Water, Water Everywhere and Not a Drop Contaminated by Hydraulic Fracturing
As I mentioned in a post last week, I am a new member of the EID Northeast Marcellus team. Previously I worked in the water sector, first as a consultant for municipal governments interacting with the Federal government on water issues followed by a tour as the Legislative Manager for the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA). In both these capacities, I gained first hand experience of the many challenges facing our nation’s freshwater resources. Not only did I learn of these challenges, but I also assisted in moving forward some of the most innovative environmental restoration projects throughout the Country.
It was this experience that compelled me to join the EID team. Why? Because having been involved in issues affecting this precious resource (water) I could not sit idly by while a group of enraged activists distorted facts and sensationalized reliable and sound technological practices in an attempt to block the production of clean burning and affordable natural gas. The stakes were simply too high to let misinformation rule the day.
That being said, I am not writing this to simply provide you a glimpse of my background, rather I am writing to show you the plethora of credible experts throughout the nation that are all saying the same thing. Hydraulic fracturing has not been shown to have negative impacts on water resources. Even Lisa Jackson, President Obama’s handpicked Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is in agreement there are no proven cases of hydraulic fracturing affecting water supplies. The idea that all of these senior level officials are wrong just doesn’t pass any test of common sense.
This week Scott Perry, Director of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s Bureau of Oil and Gas Management, and Jim Richenderfer, Director, Technical Programs, Susquehanna River Basin Commission joined this growing list of regulatory officials with comments they made at the Mid-Atlantic Conference of Regulatory Utilities Commissioners. In a panel presentation entitled “Marcellus Shale: Water and Environmental Issues” they said the following.
Yet after a “million experiments across the country, I’ve yet to see a single impact of fracking actually directly communicating with freshwater resources. Again and again and again, I never see a single incidence of fracking causing this direct communication that we keep hearing about” – Scott Perry
Dr. Richenderfer had similiar remarks although his were focused on the near hysteria some groups portend hydraulic fracturing will cause on the amount of freshwater available to support aquatic ecosystems and potable water supplies.
The amount of water being reported to be used by this industry is out of whack. On average the Susquehanna River sends to the bay 26 billion gal/day. Non-gas energy production resources use about 190 million gal/day and recreation–comprised mostly of golf courses and ski resorts–use about 50 million gal/day. Yet, at its peak use, natural gas play is expected to use up to 30 million. Right now gas production uses between 4 and 5 million gal/day. – Jim Richenderfer
These are two more senior officials in a growing list of voices bringing reason and perspective to some of the outlandish claims being generated in a futile attempt to block the production of this needed resource. On this eve of our nation’s independence I ask each of you to arm yourselves with this knowledge and share it with others. Our future very much depends on the outcome of this critical debate.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Comments are closed.
JD,
First …..Welcome to a great team!
How does our water ..our well water stack up. I mean most folks think they have the cleanest water that can be had. Then again most folks only get the water tested if selling or buying a house. We have septic systems on our rural lands that are supposed to be 100 feet from our wells.
Between septic and run off from everything around a property I would think surface would be a far larger problem than any other issue?
JD forget replying did my own research…………
the ONLY peer reviewed scientific study on this issue (Duke) reaches a very different conclusion.
agree their should be far more study of the issue because homeowners near wells all over the country tell a very different story than what you and your well funded propaganda / disinformation team here spew.
Obviously, you didn’t read the Duke study or you would know that it specifically says hydraulic fracturing has NOT caused water contamination. Specifically, it says “We found no evidence for contamination of drinking-water samples with deep saline brines or fracturing fluids.” What part of that don’t you understand??
ok, lets break down the obfuscation you are paid to shill here, which we all well understand “john”…
the duke study, the only peer reviewed scientific study thus far showed 85% of wells near drilling sites w elevated levels of methane. but of course you’ll point out methane is tasty and delicious, just dont turn the lights on while showering.
by saying “hydraulic fracturing” has not been proven to show contamination you are avoiding that the drilling process preceding the fracking was the likely cause of contamination. the EPA in texas and wyoming has also made the case that benzene from the fracking process was the cause of well contaminations, http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/12/08/08greenwire-epa-action-on-texas-natural-gas-driller-escala-55869.html
http://watertestingblog.com/2010/09/05/usepa-finds-methane-and-benzene-in-wyoming-water/
yet industry shills continue to argue what “is” “is”…the mesa health assemnet plan also breaks down the numerous risks not just to water, but the cumulative air pollutants effects on human health.
but do carry on your disinformation campaign…
Oh, you are so clever! I suggest you read the facts on the Duke study or maybe even the actual study. Go here for the details:
http://eidmarcellus.org/2011/05/10/duke-study-misrepresented/
You might also check out out what the State of Texas said about those politically motivated EPA items you mention. They were produced by an EPA Regional Office with a radical Regional Director from your ranks and have already been discredited.
Yes. So quick to point out the Duke study as your holy grail on how this proven process must contaminate water. I think it therefore it must be true! Well, the Duke study you are so quick to reference didn’t even have baseline data. Meaning that 85% methane contamination number you are so quick to tout could have been the case before a single operator even stepped foot in Pennsylvania to produce gas from the Marcellus Shale. This was a fact that was actually highlighted in the peer review process and was openly admitted as a drawback of the study by its own authors.
there are troves of data documenting the water contamination across the country done by gas drilling.
repeating a LIE endlessly and spending billions advertising it will not dissipate THE FACTS.
NY DEC obviously recogonizes the facts of water contamination by not allowing drilling in NYC watershed.
here is just one of countless examples that they looked at:
Bruce Baizel, Senior Staff Attorney Oil & Gas Accountability ProjectBetween 1992 and 2000 testimony related to Natural Gas Drilling in the New York City Drinking Water Watershed w link to data:
“the New Mexico Oil Conservation Division (OCD) documented over 700 groundwater contamination events due to oil and gas development.”
New Mexico oil Conservation Division, Generalized Record of Ground Water Impact Sites, September
30, 2005. Available at: http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/ocd/Statistics.htm.
Here we go again. Even Lisa Jackson, Administrator of the U.S. EPA, has stated there are no known cases where hydraulic fracturing has contaminated groundwater. Perhaps in your mind your opinions are worth more than her expert knowledge. In ours, they are not.
In regards to New Mexico’s pits which is a different circumstance than hydraulic fracturing. The state passed aggressive new rules following 2008. The new rules banned unlined pits entirely (unlined pits are not allowed in the Marcellus in NY and PA) and required that all pits be permitted with the Oil Conservation Division. The rule also strengthens liner requirements and requires the use of closed loop systems-whereby drilling fluids and cuttings don’t make contact with the environment (another practice being used extensively in the Marcellus). This led to a drastic reduction of incidents (as noted on the website you provided as none have been reported since 2008).
Who are you to pollute our water? How far from your well is your septic and dry well?
What are you flushing down the toilets ? The meds from 12 to 72 hours ago? What chemicals are you dumping down your sink ?
The first step to protect your health and the health of your family is learning about what may pollute your source of drinking water. Potential contamination may occur naturally, or as a result of human activity.
What are Some Naturally Occurring Sources of Pollution?
• Microorganisms: Bacteria, viruses, parasites and other microorganisms are sometimes found in water. Shallow wells — those with water close to ground level — are at most risk. Runoff, or water flowing over the land surface, may pick up these pollutants from wildlife and soils. This is often the case after flooding. Some of these organisms can cause a variety of illnesses. Symptoms include nausea and diarrhea. These can occur shortly after drinking contaminated water. The effects could be short-term yet severe (similar to food poisoning) or might recur frequently or develop slowly over a long time.
• Radionuclides: Radionuclides are radioactive elements such as uranium and radium. They may be present in underlying rock and ground water
• Radon: Radon isa gas that is a natural product of the breakdown of uranium in the soil — can also pose a threat. Radon is most dangerous when inhaled and contributes to lung cancer. Although soil is the primary source, using household water containing Radon contributes to elevated indoor Radon levels. Radon is less dangerous when consumed in water, but remains a risk to health.
• Nitrates and Nitrites: Although high nitrate levels are usually due to human activities (see below), they may be found naturally in ground water. They come from the breakdown of nitrogen compounds in the soil. Flowing ground water picks them up from the soil. Drinking large amounts of nitrates and nitrites is particularly threatening to infants (for example, when mixed in formula).
• Heavy Metals: Underground rocks and soils may contain arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and selenium. However, these contaminants are not often found in household wells at dangerous levels from natural sources.
• Fluoride: Fluoride is helpful in dental health, so many water systems add small amounts to drinking water. However, excessive consumption of naturally occurring fluoride can damage bone tissue. High levels of fluoride occur naturally in some areas. It may discolor teeth, but this is not a health risk.
What Human Activities Can Pollute Ground Water?
•
Septic tanks are designed to have a “leach field” around them — an area where wastewater flows out of the tank. This wastewater can also move into the ground water.
• Bacteria and Nitrates: These pollutants are found in human and animal wastes. Septic tanks can cause bacterial and nitrate pollution. So can large numbers of farm animals. Both septic systems and animal manures must be carefully managed to prevent pollution. Sanitary landfills and garbage dumps are also sources. Children and some adults are at extra risk when exposed to water-born bacteria. These include the elderly and people whose immune systems are weak due to AIDS or treatments for cancer. Fertilizers can add to nitrate problems. Nitrates cause a health threat in very young infants called “blue baby” syndrome. This condition disrupts oxygen flow in the blood.
• Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs): The number of CAFOs, often called “factory farms,” is growing. On these farms thousands of animals are raised in a small space. The large amounts of animal wastes/manures from these farms can threaten water supplies. Strict and careful manure management is needed to prevent pathogen and nutrient problems. Salts from high levels of manures can also pollute ground water.
• Heavy Metals: Activities such as mining and construction can release large amounts of heavy metals into nearby ground water sources. Some older fruit orchards may contain high levels of arsenic, once used as a pesticide. At high levels, these metals pose a health risk.
• Fertilizers and Pesticides: Farmers use fertilizers and pesticides to promote growth and reduce insect damage. These products are also used on golf courses and suburban lawns and gardens. The chemicals in these products may end up in ground water. Such pollution depends on the types and amounts of chemicals used and how they are applied. Local environmental conditions (soil types, seasonal snow and rainfall) also affect this pollution. Many fertilizers contain forms of nitrogen that can break down into harmful nitrates. This could add to other sources of nitrates mentioned above. Some underground agricultural drainage systems collect fertilizers and pesticides. This polluted water can pose problems to ground water and local streams and rivers. In addition, chemicals used to treat buildings and homes for termites or other pests may also pose a threat. Again, the possibility of problems depends on the amount and kind of chemicals. The types of soil and the amount of water moving through the soil also play a role.
• Industrial Products and Wastes: Many harmful chemicals are used widely in local business and industry. These can become drinking water pollutants if not well managed. The most common sources of such problems are:
o Local Businesses: These include nearby factories, industrial plants, and even small businesses such as gas stations and dry cleaners. All handle a variety of hazardous chemicals that need careful management. Spills and improper disposal of these chemicals or of industrial wastes can threaten ground water supplies.
o Leaking Underground Tanks & Piping: Petroleum products, chemicals, and wastes stored in underground storage tanks and pipes may end up in the ground water. Tanks and piping leak if they are constructed or installed improperly. Steel tanks and piping corrode with age. Tanks are often found on farms. The possibility of leaking tanks is great on old, abandoned farm sites. Farm tanks are exempt from the EPA rules for petroleum and chemical tanks.
o Landfills and Waste Dumps: Modern landfills are designed to contain any leaking liquids. But floods can carry them over the barriers. Older dumpsites may have a wide variety of pollutants that can seep into ground water.
• Household Wastes: Improper disposal of many common products can pollute ground water. These include cleaning solvents, used motor oil, paints, and paint thinners. Even soaps and detergents can harm drinking water. These are often a problem from faulty septic tanks and septic leaching fields.
• Lead & Copper: Household plumbing materials are the most common source of lead and copper in home drinking water. Corrosive water may cause metals in pipes or soldered joints to leach into your tap water. Your water’s acidity or alkalinity (often measured as pH) greatly affects corrosion. Temperature and mineral content also affect how corrosive it is. They are often used in pipes, solder, or plumbing fixtures. Lead can cause serious damage to the brain, kidneys, nervous system, and red blood cells. The age of plumbing materials — in particular, copper pipes soldered with lead — is also important. Even in relatively low amounts these metals can be harmful. EPA rules under the Safe Drinking Water Act limit lead in drinking water to 15 parts per billion. Since 1988 the Act only allows “lead free” pipe, solder, and flux in drinking water systems. The law covers both new installations and repairs of plumbing.
o For more information on avoiding lead in drinking water, visit the EPA’s Lead in Drinking Water web site.
• Water Treatment Chemicals: Improper handling or storage of water-well treatment chemicals (disinfectants, corrosion inhibitors, etc.) close to your well can cause problems.