* For articles and updates or to just vent, visit us on facebook;
https://www.facebook.com/groups/MarcellusWestmorelandCountyPA/
* To view past updates, reports, general
information, permanent documents, and meeting
information http://westmorelandmarcellus.blogspot.com/
* Email address: janjackmil@gmail.com
* 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
Contributors To Our Updates
A
little Help Please --Take Action!!
Tenaska Air Petitions—Please sign if you have not done so:
Please
share the attached petition with residents of Westmoreland and all bordering
counties. We ask each of you to help us
by sharing the petition with your email lists and any group with which you are
affiliated. As stated in the petition, Westmoreland County cannot meet air
standards for several criteria. Many areas of Westmoreland County are already
listed as EPA non-attainment areas for ozone and particulate matter 2.5, so the
county does not have the capacity to handle additional emissions that will
contribute to the burden of ozone in the area as well as health impacts. According to the American Lung Association,
every county in the Pittsburgh region except for Westmoreland County had fewer
bad air days for ozone and daily particle pollution compared with the previous
report. Westmoreland County was the only
county to score a failing grade for particulate matter.
The Tenaska gas plant will add tons of pollution to
already deteriorated air and dispose of wastewater into the Youghiogheny
River. Westmoreland County already has a
higher incidence of disease than other counties in United States. Pollution won’t stop at the South Huntingdon
Township border; it will travel to the surrounding townships and counties.
The action to Tenaska and State Reps: http://tinyurl.com/stoptenaska
The hearing request to DEP: http://tinyurl.com/tenaskahearing
If you know of church groups or other organizations that will help with
the petition please forward it and ask for their help.
*********************************************************************************
Calendar
*** WMCG Group
Meeting We usually
meet the second Tuesday of every month at 7:30 PM in Greensburg. Recently we have adjusted this schedule. Email
Jan for details and directions. All are
very welcome to attend.
***Rally to Clean
Up Fracking in PA- Nov 18, 12:00
Join
local activists in and the newly created coalition ‘Pennsylvanians Against
Fracking’ at a rally to be held in Harrisburg:
Noon
to 2:00 pm, Tuesday, November 18
N.
3rd Street Harrisburg, PA 17120
Contact
Diane Sipe at < mpro113@gmail.com > to get plugged into carpools with
Marcellus Outreach Butler and Marcellus Protest.
“Tom Wolf just won the election
to be Pennsylvania’s next Governor. As Governor, Wolf will have the power to
halt fracking. However, we know it is going to take a lot of pressure to win a
statewide moratorium.
“That pressure starts November
18th in Harrisburg. We’ll use a big box of cleaning supply to show the next
Governor how to clean up our state. Please also bring your own cleaning tools-
brooms, mops, sponges- get creative! We’ll also bring some homemade solar
panels to shine sunlight- the best disinfectant- on the Capitol.
Sponsors
include Berks Gas Truth, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, Marcellus Outreach
Butler, Marcellus Protest, PennEnvironment and Pennsylvania Alliance for Clean
Water and Air
***Program to
document impacts of Fracking Near National Parks-
Nov 12, Phipps Conservatory
Next week, NPCA will unveil
a new initiative focused on protecting our parks in Pennsylvania. They have
teamed up with FracTracker Alliance on a
new smartphone app that enables citizens to document the impacts "fracking" has had in their communities
and near our national parks. We'll also discuss opportunities created by
the change in the governor's office.
We started documenting many
impacts of fracking occurring near our beloved Theodore Roosevelt National Park
in North Dakota, and now we are bringing those photos and videos, along with
expert panelists, to Pennsylvania to raise awareness about the potential
impacts fracking could have on our parks.
Act now to join us in Pittsburgh
on November 12 and learn from the experts, see bird's-eye views of landscapes
affected by fracking, and discuss how the practice could affect national park
communities in Pennsylvania. We'll also share ways citizens like you can help
protect our parks.
Will you join us? Time is running
out, so RSVP now to melliott@npca.org.
Event Details
WHAT:
An expert panel and group discussion about protecting our parks from the
impacts of hydraulic fracturing.
WHO:
Brook Lenker, executive director, FracTracker Alliance; Nick Lund, landscape
conservation program manager, NPCA; Valerie Naylor, National Park Service
(retired), superintendent of Theodore Roosevelt National Park (2003-2014); Jan
Swenson, executive director, Badlands Conservation Alliance.
WHEN
& WHERE:
Wednesday,
November 12, from 6 - 8 p.m. at the Phipps Conservatory and Botanical Gardens,
One Schenley Park, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. We'll be meeting in Botany Hall.
Thursday,
November 13, from 6 - 8 p.m. at The Hub, CityView, 30 S. 17th Street, #1410,
Philadelphia, PA 19103. We'll be meeting in the "Sky" room.
RSVP:
Please RSVP to Matt Elliott at melliott@npca.org or 215.327.2529.
OTHER
DETAILS: Events are free, and light refreshments will be provided. Parking is
available at both locations. For Pittsburgh, metered parking (free after 6
p.m.) is available along Schenley Drive; parking is also available at the
nearby Carnegie museums. For Philadelphia, Liberty Place garage is located at
44 S. 16th Street. The nearest SEPTA stop is Suburban Station.
I
hope to see you there!
Sincerely,
Matt Elliott
Pennsylvania
and Delaware Program Manager
***Boston Art Show
Uses Local Voices-- July 11, 2014 through
January 5, 2015
Open to the public, Boston Museum
of Science
Several of us spoke to artist Anne Neeley about water
contamination from fracking. Excerpts of what we said about our concerns
regarding fracking will play in a loop along with music in the background as
people view Anne’s murals of water. The show is not exclusively about the
effect of fracking on water and includes other sources of pollution. (see sites
below).
Some of us were fortunate to see photos of Anne’s
murals. They are beautiful and very thought provoking. Jan
ANNE NEELY WATER STORIES
PROJECT: A CONVERSATION IN PAINT AND SOUND
July
2014 – January 2015, Museum of Science, Boston
David G. Rabkin, PhD,
Director for Current Science and Technology, Museum of Science, Boston, MA
Visit
these sites for images and more information:
http://www.anneneely.com/pages/mos.html
TAKE ACTION !!
***Letters to the editor are important and one of the best ways to share
information with the public. ***
***Comment Period
Ends Nov 18 on DEP's Marcellus Violation Standards
The DEP has taken much flack
for "inadequate inspections" of the oil & gas industry. That
policy is now under review. The Public Comment Period will end on November
18
That
is your last chance to weigh in regarding their policy of identifying, tracking
and resolving violations.
See
comments on DEP's proposal at
We feel that DEP must
"follow the book". Their guidelines should be followed in actual
practice, not just as "aspirational goals".
You can find many "talking
points" in the newspaper article. The Auditor General's comments are
excellent and should be mentioned. We feel that as a minimum there should be
at least one inspection prior to drilling and a clearly- mandated minimum total
of at least six inspections per well.
The ability of DEP to inspect wells must not be overwhelmed by the
number of permits issued.
For
more information, file://localhost/see http/::cogentpa.org:2014:10:25:action-alert-public-comment-period-standards-guidelines-identifying-tracking-resolving-violations:
Many
thanks to Emily Krafjack and
C.O.G.E.N.T. for providing this information.
Submit
your comments via e-mail: ra-epoilandgas@pa.gov
Subject line:
Comments on
Standards for Identifying Tracking and Resolving Violations
You
may want to CC your State Senator and Representative.
DEP Address:
John
Ryder, DEP
PO
BOX 8467
Harrisburg
PA 17105-8467
Be
sure to include your full name and address.
R.Martin Coordinator
p.s. Do not sign on to any form letters; they will
be ignored by DEP
***TRI (Toxic Release Inventory)
Action Alert-Close the Loophole:
“We need your help!! Please send
an email to the US EPA urging them to "Close the TRI Loophole that the oil
and gas industry currently enjoys".
We all deserve to know exactly what these operations
are releasing into our air, water and onto our land. Our goal is to guarantee the public’s right
to know.
Please let the US EPA know
how important TRI reporting will be to you and your community:
Mr.
Gilbert Mears
Docket #:
EPA-HQ-TRI-2013-0281 (must be included on all correspondence)
Mears.gilbert@epa.gov
Some facts on Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) – what it is and why it’s important:
What
is the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)?
Industrial
facilities report annually the amount and method (land, air, water, landfills)
of each toxic
chemical
they release or dispose of to the national Toxics Release Inventory.
Where
can I find the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)?
Once
the industrial facilities submit their annual release data, the Environmental
Protection Agency
makes
it available to the public through the TRI’s free, searchable online database.
Why
is this important?
The
TRI provides communities and the public information needed to challenge permits
or siting
decisions,
provides regulators with necessary data to set proper controls, and encourages
industrial
facilities
to reduce their toxic releases.
Why
does it matter for oil and natural gas?
The
oil and gas extraction industry is one of the largest sources of toxic releases
in the United
States.
Yet, because of loopholes created by historical regulation and successful
lobbying efforts,
this
industry remains exempt from reporting to the TRI—even though they are second
in toxic air
emissions
behind power plants.
What
is being done?
In
2012, the Environmental Integrity Project filed a petition on behalf of sixteen
local, regional, and
national
environmental groups, asking EPA to close this loophole and require the oil and
gas
industries
to report to the TRI. Although EPA has been carefully considering whether to
act on the
petition,
significant political and industrial pressure opposing such action exists.
What
is the end goal?
Our
goal is to guarantee the public’s right to know. TRI data will arm citizens
with powerful data,
provide
incentives for oil and gas operators to reduce toxic releases, and will provide
a data-driven
foundation
for responsible regulation.
What
can you do?
You
can help by immediately letting EPA know how important TRI reporting will be to
you and your
community.
Send written or email comments to:
Gilbert Mears
Toxics Release Inventory
Program Division, Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20460
mears.gilbert@epa.gov
Docket #: EPA-HQ-TRI-2013-0281 (please be sure to
include in all your correspondence)
From: Lisa Graves Marcucci
Environmental
Integrity Project
PA
Coordinator, Community Outreach
lgmarcucci@environmentalintegrity.org
412-653-4328
(Direct)
412-897-0569
(Cell)
Frack Links
***Cool Video--Colbert and Neil Young Sing About Fracking
***Link to DEP’s Water Violation List
“The
link lists 250 water supplies across PA compromised by fracking...the tip of
the iceberg, since the DEP can't be depended on to know about or report on the
actual number of spills. The spread of fracking across the state is reflected
in when and where these spills occur, so you'll find the arrival of fracking
(and the inevitable spills) here in Westmoreland County on page six, with
spills in Donegal in 2013 and 2014.”
***Link to
Shalefield Stories-Personal stories of those affected by
fracking http://www.friendsoftheharmed.com/
***To sign up for Skytruth notifications of activity and violations
for your area:
*** List of the Harmed--There are now
over 1400 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/
Frack News
There is so much going on right now
with our Ligonier Township zoning code being completely revised that I am getting
the Updates out every 2 weeks instead of weekly. That means the Updates will be
longer. It also means I need the info about events you want to be shared with
the group to be submitted a little earlier.
Thx, jan
***Zoning Corner
Comment
by Area Councilman
“These folks are still treating
the decision as to if and where to allow drilling as a purely policy
decision. It is not. Allowing an industrial operation in a zoning
district in which it is a use incompatible with existing and permitted uses is
a constitutional violation. It is not a
decision in which the Supervisors have any discretion. There’s no “balancing” to be done. The zoning either does or does not permit
drilling. Conditional use does not
change or modify the underlying zoning.”
***Parents Fight For Schools Safe From
Fracking
“Locals say their health concerns over wells
and waste pits are ignored by oil and gas companies and state authorities
Amy Nassif thought petitioning
her Pennsylvania school board to vote against drilling near her two children’s
school would be enough — but even without the board’s approval, the DEP
approved the permits.
“I was completely shocked at the
total disregard for the safety of the community,” she said. “They have
active-shooter drills at the school, they have drug free zones, but we can’t
protect our kids from this.”
In March the Pennsylvania-based
company Rex Energy proposed drilling for gas under the Mars Area School
District’s campus, where about 3,200 elementary, middle and high school
students attend.
“We knew the benefit of the
drilling would be money for the school district, and that’s a great thing, but
at what cost?” Nassif said. “The
chemicals, the VOCs [volatile organic compounds], the diesel exhaust … Distance
is really the only thing you can provide as a buffer.”
She petitioned her school board
to vote against the drilling, but before
the school board voted on the proposal, Rex went ahead and began the permitting process to get six wells drilled less than a mile from
the school. The DEP issued a permit for Rex Energy’s facilities last month.
The natural gas formation under
the schools won’t be accessed, but the gas from surrounding properties will.
“DEP conducted an extremely
thorough review of the permit, considering all public comments, and is
confident that the proposed well pad does not pose any threat to the health or
safety of local residents,” DEP spokeswoman Morgan Wagner said in an email. “There is no legal basis for dismissing the
permit application.”
Rex Energy declined to comment
for this story
Stories like Nassif’s are
increasingly common as fracking infrastructure expands across the U.S. into
places once largely untouched by the oil and gas industry, where many proposed
wells, waste sites and compressor stations are running into community
opposition.
That opposition is strongest where oil and gas
infrastructure abuts places children congregate — schools, family-friendly
neighborhoods and playgrounds. From Pennsylvania to Texas, Colorado to Ohio,
parents and other concerned citizens are banding together to voice concern
about the potential health impacts of drilling and its associated processes.
Scientific data about the
potential health effects of fracking is limited, but a growing body of studies points to decreased air quality and an
increased presence of carcinogens near gas wells and infrastructure.
But there’s often little local
citizens and their municipalities can do to ameliorate their concerns about
this ever-growing web of wells, pits, pipelines and compressor stations as they
grapple with outdated zoning laws and underfunded and understaffed
environmental protection departments.
“Maybe what we need is more
coordinated oversight of these types of operations,” said Patty Robertson, the
chief prosecutor for statewide environmental crimes in Texas, where many
communities are pushing back against drilling. “You’ve got one agency saying,
“We don’t regulate that” and one saying, “Well, we do what we can,” and nobody
is taking the bull by the horns and running with it. So we fall back on the EPA
and rely on them, but they’re hampered also.”
That lack of coordination was on
display this year in Nordheim, Texas, a town of about 300
people 75 miles southeast of San Antonio where a local waste company, Pyote Water Systems, is planning to build three
solid-waste disposal pits that will store fracking waste less than a mile from
Nordheim's school. The waste pits will
take up as much space as nine city blocks — nearly the size of Nordheim
itself — and can hold 720,000 cubic yards of waste, according to the
investigative nonprofit the Center for Public Integrity, which originally
reported on the controversy last month.
Pytoe Water Systems did not
return calls for comment for this story.
In 1988 oil and gas companies successfully lobbied to protect most kinds
of oil and gas waste from the federal government's hazardous waste regulations.
That has enabled companies to dispose of fracking waste — mostly dirt and rock
mixed with leftover chemicals and traces of gas — in open-air pits essentially
wherever the companies can find enough land to build them. In 27 states (including Pennsylvania, Texas and Colorado)
air monitoring isn’t required at the sites.
In an email EPA spokeswomen
Rachel Deitz said the agency is reviewing a petition from the National
Resources Defense Council to revoke the oil and gas waste exemption.
One study from the University of Pittsburgh in 2013 found fracking
waste to contain barium, strontium, bromides and benzene — which can cause
cancer. A study from the University of Missouri in 2013 found that
groundwater near hydraulic fracturing sites in Colorado had elevated levels of
endocrine-disrupting chemicals, which can cause birth defects. Another Colorado
study, released this year from the Colorado School of Public Health, found an
association between the density of fracking wells and congenital heart defects
in infants.
In communities close to fracking
sites in Pennsylvania, the state’s DEP
found in 2013 that levels of carbon dioxide as well as nitrogen dioxide and
other pollutants in the air were several times higher than the state’s average.
Higher levels of those compounds can cause respiratory issues. And in Utah
a 2014 study from the University of Colorado at Boulder found high levels of
benzene, toluene and other volatile organic compounds in the air in communities
with active fracking.
Denton, Texas, a city of about 100,000 just north of Dallas, is
surrounded by oil and gas operations. The city has the worst air quality in all
of Texas, and the area’s childhood asthma rates are six to nine times higher
than the state average, according to the nonprofit organization the Center for
Children’s Health.
One playground in Denton is just
520 feet from a drilling site. There
benzene, ethyl acetate, n-hexane and toluene — all of which can cause various
health effects, from vision problems to muscle weakness — were found coating
playground equipment in a recent lab test by the nonprofit organization
ShaleTest.
Denton residents found there was little they
could do at the state level to fix the problem. Realizing state zoning and
environmental protection laws would be of little help, residents formed the
Denton Drilling Awareness Group and gathered enough signatures to get a city
fracking ban placed on this November’s ballot.
Rhonda Love, one of the
members of the group, said that she’s not against oil and gas drilling but that
they had no other option but to push for the ban.
Even if the ban passes, it
probably won’t apply to wells already in Denton, and Love says it will likely
be challenged. But after years of worry, even the prospect of the ban’s passing
has given residents some hope.
“We would travel to Austin
to pressure them, but they said there’s nothing they can do,” Love said. “So
instead of driving up and down I-35 forever, we focused here.”
From: Amy Nassif,
Mars Parent Group To DEP
Subject: PA DEP studies
“Mr.
Lobins,
Through continued research, the Mars Parent Group is now aware that the
PA DEP studies referenced in your letter to the group on September 15, 2014 are
inaccurate, incomplete, and do not consider vulnerable populations like
children. These studies were referenced to justify your position on granting the
Geyer site well permits near the Mars Area School District.
As a parent, it is alarming that
you clearly stated to me, "this is safe", during your courtesy call
prior to issuing the Geyer permits. When
you are referencing 3,200 children and "safety", please be properly
informed on the accuracy and relevance of the research you use to justify your
decisions regarding permitting well sites.
I will also point out a recent incident at a gas well site that
mandated a two mile evacuation. In this
instance, the local high school was outside the 2-mile zone and was closed for
a day to accept evacuees. In our local case, all 3,200 children in the Mars
Area School District are clearly now within an evacuation zone of your
permitted Geyer well site. As a
parent, it is disconcerting that the PA DEP does not consider this information.
Our group focus remains on safety
and quality of life for our children in school and in the community as shale
development encroaches on our schools and densely populated areas.
The
Mars Parent Group requests that this also be a primary focus for the PA DEP.
Amy
Nassif
Mars
Parent Group
marsparentgroup.com
And the GOOD NEWS:
***Legal challenges Result in Stay On fracking near Middlesex Township Schools
“Rex Energy will not proceed with drilling operations
on their Geyer well pad, a controversial cluster of six wells located about a
half mile away from 3,200 students at the Mars Area School District campus. Rex
Energy recently sent gas leaseholders a letter explaining how the stay will prevent the company from
further development of the Geyer well pad during the time that the legal
challenges are heard.
Last
month, parents in Middlesex Township,
along with environmental groups Clean Air Council and Delaware Riverkeeper
Network, filed multiple challenges related to the Geyer well. The parents and groups filed a substantive validity challenge
to an overhaul of Middlesex Township’s zoning, which opens up the Township to
drilling and related facilities. The challengers appealed the land use permit
issued by Middlesex Township, and the well permits issued by the PA DEP. The challengers argued that the amendment and
related permits violate the people’s right to pure water, clean air, a healthy
environment, and fail to protect public health, safety, and welfare. The
challenge to the ordinance and land use permit automatically imposed a stay on
further site development. According to area residents, Rex Energy violated the
stay shortly after October 10th.
Rex
Energy had planned to begin drilling the Geyer wells as early as January or
February 2015, but the legal actions require that Rex Energy halt all well pad
development. Rex Energy petitioned
Middlesex Township to allow it to complete the well pad under the pretext that
full cessation could cause soil erosion. The Township agreed to allow Rex
Energy to finish constructing the well pad, but barred it from pursuing any
further development at the site, including drilling and fracking.
Amy
Nassif leads the Mars Parent Group, a local group of Mars Area School District
parents concerned about the proximity of drilling near the school.
"Speaking as a parent, it is extremely disappointing to learn that
industry is allowed to make their own rules and break the law,” said Nassif.
“Their actions further erode confidence in their procedures and operations as
they encroach on schools and densely populated areas," Nassif added.
Joseph
Otis Minott is Chief Counsel and Executive Director for Clean Air Council.
“While it’s a win for residents and school children that Rex is not allowed to
drill during the course of the legal hearings, it is a major blow to the community that Rex began substantial earth
disturbance when they knew full well that the permits would be challenged, and
continued construction of the well pad once the stay was in effect,” said
Minott. “Rex Energy claimed that stopping construction would pose imminent
peril to the environment, but Rex was solely responsible for any alleged peril.
Rex ignored the stay, caused further earth disturbance that would heighten the
peril, then lobbied Middlesex Township to receive special permission to proceed
with construction of the well pad,” added Minott.
“Rex Energy is not above the law,” said
Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper.
“Sadly their blatant violation of the stay on construction of their well
pad is a sign of the times in Pennsylvania — the drilling industry seems to
have been given license by local and state officials to inflict whatever harms
they want on our kids, communities and environment. That is why the Delaware Riverkeeper Network,
the Clean Air Council and members of the Mars Parent Group are pursuing our
legal action — because clearly if we don’t enforce our rights to a healthy
environment and safe communities, no one will,” added van Rossum.
###
Clean Air Council is a member- supported, non-profit
environmental organization dedicated to protecting everyone's right to breathe
clean air. The Council has over 8,000 members and works in Pennsylvania,
Delaware and New Jersey on public education, community advocacy, and legal
oversight and enforcement of environmental laws. The Council is a founding
member of Protect Our Children, a coalition of parents, concerned citizens, and
advocacy organizations, dedicated to protecting school children from the health
risks of shale gas drilling and infrastructure.
Delaware Riverkeeper Network
(DRN) is a
nonprofit membership organization working throughout the entire Delaware River
Watershed including Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and New York. DRN
provides effective environmental advocacy, volunteer monitoring programs,
stream restoration projects, public education, and legal enforcement of
environmental safety laws. The Delaware
Riverkeeper Network’s Generations Project was initiated in response to the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision the organization helped secure, Robinson
Township, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, et al. v. Commonwealth, 83 A.3d 901.
(Pa. 2013), in order to advance the Constitutional Environmental Rights of
people in Pennsylvania, in states across the nation and at the federal level.
Matt Walker
Clean
Air Council
Community
Outreach Director
215-567-4004
ext. 121
Website:
www.cleanair.org, www.protectourchildrencoalition.org
Facebook:
Clean Air Council
Twitter:
@cleanaircouncil, @cleanairmatt
***Letter To Rep. Dunbar
and Penn Township Officials
From A Group Member
“Representative
Dunbar and PENN Township elected officials,
In the current Dominion ROW that
runs through our PT neighborhoods, wherein Dominion installed a 24" line,
we also have the Sunoco Logistics LNG line running parallel with talk of two
more Sunoco lines to be installed within that same ROW. I personally believe part of Sunoco's second
line has already gone in since Sunoco has been securing more ROW's to nearby
lands and they were recently reworking the same grounds. Now we have this in the works!!!
What with the our recently
proposed PT Ordinance and more notifications such as in this article, our Penn
Township grounds will be forever changed into one big fracking industrial zone
with accompanying condenser stations and whatever additional facilities the
companies need to operate.
Who, among you is providing
oversight as we residents are kept in the dark???
http://www.cleanair.org/marinereast
Thank you,
Citizen’s Name
Penn
Township Resident”
***Subject:
Donegal Township Meeting
An Unholy
Experiment-That Should Be Illegal
“At the regularly scheduled
Nov. 12 Donegal Township, Washington County, Board of Supervisors meeting,
Range Resources Local Government Spokesperson and two Range Resources
employees, one from the Land Division and one from Finishing, addressed the Board to inform them of the scheduled
flaring of Claysville Sportsman’s Club
Unit 11H on Hicks Lane, Donegal Township.
The flaring is to begin December 7, will burn 24/7 and will last 7
to 10 days.
According
to Range, the stack will be 100’ high, the flame 60’ to
80’ high and would be visible for about 10 miles. A 95 decibel noise level at
the pad is anticipated for the duration of the burn, and the sound would be
heard for about 2 miles.
This flaring is considered a “big
burn” and according to Range is necessitated as this is Range’s first
experience with a Utica well in Washington County. It was stated that the burn is to determine
the size of the gas reservoir; and as this Utica is a “dry” gas, it will be a
“clean” burn with no other products of combustion.
Range stated that they will close
Hicks Lane, except to local traffic, and close the Sportsman’s Club, but club
members will be able to use the shooting range.
Range has also alerted 911 and County Emergency Response of the dates of
the flaring and will post signs on Route 40.
It was
noted by members of the audience that 95 decibels is the noise level of a fire
siren, that there are homes
within a ¼ mile of the flare site, and the high elevation of the site will make
it visible over a greater area. “ Submitted
by Group Member
***Trout Unlimited
Selects Laurel Highlands As One of 10 Special
Places
“Crowned by three ridges
along southwestern Pennsylvania’s skyline, the Laurel Highlands is home to
eight of the state’s 10 highest summits, including the highest, Mt. Davis, at
3,200 feet above sea level. From mountain laurel thickets, cool headwaters percolate
through more than 200 square miles of mostly state parks and forestlands. Class
A Wild Trout Streams, such as Camp Run and Laurel Run and dozens of other
popular fisheries, form the Laurel Highlands Trout Trail, a 70-mile region
attracting anglers from nearby Pittsburgh and neighboring states to fish for
trout and take in the scenery.
The
hunting heritage runs deep in the Laurel Highlands region. With an ample supply
of public hunting grounds, including more than 138,000 acres of state forest
and parks, and more than 25,000 acres of state game lands, the Laurel Highlands
provide ample deer, bear, turkey, ruffed grouse and small-game hunting
opportunities.
The
Threat
Natural resource extraction is
not new to the Laurel Highlands. Coal mining’s legacy lingers. After decades of
restoration work by anglers and conservation groups, many of the region’s
streams are on the road to recovery from pollution caused by coal mining.
Today, the energy industry is seeking to develop gas resources that lie beneath
some of the few remaining public hunting and fishing lands in southwest
Pennsylvania — premier recreation areas for hunters, anglers and outdoor
enthusiasts alike. Ohiopyle State Park, Forbes State Forest and other state
parks, forests and game lands within the Laurel Highlands region sit atop some
of southwest Pennsylvania’s more productive shale gas areas.
Well pad construction, gas transportation lines and access roads will
require additional land disturbances, much of which is expected to occur in the
intact forest stands and the very areas where stream restoration efforts have
taken place to correct the damage caused by previous resource extraction. Among
the many impacts of shale gas drilling on Pennsylvania’s streams, impacts from
road sedimentation is often the most pronounced in steep terrain, such as the
Laurel Highlands.”
For
the PDF:
http://www.tu.org/sites/default/files/Laurel_highlands_report.pdf
***Dominion
Submits Request To FERC
“Dominion submitted a pre-filing
request to FERC, asking regulators to begin an environmental review of its proposed $500 million Supply Header project
in Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
The project also calls for modifications and upgrades at two existing
Dominion compressor stations in Pennsylvania (JB Tonkin Station in Westmoreland
County and Crayne Station in Greene County), and two in West Virginia
(Mockingbird Hill Station in Wetzel County and Burch Ridge Station in Marshall
County). The modifications will result in approximately 75,000 hp of additional
compression.
A Dominion subsidiary, Dominion
Transmission Inc., would build and operate the Supply Header project, which
would provide an additional 1.5 Bcf/d of firm transportation. One of the
project’s main customers would be Atlantic Coast Pipeline LLC, a joint venture
of Dominion, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources.”
***PA Full of
Frack Pits-529
DEP Can’t Provide The
Data On Pits
“In 2005, Pennsylvania had 11
frack water pits. Just eight years later, aerial maps show that number has
jumped to 529. It’s unclear how many of these sites store fresh water used for
fracking, and how many store the toxic wastewater that results from oil and gas
drilling operations. The DEP could not
provide the data to public health researchers working with Geisenger on an NIH
funded health impact study. So the researchers turned to the nonprofit data
sleuths from SkyTruth, who have documented the impoundments with the help of
NASA’s satellite imagery and citizen scientists from around the world.
Smithsonian.org recently reported on how the project was initiated by public
health researchers from Johns Hopkins:
Brian Schwartz, an environmental
epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and his
colleagues have teamed up with Geisinger Health System, a health services
organization in Pennsylvania, to analyze
the digital medical records of more than 400,000 patients in the state in order
to assess the impacts of fracking on neonatal and respiratory health.
While the scientists will track
where these people live, says Schwartz, state regulators cannot tell them where the active well pads and waste pits
are located. Officials at DEP say that they have simply never compiled a
comprehensive list.
A spokesman for DEP told the
Observer-Reporter that the department can’t produce a list of impoundments that
include smaller wastewater storage sites because they have a different
classification. The DEP sent the reporter to another nonprofit that tries to
fill the state’s data and information gap – FracTracker.
Since state regulators have no
reliable knowledge of where these sites are located, volunteers from across the
globe studied the aerial images from 2005, 2008, 2010 and 2013. The accuracy of
the data was carefully vetted by SkyTruth’s methodology, which included
training on how to distinguish a frack pond from a duck pond. But the
organization has not yet figured out how to distinguish the toxic from the
non-toxic fresh water holding ponds.
“It
is an important distinction that we’re looking into,” wrote SkyTruth’s David
Manthos in an email, “but not one we were ready to make yet.”
Manthos
continued:
“Between the backlog of
reporting, and these smaller impoundments that also hold toxic chemicals but
which DEP classifies differently, the location of these features is effectively
a mystery to the general public and researchers who are trying to measure the
potential health impacts of [those] living near drilling sites and
drilling-waste impoundments.
Skytruth researchers also documented the increase in
the size of these impoundments over the last eight years.
From 2010 to 2013 the median area of drilling
impoundments more than tripled, and the average area (which also includes small
fluid reserve pits located right on the wellpad) more than doubled. As of 2013, the total
impoundment surface area measures nearly four million square meters, scattered
across the Commonwealth. (New York’s Central Park measures 3.4 million square
meters.)
Many of these impoundments are
reclaimed after a period of time. For example, the 2010 maps showed 581 frack
water storage facilities, while in 2013, Skytruth documented 529. The data is
now searchable through an interactive map on the Skytruth website. The project was conceived to help Hopkins
researchers link possible health impacts to the wastewater ponds, which contain
toxic chemicals that can emit dangerous air pollutants.
The DEP has also documented leaks
from these sites. In October, the DEP fined EQT corporation a record $4.5
million dollars for a leaking impoundment. The Attorney General has also filed
criminal charges against the driller. In September, DEP handed Range Resources
a $4.15 million fine for violations at six wastewater impoundments in
Washington County.
Open storage pits containing gas
drilling waste water have to be double-lined in Pennsylvania, and include a
leak-detection system. The industry standard advocated by the Center for
Sustainable Shale Development, whose members include the recently sanctioned
shale driller EQT, says hydrocarbons should be removed from the wastewater
before storage.”
https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2014/11/11/pennsylvanias-frack-ponds-now-number-more-than-500/
***Voters Approve
Bans
San Benito County, CA
San
Benito County voters appeared to be backing a groundbreaking ballot measure that would outlaw the controversial oil
extraction technique known as fracking.
In
early returns, county voters were supporting Measure J by a 55 percent to 45
percent margin.
http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_26866639/san-benito-countys-measure-j-voters-backing-anti
Denton, Texas
The North Texas town of Denton is the first
city in the Lone Star State to outlaw the oil and
gas
extraction technique behind the U.S. energy boom.
The vote in the city of 123,000 was highly
symbolic because fracking, is widely used in Texas, the top crude producer in
the United States.
Athens, Ohio
Issue
7, which will ban the process of fracking, in Athens, received 2,245 votes,
versus the 623 votes against it.
The
Athens Bill of Rights Committee, which was behind the initiative, believes that
the chemicals used in fracking can be harmful to water sources and air quality,
which in turn, could negatively affect resident health.
I have included several
articles on the recent research on toxic chemicals found in the air near
fracking. Each article includes additional details. Jan
***Toxic
Chemicals, Carcinogens Skyrocket Near Fracking Sites
“The spikes
almost certainly will lead to a cancer increase in surrounding areas, a study author says.
Oil and gas wells across the country are spewing
“dangerous" cancer-causing chemicals into the air, according to a new
study that further corroborates reports of health problems around frack sites.
“This is a
significant public health risk,” says Dr. David Carpenter, director of the
Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany-State
University of New York and lead author of the study, which was published in the
journal Environmental Health. “Cancer
has a long latency, so you’re not seeing an elevation in cancer in these
communities. But five, 10, 15 years from now, elevation in cancer is almost
certain to happen.”
Eight poisonous
chemicals were found near wells and fracking sites in Arkansas, Colorado,
Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wyoming at levels that far exceeded recommended federal
limits. Benzene, a carcinogen, was the most common, as was formaldehyde, which
also has been linked to cancer. Hydrogen sulfide, which smells like rotten eggs
and can affect the brain and upper-respiratory system, also was found.
“I was amazed,” Carpenter says.
“Five orders of magnitude over federal limits for benzene at one site – that’s
just incredible. You could practically just light a match and have an explosion
with that concentration.
“It’s an indication of how
leaky these systems are.”
[READ: Respiratory, Skin Problems Soar Near Gas Wells,
Study Says]
The health effects of living near a fracking site have
been felt elsewhere, according to separate research. A study published last
month by researchers from the University
of Washington and Yale University found residents within a kilometer of a well
had up to twice the number of health problems as those living at least 2
kilometers away.
“The way fracking’s being done in these five states,
it’s not being done safely,” Carpenter says.
For Carpenter's study, trained volunteers living near
the wells conducted air measurements, taking 35 “grab air” samples during heavy
industrial activity or when they felt symptoms such as dizziness, nausea or
headaches. Another 41 “passive” tests – meaning samples were taken during a
designated period, not merely when levels spiked – were conducted to monitor
for formaldehyde. The tests were then sent to accredited labs.
Not every
sample exceeded the recommended limits. But in those that did – slightly less
than half the samples taken – benzene levels were 35 to 770,000 times greater
than normal concentrations, or up to 33 times the exposure a driver might get
while fueling his or her car. Similarly, hydrogen sulfide levels above federal
standards were 90 to 60,000 times
higher than normal – enough to cause eye and respiratory irritation, fatigue,
irritability, poor memory and dizziness after just one hour of exposure.
Excessive formaldehyde
levels were 30 to 240 times higher than normal, which a statement on the
study described as “more than twice the formaldehyde concentration that occurs
in rooms where medical students are dissecting human cadavers, and where most
students report respiratory irritation.”
A law passed in 2005 by Congress included what's
commonly known as the "Halliburton loophole," which exempts oil and
gas companies from federal regulations involving the monitoring and disclosure
of fracking chemicals.
“It’s the gift that keeps on giving, the longer you’re
exposed to these things,” says Wyoming resident Deb Thomas, who saw a well open
across the road from her in 1999 and helped collect air samples for Carpenter’s
study. “I had an asthmatic episode – I’ve never had any asthma, I don’t have a
history of asthma. I ended up at the hospital where they gave me breathing
treatments. I’ve had really bad rashes.”
Thomas has come across similar symptoms at other unconventional
oil and gas sites across the country, where as executive director of the
nonprofit group ShaleTest, she’s helped take air samples for low-income
families and communities affected by fracking.
“We see a lot of cognitive
difficulties,” she says. “People get asthma or breathing difficulty or nose
polyps or something with their eyes or their ears ring – the sorts of things
that come on very subtly, but you start to notice them.”
However, it’s difficult to determine which health
issues are a result of oil and gas operations and which stem from other
factors, because symptoms often start only gradually and government air quality
studies have proved limited in scope.
The chemicals
may pose major risks to oil and gas workers, too.
“The occupational exposures we’re not even talking
about,” Carpenter says. “If anybody is exposed at the levels our results show,
these workers are exposed at tremendous levels.”
[ALSO: Booming Natural Gas Won't Slow Global Warming]
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/10/30/toxic-chemicals-and-carcinogens-skyrocket-near-fracking-sites-study-says
Fracking Emits More Formaldehyde Than Medical Students Experience From Dead Bodies
By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
“Fracking can pollute the air
with carcinogenic formaldehyde at levels twice as high as medical students experience
when dissecting dead bodies, a new report has found.
Tests around shale gas wells in
the US also found that levels of benzene were up to 770,000 higher than usual
background quantities.
The
quantities were up to 33 times the concentration that drivers can smell when
filling up with fuel at a petrol station.
Levels
of hydrogen sulfide were also up to 60,000 times an acceptable odor threshold.
The
exposure a person would get in five minutes at one Wyoming site is
equivalent to that living in Los Angeles for two years or Beijing for eight and
half months.
Tests
have shown that one hour of exposure to chemicals at that level would cause
fatigue, loss of appetite, headache, irritability, poor memory and dizziness.
Both benzene and formaldehyde cause cancer.
"Community-based
monitoring near unconventional oil and gas operations has found dangerous
elevations in concentration of hazardous air pollutants under a range of
circumstances,” said Lead researcher, David Carpenter from the University at
Albany in New York.
“Our
findings can be used to inform and calibrate state monitoring and research
programs."
Communities in Britain have reacted with anger
to plans for fracking,
However experts claim that Britain would monitor
sites more thoroughly than in the US and that
companies which allowed ‘fugitive emissions’ would face prosecution under
the Clean Air Act.
Prof
Paul Monks, Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry and Earth Observation Science at
the University of Leicester, said:
“Recent
UK work looking at Lancashire shales has shown significantly lower
concentrations of these air toxins such as benzene.”
“For
example, DECC has determined that (except as a safety precaution in
emergencies) all UK shale gas wells will
have to capture and process or treat all gases released rather than venting or
flaring them as is customary in the USA and Canada.
“Furthermore,
at all UK sites the water required for
fracking will have to be stored, between fracking operations, in enclosed tanks
rather than in open 'lagoons'.
Prof
Andrew Aplin, Professor of Unconventional Petroleum at Durham University, said:
“Whilst pollutants such as benzene and toluene occur in the atmosphere of every
urban environment, this study shows that very high concentrations of
hydrocarbons and hydrogen sulphide were found in the very local vicinity of
some specific oil and gas operations in the US.
“Poor
industrial practice and insufficient regulation can of course result in locally
elevated concentrations of atmospheric pollutants in many urban and industrial
situations - this is why the UK passed the Clean Air Act in 1956.
The
fracking industry also said it was unlikely that dangerous chemicals would be
vented into the atmosphere.
Ken
Cronin, chief executive of UK Onshore Oil & Gas (UKOOG), the industry trade
body: “In the UK, at all sites where drilling for shale gas will take
place, air quality will be monitored before, during and after any activity,
with strict controls on emissions overseen by the Environment Agency.
The
research was published in the journal Environmental Health.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/fracking/11196238/Fracking-emits-more-formaldehyde-than-medical-students-experience-from-dead-bodies.html?fb
Study Finds Carcinogen Risk Near Fracking
Unsafe levels of Formaldehyde at 2591 Feet, Benzene
at 885 feet
Tests of air around homes near natural gas drilling
wells and other production equipment in five states found potentially
carcinogenic levels of chemicals, according to a study that involved a
researcher from the University at Albany.
The
study was published in the peer-reviewed
journal Environmental Health. It
examined air pollution around gas production sites in Pennsylvania, where
hydrofracking has boomed for seven years, as well as Wyoming, Arkansas,
Colorado and Ohio.
"All
the attention being paid just to pollution to water from fracking has been
misplaced," said David Carpenter, lead author of the study and director of
the Institute for Health & The Environment at the University at Albany.
"Our tests show that the air around gas sites is much more
dangerous."
Carpenter
is a former dean of the School of Public Health and director of the Wadsworth
Center for Laboratories and Research of the state Health Department. He has
been a health researcher in the Capital Region for more than three decades and
has more than 350 publications in environmental journals.
"We
explored air quality at a previously neglected scale: near a range of
unconventional oil and gas development and production sites that are the focus
of community concern," Carpenter said. He was lead author on a study that
relied on 35 air samples taken from 11 sites at homes and farms near fracking
sites in the five states. Sixteen of the samples found unsafe levels of two
carcinogenic chemicals — benzene and formaldehyde, as well as hydrogen sulfide.
In
addition, 41 stations were set up near well sites to test for formaldehyde, and
14 of the 41 tests exceeded safety standards of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry.
The
samples were collected by trained, local grass-roots citizens groups during
times of heavy industrial activity or when experiencing headaches, nausea or
dizziness. Seven samples were taken in Susquehanna and Washington counties in
Pennsylvania, in the heart of the state's fracking region. The area contains
hundreds of gas wells, and compressor stations that pressurize gas so it can
travel through pipelines. Six of the samples were taken near compressor
stations and all contained formaldehyde levels with increased lifetime cancer
risks, according to the study.
The
study was also supported by the Center for Health, Science and Public Policy at
Brooklyn Law School; as well as the not-for-profit groups Global Community
Monitor, of Richmond, Calif.; Environmental Law Alliance, of Eugene, Ore.;
Center for Environmental Health, of Oakland, Calif.; and Powder River Basin
Council, of Clark, Wyo..
"While
these are not that many samples, what was striking was how high those levels
could be in those areas," Carpenter said. Prolonged exposure to benzene
and formaldehyde are known to cause cancer in humans.
Unsafe benzene levels ranged from
35 times to more than 777,000 times normal levels, according to the study. Carpenter said at the worst site near a Wyoming
gas well, the benzene level for five minutes was equivalent to what an average
Los Angeles resident is exposed to two years. In heavily polluted Beijing, it
would take a resident nearly nine months to breath in that much benzene. Formaldehyde
levels were between 30 and 240 times normal levels.
Both
chemicals can cause cancers that take years to develop, Carpenter said. Test
results show that buffer zones around natural gas wells — distances between gas
equipment and places where people live, as well as drinking water sources —
need to be expanded, he said.
Called
setbacks, such zones are currently established by states, not by the federal
government, because of 2005 exemptions from federal pollution rules adopted by
Congress.
In the five states, setbacks from gas wells to homes
and other occupied buildings range from 150 to 500 feet. The study found
unsafe concentrations of formaldehyde at distances as great as 2,591 feet and
of benzene up to 885 feet.
Six of the samples were taken
near compressor stations and all contained formaldehyde levels with increased
lifetime cancer risks, according to the study.
New York is still weighing whether to allow
hydrofracking. In draft regulations on fracking issued in 2012, the state
Department of Environmental Conservation proposed setbacks of 500 feet between
gas wells and an "inhabited dwelling" or "place of
assembly."
States
set such rules because of a vote by Congress — at the behest of then Vice
President Dick Cheney, a former CEO of gas drilling company Halliburton — to
exempt fracking from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Other
exemptions were added to the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act.
"Our
study focuses on complex mixtures of chemicals that can persist at ground level
in air that residents routinely breathe. This includes spots that are a
considerable distance from well pads, and beyond prevailing setback
requirements," said study co-author Gregg Macey, an associate law
professor at Brooklyn Law School.
He
is chairman of the American Bar Association's Environmental Justice Committee.
http://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Air-near-fracking-sites-carries-cancer-risk-5858256.php
High Levels of Dangerous Chemicals Found in Air Near Oil and
Gas Sites
A
five-state study raises new questions about the health impacts of the U.S.
energy boom.
Published
October 30, 2014
“Dirk
DeTurck had a years-old rash that wouldn't go away, his wife's hair came out
in chunks, and anytime they lingered outside their house for more than an hour,
splitting headaches set in.
They
were certain the cause was simply breathing the air in Greenbrier, Arkansas,
the rural community to which they'd retired a decade ago. They blamed the gas
wells around them. But state officials didn't investigate.
So
DeTurck leapt at the chance to help with research that posed a pressing
question: What's in the air near oil and gas production sites?
The
answer—in many of the areas monitored for the peer-reviewed study, published
today in the journal Environmental
Health—is "potentially
dangerous compounds and chemical mixtures" that can make people feel ill
and raise their risk of getting cancer.
"The
implications for health effects are just enormous," said David O. Carpenter, the paper's senior author and director of the
University at Albany's Institute for Health and the Environment.
The
study monitored air at locations in five states: Arkansas, Colorado, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and Wyoming.
In 40 %
of the air samples, laboratory tests found benzene, formaldehyde, or other
toxic substances associated with oil and gas production that were above levels
the federal government considers safe for brief or longer-term exposure. Far above, in some cases.
The study comes amid a growing
body of research suggesting that the country's ballooning oil and gas
production—often next to homes and schools—could be endangering the health of
people living or working nearby. For the past 18 months, the Center for Public
Integrity and InsideClimate News have been investigating
this topic, focusing mainly on the Eagle Ford Shale formation of south Texas.
A study published in Environmental
Health Studies in September found that Pennsylvania residents living less than
two-thirds of a mile from natural gas wells were much more likely to report
skin and upper-respiratory problems than people living farther away.
A Colorado
School of Public Health analysis published in April found
30 percent more congenital heart defects
in babies born to mothers in parts of that state with lots of gas wells than in
babies born to mothers with no wells within ten miles of their homes.
And a 2013 study (Mccawley)
done for the state of West Virginia
found benzene, a carcinogen, above levels considered safe by the federal Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry near four of seven gas-well pads
where air was sampled.
http://wvwri.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/A-N-L-Final-Report-FOR-WEB.pdfh
Researchers associated with the
September and April studies, for instance, noted that their findings don't
prove that gas production caused the health problems but instead flag a potential
link that needs further investigation.
"Part of the problem seems to be a concerted effort, up until
recently, to avoid asking the question," said environmental physician Bernard
Goldstein,
a faculty emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh who served as an U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency official during the Reagan Administration.
But a shift is under way. The National Institutes of Health's National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences says it's supporting nine studies
that are in progress, from an analysis of asthma near shale-gas sites to an
examination of local residents' health before, during, and after a multiwell
pad is constructed. The agency is also conducting its own studies on
chemical exposures that could be an issue for gas-extraction workers and people
living near such sites.
The industry has been largely
dismissive of the research already released.
For the new Environmental
Health study, academics teamed up with Global Community Monitor (GCM) and volunteers it
trained. The group, founded 13 years ago, had developed a process that enabled
residents to sample the air in their own neighborhoods.
That's an unusual setup for a
peer-reviewed study, but it was by design, said the University at Albany's
Carpenter. Deploying residents allowed
for quick monitoring in places where a problem was suspected, based on, for
example, bad odors or symptoms such as nausea.
Energy in Depth, which has criticized other studies
that looked at potential health effects near oil and gas production, focused on
Global Community Monitor rather than the findings.
The study's sampling
was done as a snapshot—air at one moment in time or, in the case of
formaldehyde, over the course of at least eight hours.
Carpenter said that's not how states have typically handled their own monitoring,
the results of which have suggested there was little cause for alarm or weren't
detailed enough to determine whether a health risk existed.
By averaging the
results over days, weeks, or months, he said, state monitors risk missing the
sporadic emission spikes that can harm exposed people. As Carpenter noted,
"Our results indicate that the longer-term monitoring misses peak
concentrations, which may be very important."
Toxic substances
in 20 percent of the 76 samples taken for the study exceeded safe levels for
brief exposure; another 20 percent exceeded standards for longer-term exposure.
The
study's authors said they thought both were appropriate measurements, in part
because residents picked areas to sample where odors and health complaints were
common.
The study sampled air near a mix
of sites, including compressor stations, production pads, and condensate tank
farms. Some, though not all, of the sampling sites were associated with
hydraulic fracturing.
When
the EPA indicated to Wyoming officials in 2011 that fracking had likely
contaminated groundwater near the tiny community of Pavillion, the reaction was
horror—at the potential impact on fracking.
Thomas Doll, then the state's oil
and gas supervisor, testified on Capitol Hill several months later that
Wyoming had received about two billion dollars in taxes and royalties during
fiscal year 2010 from oil and natural gas work. Almost all of that was
connected to fracking, and he blasted the EPA for what he called the
"questionable" science of its nearly three-year review.
after a year and a half of
sustained political pressure following its draft review, EPA turned the
investigation over to the state.
Wyoming’s
investigation received funding from
Encana, the energy company residents had accused of contaminating the water.
EPA spokesman Rich Mylott said
the agency stands by the work it did in Pavillion "but recognized the
state's commitment to additional investigation to advance the understanding of
groundwater quality in the area."
A draft report
of the first stage of that study said there was no evidence tying gas wells to
the fouled water. Two other avenues of investigation continue.
People were driven to help with
the air-emissions study in the five states—including Wyoming—by a deep
suspicion that their state governments were failing to protect public health.
Deb Thomas, who, at 60, has spent
years working as a community organizer on pollution matters in Wyoming, said
concerns about air followed the water worries. People told her they'd lost
their sense of smell and taste. She heard complaints about headaches and
breathing problems as well as reports of miscarriages, neuropathy, unusual
cancers, and autoimmune diseases.
Starting
in 2007, she pressed for state air
monitoring in Pavillion. The state brought in a mobile monitor designed
primarily to measure ozone, not the specific types and amounts of harmful
volatile organic compounds that might be in the air.
Keith Guille, a spokesman for the
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, said that volatiles contribute to
ozone and that a year of monitoring had found no ozone problems.
Thomas—then
at the conservation-focused Powder River
Basin Resource Council and now director
of ShaleTest,
an environmental-data-collection nonprofit based in Texas—wasn't satisfied.
"We knew people were getting really sick, and more and more data started
coming out about air issues, and the state refused to do any real
testing," she said.
"And so we
decided we would start doing some testing ourselves.
She called Global Community Monitor. The group told
her about a study just getting under way. Would she like to participate?
Thomas rounded up people to
collect samples in four areas and ended up as a co-author on the study. It
found that many of the Wyoming samples contained volatile organic compounds above safe levels—particularly hydrogen sulfide, a
naturally occurring gas that can be released by drilling and can cause
headaches, dizziness, nausea, and, in sufficient concentration, death.
She expected to find problems in
Pavillion. What startled her were the results around her own town, Clark, where tests of the air samples showed high levels of benzene, a
chemical that can be emitted by oil and gas production.
The worst sample had
110,000 micrograms per cubic meter of air, 12,000 times the safe level for
brief exposure set by the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry. Several other Wyoming samples also tested high for benzene,
though far lower than the worst one.
A 2006 blowout at a gas well near
Clark had made Thomas seriously concerned about air problems: She'd ended up in
the emergency room a few days later with her first, and only, asthmatic
episode. But she said she didn't expect much in the way of dangerous compounds
there years later.
"In the area where I live,
there's only six wells producing right now ... and they're very low
producers," she said. "I thought, Oh, we're not going to find
anything here because there's not much going on. And then it was off the
charts."
In Pennsylvania's Susquehanna County, six of the air samples
shipped off for testing contained high levels of formaldehyde, classified as a carcinogen
by the World Health Organization. All had been taken near compressor stations, which pressurize natural gas so that it can flow
through pipelines. Formaldehyde can be a by-product of the facilities'
engines.
Breathe Easy Susquehanna County coordinated the
local sampling. Rebecca Roter founded the grassroots group last year to lobby
gas companies for better pollution controls, and she knew data would be critical.
Air sampling the state had done in her county had struck her as woefully
inadequate.
"It was too late for a
baseline, because we're seven years into shale development in Susquehanna
County, so we were desperately trying to do what we could to document
anything," said Roter, 53, who lives in Brooklyn, Pennsylvania. "The
best way to have a real discussion about what's really happening is to have the
facts."
Three years ago, when she first
smelled a bad odor drifting from a compressor station several miles from her
home, she filed a complaint with the Pennsylvania DEP. By the time a field
agent got back to her a week later, she said, the smell was gone, and he wasn't
interested—an experience she said has proved typical in the state, even though
not all chemicals and gases have an odor.
"The
field rep said, Well, if it doesn't smell, it's a dead end," Roter said.
"And he accused me of driving around to find smells."
Colleen Connolly, a spokeswoman for DEP, said agency employees recall an
inspector going to Roter's home and noticing no odor, but they haven't been
able to locate the complaint record.
Connolly said by email that the state has air-monitoring units in
two towns, one of which is in Roter's county, that take air samples once a week near compressor stations. She noted that
the agency doesn't monitor near gas wells except after complaints. "It is up to the individual gas company
to monitor for VOC ... emissions [and] report those findings to DEP," she
said.
Emily Lane, an Arkansas graduate
student who helped with the air monitoring in her state, hopes the emissions
study will spur Arkansas to do its own monitoring at all oil and gas sites. She
said that a top official at the state Department of Environmental
Quality agreed to meet with her about the findings if they
were published in a scientific journal.
Lane wishes the air-sample
results themselves, available in March, had been reason enough for the state to
look more closely, since they showed high levels of formaldehyde.
Katherine
Benenati, a spokeswoman for the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality,
said the agency is happy to review outside data once a study is completed—and
peer reviewed.
When the agency did its own
gas-site monitoring in 2010 and 2011, it measured total volatile organic
compounds but not the individual types or amounts. That made it impossible for
the researchers to say whether any posed a hazard.
Their report concluded,
"Future studies should monitor air quality with instruments that can
detect lower concentrations of pollutants and identify individual VOC compounds
to determine if the emissions from gas sites are potentially harmful to public
health and welfare."
According to the agency, no
follow-up studies have been launched in the three years since, and none are
planned.
"The statement in the
executive summary is an indication of a limitation of the data that was
gathered in the study," Benenati said in an email. "It was not meant
to suggest that additional data gathering was being recommended."
DeTurck, the Arkansas retiree,
has his own take on that: "There's no problem if you never really look for
it."
He said he and other residents
have spent three years asking state officials to do something in Greenbrier.
The state did shut down injection wells blamed for setting off more than a
thousand small earthquakes in his county, he said, but that was it.
"The
state's all in on this industry," said DeTurck, who's 59. "One
legislator ... told me to my face, If you don't like it, move, because that's
the future."
DeTurck
followed that advice, though it took three years to find a buyer. He and his
wife, Eva, moved 12 miles south in December. Given the direction the winds
blow there, they figured that was enough distance to get cleaner air.
DeTurck said his wife's hair
loss, ringing in the ears, and headaches stopped within two weeks. His rash
cleared up several months later, he added, and his other symptoms dissipated
too.
"I don't miss those
headaches and nosebleeds and the rash and the smell-the putrid smell," he
said. "Every morning, every night."
This
story was published by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit,
nonpartisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C.
Toxic
Chemicals Exceed Federal Guidelines-
Excerpts From the Research Study
Research: Macey, Gregg,
Breech, Chernaik, Cox, Larson, Thomas , Carpenter
Affiliations: Center for
Health, Science, and Public Policy, Brooklyn Law School, Brooklyn, New York,
USA; Global Community Monitor, Richmond,
California, USA; Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide, Eugene, Oregon, USA; Center for Environmental Health, Oakland,
California, USA; Powder River Basin
Resource Council, Clark, Wyoming, USA,,Institute for Health and the
Environment, University at Albany, Rensselaer, New York, USA
Results
Levels of eight
volatile chemicals exceeded federal guidelines under several operational
circumstances. Benzene, formaldehyde, and hydrogen sulfide were the most common
compounds to exceed acute and other health-based risk levels.
Conclusions
Air
concentrations of potentially dangerous compounds and chemical mixtures are
frequently present near oil and gas production sites. Community-based
research can provide an important supplement to state air quality monitoring
programs.
Pennsylvania
(Susquehanna County)
One of the four grab samples contained benzene at concentrations that
exceeded the EPA 1/100,000 cancer risk level. Six of the ten passive samples
contained formaldehyde at levels that exceeded ATSDR MRLs or EPA IRIS risk
levels. Two of the samples exceeded both the acute MRL and the 1/10,000 cancer risk
level (Table 5, Figure 4).
Air contaminants
We identified unique
chemical mixtures at each sample location (see Tables S1 through S5 in
Additional file 1). In addition, we
identified eight volatile compounds at concentrations that exceeded ATSDR
minimal risk levels (MRLs) or EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
cancer risk levels (see Table 2). Although our samples represent a single
point in time, we compared concentrations to acute as well as chronic risk
levels as many of the activities that generate volatile compounds near UOG
operations are long-duration (the life cycle of an unconventional natural gas
well can span several decades) [16]. Residents
chose sample locations where odors and symptoms were the “norm” for the area,
not a one-time event. In addition, a growing body of research suggests that peak (e.g., 1-hr. maximum), rather
than average exposure to air emissions may better capture certain risks to
human health [55-57].
Table 2. ATSDR minimal risk
levels and EPA IRIS cancer risk levels for chemicals of concern (all data in
μg/m3)
Sixteen of the 35 grab
samples, and 14 of the 41 passive samples, had concentrations of volatiles that
exceeded ATSDR and/or EPA IRIS levels. ATSDR MRLs and EPA IRIS levels for
chemicals of concern are provided in Table 2. The chemicals that most commonly exceeded these levels were hydrogen
sulfide, formaldehyde, and benzene. Background levels for these chemicals
are 0.15 μg/m3 for hydrogen sulfide, 0.25 μg/m3 for formaldehyde, and 0.15
μg/m3 for benzene [58-60]. Our samples
that exceeded health-based risk levels were 90–66,000× background levels for
hydrogen sulfide, 30-240× background levels for formaldehyde, and 35–770,000×
background levels for benzene. Details of our results are presented in
Tables 3, 4, and 5 and in Figures 2, 3, and 4 (greater detail is provided in
Additional file 1). A state-by-state summary follows.
Table 5. Concentrations of volatile compounds exceeding health-based risk
levels in samples collected in Pennsylvania
Figure 4. Concentrations
of volatile compounds exceeding health-based risk levels in samples collected
in Pennsylvania.
Discussion
We
identified significant concentrations of four well-characterized chemicals:
benzene, formaldehyde, hexane, and hydrogen sulfide. Benzene was detected at sample locations in
Pennsylvania and Wyoming. Concentrations exceeded health-based risk levels
by as many as several orders of magnitude. Previous studies similarly found
benzene concentrations near oil and gas development [10,11]. Our monitors
detected benzene at higher concentrations (5.7 – 110,000 μg/m3) than those
found in the published literature. The results are of concern given their
proximity to subdivisions, homes, and farms. In Wyoming, multiple samples
with high benzene concentrations were taken on residential property 30–350
yards from the nearest well, or on farmland along the perimeter of a well pad.
Equipment included separators, compressor stations, discharge canals, and
pipeline cleaning operations. The results suggest that existing regulatory
setback distances from wells to residences may not be adequate to reduce human
health risks [61]. Setbacks from wellheads to homes and other occupied
structures cluster around the 150 to 500 feet range in the five states (see
Table 1). We found high concentrations of volatile compounds at greater
distances, including formaldehyde (up to 2,591 feet) and benzene (up to 885
feet). High levels of benzene near oil production wells indicate that EPA
should revisit the extent to which oil wells are addressed in its new source
performance standards [62].
Benzene
is a known human carcinogen. Chronic exposure to benzene increases the risk of
leukemia [63]. The increased risk occurs at low levels of exposure with no
evidence of threshold level [64]. Benzene exposure increases risk of birth
defects [65], including neural tube and other defects found near natural gas
development [24]. Respiratory effects include pulmonary edema, acute granular
tracheitis, laryngitis, and bronchitis [60].
UOG fields present multiple sources and exposure
routes for benzene. Benzene occurs naturally in shale and other hydrocarbon
deposits, and is vented, flared, or released as fugitive emissions along
numerous points of production, such as wells, production tanks, compressors,
and pipelines [6]. It can volatize and disperse from flowback and produced
water at drilling sites and remain in the air for several days [66]. It was
among the first pollutants found in air samples near shale gas operations [67].
Previous studies found benzene to be the largest contributor to excess
lifetime cancer risk near gas fields [12]. Residents exposed to VOCs
including benzene experience immediate health symptoms and illness. Within days
after a flaring event at a Texas City refinery, children exhibited altered
blood profiles, liver enzymes, and somatic symptoms [68]. Future research is
needed to determine whether the concentrations of benzene we measured are due
to continuous releases or flaring, fugitive emissions, or facility upsets.
Formaldehyde is another volatile compound that exceeded
health-based risk levels near compressor stations in Arkansas, Pennsylvania,
and Wyoming. As with benzene, there are known sources of formaldehyde emissions
along the production chain. Formaldehyde is a product of incomplete combustion
emitted by natural gas-fired reciprocating engines at compressor stations
[69]. Formaldehyde is also formed from methane in
the presence of sunlight, which may be an important source given
significant amounts of methane that are known to escape from UOG sites [70].
But air monitoring studies, particularly in shale gas regions, either do not
measure for formaldehyde [12,14] or find it at lower concentrations. For
example, the Barnett Shale Energy Education Council [71] found levels that did
not pose a risk to human health. Colborn et al. [10] found formaldehyde and
acetaldehyde in each of 46 samples with a mean of 1.0 part per billion by
volume. In contrast, our CBPR framework resulted in the targeting of compressor
stations for passive sampling, where diesel emissions likely account for the
higher levels that we found. Our results are similar to the Fort Worth Natural
Gas Air Quality Study, which found formaldehyde concentrations in areas with
multiple large compressor engines [72]. We found high concentrations of
formaldehyde near fourteen compressor stations in three states.
Formaldehyde
is a suspected human carcinogen [73]. It can affect nearly every tissue in
the human body, leading to acute (dermal allergies, asthma) and chronic
(neuro-, reproductive, hematopoietic, genetic and pulmonary toxicity and
cellular damage) health effects [74]. The science of childhood exposure to
formaldehyde is progressing rapidly [75]. State agencies and international
organizations continue to lower exposure limit values and guidelines for
formaldehyde [76]. Our results exceed those guidelines. Symptoms reported by
community members mirror the effects of acute formaldehyde exposure, which
causes irritation of the eyes, nose, throat, and skin.
Other volatiles of concern
included hexane and hydrogen sulfide. Hexane detects were most prevalent near oil and gas operations in
Wyoming near well pads, compressor stations, separators, and produced water
discharges. Other studies in oil and gas regions found hexane, but at low
concentrations [10,12]. The circumstances under which high concentrations of
hexane were found in Wyoming suggest a combination of leaks, spills, and
fugitive emissions as potential causes. Acute exposure to hexane affects the
central nervous system, causing dizziness, nausea, and headache. Chronic
effects include neurotoxicity [77].
We
also found elevated levels of hydrogen sulfide in Wyoming along the
chain of production (pump jacks, produced water discharge impoundments,
discharge canals) and near a well pad in Colorado. Hydrogen sulfide is a
broad-spectrum toxicant that can impact most organ systems [78]. As such, it
contributes to a range of short- and long-term neurological, upper
respiratory, and blood-related symptoms, including those that were
prevalent among community samplers in Wyoming (headaches, dizziness, eye
irritation, fatigue) [79]. Hydrogen sulfide is a natural component of crude oil
and natural gas [5] and is released during many industrial processes. In
addition, five samples from Wyoming exceeded ATSDR health-based risk levels
for toluene and xylenes.
Health-based
risk levels provide only a limited sense of potential human health impacts from
air emissions. They do not fully account for vulnerable subpopulations, and
toxicity values are available for a comparatively small number of compounds. The
levels that we found for the above chemicals of concern suggest that state
monitoring studies are incomplete. Recent state-funded projects found air
volatiles at UOG sites that were either near detection limits or within
acceptable limits to protect the public [80-82]. One area of agreement between
our community-based and state monitoring studies concerns the presence of
complex chemical mixtures. These mixtures demonstrate the contingent nature
of ambient air quality near UOG infrastructure.
For
example, one sample, taken midday in early winter near a well pad in Wyoming
with clicking pneumatic pumps, found high concentrations of hydrogen sulfide,
hexane, benzene, and xylenes. It also captured cyclohexane, heptane, octane,
ethylbenzene, nonane, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and 15 tentatively identified
compounds (TICs). TICs are compounds that a device or analytic process is
not designed to measure. Total VOC concentrations in the sample exceeded 1.6
million μg/m3, excluding methane. While toxicity values are not available for
every TIC in our samples, they exceeded reference concentrations available for
related compounds such as hexane [77]. Another sample taken in Arkansas, during
autumn in the afternoon near a compressor station, captured 17 volatile
compounds and five TICs. A third sample, near a separator shed in Wyoming in
late autumn at midday, showed spikes in hydrogen sulfide, benzene, and hexane,
19 additional VOCs, and 15 TICs, with total VOC concentrations exceeding 25
million μg/m3, excluding methane. These and other complex mixtures are provided
in Additional file 1.
The
mixtures that we identified are related to sources commonly used in well pad
preparation, drilling, well completion, and production, such as produced water
tanks, glycol dehydrators, phase separators, compressors, pipelines, and diesel
trucks [14]. They
can be released during normal operating conditions and persist near ground
level, especially in regions where topography encourages air inversions [83]. The toxicity of
some constituents is well known, while others have little or no toxicity
information available. Our findings of chemical mixtures are of clinical
significance, even absent spikes in chemicals of concern. The chemical mixtures
that we identified should be further investigated for their primary emissions
sources as well as their potential cumulative and synergistic effects
[84]. Clinical and subclinical effects of hydrocarbons such as benzene are
increasingly found at low doses [85]. Chronic and subchronic exposure to
chemical mixtures is of particular concern to vulnerable subpopulations,
including children, pregnant women, and senior citizens [86].
Apart
from chemicals of concern (including known and suspected human carcinogens) and
chronic exposure to complex mixtures, our findings point to the value of
community-based research to inform state testing protocols. Air quality near
the diverse range of equipment and stages of UOG development is inherently
complex. While states sometimes rely on state-of-the-art technologies such as
wireless sensors to characterize local air quality, they continue to collect
only a “snapshot” of near-field conditions. For example, Arkansas carried
out a technologically ambitious program, placing multi-sensor gas monitors on
five-foot tripods along each perimeter of a well pad at several sites. AreaRAEs
(the trade name for a wireless monitor produced by RAE Systems) use
electrochemical sensors to measure nitrous oxides and a photoionization detector
to determine VOC concentration. The continuous monitors wirelessly transmitted
data at five-second intervals over a four- to six-hour period (see Table
6). In addition, Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) personnel
carried handheld versions of the AreaRAE along the perimeter of the sites every
one or two hours. While the study did not identify individual VOCs, it found
that total VOC emissions at the edge of a well pad fluctuate wildly over a
five-hour period. The agency concluded, “The spatial and temporal
distribution of VOC concentrations at most drilling sites was significantly
affected by monitor location, wind, and the interaction between location and
wind direction” [81]. Other studies noted similar variation, although the
extent to which short-term spikes and unique chemical mixtures might pose a
risk to human health was not considered.
Community-based
research can improve the spatial and temporal resolution of air quality data
[87] while adhering to established methods. Our findings can inform and
calibrate state monitoring and research programs. Additional file 1: Table S6
gives a more in-depth overview of community monitoring in action, including
sample site selection factors, sources of public health concern at each site,
and the range of infrastructure present and life cycle stage when samples were
taken. For example, grab samples in Wyoming with some of the highest VOC
concentrations were collected during production, as opposed to well completion
(see Table S6, Additional file 1). The timing and location of our samples were
driven by two primary factors: local knowledge gleaned from daily routines, and
a history of chronic or subchronic symptoms reported by nearby residents. For
example, a separator shed was targeted because of subchronic symptoms
(dizziness, nausea, tight chest, nose and throat problems, metallic taste, and
sweet smell) and loud sounds nearby (“hissing, clicking, and whooshing”). Well
pads were selected based on impacts to livestock, pasture degradation from produced
water, and observations of residents and farmers. Other samples were driven by
observations of fugitive emissions, including vapor clouds, deposition,
discoloration, and sounds (see Table S6 in Additional file 1).
Community-based
research can identify mixtures, and their potential emissions sources, to
prioritize for study of their additive, cumulative, and synergistic effects
[88]. The mixtures can be used to determine source signatures [14] and isolate
well pads for more intensive monitoring. Symptom-driven samples can
define the proper length of a sampling period, which is often limited to days
or weeks. They can inform equipment placement for continuous monitoring and
facilitate a transition from exploratory to more purposive sampling. Testing
informed by human health impacts, and more precise knowledge of the mix and
spacing of sources that may contribute to them, contrasts with state efforts,
which are limited by access to property, sources of electrical power, fixed
monitoring sites, and the cooperation of well pad owners and operators. In
these ways, community-based monitoring can extend the reach of limited public
resources.
Conclusions
Community-based monitoring near unconventional oil
and gas operations demonstrates elevations in concentrations of hazardous air
pollutants under a range of circumstances. Of special concern are high
concentrations of benzene, hydrogen sulfide, and formaldehyde, as well as
chemical mixtures linked to operations with observed impacts to resident
quality of life.
Environ Health Perspect 2013, 121:6-8. Publisher Full Text
The resource list for this study is comprehensive
and a good reference if you are looking for research. jan
***FERC Blockade
Thank you Veronica Coptis, Maggie Henry, Diane Sipe and All the
Others Who Stood for Our
Environmental Rights
By Ted Glick who
was one of the organizers of Beyond Extreme Energy, representing the Chesapeake
Climate Action Network. Past writings and other information can be found at
http://tedglick.com, and at twitter at http://twitter.com/jtglick.
“The
people gonna rise like the waters,
Gonna calm this crisis down.
I
hear the voice of my great granddaughter Saying shut FERC down right now.”
Who would have thought it? On Friday morning,
November 7th, for 2 ½ hours, the determined and courageous nonviolent activists
of Beyond Extreme Energy shut down the DC headquarters of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, FERC.
All three entrances to the building were
successfully blockaded, and virtually no one was getting in.
By
9 am there were about 150 FERC employees massed on the sidewalks in front of
FERC, waiting for the police to clear away five fracking fighters who had
successfully locked down at 7 am with lock boxes across the driveway into the
FERC parking garage. The driveway had been the route used by police to funnel
FERC employees into the building for the four days previous when BXE activists
had successfully blockaded the two pedestrian entrances.
For
short periods of time during those four days, no more than for maybe 20 minutes
at a time, we had been able to prevent pedestrian use of that driveway (we
prevented car use for the entire week). We did so by forming a long enough line
of people to prevent anyone getting through, until the cops moved in and made
arrests after their required three warnings. About 70 people were arrested over
the course of the week.
But Friday morning was different. And because of
the successful lock box action and total blockade, it was different in a way
none of the BXE organizers had even thought about.
Friday
was the day for additional fracktivists and extractivists from the severely
fracked-up state of Pennsylvania to join BXE. So as those
150 FERC employees waited to get into the building,
we organized a teach-in on the front sidewalk, right in the midst of the
employees.
For fifteen or
twenty minutes people like Maggie Henry and Veronica Coptis spoke from the
heart, shedding tears but fighting through them, to let the silent and
listening FERC employees know the human toll that their support of the gas rush
has caused. There were no catcalls, no boos, no one publicly questioning the
truth of what was being said.
It was a very special moment.
We
had been talking with and distributing material to FERC employees and others
passing by all week. The leaflet we distributed to FERC employees said, in
part:
“We apologize for any disruption to your work day,
but that’s what we’re here for—to disrupt the workings of FERC, which continues
to approve gas infrastructure projects that threaten the health and quality of
life for millions of Americans and the whole planet through increased
greenhouse gas emissions.
“Many
of you work at FERC because you think it does a good job of balancing the needs
of industry and economic development with the health and environmental
challenges of impacted communities. But the Obama
Administration’s ‘all of the above’ strategy is condemning us to runaway
climate chaos while condemning families in fracking’s path to a hellish
existence. FERC should be prioritizing the emergence of renewable energy as a
growing sources of our electrical power.”
We
found surprisingly little hostility from the close to 2,000 people we
distributed our flyers to. We even found, to our surprise, indications of
support from some of the Federal Protective Services and DC Metro police who
were doing their best to keep FERC open despite our blockading. Going into the
week, our lawyer had said to us that he expected that they would get more
aggressive as the week went by, but that turned out, in general and with
exceptions, not to be the case.
Exceptions
included a couple of people tasered on Friday (including Diane Sipe of MOB)
after we heard talk of it earlier in the week, several people falsely charged
with “assault” for standing their nonviolent ground as part of
a blockade and some police assistance to a small number of aggressive FERC
employees who tried to push through us.
Central to the success of this
action were the sisters and brothers from the Great March for Climate Action
who were there for all, or most, of the week. The decision to
do this action during election week had a lot to do with the plan of the Great
March to arrive in DC on November 1, ending on that day their eight month walk
across the United States. Many of us not part of that march were impressed by the
depth of commitment and soulful strength and organizing smarts they
collectively brought to the November 1-7 week.
We
received more than a little bit of criticism about our decision to do this week
during election week, and we understood why. We were not doing this to make a
statement about how messed up our electoral system is and that people should
forget voting—not at all. In our call to action we said, right up at the top,
“vote we must, but we must also do more.”
If the Great March had not been arriving on November 1 we probably would
have moved things back a week or two.
But
as it turns out, it was very timely that Beyond Extreme Energy did happen
during election week, during a week when the Republicans took back the Senate
and Democrats generally did pretty badly—in large part because of the
willingness of far too many, once again, to be Republicans-lite.
It
is time, in 2015 and 2016, for many, many more of us to “vote” with our whole
lives through massive, serious, strategic nonviolent direct action campaigns
that are as coordinated as we can make them.
Investors
in the fossil fuel industry, Democrats and others who want our votes, members
of the mass media and the American people generally need to get it that the
climate justice movement, increasingly aligned with other movements for
progressive social change, refuses to accept “all of the above” and “business
as usual.” We know what time it is—there is little time left—and we are the
leaders we have been waiting for. Now must be, has to be, our time to rise up
in large numbers and with a spirit of love, a nonviolent discipline and a
willingness to sacrifice that cannot be ignored.”
Ted
Glick was one of the organizers of Beyond Extreme Energy, representing the
Chesapeake Climate Action Network. Past writings and other information can be
found at http://tedglick.com,
and at twitter at http://twitter.com/jtglick.
***Convent May Become Frack Boarding House
“The
businessman who wants to convert a former convent into a boarding house for
Marcellus Shale workers will argue in court next month that Washington
officials are illegally blocking his development.
Lawyers
for Robert Starr of Phive Starr Properties filed a brief in Washington County
Court last month appealing the city’s
decision earlier this year to reject
proposed changes to the zoning code that would allow a boarding house at the
convent on North Franklin Street formerly owned by Immaculate Conception
Parish.
The
proposal by Starr to renovate the aging building so it could house up to 28 people temporarily working
in the area was met with stiff resistance from parishioners who said they were
concerned about the transient nature of those tenants.
“Their
testimony was entirely anecdotal, based on vague speculation, and unsupported
by any facts,” the brief reads. “Such testimony cannot be credited as
establishing a basis for justifying the total exclusion of an identifiable form
of housing throughout the city.”
Oral
arguments between the two sides before Judge Katherine Emery are scheduled for
Dec. 5.
In
Washington’s counterclaim against Phive Starr filed Oct. 28, city solicitor Jack Cambest writes there is
nothing restricting a boarding house, but the city rejected Starr’s development
because it had specific concerns in the application. The city also claims it
has no reason to tweak its ordinance.
“An ordinance is not required to provide for every
conceivable subcategory of potential use,” the city’s brief states.
The
city also called Starr’s contention that his plans to run a boarding house is
similar to an apartment complex “a desperate analogy at best.”
***Fracking Brings
Pipelines and Compressor Stations
The Mid-Atlantic region is facing
an expansion of gas transport
infrastructure that threatens communities' health, safety and homes. With
increased “fracking” and plans to export
liquefied natural gas (LNG), the gas industry needs supporting infrastructure. Beyond drilling wells, energy companies are
building compressor stations and laying thousands of miles of pipelines.
The Interstate Natural Gas
Association of America has estimated that from 2011 to 2035, the industry must build nearly 15,000 miles of
subsidiary lines — each year.
It is hard to ignore the
compressors and pipelines extending quickly through the region. Last month,
Dominion Power gained the approval of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
for a plan to convert a dormant LNG import facility at Cove Point on the
Chesapeake Bay into a major exporting facility for fracked gas. With the FERC's
green light, Dominion will start exports from the facility in Lusby, Md., in
2017.
Now, residents are engaged in
battles to protect their families and neighborhoods: Until 2012, Lusby was a
peaceful town of more than 20,000 people who happily raised children in a safe
and quiet environment. Dominion's plans will turn their lives upside down,
threatening quality of life, health, safety and property values.
Families are distraught. About
360 homes lie within 4,500 feet of the site, to which large trucks will
regularly haul heavy equipment and construction will generate noise. While an increase in pollution is
undisputed, Dominion
has easily satisfied the FERC's pollution-abatement requirement by buying clean-air credits from elsewhere
in Maryland — which will not alleviate the toxic conditions around the
facility.
Moreover, the possibility of an explosion is undeniable. Homeowners
know
that, unlike with oil-based fires that burn locally, an LNG fire could trigger
an explosion that could race along the pipeline.
In Myersville, Md., citizens
learned in 2011 that Dominion Transmission Inc. (DTI) proposed to build a noisy compressor station less than
a mile from the town's only elementary school. The 16,000-horsepower compressor
is expected to emit 23.5 tons of nitrogen oxide and 53,892 tons of greenhouse
gas every year.
Myersville's residents and officials have been
battling to stop the compressor. The town's council rejected DTI's request for
a zoning variance, but the FERC authorized the project.
Communities must mobilize to
protect themselves. If your home or town lies in the path of pipelines or near
a planned compressor, you will have little warning: Lusby's residents did not see the notice of
Dominion's application in the Federal Register, and it allowed parties only two
weeks to intervene. To be sure, corporations have rights, and businesses
may pursue profits. But the playing field should be level for homeowners.
Communities must wrest back local
control. They must demand that states repeal laws that enable the gas industry
to invade private property and challenge state laws pre-empting local
lawmaking. They should pass bills making sure people's rights trump corporate
privileges. Unless we rise up and are vigilant, this might be in our own
backyards soon.
Marcia Greenberg, a lawyer, has
worked on U.S.-funded democracy programs and local economic development in
Eastern Europe.”
Read
more:
http://triblive.com/opinion/featuredcommentary/6994697-74/gas-dominion-compressor#ixzz3HbQOnAK1
***Frack-Well
Blowout in Eastern Ohio
By
Laura Arenschield
The
Columbus Dispatch
“From
his fishing boat on a rural Jefferson County pond, Mike Poole could see the
natural-gas wellhead owned by American Energy Parners, less than a tenth of a
mile away.
Poole, who lives above the Mingo Sportsmans Club less
than a mile from the well, was one of about 400 families to be evacuated after
the well ruptured spewing natural gas and methane into the air.
Jefferson County’s
emergency-management officials worried about what those gases could do to
people and homes. Methane can become explosive in small amounts and can cause
headaches and dizziness.
“What if I had been
out there fishing and this thing had blown up?” Poole asked. “I’d have been
instantly dead.”
the company brought in Boots and Coots, a well
emergency-response company owned by Halliburton and based in Texas, to shut
down the well and stop the gases from leaking into the air.
Poole spent the night with family in a nearby village. The experience
left him worried for his home and for the woods and lakes where he likes to
hunt, hike and fish.
“They’re telling everybody, ‘Oh, this is perfectly, 100 percent safe,
it’s safe safe safe safe, it’s not hurting the water, it’s not hurting the
air,’ ” he said. “Well, why were we evacuated last night?”
He questioned why American Energy Partners hadn’t trained
emergency responders in Ohio, rather than relying on a team that had to be
flown in from Texas.
In Ohio alone in the past year, residents near fracked wells and
injection wells — the wells where fracking waste is dumped — have experienced
earthquakes and have been evacuated because of fires. Chemicals have spilled
into streams and rivers, in some cases killing fish for miles.
Tuesday’s incident was the third in three days tied to
fracking operations in eastern Ohio. On Sunday, a worker at a fracking site in Guernsey
County was burned in a fire. On Monday, a pipeline carrying natural-gas
condensate ruptured in Monroe County, igniting several acres of woods.
“We need a moratorium on drilling
in Ohio until the state and the industry can figure out how to prevent these
things from happening,” said Teresa Mills, an environmental activist and Ohio
organizer with the Center for Health, Environment and Justice. “It seems like
the more they’re drilling, the more accidents and incidents that are occurring.
Maybe the state needs to seriously look at the laws and figure out how to
prevent these accidents from happening.”
Shawn Bennett, senior vice
president of the Ohio Oil and Gas Association, said in an email that a
moratorium is extreme.
‘larenschield@dispatch.com
***12 People Blockade Entrance to NY Compressor
Station Protesting Methane Gas Storage
Project
“A dozen people put their bodies on the line in a
last-resort protest to stop a major gas storage expansion project that has
been authorized to begin construction on the shore of Seneca Lake, the largest
of New York’s Finger Lakes. The
protesters formed a human blockade in front of the Texas-based Crestwood
Midstream company gate, shutting down the Finger Lakes facility
from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. today.
The
“WE ARE SENECA LAKE” actions are taking place to protest the methane gas
storage expansion project that will store
highly pressurized, explosive gas in abandoned salt caverns on the west side of
Seneca Lake.
“Seneca Lake is a source of drinking water
for 100,000 people and a source of economic prosperity for the whole region,
not a gas station for fracking operations,”
said renowned biologist and author Sandra
Steingraber,
PhD, one of the residents participating in the human
blockade. “It’s a place for tourists, wineries, farms and families. Speaking
with our bodies in an act of civil disobedience is a measure of last recourse
to protect our home, our water, and our local economy—with our bodies and our
voices, telling Texas-based Crestwood to go home!”
This proposed project has faced
unparalleled public opposition due to unresolved questions about
geological instabilities, fault lines, possible salinization of the lake
and public health concerns. Even though Capital New York
investigation revealed this month that Gov. Cuomo’s Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) excised references to the risks of underground gas storage from a
2011 federal report on methane contamination of drinking water and has allowed
key data to remain hidden, Crestwood still received federal
approval to move forward with the construction of this methane gas
storage project.
Protestors
are outraged that Crestwood was given approval by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission to store two billion cubic feet of
methane (natural gas) in the caverns along the western shore of Seneca Lake where the New York State DEC
temporarily halted plans to stockpile propane and butane (LPG) due to
ongoing concerns for safety, health and the environment.
The project
is opposed by more than 200 businesses, more than 60 wineries, 11
municipalities (including neighboring Watkins Glen) and thousands and thousands
of residents in the Finger Lakes region who are concerned about the threat it
poses to human health, drinking water and the local economy, including the
tourism industry. A
recent report
on the state’s grape and wine industry showed that it contributes $4.8
billion to the New York State economy every year and generates more
than 5.2 million wine-related tourism visits.
“As
we literally put our bodies on the line, we once again call on President Obama,
Governor Cuomo, Senator Schumer, Senator Gillibrand and Congressman Reed to do
what’s right and step in and stop this terrible project from ruining the heart
of the Finger Lakes,” said Watkins Glen resident Lyn Gerry who participated in today’s blockade.
***Future of
Fracking Not As Bright As Forecasted
Post
Carbon Institute has published a report calling into question the production
statistics touted by promoters of fracking. By calculating the production
numbers on a well-by-well basis for shale gas and tight oil fields throughout
the U.S., Post
The
report, Drilling Deeper: A Reality Check
on U.S. Government Forecasts for a Lasting Tight Oil & Shale Gas Boom,
authored by Post Carbon fellow J. David Hughes, updates an earlier report he
authored for Post Carbon in 2012.
“Hughes analyzed the production
stats for seven tight oil basins and seven gas basins, which account for 88
percent and 89 percent of current shale gas production.
Among
the key findings:
By 2040, production rates from the Bakken Shale and Eagle Ford Shale
will be less than a tenth of that projected by the Energy Department. For
the top three shale gas fields—the Marcellus Shale, Eagle Ford and
Bakken—production rates from these plays will be about a third of the U.S.
Energy Information Administration (EIA) forecast.
The three year average well decline rates for the seven shale oil
basins measured for the report range from an astounding 60 percent to 91
percent. That means over those three years, the amount of oil coming out of
the wells decreases by that percentage. This translates to 43 percent to 64
percent of their estimated ultimate recovery dug out during the first three
years of the well’s existence.
Four of the seven shale gas
basins are already in terminal decline in terms of their well productivity: the
Haynesville Shale, Fayetteville Shale, Woodford Shale and Barnett The three year average well
decline rates for the seven shale gas basins measured for the report ranges
between 74 percent to 82 percent.
The average annual decline rates
in the seven shale gas basins examined equals between 23 percent and 49
percent. Translation: between
one-quarter and one-half of all production in each basin must be replaced
annually just to keep running at the same pace on the drilling treadmill and
keep getting the same amount of gas out of the earth.
The report’s findings differ
vastly from the forward-looking projections published by the EIA, a statistical
sub-unit of the U.S.Department of Energy (DOE).
The findings also come just days
after Houston Chronicle reporter Jennifer Dlouhy reported that in a briefing
over the summer, EIA Administrator Adam Sieminski told her it was EIA’s job to
“tell the industry story” about tight oil and shale gas production.
“We want to be able to tell, in a
sense, the industry story,” Sieminski told Dlouhy, as reported in the
Chronicle. “This is a huge success story in many ways for the companies and the
nation, and having that kind of lag in such a rapidly moving area just simply
isn’t allowing that full story to be told.”
The independent story, though,
opens up a window to tell a different tale.
“The Department of Energy’s forecasts—the
ones everyone is relying on to guide our energy policy and planning—are overly
optimistic based on what the actual well data are telling us,” Hughes—a
geoscientist who formerly analyzed energy resources for over three decades for
the Geological Survey of Canada—said in a press release about the
reporting’s findings.
“By
asking the right questions you soon realize that if the future
of U.S. oil and natural gas production depends on resources in the
country’s deep shale deposits … we are in for a big disappointment in the longer term.”
According
to Hughes’ number-crunching, four of the top seven shale gas fields have
already peaked: the Haynesville, Barnett, Woodford and Fayetteville. But
three of those are actually doing the opposite and increasing their production:
the Marcellus, Eagle Ford and Bakken, though the latter two are primarily
fracked oil fields.
Further,
the report points to the phenomenon first discussed in the original Post Carbon
report back in 2012: that of the “drilling treadmill,” or having to drill more
and more wells just to keep production levels flat. The report argues that drillers hit the “sweet spots” first to maximize
their production, do so for a few years until production begins to decline
terminally, and then start drilling in spaces with less rich oil and
gas bounties.
A
case in point: Post Carbon projects the Bakken and Eagle Ford Shale basins—the
two most productive oil plays—will produce 730,000 barrels of oil per day in
2040. EIA, meanwhile, says 1.04 million barrels per day of oil will be
pumped from the ground at that point.
“One
of the keys to the so-called ‘shale revolution’ is supposed to be technological
innovation, making plays ever-more productive in the face of the steep well
decline rates and the move from ‘sweet spots’ to lower quality parts of
plays,” wrote Post Carbon in an
introduction to the report for members of the media. “But despite years of concerted efforts, average well productivity has gone flat in all the major shale gas
plays except the Marcellus.”
The Bakken and Eagle Ford serve as
Exhibit A and Exhibit B of the mechanics of how the “sweet spot” phenomenon
works in action.
“Field declines from the Bakken and
Eagle Ford are 45% and 38% per year, respectively,” wrote Hughes in the executive summary. “This is the amount of
production that must be replaced each year with more drilling in order to
maintain production at current levels.”
For gas, it’s the same story,
centering around “sweet spots” and the “drilling treadmill.”
So
where do the EIA’s rosy statistics originate? Post Carbon Institute posed its own questions
directly to the EIA, while also saying one has
to look at the difference between proven and unproven reserves to
understand EIA’s data.
“Shale
gas producers and the EIA report ‘proved reserves,’ a definition with
legal weight describing hydrocarbon deposits recoverable with current
technology under current economic conditions,” they write. “The EIA also estimates ‘unproved technically
recoverable resources’ which have loose geological constraints and no implied
price required for extraction, and hence are uncertain.”
Also
implicit in the rosy numbers and figures is that cash will continue to be
injected into capital-intensive shale gas and oil production operations.
So far, the industry and its
financiers have received a blessing from the U.S.Federal Reserve: zero percent interest rates to obtain junk debt bonds to finance fracking since 2008. But with the Federal Reserve
considering hiking rates, economics could change
quickly on the feasibility of continued unfettered shale oil and
gas extraction.
Hughes said his findings are based
on “best case scenarios” and rule out external conditions that could reverse
the drilling treadmill, including hiked interest rates.
“Other factors that could limit production
are public pushback as a result of health and environmental concerns, and
capital constraints that could result from lower oil or gas prices or higher
interest rates,” he wrote. “As such factors have not been included in this
analysis, the findings of this report represent a ‘best case’ scenario for
market, capital, and political conditions.”
http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/27/fracking-forecast-post-carbon/
***Bob Donnan on Kiskadden Case
(Bob always includes details of a case that you probably won’t
read in the newspapers. Jan)
“I’ve spent a half dozen days over the past
month attending an Environmental Hearing Board (EHB) hearing in Pittsburgh:
Kiskadden vs. Range Resources & Pa. DEP. Range and the DEP made a
determination that denied Buzz Kiskadden replacement water, with them both
concluding that Range Resources’ activities did not contaminate his water well.
The volume of documented evidence is quite damning however. Judge Renwand
stated yesterday that this is the oldest case on his docket, probably to
illustrate it is moving much too slowly, as attorneys were going over water
tests and documents dating back to 2010 and 2011, with June 2011 of special
interest to the judge. No video or photography is allowed in the courtroom. The
hearing schedule is sort of like ‘bankers hours’ with late starts (9:30am) and
multiple breaks, over an hour lunch breaks, but in fairness, some hearing days
have run late.
I’m
usually the only person in the hearing room full of suits not drawing a
paycheck (and not wearing a suit), but it is cheap entertainment and sometimes
makes for great theater. It’s both interesting
and disturbing how the Pa. DEP attorneys and Range Resources attorneys work
together as if joined at the hip, but after all, they are both defendants
in the case. The lead showman for Range is John Gisleson, a flash and dash sort
of trial lawyer who doesn’t hesitate to use extended arms, dipping legs, and
‘show & tell’ visual props such as Gatorade, Centrum Vitamins and a chunk
of shale to dazzle Judge Renwand and his two assistants, as well as the
courtroom. He projects loud enough for the deaf to hear, and if you sit in the
front row you may get your toes stepped on as he spins, twists, dips and
constantly moves away from the podium.
On the ‘white hat’ team
representing Buzz Kiskadden we have soft spoken Kendra Smith with husband John
at her side, worthy of recent note for his pro bono work on getting the onerous
Act 13 disemboweled in Pennsylvania. Zoning actually means something again!
They are backed up by a third attorney from the Smith-Butz firm, but Kendra is
leading the charge for Buzz Kiskadden, who lives on Banetown Road, Amwell Twp,
Pennsylvania, just south of Washington. Even
though his water well is 2,500 feet down gradient from the Yeager site
(drilling pad with gas wells, a former leaky drill cuttings pit and leaky 13
million gallon wastewater evaporation pit) in question, he also has laterals
from the Sierzega Unit extending his way, perhaps even beneath his 200 to 400
foot deep water well, which has ended up with all sorts of freaky-fracking
elements in it, both known and unknown.
You
familiar with pH? If not, it is a basic
number scale from zero to 14 with 7 as the middle number and representing
“neutral.” I learned it in regards to soils, since certain plants we installed
for clients over the past 40 years have specific pH requirements, namely acid-loving
plants like Rhododendrons which prefer an acidic pH of 5 to 6. The interesting
thing about pH for the uninitiated is that the pH scale is logarithmic, meaning
that an increase in pH from 5 to 6 is a ten times (x10) increase, not just a
20% increase from 5 to 6. So long story short, while most water should be
around 7 or slightly above, at least one water test the Kiskadden test results
went over pH 9, which would be a 100-times (x100) change. A bevy of other
elements showed up in his water, so many I won’t try to list or quantify all of
them. Range’s attorney has been trying to pick apart individual elements in the
water test reports, while expert witnesses testifying on Buzz’s behalf keep
pointing out you have to look at the overall picture.
Paul Rubin, a hydro-geologist from New York with 30
years of experience and a Master’s degree from SUNY, was on the
stand again yesterday as the Range attorney pounded on him all day. Countering
testimony by earlier Pa. DEP witnesses, while agreeing with another Kiskadden
expert, Paul Rubin has no doubt in his mind that the Yeager site contaminated
Buzz’s water well.
His evidence is based on 3 main tenets, as I understood them to be: 1)
a geological rock fracture network lines-up perfectly with Buzz’s down gradient
water well, 2) gravitational forces, which would easily move contaminants 2,500
feet considering the 260 foot drop in elevation, and finally, the most tenuous
concept 3) Marcellus Shale contaminants finding their way upwards over 6,000
feet into Buzz’s water well due to the extremely high pressures used in
fracking and the fracture network in the Greene and Washington rock formations.(
I think bob is saying #3 is highly unlikely, jan)
I learned a new term yesterday,
“old water” with ‘old’ meaning hundreds of millions of years old, as would be
the case with Marcellus Shale fluids. According
to Paul Rubin, the ratio of Strontium 87 to Strontium 86 in the strontium found
in Buzz’s water well is a perfect fingerprint (tracer if you will) for ‘old
water’ from the Marcellus shale. It’s a ratio around .7122 if memory
serves. A second key fingerprint for
shale drilling contamination is the presence of both Boron and Lithium in the
well water. So during one of the more comical segments of yesterday
afternoon’s proceedings was when an drawing board easel was set-up facing the
judge, and work began with a series of long numbers around .7122 it quickly
became obvious that some of the sharpest minds in the room were not too great
at basic math, as they tried to show that Kiskadden ratio was more likely to be
related to younger water from upper layers like coal seams. Reference was also
being made to the Voyles and Haney water tests, two of the families with civil
suits due in court next year depending on the status of Range Resources appeal.
Other
regular attendees in the courtroom included former head of O&G in the SW Pa
regional office, Alan Eichler, as well as his recent replacement in that
position whose name escapes me. I did learn from him that his first 17 years at
the Pa DEP were in air quality, then he spent several years in brownfields work
at the NW Pa regional office before taking over Alan’s job. He told me one of
his main goals is to improve the paper records used in file reviews, but he was
very skeptical about DEP documents being converted anytime soon to
easily-accessible and searchable electronic documents.
I
gave him a couple examples of problems I had recently experienced on E-Facts: No address or GPS listed for many sites,
namely the Smith Compressor Station near Burgettstown (above), and also a
shortage of gas well information which used to list each gas well. A friend
tells me you now have to look under E&S permitting to find the individual
well permits. While surfing eFacts I came across this document related to
Range’s impoundments:
Range’s defense attorney has also
been pounding on what he believes is a disconnect between chloride and sodium
levels in water tests, with sodium levels being much higher. While talking to
one of the Pa DEP lawyers I learned they are not from Harrisburg as I first
thought, but from the SW Pa DEP regional office, which is apparently quite
active on the legal front considering all the coal issues as well as everything
else they cover.
While
I don’t have a clue which way the EHB will rule on Buzz Kiskadden getting
replacement water, all the evidence I have seen tells
me his well was contaminated by that huge leaky impoundment and drill cuttings
pit. Keep in mind these huge pits are all over our county and most of them seem
to leak. Paul Rubin suggested anyone living in that Yeager-Kiskadden area,
especially extending down to and beyond Banetown Road, should be testing their
well water once a month to detect any future contamination from the
contamination plumes, since the contamination will continue to move. As
important as this case is, I find it surprising that the only reporter in the
courtroom on a regular basis is Don Hopey of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
As far as
drill cuttings pits, these are the same ones Range has typically buried on
drilling pads all over our county by using ‘Alternate Waste Disposal’
permitting from the DEP. Add some ‘Solibond’ then finish by wrapping the bundle
in plastic and bury it below ‘plow depth’ on the drilling pad. I nicknamed them
toxic teabags after learning they permitted burial of some in our country park,
Cross Creek County Park.”
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
