Monday, January 28, 2013


Livestock falling ill in fracking regions, raising concerns about food

28th January, 2013
Elizabeth Royte

In the midst of the US domestic energy boom, livestock on farms near oil-and-gas drilling operations nationwide have been quietly falling sick and dying. Elizabeth Royte reports


                                                        Cows outdoors
                                                                          Some reports suggest livestock living near to fracking operations may be falling ill

While scientists have yet to isolate cause and effect, many suspect chemicals used in drilling and hydrofracking (or “fracking”) operations are poisoning animals through the air, water, or soil.
Last year, Michelle Bamberger, an Ithaca, New York, veterinarian, and Robert Oswald, a professor of molecular medicine at Cornell’s College of Veterinary Medicine, published the first and only peer-reviewed report to suggest a link between fracking and illness in food animals.
The authors compiled 24 case studies of farmers in six shale-gas states whose livestock experienced neurological, reproductive, and acute gastrointestinal problems after being exposed—either accidentally or incidentally—to fracking chemicals in the water or air. The article, published in New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy, describes how scores of animals died over the course of several years.
The death toll is insignificant when measured against the nation’s livestock population (some 97 million beef cattle go to market each year), but environmental advocates believe these animals constitute an early warning.
Exposed livestock “are making their way into the food system, and it’s very worrisome to us,” Bamberger says. “They live in areas that have tested positive for air, water, and soil contamination. Some of these chemicals could appear in milk and meat products made from these animals.”
In Louisiana, 17 cows died after an hour’s exposure to spilled fracking fluid, which is injected miles underground to crack open and release pockets of natural gas. The most likely cause of death: respiratory failure.
In New Mexico, hair testing of sick cattle that grazed near well pads found petroleum residues in 54 of 56 animals.
In northern central Pennsylvania, 140 cattle were exposed to fracking wastewater when an impoundment was breached. Approximately 70 cows died, and the remainder produced only 11 calves, of which three survived.
In western Pennsylvania, an overflowing wastewater pit sent fracking chemicals into a pond and a pasture where pregnant cows grazed: Half their calves were born dead. Dairy operators in shale-gas areas of Colorado, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Texas have also reported the death of goats.
Drilling and fracking a single well requires up to 7 million gallons of water, plus an additional 400,000 gallons of additives, including lubricants, biocides, scale- and rust-inhibitors, solvents, foaming and defoaming agents, emulsifiers and de-emulsifiers, stabilizers and breakers. At almost every stage of developing and operating an oil or gas well, chemicals and compounds can be introduced into the environment.

Cows lose weight, die
After drilling began just over the property line of Jacki Schilke’s ranch in the northwestern corner of North Dakota, in the heart of the state’s booming Bakken Shale, cattle began limping, with swollen legs and infections. Cows quit producing milk for their calves, and they lost from 60 to 80 pounds in a week and their tails mysteriously dropped off. Eventually, five animals died, according to Schilke.
Read More:
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/1784382/livestock_falling_ill_in_fracking_regions_raising_concerns_about_food.html

Friday, January 25, 2013


Fracking wastewater can be highly radioactive

Posted: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:13 pm
Its contents remain mostly a mystery. But fracking wastewater has revealed one of its secrets: It can be highly radioactive. And yet no agency really regulates its handling, transport or disposal. First of a four-part series on radiation in fracking wastewater.
PORTAGE, Pa. -- Randy Moyer hasn’t been able to work in 14 months.
He’s seen more than 40 doctors, has 10 prescriptions to his name and no less than eight inhalers stationed around his apartment.
Moyer said he began transporting brine, the wastewater from gas wells that have been hydraulically fractured, for a small hauling company in August 2011. He trucked brine from wells to treatment plants and back to wells, and sometimes cleaned out the storage tanks used to hold wastewater on drilling sites. By November 2011, the 49-year-old trucker was too ill to work. He suffered from dizziness, blurred vision, headaches, difficulty breathing, swollen lips and appendages, and a fiery red rash that       covered about 50 percent of his body.
“They called it a rash,” he said of the doctors who treated him during his 11 trips to the emergency room. “A rash doesn’t set you on fire.”
Moyer spent most of last year in his Portage apartment, lying on the floor by the open screen door because his skin burned so badly, while doctors scrambled to reach a diagnosis. He says the only thing that has helped ease his symptoms is a homeopathic tea recommended by others in the community who have similar symptoms.
Today, he has a box brimming with doctors’ bills but still no diagnosis. Moyer believes he’s sick from the chemicals in fracking fluid and the ensuing wastewater -- and from radiation exposure.
And he may be right.
Studies from the U.S. Geological Survey, Penn State University and environmental groups all found that waste from fracking can be radioactive -- and in some cases, highly radioactive.
A geological survey report found that millions of barrels of wastewater from unconventional wells in Pennsylvania and conventional wells in New York were 3,609 times more radioactive than the federal limit for drinking water and 300 times more radioactive than a Nuclear Regulatory Commission limit for nuclear plant discharges.
And Mark Engle, the USGS research geologist who co-authored the report, said that fracking plowback from the Marcellus shale contains higher radiation levels than similar shale formations.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013


Drilling and fracking have destroyed value of our most significant investment — our homes

THE COLORADO STATESMAN
GUEST COLUMNIST     
As the pace of oil and gas development increases in Colorado the controversy and impacts on our communities and public health have been well documented. However, one impact to Coloradans which not has received as much attention is how drilling and fracking has impacted Colorado’s real estate and the value of Coloradans’ most significant investment and nest egg — our homes.
 
                                                             
As a managing broker of 40 realtors on the Front Range, I hear from brokers of potential buyers balk at buying a home near a drilling or fracking site, even though that’s often where the discounted homes are. The reason these homes have reduced value is that they are so close to oil and gas activity. The flip side of that same coin is that there are homeowners struggling to sell their home near these sites because of low buyer interest. They often have to sell at significantly lower prices than when originally purchased due to the oil and gas industry neighbors.
 

Many Coloradans describe moving into quiet suburban and ex-urban developments fully expecting to establish roots, raise families, or settle into well-earned retirements. This quintessential American dream is soon rudely interrupted when heavy industrial activity appears at their backyard fence, sometimes with little to no notice.
They soon discover that oil and gas activity does not make a good neighbor. Besides the obvious intrusion of 100 foot drill rigs and 24 hour construction schedules next to bedroom windows, many nearby homeowners describe feeling like they are on the deck of an aircraft carrier rather than enjoying the solitude of a quiet suburban neighborhood or a rural ranchette. There are dramatic increases in truck traffic and noise. Nearby roads once nicely paved are soon chewed up by constant semi-truck traffic and the movement of heavy loads.
When wells are being initially drilled or fracked the sites are often illuminated 24 hours a day.
 

If these physical and quality of life disruptions are not enough, many Coloradans have described a litany of health impacts and irritations from living next to oil and gas drilling. In recent testimony at public hearings to attempt to establish safe distances between homes and drilling, landowners near oil and gas operations complained of nosebleeds, headaches, sick or dead animals and being afraid to drink the water for fear of potential contamination. Those concerns weigh heavily on any family looking to move to a community with an influx of drilling and fracking.
 

Adam Cox is a district broker at Zip Realty in Morrison.

Saturday, January 19, 2013


EPA backed off Weatherford water contamination probe after gas drilling company protested

 LM Otero/The Associated Press
In this November 2012 photo, Steve Lipsky demonstrates how his well water ignites when he puts a flame to the flowing well spigot outside his family's home in rural Parker County near Weatherford 
WEATHERFORD — When a man in a Fort Worth suburb reported his family’s drinking water had begun “bubbling” like champagne, the federal government sounded an alarm: An oil company may have tainted their wells while drilling for natural gas.
At first, the Environmental Protection Agency believed the situation was so serious that it issued a rare emergency order in late 2010 that said at least two homeowners were in immediate danger from a well saturated with flammable methane. More than a year later, the agency rescinded its mandate and refused to explain why.
Now a confidential report obtained by The Associated Press and interviews with company representatives show that the EPA had scientific evidence against the driller, Range Resources, but changed course after the company threatened not to cooperate with a national study into a common form of drilling called hydraulic fracturing. Regulators set aside an analysis that concluded the drilling could have been to blame for the contamination.
For Steve Lipsky, the EPA decision seemed to ignore the dangers of his well, which he says contains so much methane that gas coming from the water in a garden hose attached to the well head can be ignited.
“I just can’t believe that an agency that knows the truth about something like that, or has evidence like this, wouldn’t use it,” said Lipsky, who fears he will have to abandon his dream home in an upscale neighborhood of Weatherford.
The case isn’t the first in which the EPA initially linked a hydraulic fracturing operation to water contamination and then softened its position after the industry protested.
A similar dispute unfolded in west-central Wyoming in late 2011, when the EPA released an initial report that showed hydraulic fracturing could have contaminated groundwater. After industry and GOP leaders went on the attack, the agency said it had decided to do more testing. It has yet to announce a final conclusion.
Read More: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20130116-epa-backed-off-weatherford-water-contamination-probe-after-gas-drilling-company-protested.ecehttp://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20130116-epa-backed-off-weatherford-water-contamination-probe-after-gas-drilling-company-protested.ece

Wednesday, January 9, 2013


01-09-2013FrackAction

Pete Seeger joined more than 1,500 New Yorkers from every corner of the state today to rally against fracking outside of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s State of the State address.
More than 1,500 New Yorkers from every corner of the state descended on Albany today to rally against fracking outside of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s State of the State address. The group delivered a clear message calling for the governor to reject fracking, implement a statewide ban, and be a leader in clean, renewable energy for New York and the nation.
 
“New Yorkers simply want Governor Cuomo to listen to the people he represents and would be most impacted by fracking, not the gas industry,” said Natalie Merchant of New Yorkers Against Fracking. “We love our state and don’t want to see it permanently damaged by fracking just so the gas companies can make profits and leave us with the economic, health and environmental costs of their mess.”
Governor Cuomo’s State of the State address, which is expected to include the announcement of initiatives to address climate change and protect the environment, comes just days after a coalition of national environmental and progressive groups sent him a letterurging his leadership on climate change. The letter’s release came on the heels of new data from researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration showing methane leaks from natural gas production at an alarming rate that was twice as high as its previous study and industry estimates. The evidence further undermined arguments about natural gas’ environmental benefit and the data did not even include other methane leaks that occur during storage and transfer in pipelines.
Hurricane Sandy devastated New York, inflicting billions in damages,” said Phil Aroneanu, campaign director of 350.org. “Opening New York to hydrofracking would be opening the floodgates for more Sandys now and in the future—that’s not a legacy we should be leaving our kids and grandkids.”
Protesters highlighted the environmental and health dangers that allowing fracking would pose to the state, as well as the economic dangers. Since fracking began in states outside of New York, there have been numerous reports of water contamination with studies linking fracking-related activities to contaminated groundwater, air pollution, illness, death and reproductive problems in cows, horses and wildlife, and human health problems. Rather than undertake a comprehensive health impact assessment of fracking, the Cuomo administration instead has hired outside experts to review its own internal health evaluation but released fracking regulations before the health review’s completion. The administration has also refused to release any substantial information on the review and placed gag-orders on the outside health experts.
“Fracking will jeopardize the health of millions of New Yorkers,” said Sandra Steingraber of Concerned Health Profesionals of NY. “The Cuomo administration’s refusal to conduct a comprehensive health impact assessment is unacceptable. The secretive health review it instead decided upon is also unacceptable. And non-disclosure agreements for those paid with taxpayer money to review DEC’s work? That’s just shameful. The health of New Yorkers is far too important to be decided by a secret review of a secret review.”
The exaggerated economic benefits touted by the gas industry and the faulty economic analysis of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) have been criticized by New Yorkers and economists.
“New Yorkers continue to express to Governor Cuomo and our state government that we don’t want our air, health or water poisoned by fracking,” said actress and longtime Sullivan County resident Debra Winger. “Regulations cannot minimize the risks and we want our governor to move New York forward by leading us into an era of clean energy and away from dirty fossil fuels and the fantasies the gas industry is peddling.” 
The gas industry has poured millions of dollars into New York to influence state government through campaign contributions to elected officials and lobbying. In July, a Freedom of Information Act request by the Environmental Working Group revealed gas industry lobbyists were given preferential access to draft regulations by DEC, allowing them to lobby for changes before the regulations were released to the public. A few weeks ago, Common Cause released an analysis of campaign contributions from the 2012 election cycle showing pro-fracking interests contributed nearly $400,000 to candidates for state legislature and county executive in New York’s Southern Tier. In some races, contributions from pro-fracking interests were more than 20 percent of a candidate’s total fundraising.
Governor Cuomo is weighing whether or not to allow fracking in New York State. With or without regulations in place, fracking is a menace to public health and will produce hazardous air pollution and endanger the state’s food and water.
“Governor Cuomo, don’t do this,” said Logan Adsit, a resident of Pharsalia in Chenango County, which is located in the Southern Tier that the Cuomo administration has indicated as a target of fracking. “Don’t poison my family. Don’t poison anyone’s family. This state, which my family has called home for generations, should not become your toxic legacy. That’s what I’ve come here to say today.”
The group of New Yorkers rallying was also joined by folk artist Pete Seeger, who warned Governor Cuomo in a video message that he risks his family’s legacy if he moves forward with fracking.