will be sent to all legislators urging them to oppose
this proposal and any budget that contains it.
Steve
Hvozdovich
Clean
Water Action- Pennsylvania
Marcellus
Shale Coordinator
February 11, 2014
************************
WMCG Signed
on to the following letter:
Dear Legislators:
The
undersigned organizations urge you to oppose
Governor Tom Corbett’s proposed plan to end the existing moratorium on gas leasing
in state forests and ask you to vote against any budget that incorporates
revenue from that plan. Reopening state
forests to new gas development fills a one-time budget gap with decades of risk
and the vast majority of Pennsylvanians oppose it.
Pennsylvania
state forests are recreational and ecologic gems as well as leading drivers of
our tourism economy. Our state forests consist of more than 2.2 million acres
of pristine wilderness that are home to a variety of animals including black
bear, wild turkey, native brook trout, and rare birds. Parks and forests
offer opportunities for hiking, cross-country skiing, mountain biking,
horseback riding and is one of the best sources for hunting and fishing.
Governor
Corbett’s proposal to balance the 2014 budget by opening up our state forests
to further gas leasing threatens both the environmental and economic benefits
our forests provide. His proposal would end the moratorium on new leases for
natural gas drilling former Governor Ed Rendell put in place. Former Governor
Rendell issued the moratorium in October 2010 because he determined that more
forest drilling would “jeopardize fragile ecosystems.”
The
public agrees with former Governor Rendell’s decision. A poll in September 2013
by Mercyhurst University found that 67% of Pennsylvanians thought gas
extraction should not occur in state parks. A more recent January 2014 poll by
Franklin and Marshall College found that 68% of Pennsylvanians oppose
additional gas development in state forests. Governor Corbett’s proposal is an
affront to the wishes of Pennsylvanians. Advancement and support for this
proposal would signal that our government is not listening and that the
opinions of citizens don’t matter.
Gas
exploration and drilling causes impact to the state forests. There is no such
thing as no-impact drilling. Even proximity to drilling puts our forests at
risk. Pollution respects no boundaries. Accidents with natural gas drilling
operations like spills of toxic wastewater, explosions, and methane migration
have occurred across the Commonwealth. Additional drilling will mean noise and
light disturbance from heavy machinery, seismic exploration, construction of
new roads and pipelines, and increased truck traffic. These potential dangers and activities
increase the risk of upsetting the natural habitat of animals, disrupting the
peace that is associated with enjoying nature and threatening the health of
nearby families. The Commonwealth has
leased nearly half of the 1.5 million acres of forest it owns that overlays
with the Marcellus shale. Many of the leased land have yet to be drilled. Have
we not already leased enough land for the natural gas industry? According to a
study the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR)
finished in 2010, all of the unleased forest land is in ecologically sensitive
areas or cannot be accessed without cutting through ecologically sensitive
areas. According to former DCNR Deputy
Secretary John Quigley, the Rendell administration scoured the state forest for
tracts that were not ecologically sensitive and could still be leased. “We
found all the needles in the haystack at that time, said Quigley. I don't know
where there are additional tracts like that.”
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently
reminded us that we have an obligation to protect our forests for future
generations. Once the integrity of our
state forests are destroyed there is no turning back. Our state forests were established as sacred places for the enjoyment of
all and the conservation of the natural environment—not as future
industrial sites used to fill short term revenue needs. We need to preserve
these places for future generations as they were preserved in the past for us.
Again, we ask you to oppose Governor
Corbett’s proposal to lease our state forests for natural gas drilling and any
budget proposal that includes it. We look forward to any comments or questions
you may have on this subject and offer our support to any leader standing in
opposition to this irresponsible and irrevocable action.
Respectfully,
Steve Hvozdovich, Marcellus Shale Campaign
Coordinator
Clean Water Action
Josh McNeil, Executive Director, Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania
Frack Links
***Concerned about the air quality in
your community due to drilling?—Speaker Available
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Environmental Health Project will provide a professional speaker if you host a
community meeting. “Tyler Rubright is available throughout the next couple of
weeks to come to meetings and present and/or help to facilitate and answer any
questions.”
Contact Jessa Chabeau
***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/
*** Link to the Duquesne Seminar:
Mediasite presentation -- Facing the
Challenges Conference, Duquesne University, November 2013
List of Presentations:
Bain - Establishing a
Water Chemistry Baseline for Southwest Pennsylvania: The Ten Mile Creek Case
Bamberger, Oswald - Impacts of gas
drilling on human and animal health: updates
Boufadel - The potential for air
migration during pneumatic drilling: Recommendations for best performance
Brittingham - The effects of shale
gas development on forest landscapes and ecosystems
Brown - Understanding exposures from
natural gas drilling puts current air standards to the test
Capo, Stewart - Isotopic signatures
as tracers for shale gas fluids
Christopherson - Why local
governments take action in response to shale gas development
Collins - Regulatory structures for
reuse and disposal of shale gas wastewater
Drohan - How fracking technology is
changing landscapes compared to past resource extraction disturbance
Grant - Marcellus shale and mercury:
assessing impacts on aquatic ecosystems
Howarth - Shale gas aggravates global
warming
Ingraffea - A statistical analysis of
leakage from Marcellus gas wells in Pennsylvania
Jackson - Water interactions with
shale gas extraction
Jansa - Gas Rush Stories
Kelso, Malone - Data inconsistencies
from states with unconventional oil and gas activity
Porter - Impact of Marcellus
activities on salamanders and fish populations in the Ten Mile Creek watershed
Rabinowitz - Health complaints, water
quality indicators, and proximity to gas wells in Washington County PA
Robinson - Air Quality and Climate
Issues with Natural Gas Development and Production
Stolz - The Woodlands: a case study
of well water contamination related to unconventional shale gas extraction
Stout - Wheeling, West Virginia
Experience with Frackwater: What "Brinewater" and "Residual
Waste" Trucks are Really Carrying
VanBriesen - Challenges in assessing
effects of shale gas produced water on drinking water treatment plants
Ward - Measuring the human and social
service impacts of natural gas development
Ziemkiewicz - What does monitoring in
the three rivers tell us about the effects of shale gas development?
*** Southwest PA
Environmental Health Has Air Monitors
From
Ryan Grode at the SWPA-EHP:
“I
am beginning a distribution of new air
quality monitors for individuals who are living near any type of drilling
activity. If you know of anyone who
would want to have one of these monitors at their home I would visit them and
set up the monitor for them, then come back in a few weeks to pick up the
monitor and perhaps our nurse practitioner will join me and conduct an exposure
assessment on the family.
If
you hear of anyone who would like help dealing with issues because of drilling
please refer them to me. The office number is 724-260-5504. As mentioned I'll
personally be able to go out to see the family and speak with them and possibly
set up air quality, water quality, and possibly in the future soil quality
monitors.”
From Jan:
At
our last WMCG meeting, SWPA-HEP provided information about the air and water
monitors. “Speck” is the air monitor developed by Carnegie Mellon. It is used
indoors, plugged into an outlet, and detects particulate matter. These monitors
are being used within about 3 miles of fracked wells. The device is not calibrated in a way to be
used in a court of law. It is used to
give the homeowner an idea of the level of pollution they are being exposed to,
and it registers a continuous read. The
dylos monitor could detect 2.5 particulate but had no continuous read.
The
water indicator, called “Catfish”, is
placed in the back of a toilet and measures conductivity which is related to
general water quality of water. Further testing can be done if conductivity is
abnormal.
All articles are excerpted or summarized. Please
use links to read more.
Fracking News
1.
North Huntingdon
Commissioners Vote to Drill Under Parks
Braddock’s
Trail and Oak Hollow
The
vote was 5-yeahs and 2-nays, allowing a subsurface
lease to be signed with Huntley & Huntley for Braddock’s Trail and Oak
Hollow Park. This means a drill rig with
associated flaring will be sited in close proximity to those parks as well as heavy
truck traffic, use of toxic chemicals, and possibly a frack impoundment pit to
hold flowback waste which contains brine, heavy metals, toxic chemicals and can
be radiocactive. .
Frack
lines will run under the parks to extract the gas via the use of high pressure,
toxic chemicals, and millions of gallons of water.
A
group of North Huntingdon Township citizens informed the commissioners of
concerns regarding the health, environmental, and property value effects of
fracking. WMCG and Mt. Watershed Assoc. supported their efforts.
Had I read this excerpt from Sandra
Steingraber’s letter (see item 10) to Governor Cuomo prior to the NH meeting, I
would have included an excerpt in the WMCG letter to the NH commissioners:
“New
York State currently funds important projects, such as the creating Healthy
Places to Live, Work and Play programs, many of which are being carried out in
rural or small-town communities. Objectives
of this initiative include increasing the availability and accessibility of
places to be physically active and creating landscapes conducive to physical
activity, such as playgrounds and walking trails. It is clear that the
industrialization of the landscape where fracking would occur – with increased
truck traffic and reduction in air quality described above – undermines these
initiatives.
As
cancer advocates, we know that regular physical activity lowers the risk for
many common cancers. Indeed, the American Cancer Society attributes one-third
of all cancer diagnoses to sedentary lifestyles, obesity, and poor diet and
thus specifically advocates for land use and urban design that encourages
outdoor exercise: “Let’s make our
communities safer and more appealing places to walk, bike, and be active”
(American Cancer Society). Fracking does the opposite. No one wants to walk,
bike, or jog along roads filled with 18-wheelers hauling hazardous materials
and filling the air with diesel exhaust. Changes to the built environment that
discourage outdoor recreation and promote sedentary behavior will increase our
state’s cancer burden and further fan the flames of rising health care costs.”
2. PA Residents Offered Pizza
By
Allie Malloy and Lauren Morton, CNN
“A
Chevron natural gas well exploded last week, killing one worker and injuring
another.
Meanwhile, 100 certificates
for free pizza are sent by Chevron to residents
One resident tweets:
"Worst apology ever: Sorry our ... well exploded. Here's a free
pizza"
(CNN)
-- Some Pennsylvania residents who live near a Chevron natural gas well that
exploded, killing a worker, are getting compensation of sorts from the
corporation.
Free
pizza and sodas.
Chevron is dispensing 100 gift
certificates for pizza and soft drinks to those in the area of Greene County
where the February 11 explosion sparked a fire that burned for four days. An
employee at Bobtown Pizza confirmed the corporation's order of gift
certificates.
The
cause of the explosion is still unknown, according to Jeff Rhodes, Greene
County 911 Emergency Coordinator.
The
blast killed a worker and injured another, and although the fire is out gas and
heat are still being emitted into the atmosphere, Rhodes said.
"Nice
community relations: if you are frightened by fire and explosion, relax, have a
pizza!" another tweet stated.
One
resident who said he wished to remain anonymous because of Chevron's strong
presence in the area told CNN that he received a certificate on Sunday while he
and his family were out. He said it was the first and last time they had heard
from Chevron regarding the incident.
"It
felt like a huge slap in the face," the resident told CNN.
"I do not feel that
they've addressed anything. I haven't even called their hotline yet because I'm
just too upset. A pizza coupon? I mean come on!"
"We
appreciate the strong support we have received from nearby residents as we work
to respond to this incident in a safe manner," the Chevron statement said.
The resident who spoke to
CNN said he plans to move his family as a result of the incident.
"We're
moving as soon as we can. That's not their only well near our house. It's just
not safe," he said.
In
an update published Tuesday on its website, Chevron said the situation at the
well "remains serious and teams are working around the clock to safely
approach and shut the well."
Update from Bob Donnan on Greene
County Explosion
“A newspaper carrier said they almost evacuated his small town of
Bobtown. After playing outside earlier in the week, his daughter told him “the
air isn’t right Daddy.” While exiting the area, I drove through a
valley downwind from the well site and noticed a strong odor that is difficult
to describe, maybe mineral oil with a tangy scent? My second thought was
that I hoped no one set off a spark or lit a match! For about 15-minutes after
passing through that area I was more conscious of my lungs and experienced a
mild headache. You really have to wonder
who at the Pa DEP is a health professional that has the credentials to say
those fumes are “non-hazardous” and are “not a problem.” Shouldn’t the
Department of Health be called in?”
3. Gas Drilling Explosion
Highlights Danger of Proximity to Homes
and Schools
“On Feb. 11, the town of
Dunkard, PA was rocked by an explosion at a Chevron Appalachia natural gas
drilling site. Yesterday the fire was still burning. One worker was reported
injured and another as missing. According to press reports,
DEP Secretary Chris Abruzzo said
it was “fortunate” that the nearest house was about a half mile away from the
exploding drilling site.
While
Abruzzo is busy thanking fortune for protecting families and the community from
the devastating explosion, it is his agency that continues to fight to
reinstate Governor Corbett’s pro-drilling Act 13—the law that would allow gas
well pads and their attendant infrastructure and harms, to be built just 300
feet from homes, schools, day care centers, hospitals or any other structure in
Pennsylvania.”
4. Greene County Gas Well Fire Raises Concerns About Drilling at Airport
Feb 18 – “A gas well fire that
burned for four days in rural Greene County raised concerns among Allegheny
County Council members over drilling operations at Pittsburgh International
Airport. They worried a similar well fire could ground flights and pose a
public safety risk. “I don't see how any
person who ever flies in and out of that airport would not be concerned about
this,” Councilwoman Barbara Daly Danko, D-Regent Square, said on Monday. “If
we end up having to shut down the airport for any amount of time, that becomes
problematic.”
County Council voted a year ago to allow Consol Energy to drill
for natural gas at the airport. Danko joined three other members in voting
against the deal, which could generate more than $500 million in royalties over
about 20 years. Drilling could start this year. As the fire burned, state
police established a half-mile perimeter around the well site as a precaution.
With the fire out, the perimeter became 300 feet. The airport has an average of
139 flights per day. At least $14 million in economic activity could be lost
each day Pittsburgh International Airport is out of service, based on an
economic analysis by the Allegheny County Airport Authority.”
5. Dr. Landrigan- Neurotoxins
Include Arsenic and Toluene
(CNN)
—“The number of chemicals known to be toxic to children's developing brains has
doubled over the last seven years, researchers said.
Dr. Philip Landrigan at Mount
Sinai School of Medicine in New York and Dr. Philippe Grandjean from Harvard
School of Public Health in Boston, authors of the review published Friday in
The Lancet Neurology journal, say the
news is so troubling they are calling for a worldwide overhaul of the
regulatory process in order to protect children's brains.
"We
know from clinical information on poisoned adult patients that these chemicals can enter the brain through
the blood brain barrier and cause neurological symptoms," said Grandjean.
"When this happens in
children or during pregnancy, those chemicals are extremely toxic, because we
now know that the developing brain is a uniquely vulnerable organ. Also, the
effects are permanent."
The
two have been studying industrial chemicals for about 30 years. In 2006, they
published data identifying five chemicals as neurotoxicants -- substances that
affect brain development and can cause a number of neurodevelopmental
disabilities including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism,
dyslexia and other cognitive damage, they said.
Those five are lead, methylmercury, arsenic,
polychlorinated bipenyls (PCBs), and toluene.
At greatest risk? Pregnant women and small children,
according to Grandjean. According to the review, the biggest window of
vulnerability occurs in utero, during infancy and early childhood.
The impact is not limited to
loss of IQ points.
"Beyond IQ, we're
talking about behavior problems -- shortening of attention span, increased risk
of ADHD," Landrigan said.
"We're talking about emotion problems, less
impulse control, (being) more likely to make bad decisions, get into trouble,
be dyslexic and drop out of school. ... These are problems that are established
early, but travel through childhood, adolescence, even into adult life."
It's
not just children: All these compounds
are toxic to adults, too. In fact, in 2006 the pair documented 201
chemicals toxic to the adult nervous system, usually stemming from occupational
exposures, poisonings and suicide attempts.
Landrigan and Grandjean now say
all untested chemicals in use and all new chemicals should be tested for
developmental neurotoxicity.
This is not a new concept. In
2007, the European Union adopted regulations known as REACH -- Registration,
Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals -- to protect human
health from risks posed by chemicals. REACH covers all chemicals, placing the
burden of proof on companies to prove that any chemicals they make are safe.
"We are behind right now and we're falling further behind,"
Landrigan said. "... I find it very irritating some of the multinational
manufacturers are now marketing products in Europe and the U.S. with the same
brand name and same label, but in Europe (they) are free of toxic chemicals and
in the U.S. they contain toxic chemicals."
6.
Methane Negates Benefit of Gas-Fueled Buses and Trucks
Feb 14 – “The
sign is ubiquitous on city buses around the country: “This bus runs on clean burning
natural gas.” But a surprising new report, to be published in the journal
Science, concludes that switching buses and trucks from traditional diesel
fuel to natural gas could actually harm the planet’s climate. Although
burning natural gas as a transportation fuel produces 30 percent less
planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions than burning diesel, the drilling and production of natural gas
can lead to leaks of methane, a greenhouse gas 30 times more potent than carbon
dioxide.
Those methane leaks negate the climate
change benefits of using natural gas as a transportation fuel, according to
the study, which was conducted by scientists at Stanford University, the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Department of Energy’s National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. Natural gas producers celebrated a September
report published in The Proceedings of the Natural Academies of Science that concluded
that methane leaks from hydraulic fracturing sites are, on average, at or lower
than levels set by the E.P.A. However, that study also found that on some
fracking rigs, valves allow methane to escape at levels 30 percent higher than
those set by E.P.A.”
7. Gas Worker Arraigned In Standoff
“Feb 16 –
Joe Carl Cunningham, 48, was arraigned Sunday by District Judge James Ellis on
charges of burglary, aggravated assault, unlawful restraint, terroristic threats,
simple assault, criminal mischief and recklessly endangering another person.
Cunningham, of Ellsworth, kept police at bay for about 19 hours during a
standoff this weekend. Ellis said Cunningham’s bond was set $250,000.
Cunningham moved to the Pittsburgh area
four years ago from Texas to work in the natural gas industry.
Cunningham
surrendered Saturday morning after a 19-hour standoff with state police at a
home along Oak Street in Ellsworth. According to state police, Cunningham went
to the 36 Oak St. home he once shared with an unidentified woman who currently
lives there about 4 p.m. Friday. He ordered the woman, who was with her
boyfriend and 15-year-old daughter, to open the door or he would harm them.
State police said Cunningham had weapons at the time.”
8. DEP Fines Halliburton For
Repeated Violations Of Waste Management
Act
“DEP is fining Halliburton Energy Services $1.8 million for 255
violations of the Solid Waste Management Act between 1999 and 2011.
DEP
became aware of the violations in 2011 during an inspection of the facility,
and further investigation revealed violations dating back to 1999. “Our
regulations are in place to protect the health and safety of our residents and
to preserve our environmental resources,” DEP Secretary Chris Abruzzo said.
“Halliburton’s repeated disregard of these regulations is unacceptable.” The
violations occurred when the company, at
its Homer City facility in Indiana County, stored, treated and transported
waste hydrochloric acid without obtaining proper permits from DEP.
During
the 12-year time period, Halliburton transported acidic waste, which had
originated from various gas well sites, without
identifying the waste as “hazardous waste,” without proper hazardous waste
trucking records, and without using a licensed hazardous waste transporter.
In addition, the company sent the hazardous waste to an unauthorized treatment
and disposal operation. While there is no evidence that Halliburton’s handling
of the hazardous waste caused any actual harm to the public or the environment;
Halliburton violated state regulations governing the handling, storage,
transport and disposal of hazardous waste on hundreds of occasions.’
Tim Puko- Tribune Review:
Halliburton to pay $1.8 million DEP
penalty
“Feb
18 - The loophole wasn't big enough for Halliburton Co. The company that helped
make fracking popular with loophole critics named after it agreed to pay a $1.8
million fine for its work with local drillers. It violated an exemption that allowed it to store small quantities of
waste from its acid-based fracking fluid, storing more than 10 times the limit
at its facility in Indiana County, the DEP said. Hart Resource Technologies
former owner, Paul Hart, said the company was since sold to Fluid Recovery
Services LLC and he referred questions to a spokeswoman who could not be
reached. Both companies signed separate consent agreements with the DEP and the
EPA in 2013 for unrelated violations for exceeding permitted limits for the
waste they could dump in local rivers. Hart will not face more penalties for
the Halliburton case, Poister said.
Unlabeled trucks
could have posed a hazard during any spill, putting truckers, emergency
responders and the public at risk of serious health problems, Poister and a
safety expert said. Hydrochloric acid is so corrosive it dissolves cement and
minerals, making it useful to help start the hydraulic fracturing, or fracking,
process used in shale gas drilling.” Short-term exposure in humans can cause
severe burns and scarring and potentially deadly respiratory problems,
according to the EPA.
“For this to go on this long, it's evidence of
a corporate culture that lacks concern for environmental compliance,” Jugovic
said. “It's just incredibly outrageous.”
9. How Do You Count the Jobs?
“Gov Corbett routinely says 200,000 plus jobs have
been created by fracking. An economist responds that there is only one seventh
of that. PA Senator McCarter has
introduced a resolution directing the Legislative Budge and Finance Committee
of the state House to study the number of jobs being generated by the industry,
paying specific attention to jobs in ancillary industries, workers from out of
state, and what wages and benefits are offered.
That bill haves gotten no
traction but Mc Carter keeps pushing
He said it’s important to have an
unassailable statistics when debating whether to tax the industry or give it
incentives.
In Pennsylvania, if you go with
the conservative estimate, counting only jobs that touch a well pad or pipeline,
or if you bunch in all jobs in 30 other related industries, oil and gas employment still comprises a sliver of
the states workforce-between .4 % and 3% of the employed populations.
Stephen Herzenberg of Keystone
Research Center notes, ”Its still true that the scale of the jobs is modest.”
PA Dept of Labor and Industry
calculates employment by counting jobs in six core industries and jobs in 30
other industries the state designates as ancillary. This includes truck
transportation, power plants, sewage treatment plants and engineering.
The counting mechanism underestimates some
jobs as lawyers working on gas deals or diner waiters who staff increased
demand.
But it inflates other jobs by placing the entire trucking industry in the
count. The numbers don’t say what percentage of truckers on the road are
hauling frack water and which are delivered to Wal-Mart.
Mc Carter says Pennsylvania needs
an economic boom, “If this industry’s not helping us, we need to tout other
things. “
He’s interested in determining
how many workers are brought in form other states to serve the industry, an
issue that can downplay the impact of shale development on the economy.”
Post
Gazette, 12-9-13, Anya Litvak,
10. Bad Air From Drill Operations
The Eagle Ford Shale in South
Texas is the site of one of the biggest energy booms in America, with oil and
gas wells sprouting at an unprecedented rate. But local residents fear for
their health - not from the water, but from the air they breathe. Our eight-month investigation reveals the
dangers that come with releasing a toxic soup of chemicals into the air and
just how little the government of Texas knows - or wants to know - about it.
KARNES
CITY, Texas — When Lynn Buehring leaves her doctor’s office in San Antonio she
makes sure her inhaler is on the seat beside her, then steers her red GMC
pickup truck southeast on U.S. 181, toward her home on the South Texas prairie.
About 40 miles down the road, between Poth and Falls City, drilling rigs, crude
oil storage tanks and flares trailing black smoke appear amid the mesquite,
live oak and pecan trees. Depending on the speed and direction of the wind, a
yellow-brown haze might stretch across the horizon, filling the car with
pungent odors. Sometimes Buehring’s eyes burn, her chest tightens and pain
stabs at her temples. On those days, she touches her inhaler for reassurance.
People who live close to oil and gas
development — whether in Texas’ Eagle Ford, Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale or
Wyoming’s Green River Basin — tend to report the same symptoms: nausea,
nosebleeds, headaches, body rashes and respiratory problems. Public health
experts say these shared experiences point to a pressing need for improved air
monitoring.
“If
you have pockets of communities with the same symptoms downwind of similar
sources, then there is a body of evidence,” said Isobel Simpson, an atmospheric
scientist at the University of California, Irvine, who studies air pollution
around the world.
Chemicals released during oil and
gas extraction include hydrogen sulfide, a deadly gas found in abundance in
Eagle Ford wells; volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like benzene, a known
carcinogen; sulfur dioxide and particulate matter, which irritate the lungs;
and other harmful substances such as carbon monoxide and carbon disulfide. VOCs
also mix with nitrogen oxides emitted from field equipment to create ozone, a
major respiratory hazard.
Studies show that, depending on the concentration and length of
exposure, these chemicals can cause a range of ailments, from minor headaches
to neurological damage and cancer.
The TCEQ relies primarily on
field canister samples, on-the-ground investigations and aerial surveys with
infrared cameras to detect emissions. Last summer, the agency used the cameras
during two flyovers to capture hundreds of images of the Eagle Ford. A
contractor then surveyed 16,015 oil and gas storage tanks and found 800 with
leaks, TCEQ spokesman Terry Clawson said.
Scientists say that while these
spot checks are important, they are no substitute for strategically placed,
stationary monitors that continuously measure how air quality changes over
time.
The TCEQ has only five permanent monitors in the Eagle Ford, all
positioned far from the most heavily drilled areas. The Barnett Shale in North
Texas, by contrast, has 35 permanent monitors, even though that field
covers only about 5,000 square miles — a quarter of the area of the Eagle Ford.
“The biggest challenge with
air monitoring is having the measurements in place so you can catch the times when
concentrations are high,” said Rob Jackson, a Duke University scientist who
studies pollution from shale extraction.
Even the EPA doesn’t know much about methane emissions or the other pollutants
from oil and gas production. An inspector general's report last year concluded
that the agency's air emissions database is incomplete and “likely
underestimates” those emissions. The lack of reliable data, the report
said, “hampers EPA’s ability to accurately assess risks and air quality impacts
from oil and gas production activities.”
Environmental groups have
tried to collect their own air-quality data in the Eagle Ford, but the process
is so expensive and time-consuming that they’ve had little success. Last March, Wilma Subra,
an environmental consultant from Louisiana, and Sharon Wilson of the advocacy
group Earthworks, accompanied Calvin Tillman, who runs a nonprofit called
ShaleTest, as he took air samples near Mike and Myra Cerny’s one-acre tract,
about a half-mile from the Buehrings.
There are at least 17 oil wells
within a mile of the Cernys' small house. Their
teenage son, Cameron, gets frequent nosebleeds, and the fumes make his parents
dizzy, irritable and nauseous. “This crap is killing me and my family,” said
Mike, a former oil company truck driver. “We went from nice, easy country
living to living in a Petri dish.”
Myra
complained to the TCEQ in 2012, and the agency cited Marathon Oil for operating
a broken flare and failing to report thousands of pounds of unauthorized
emissions at its Sugarhorn Central gas processing plant. But Marathon paid no
penalty. “I feel like we’re expendable,” Myra said.
The air samples the environmental
groups took near the Cerny home detected 14 VOCs, including benzene, toluene
and xylene, but none in concentrations the TCEQ considers immediately
dangerous. Subra said that doesn’t mean the air is safe, because the data came
from a “grab sample” that represented
only a snapshot in time. Guidelines are set for one compound at a time
without considering what happens when people are simultaneously exposed to
multiple chemicals. To add to the confusion, scientists don’t know much about
some of the chemicals emitted, and certain proprietary compounds are hidden
from public scrutiny.
Full
story:
11. Fracking and Cancer: Health Risks At
Every Step
(Sandra Steingraber’s letter from 2011 is still a
valuable resource and provides a good overview of problems associated with
fracking. Jan)
By Barb Harris
“We’ve
got to push the pause button, and maybe we’ve got to push the stop button” on
fracking, said Dr. Adam Law, an endocrinologist at Weill Cornell Medical
College in New York. Law was among doctors at a
conference in Virginia calling for a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for
natural gas in populated areas until health effects are better understood. The
January 2012 conference was organized by the Mid-Atlantic Center for Children’s
Health and the Environment and Physicians, Scientists and Engineers for Healthy
Energy.
Fracking for shale gas has been the hot
environmental health story of 2011. An unfamiliar word to most people a year
ago, fracking is now a household term in much of North America. Millions of
people already live with the effects of shale gas and fracking, or face the
impending threat. Fracking is a technology used to extract natural gas from
dense shale, (or from coal). Fracking for shale gas combines several new
techniques, including multi-well pads, horizontal drilling, high pressure
fracturing, and the addition of fracking fluids containing toxic chemicals to
huge volumes of fresh water.
Development
of shale gas, including fracking, releases toxic chemicals into air, water and
soil at every step of the process, from drilling to waste storage and disposal.
Multiply these exposures by thousands, because shale gas development is dense,
averaging one well pad with 8 or more wells per 10 acres. In Pennsylvania, more
than 3,000 gas fracking wells and permitted well sites are located within two
miles of 320 day care centers, 67 schools and nine hospitals, and development
is still in the early stages.
Over
the last year, the public health impacts of fracking have gained increasing
attention. Scientific American, June 2011, published an article titled “Science Lags as Health
Problems Emerge Near Natural Gas Fields.” “In some
communities it has been a disaster,” states Christopher Portier, director of
the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and the
National Center for Environmental Health. “…We do not have enough information
on hand to be able to draw good solid conclusions about whether this is a
public health risk as a whole.” In July 2011, Global Community Monitor released
“Gassed”,
a study of toxic air near natural gas operations in Colorado and New Mexico.
When citizens became ill in large numbers and could not convince government
agencies to respond to their concerns, they were trained by Global Community
Monitor to take their own air samples. The samples were sent to a lab for
analysis, and the results compiled. Citizen
air sampling found four known carcinogens, including high levels of benzene and
acrylonitrile, as well as toxins known to damage the nervous system and
respiratory irritants.
Fracking and shale gas pose serious and irreversible
multiple health risks, including cancer, respiratory damage and endocrine
disruption that can lead to birth defects and increase cancer risks. It is
too early yet to know definitively whether cancer rates are rising in areas
where shale gas development and fracking is taking place. But there is abundant
evidence of exposure to carcinogenic substances from these operations.
Environmental biologist and prize-winning
author Dr. Sandra Steingraber summarizes the cancer risks of fracking in a letter to New York
State Governor Cuomo. New York State is poised to decide whether to lift a
moratorium on fracking and allow extensive development throughout the state.
The state’s environmental assessment has been widely criticized for virtually
ignoring all health issues. The
Steingraber letter was signed by major cancer prevention organizations
throughout New York State and sent to Governor Cuomo and review panel
members on December 12, 2011 as part of the state’s environmental review
process.
The main points of the letter are
excerpted below.
1. Hydraulic
fracturing introduces cancer risks from the start and into perpetuity.
Cancer-causing chemicals are associated with all stages of the high-volume
hydraulic fracturing process, from the
production and use of fracking fluids, to the release of radioactive and other
naturally hazardous materials from the shale, to transportation and
drilling-related air pollution, to the disposal of contaminated wastewater. The
potential for accidents during the injection and transportation of fracking
chemicals concerns us deeply. And, as data from other states clearly
demonstrate, the storage, treatment and disposal of the contaminated water can
be a source of human exposure to chemical carcinogens and their precursors
(Volz, 2011). In addition, the industrialization of the landscape and
congestion of small communities with truck traffic impairs the safety and
healthfulness of outdoor exercise. Regular exercise is an important, established
risk reducer for many cancers, including breast cancer (Bernstein, 2009).
Outdoor exercise is associated with a greater intent to continue the activity,
along with other positive health indicators.
2. Fracking
fluids contain carcinogens and cancer-promoting chemicals. More than 25% of the
chemicals used in natural gas operations have been demonstrated to cause cancer
or mutations (Colborn, Kwiatkowski, Schultz,
& Bachran, 2011). Between 2005 and 2009, according to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, hydraulic fracturing companies used 95 products containing
13 different known and suspected carcinogens. These include naphthalene,
benzene, and acrylamide (Committee Staff for Waxman, 2011). Thirty-seven
percent of chemicals in fracking fluids have been identified as
endocrine-disruptors. By definition, these substances have the power, at minute
concentrations, to alter hormonal signaling pathways within the body. Many can
place cells on the pathway to tumor formation. Exposure to endocrine-disrupting
chemicals has been implicated in cancers of the breast, prostate, pituitary,
testicle, and ovary (Birnbaum & Fenton, 2003; Soto & Sonnenschein,
2010). These exposures may alter gene expression in pregnancy and early life
(Colborn, et al., 2011).
3. Fracking
operations release from the earth radioactive substances, carcinogenic vapors,
and toxic metals. The shale bedrock of New York
State contains many highly carcinogenic substances that can be mobilized by
drilling and fracturing. Among these are arsenic, chromium, benzene, uranium,
radon, and radium (Bishop, 2011). Drill
cuttings and flowback waste are typically contaminated with naturally occurring
radioactive substances and cancer-causing metals, which would otherwise
remain safely entombed underground. Flowback
waste can contain up to 16,000 picoCuries per liter of radium-226, this is more
than 200 times higher than the discharge limit in effluent (60 pCi/L) and more
than 3,000 times higher than the US EPA drinking water standard (5 pCi/L)
(NYSDOH Bureau of Environmental Radiation Protection, 2009). Traditional water
filtration cannot remove these contaminants. We are especially alarmed by the
ongoing practice of burying radioactive drill cuttings on-site (Bishop, 2011)
and of using radioactive production brine from (currently out-of-state)
fracking operations on New York State roads, for purposes of dust control and
de-icing (NYSDOH Bureau of Environmental Radiation Protection, 2009). This
practice exposes unknown numbers of people, without their consent, to unknown
amounts of a known human carcinogen.
4. Fracking
pollutes the air with known and suspected human carcinogens.
Air pollutants from fracking take the form of diesel exhaust (from trucks, pumps, condensers, earthmoving machines,
and other heavy equipment) along with volatile organic compounds, including
benzene (released from the wellheads themselves) and formaldehyde (produced by
compressor station engines). Exposure to these air pollutants have been
demonstrably linked to lung, breast, and bladder cancers (Brody et al.,
2007; Liu et al., 2009). Using US EPA risk assessment tools to examine
carcinogenic effects of air quality at oil and gas sites, researchers in
Colorado found excess cancer risks from air pollution alone (from 5 to 58
additional cancers per million). At 86 percent of these sites, the human
carcinogen benzene was found at hazardous levels. Airborne concentrations of
other carcinogens were also elevated (Witter et al., 2008).
Volatile organic compounds can combine
with tailpipe emissions to create ground-level ozone. We are alarmed by studies
conducted in the gas fields of Wyoming that reveal ozone non-attainment in
areas with formerly pristine air quality (Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality, 2009). Ozone can travel up to 200 miles beyond the gas production area
(Colborn, et al., 2011). While not a direct carcinogen, ozone exposure is
strongly associated with premature death and is believed to promote the
development of metastases, thus making cancer more lethal (Breslin, 1995; Fann
et al., 2011). Exposure to traffic exhaust and petroleum fumes further
potentiates tumor formation and increases cancer risk (Hanas et al., 2010).
Natural gas drilling in New York State is
predicted to increase heavy truck traffic
on local roads by as much as 1.5 million more trips per year, with an average
of 90 and up to 1000 trucks per day at a single well pad (NYSDOT, 2011). For
each individual site, hundreds of tanker trucks hauling fracking fluids for
injection and flowback fluids for disposal will roll through our communities
and neighborhoods, and yet no one has calculated the cumulative impact of the
resulting particulate matter and ozone on public health.
We remind the Governor that traffic exhaust, especially from diesel
engines, is a well-established cause of chronic illness and premature death –
even at levels well below regulatory limits. Most ominously, research is
steadily corroborating the relationship between childhood leukemia and traffic
density, and childhood leukemia and exposure to airborne benzene (Amigou et
al., 2011; Pearson, Wachtel, & Ebi, 2000; Whitworth, Symanski, & Coker,
2008). We are also deeply concerned by the growing evidence linking lung cancer
in non-smokers to air pollution, including traffic exhaust. Among adults,
non-smoker’s lung cancer is now the sixth most common cancer diagnosis, and
rates are rising particularly rapidly among women. A new, nationwide study
finds that people who have never smoked but live in areas with higher air
pollution are 20 percent more likely to die from lung cancer than people
breathing cleaner air (Turner et al., 2011). Fracking will increase this lethal
risk.
5. Fracking
adds carcinogens to drinking water. Nationwide, more than a thousand different
cases of water contamination have been documented near fracking sites. We
draw your attention to one of these: the drinking water wells of Pavillion,
Wyoming. An EPA study released just this month confirms the presence of the
carcinogen 2-butoxyethanol, a widely used fracking chemical, in the aquifer
under Pavillion, which is an intensively drilled community (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 2011). Pavillion’s drinking water also contains benzene,
naphthalene, and diesel fuel. We are deeply troubled that confirmation of these
cancer-causing contaminants comes three years after their initial discovery and
in the wake of repeated denials of responsibility by the gas industry. The
story of Pavillion reveals not only that drinking water is at risk of chemical
contamination from fracking operations but also that swift mitigation of such
disasters is far from assured. The wheels of science grind slowly while the
lives of people have remained in harm’s way.
We are also troubled by the discovery
that drinking water wells located near active
gas wells here in the Marcellus region contain methane levels that are 17 times
higher than those located near inactive wells (Holzman, 2011; Osborn,
Vengosh, Warner, & Jackson, 2011) and by the reports of spiking bromide
levels in the rivers of western Pennsylvania that followed discharges of
fracking wastewater into sewage treatment plants last spring (Hopey, 2011).
While methane and bromide are not suspected carcinogens, they serve as
precursors for the creation of trihalomethanes, which can form when water is
chlorinated. Trihalomethanes are associated with both bladder and colorectal
cancers (Weinberg, Krasner, Richardson, & Thruston, 2002).
6. Preliminary
evidence points to high rates of cancer in intensively drilled areas.
In Texas, breast cancer rates rose significantly among women living in the six
counties with the most intensive gas drilling (Heinkel-Wolfe, 2011). By
contrast, over the same time period, breast cancer rates declined within the
rest of Texas. In western New York State – where vertical gas drilling has been
practiced since 1821 and has resulted in significant contamination of soil and
water – rural counties with historically intensive gas industry activity show
consistently higher cancer death rates than rural counties without drilling
activity. In women, cancers associated
with residence in a historically drilling-intensive county include breast,
cervix, colon, ovary, rectum, uterus, and vagina. Men living in the same region
are consistently in the highest bracket for deaths from cancer of the bladder,
prostate, rectum, stomach, and thyroid (Bishop, 2011), (based on National
Cancer Institute cancer mortality maps and graphs).
While these correlations do not prove a
connection between abnormally high rates of cancer and gas industry pollution,
they do offer clues for further inquiry. We in the cancer advocacy community
believe that this inquiry must precede, not trail behind, any decision to bring
hydro-fracking to New York State. Benefit of the doubt goes to public health
rather than to the forces that threaten it.
7. Fracking
operations will undermine New York State efforts to prevent chronic disease.
New York State currently funds important projects, such as the creating Healthy
Places to Live, Work and Play programs, many of which are being carried out in
rural or small-town communities. Objectives
of this initiative include increasing the availability and accessibility of
places to be physically active and creating landscapes conducive to physical
activity, such as playgrounds and walking trails. It is clear that the
industrialization of the landscape where fracking would occur – with increased
truck traffic and reduction in air quality described above – undermines these
initiatives.
As cancer advocates, we know that regular
physical activity lowers the risk for many common cancers. Indeed, the American
Cancer Society attributes one-third of all cancer diagnoses to sedentary
lifestyles, obesity, and poor diet and thus specifically advocates for land use
and urban design that encourages outdoor exercise: “Let’s make our communities safer and more appealing places to walk,
bike, and be active” (American Cancer Society). Fracking does the opposite. No
one wants to walk, bike, or jog along roads filled with 18-wheelers hauling
hazardous materials and filling the air with diesel exhaust. Changes to the
built environment that discourage outdoor recreation and promote sedentary
behavior will increase our state’s cancer burden and further fan the flames of
rising health care costs.
8. The proposed
mitigation strategies set forth in the revised environmental impact statement
are insufficiently protective. The revised
environmental impact statement makes no attempt to explicate the possible human
health effects that may result from permitting thousands of gas wells within
New York State and from filling our roadways with the fleets of trucks that
will service them – or to project the monetary costs of these health effects.
Rather, the document asserts, axiomatically, that no such health effects will
occur because each gas well will be surrounded by a buffer zone that sets it
apart from residential areas and public drinking water sources. But set-backs,
like non-smoking sections inside airplanes, are imaginary circles that cannot
contain volatile, inherently toxic substances when they are released from
multiple sources into interconnected environmental media. We all breathe the
same air, and we all live downstream. The best science shows us that cancer is
the end result of multiple stressors adding together over time to alter the
genetic signaling pathways within our cells (President’s Cancer Panel Report,
2010) When it comes to cancer, the cumulative impact of many small straws is
what breaks the camel’s back.
9. Chemical
disclosure requirements, health registries, and after-the-fact bio-monitoring
programs cannot substitute for due diligence.
Disclosing the chemicals used in fracking operations, monitoring human
exposures to those chemicals, and establishing registries of those harmed by
chemical exposures are useful tools for scientific study and are basic to a
transparent, right-to-know democracy, but they do not, by themselves, protect
public health. Instead, we need a precautionary, prevention-oriented approach
to reducing environmental cancer risk. Drawing on scientific research conducted
here in New York and concluding that “… the true burden of environmentally
induced cancer has been grossly underestimated,” the 2008-2009 Annual Report of
the President’s Cancer Panel, calls on state governments to take action to
reduce and eliminate toxic exposures implicated in cancer causation before
human harm occurs (President’s Cancer Panel, 2010). To permit a form of fossil
fuel extraction that opens countless portals of toxic contamination – upon
commencement of the fracking operation and in perpetuity – turns us away from a
meaningful approach to cancer prevention.
Full text of the letter including
references and supporting organizations is available here.Barb Harris is a writer,
researcher and activist. Her focus for the last decade has been the human
health impacts of environmental toxins and finding healthier alternatives. For
the last year, she has researched the health impacts of shale gas and fracking.
She is a Board member of the Environmental Health Association of Nova Scotia,
and co-author of the on-line Guide to Less Toxic
Products. She lives in River John, Nova Scotia.
http://www.preventcancernow.ca/fracking-shale-gas-and-cancer-health-risks-at-every-step
************************************************************************
“I’d
have to say this is the first year the Olympic flame made me think first of a
gas well flare.” Bob Donnan
Donations
We are very appreciative of
donations, both large and small, 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 Lou Pochet or Jan Milburn.
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
Science Advisor-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
