Ohio lawmakers should impose fracking moratorium until impact on ground water can be determined

Last week, many news agencies reported on the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency'sconclusion that contamination of water wells around the town of Pavillion, Wyo., was the result of natural gas drilling. The contaminants recovered from the aquifer included an assortment of carbon-based compounds, among them the carcinogens benzene, phenol and 2-butoxyethanol. These and hundreds of other chemicals are known to be used where gas extraction is accomplished using horizontal drilling and hydraulical fracturing -- the two procedures commonly and simply referred to as "fracking."

Fracking had been done extensively in the Pavillion area for more than a decade, and, indeed, local residents had been complaining of smelly, oddly-colored water for about as long. They are not alone. According to the nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy group Common Cause, at least 1,000 complaints of water contamination connected to fracking have been reported across the country from the Rocky Mountains to our neighbors in Pennsylvania (most famously around the town of Dimock). The industry continues to reject concerns and fight allegations with a substantial public relations campaign and lobbying effort estimated to have cost the industry $747 million over the past 10 years, with over $20 million of that going to current members of Congress from both parties. Their expenditures have paid off . . . for the gas industry. With tens of thousands of wells across the country, the industry has been exempt from much regulation, including parts of the Clean Water Act, and to date no independent and comprehensive study of the safety of fracking has been conducted.

Meanwhile in Ohio, as gas lease brokers -- with the lure of fast, easy money -- descend on rural areas across the state, two bills that advocate precaution are stalled in the Ohio state legislature.House bill 345 and Senate bill 213 are easy to understand: Pause natural gas extraction by fracking in the state until the U.S. EPA concludes a study -- the first of its kind -- on the safety of fracking with regard to water resources. (This study is expected to be done by 2014). Then require the Ohio Department of Natural Resources to alter Ohio's regulation and oversight of fracking to address the safety concerns identified by the EPA's research.

Simple and common sense, right? It's like making sure your kid knows how to drive before handing him the keys. I'm not sure our state politicians think that protecting the state's water resources is of particular importance, requiring urgent passage of these bills. Instead, I've heard grumblings by many proponents of the moratorium that the bills will be killed in committee.

To contrast, let's look to Nebraska, where, over the course of weeks, Republican Gov. Dave Heineman, with a unanimous bipartisan vote from the legislature, took control of the proposed TransCanada tar sands oil pipeline (the Keystone XL pipeline), re-routing its Nebraska pathway to avoid the Ogallala aquifer -- a major source of water for that and surrounding states. While admittedly I'm no fan of the XL pipeline, I applaud the Nebraska state government for its recognition of the importance of ground water to the residents of that state and its quick action to protect it.

No one likes to believe that their representatives in government, especially state government, would hold moneyed interests above those of ordinary constituents. That's why I am ignoring thereport and accompanying impressive spreadsheet called "Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets," published last month by Common Cause, showing Ohio leaders and committees received over $2.8 million in gas industry money over the past 10 years. At the top of the list of state-level recipients were Gov. John Kasich ($213,519), the Republican Senate Campaign Committee ($114,750) and the Ohio House Republican Organizational Committee ($95,500). (To be fair, former Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland was No. 4).

Instead, I'm going to urge lawmakers to apply common-sense precaution and pass the bills to impose a moratorium on fracking until we know how it can be done safely. Other states have done it -- New York, Maryland, even New Jersey. Utilizing domestic, even local, energy resources should be a priority for the country and the state. But it's foolish -- even unpatriotic -- to destroy our drinking water in the pursuit of a buck. And with this last sentence, I'm talking to everyone from federal and state politicians to my neighbors signing gas leases.

Steven Corso Chardon

http://blog.cleveland.com/letters/2011/12/ohio_lawmakers_should_impose_f.html

Hubbard ODNR reps back in Valley

By Robert Guttersohn

rguttersohn@vindy.com

Hubbard

Less than a month after Ohio Department of Natural Resources representatives took the three-hour drive from Columbus to Coitsville, they were back in the Mahoning Valley on Tuesday.

This time they appeared in front of Hubbard Townhip trustees and approximately 50 township residents who had questions of ODNR regarding a proposed injection well slated to be constructed on Hubbard Masury Road near Interstate 80.

Injection wells, which often are drilled as deep as 9,000 feet below the ground, accept brine water from well drilling, including fracking, a process in which water, chemicals and sand are blasted into rocks thousands of feet below the ground to unlock oil and natural gas.

The proposed site for the injection well is along the Little Yankee Run Creek, which eventually empties into the Shenango River.

Several communities in western Pennsylvania rely on the river for drinking water.

D&L Energy would drill the well, the same company that has done so in Coitsville. And like the ODNR meeting in Coitsville, a D&L Energy representative was not present to answer some questions specific to the Hubbard site.

The theme of Tuesday’s meeting was, “Is this the right site?”

“We have no say-so in the site they choose,” said ODNR geologist Tom Tomastik.

The site would consist of 20 holding tanks and a dyke that would be large enough to hold back 100 percent of the brine water from flowing into the creek if all tanks began to leak.

He said D&L Energy would drill 9,100 feet into the earth and inject brine water through pores in the rock formation. Tomastik said they will not know how many gallons the rock formation can take a day until the well is drilled and tested.

Residents also were concerned about the possible link between the wells and the recent uptick in earthquakes. The earthquakes’ epicenter has been in proximity to Youngstown’s D&L Energy well on the city’s West Side.

Brine-injection well meeting Tuesday in Hubbard

HUBBARD — The Ohio Department of Natural Resources will meet with Hubbard residents at 3 p.m. Tuesday at the Hubbard Township Administration Building, 2600 Elmwood Drive.

Residents will be able to provide input regarding a brine-injection well at Masury Road in the township (at the Nexlev, Inc. property, located between the Yellow Freight Terminal and King Collision.)

Tom Tomastik, ODNR geologist, will host the meeting and a state recorder will be present to document an official transcript.

Objections will be limited to this specific brine-injection well, not other natural gas or oil wells in the area.

Citizens that cannot attend can mail comments to Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil and Gas, 2045 Morse Road, Building H-3, Columbus, Ohio, 43229, Attention: Tom Tomastik.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/dec/12/brine-injection-well-meeting-tuesday-hubbard/?nw

Habitat destruction should worry hunters

A while back, I wrote about the disappearing hunting lands and why we, as sportspeople, should be worried. The outfitters are leasing land, and out-of-staters also are eating up land. Developers arebuying farmlands and making subdivisions, and a new monster is looming: the Marcellus miners. These oil companies are leasing vast expanses of land to do shale drilling. I wonder just how this will affect hunting land. I do not think they will let people hunt where they are drilling just as the coal companies closed land in the past.

Will this spell the end of yet more of our sport?

I have a real concern about this. Hunting is the least of our worries. I did some research on the operations at the Natural ResourcesDefense Council website, and what I found is truly scary. Outdated regulations do not cover the new high-tech drillings, and some of the results were not pleasant. I read of exploding water wells and contaminated water supplies resulting in flammable water and human and animal illnesses. Imagine the impact on wildlife habitat.

The shale formation is along the southeastern part of Ohio in about 10 counties, not in Muskingum County, according to my research, but in Guernsey and Noble. The by-products of this fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, need to be disposed of in some way. Chemicals, water and sand are used under extremely high pressure to fracture the shale. The people who are doing this process say it is safe. Maybe it is, but some other research shows that fracking is suspected in polluted water tables. Once water is polluted, it is done.

All this being said, I submit when habitat is destroyed, animals are atrisk as well. Water, air and habitat destruction only can mean fewer animals and fewer leased lands means less land for us to hunt on in an already shrinking picture. In an area of Wyoming where fracking is allowed, the mule deer numbers declined by 30 percent. I think you can get my drift.

http://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder.com/article/20111211/SPORTS/112110340/Habitat-destruction-should-worry-hunters

Stark County's Uniontown first 'fracking' target

UNIONTOWN -- Ohio's oil and gas energy rush is taking off and one Stark County community with a dark industrial history is listed to be one of the first fracking sites in our area.

Where the well is going and who is drilling it may surprise you.

WKYC Photojournalist Carl Bachtel brings you the story.

Uniontown is a small community nestled between Akron and Canton in Stark County.

It's also the location of the federally monitored toxic waste site, the Industrial Excess Landfill.

Soon the property across busy Cleveland Avenue from the EPA Superfund site could have drilling.

Hydrofracture drilling is on its way and some residents who know the area's environmental history are fearful.

The Ohio Department of Natural Resourcesalready approved the permit to allow Ohio Valley Energy System to drill right under the homes along Route 619.

Ohio Valley Energy has a history of residential drilling, most notably in Bainbridge Township in Geauga County. In December 2007, the results there were contaminated well water and exploding homes.

Industry videos posted on YouTube tout the safety and environmentally friendly aspects of gas drilling.

But one resident thinks the poor economy is clouding people's judgement.

Fracking may be culprit for groundwater pollution, EPA says

By Steve Bennish, Staff Writer11:25 PM Thursday, December 8, 2011

An investigation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has raised alarm among critics of the oil and natural gas exploration boom getting under way in Ohio.

The federal agency said Thursday for the first time that fracking, a technique that can be used to extract deep deposits of oil and gas, may be to blame for groundwater pollution in Wyoming.

Residents in Pavillion, Wyo., initiated the investigation with complaints in 2008 that well water reeked of chemicals. Health officials advised them not to drink the water after the EPA found hydrocarbons in wells.

Natural gas exploration in Ohio is getting off the ground to the excitement of Gov. John Kasich, who said earlier this year he was “simply thrilled” by a report on natural gas explorations.

The Oklahoma City-based company Chesapeake Energy told shareholders it had leased 1.25 million acres to get at the deep Ohio Utica Shale formation.

Chesapeake estimated it could be worth up to $20 billion to the company. Other major companies are also exploring the Utica, believed to underlie the eastern three-quarters of the state.

Andy Ware, deputy director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, said Ohio officials understand that state officials in Wyoming are disputing the report. “As far as Ohio, we believe we have the best drilling regulations in the country. We are confident we will protect our groundwater here in Ohio,” he said.

But Peggy Koebernick of Yellow Springs, a member of the No Frack group, said the EPA finding could make residents reconsider signing leases for gas exploration. “It could have an impact,” she said. “It could make fracking more controversial, while it’s now touted by the industry as being safe. We need more thorough investigation and a moratorium.”

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/fracking-may-be-culprit-for-groundwater-pollution-epa-says-1296532.html

Is Ohio the Next “Frontier of Fracking?”

December 9, 2011

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Environmental groups say more must be done to ensure that Ohio does not become the next "frontier of fracking." Horizontal hydraulic fracturing, the drilling method commonly known as "fracking," involves injecting millions of gallons of water and chemicals into deep underground wells to break up rock and release natural gas.

While supporters say it provides a substantial source of energy, some of the chemicals are toxic and the process is hazardous to the environment, says Matt Trokan, water conservation coordinator for the Sierra ClubOhio Chapter.

"Fracking is very different than conventional drilling and it threatens our water and our air, particularly the disposal of waste water from the fracking activities."

Currently there are 40 horizontally-fractured wells in Ohio – and 4,000 more expected in the next four years. Natural gas companies are not required to disclose the chemicals used in fracking, and Trokan says the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency cannot properly monitor all the horizontal drilling and wastewater disposal sites. His group and others insist more research is needed, along with better policies and regulations to ensure public and environmental health.

http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/23656-1