Air Too Dangerous to Breathe: How Fracking Can Turn Rural Communities Into Industrial Wastelands

The exploding faucet may have launched the movement against fracking, but it's the unsexy compressor station that is pushing it to maturity.

Last week, more than a hundred activists from Pennsylvania and New York, includingactor Mark Ruffalo, brought thousands of gallons of drinking water to 11 families inDimock, Pa., who had been left dry after Cabot Oil and Gas stopped their water deliveries.

The mess Cabot created in 2009 from shale gas drilling had now been cleaned, according to the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which meant no more water for the Dimock 11, the holdout families in a long-running feud over water contamination and cleanup.

At issue was the safety of well water symbolized by a jug filled with brown fluid taken from Dimock resident Scott Ely's well. Held aloft by Ruffalo, who was flanked by families and Gasland director Josh Fox, the crowd challenged officials to come and take a swig if the water was so safe. Paul Rubin, a hydrogeologist, painted a grim picture, laying out a future of continued water contamination. The Ely water had arsenic, manganese, aluminum, iron, and lead at several times the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for safe drinking water.

The visuals were dramatic, and the anti-frack action ended with supporters triumphantly holding a huge water line that snaked from a tanker truck on Carter Road to a family's "water buffalo" — a large storage tank. The Dimock 11 were now supplied.

Next door pro-gas families and a Cabot industry representative held a dueling press conference calling their anti-frack neighbors liars and greedy for money. They bemoaned the besmirching of Dimock by their neighbors and outside agitators.

How the water went bad, how it was tested, when it was tested, who tested it and for what are just some of the issues confronting residents of the Marcellus Shale region and lawyers around the country suing drilling companies for alleged water contamination.

Many of these legal cases have lagged on for years, leaving residents dependent on bottled drinking water and "good neighbor" gestures by drilling companies that deny blame but temporarily supply water, until they decide to stop as Cabot did in Dimock.

Missing from this debate is what many environmentalists see as an equally important issue in shale gas exploration: the air quality.

An invisible product of the huge industrialization of the Marcellus Shale region is the air pollution created not just from thousands of transport trucks used in well construction and fracking, but the added infrastructure required to bring gas to market, most significantly the compressor stations.

These stations are essential to push gas through the pipelines. They can be loud; they emit methane, and BTEX compounds, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. They have been associated with significant headaches, bloody noses, skin lesions, blisters, and rashes. They operate continuously and permanently.

"Compressor stations are not just accessories to gas production facilities — they are large-scale industrial installations. In some parts of the West, compressor engines contribute an average of nearly 60 percent of all nitrogen oxide emissions from oil and gas operations," said Nadia Steinzor, the Marcellus Shale Regional Organizer for Earthworks.

The same day activists staged the water mercy mission to Dimock, a remarkable but largely unnoticed event occurred a few miles north, in Montrose.

http://www.alternet.org/story/153417/air_too_dangerous_to_breathe_how_fracking_can_turn_rural_communities_into_industrial_wastelands_with_photos

Hydrofracking sure to contaminate water

As an environmental engineering technician with NYSDEC Region 5, I managed scores of groundwater remediation projects in the 1990s. I’ve reviewed countless hydrogeologic reports and seen thousands of lab results from contaminated wells. I’m familiar with the fate and transport of contaminants in fractured media, and let me be clear:

Hydraulic fracturing as it’s practiced today will contaminate our aquifers. 

Not might contaminate our aquifers. Hydraulic fracturing will contaminate New York’s aquifers. If you were looking for a way to poison the drinking water supply, here in the Northeast you couldn’t find a more chillingly effective and thorough method of doing so than with hydraulic fracturing. 

My experience investigating and remediating contaminated groundwater taught me some lessons. There’s no such thing as a perfect well seal. Occasionally sooner, often later, well seals can and do fail, period.    

       

No confining layer is completely competent; all geologic strata leak to some extent. The fact that a less-transmissive layer lies between the drill zone and a well does not protect the well from contamination. 

A drinking water well is never in “solid” rock. If it were, it would be a dry hole in the ground. As water moves through joints, fissures and bedding planes into a well, so do contaminants. In fractured media such as shale, water follows preferential pathways, moving fast and far, miles per week in some cases. 

In the absence of oxygen (such as under the ground), organic compounds break down infinitesimally slowly. Chemicals injected into the aquifer will persist for many lifetimes.

       

When contamination occurs—and it will occur— we will all pay for it, regardless of where we live. Proving responsibility for groundwater contamination is difficult, costly and time-consuming, and while corporate lawyers drag out proceedings for years, everyone’s taxes will pay for the subsurface investigations, the whole-house filtration systems, the unending lab analyses. 

    

I’d love to see hundreds more jobs created. But not if it means hundreds of thousands using well water will be at a high risk of contamination. Not if it means every New Yorker will be on the hook for the cost for cleanup and for creating alternate water supplies. If your well goes bad, neither you, nor your children, nor their children will ever be able to get safe, clean water back. That’s too high a price. 

Drill for gas, absolutely, but develop safe technologies first. 

     

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20111213/OPINION02/712139975

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.

EPA criticizes state for shale air pollution rules

Tuesday, December 06, 2011

By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has strongly criticized Pennsylvania's new policy guidelines for regulating air pollutants emitted by Marcellus Shale gas wells and development sites located in close proximity to one another.

According to the EPA, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's Oct. 12 draft policy differs from established federal law and the state's own air pollution control plan by imposing new limitations on the aggregation of air emissions from multiple shale gas industry sources such as gas wells, compressor pumping stations and pipelines.

That state policy, which amended a policy adopted by the Rendell administration in December 2010, uses the physical distance of one quarter mile between the shale gas facilities as a major qualifying criteria for determining if they should be considered as individual minor sources or a single, major source of air pollutants.

A broader geographic policy of aggregation consistent with the federal Clean Air Act would result in multiple gas development activities being treated as a single major source, and as such it would require them to meet stricter emissions standards to prevent deterioration of existing air quality.

"The [DEP] draft guidance appears to alter the conventional way in which aggregation determinations have been made federally and by PADEP," said Diana Esher, EPA Region III air protection division director, in an agency comment letter dated Nov. 21. "For example the guidance imposes new terms and requirements when considering the 'contiguous or adjacent' nature of two or more sources and provides a bright line test of distance between sources when making aggregation determinations."

She said in her letter and in comments attached to the letter that the EPA will review and comment on the DEP's air pollution source aggregation determinations.

The DEP did not respond Monday afternoon to several requests for comment about the EPA's criticism or the agency's plans to review DEP decision making. When the new policy, which de-emphasizes the inter-relatedness of oil and gas facilities, was announced, DEP Secretary Michael Krancer characterized it as a "practical, common-sense and legally required approach to air aggregation issues."

The DEP's air staff began implementing the new policy on an interim basis on Oct. 12, and they took public comments until Nov. 21.

Kathryn Klaber, president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, said the industry supports the state policy's "prescriptive definition of proximity" because it "gives predictability for development" while still allowing regulators to consider other factors depending on the specific site.

"That gives predictability for development," she said. "It's a good compromise."

The Clean Air Council, one of several environmental organizations that criticized the DEP policy when it was issued, applauded the EPA review and called on the federal agency to "ensure that the [state] guidance is repealed and public health and the environment is protected in Pennsylvania."

Jan Jarrett, president and chief executive officer for Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, a statewide environmental organization active on Marcellus Shale issues, said the DEP "thumbed its nose at the EPA" by rejecting established federal aggregation policy guidelines.

"What we need in Pennsylvania, and deserve in Pennsylvania, are world-class standards for controlling drilling pollution," Ms. Jarrett said. "The EPA's standards are better. And you would think, given the state's long history of bad air and the cost of bringing it into compliance, that the DEP would be eager on economic grounds to restrict emissions."

Thomas Au, conservation chair of the Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter, said the EPA should closely monitor the DEP's permitting of Marcellus Shale development to ensure it is consistent with federal policies.

"If many gas industry sources of air pollution escape strict air pollution controls," Mr. Au said, "the regional air quality would degrade. Eventually, whole counties would not attain the national ambient air quality standards."

Don Hopey: dhopey@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983.

First published on December 6, 2011 at 12:00 am

RPT-China quietly finds niche in U.S. shale oil boom

By Selam Gebrekidan and Chen Aizhu
    NEW YORK/BEIJING, Dec 12 (Reuters) - China has quietly
gained a toehold in the U.S. shale oil-and-gas boom.
    Even as the Asian nation's giant energy firms only now
begin to see the first glimmers of success in their domestic
shale fields, a handful of small manufacturers in China have
found a quicker way to join the bonanza: supplying ceramic
proppants, a key raw material used in hydraulic fracturing.
    Over the past three years, China has emerged as a go-to
source for the engineered spherical pebbles that, like sand,
are injected deep underground to help "prop" open tight shale
rocks as part of the controversial fracking process, allowing
oil and gas to flow to the surface.
    U.S. imports of the proppants from China have surged
12-fold since 2008, data from the U.S. International Trade
Commission shows. At year's end, Chinese imports will account
for 13 percent of the total North American ceramic proppant
market, a $3 billion a year business, by analysts' estimates.
    The boom may not last forever. U.S. manufacturers are now
gearing up to challenge the Chinese. Prices have surged by 60
percent in two years and eventually experts expect China's own
shale revolution to absorb supply.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/12/shalegas-usa-china-idUSN1E7BB05I20111212

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