![On the back of a Dragonfly [B&W]](http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6194/6128449851_14ec409b56_s.jpg "On the back of a Dragonfly [B&W]")
Suddenly, the residents of a small town in rural New York are barraged by smartly-dressed men asking to lease their land for a sophisticated new type of gas drilling called hydrofracking. It's safe, these men assure them. They offer a promise of easy money. Soon an excited frenzy of landowners-many of whom are uneducated about what they are getting themselves into--are leasing their properties left and right. Unless someone monkey wrenches the system, western NY will be flooded with hydrofracking gas rigs within a few years. True, landowners may make a short-term profit. But in the long term, hydrofracking will both destroy rural communities and degrade their clean air and water.
Hydrofracking allows gas companies to extract natural gas from shale rock-a process that was once too expensive and complex to be feasible. Basically, a corporation drills vertically down several thousand feet to get into the Marcellus shale formation, and then drills horizontally for more than a mile through the shale layer. Since the gas is trapped in fragmented pockets of the shale, the companies use a special fluid to extract it. To frack open the pores in the shale rock, the companies must first "borrow" millions of gallons of water from local sources. Then, they add sand(which holds open the rock to allow gas to seep out) and numerous chemicals. The chemicals are considered proprietary-a "secret", in industry speak-so the landowners and residents of the area won't even know whether or not certain carcinogens and toxins are entering the soil under their feet. Lastly, this concoction is shot deep into the ground. Will it seep into the groundwater? It has in Pennsylvania and in Colorado. But the gas companies say it's safe, so don't worry: everything will be all right.
Many people argue that we need hydrofracking. The economy of western New York is faltering, and more jobs are desperately needed. However, hydrofracking will harm New York's economy, both in the long and short term. Most industry workers won't come from local areas, so relatively few New Yorkers will get jobs. Perhaps local hotels and restaurants will get more traffic. But farmers will lose business. Who will go to a farmer's market if they know the produce could be contaminated with carcinogens and radioactivity from hydrofracking? As well, tourism is one of the region's largest industries. Tourists visit to breathe clean air and relax. How long will the tourist industry survive once the atmosphere reeks of industrial pollutants? Tourists don't come to rural New York so they can feel like they're in New Jersey. Anyway, whatever jobs are gained will be lost once the resource is fully exploited.
Some environmentalists support hydrofracking; they think natural gas is an essential transition fuel that will wean America off dirtier fuels and will reduce our CO2 emissions. Yet natural gas is still a fossil fuel, and it still releases plenty of greenhouse gasses. Instead of investing in gas infrastructure, energy companies should develop more truly renewable energy. We are the richest country in the world; we have the technology to power our country renewably. What are we waiting for?
Hydrofracking will have a plethora of negative consequences. Rural communalities will become more impoverished once the boom ends. Property values will fall. Groundwater can easily become polluted. If drilling occurs in the NYC watershed in the Catskills, the water source of 14 million people could be in jeopardy. Currently, New York City has some of the purist unfiltered water in the nation. Yet, if drilling occurs in the Catskills, the city would be forced to spend about $8 billion to build a filtration plant. Air quality in the country would deteriorate. Truck trips in rural areas would more than quadruple, and the infrastructure isn't built for such heavy traffic. Is hydrofracking worth it?
The NY Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) addressed the issue with possibly the worst document it has ever written: the Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DSGEIS). This document was contracted out by the DEC, and one could make the argument that it was practically written by gas company lobbyists. It fails in almost every way to protect NY from being exploited for the profit of gas companies. According the Hudson River environmental advocacy group Riverkeeper, the DSGEIS fails to analyze the economic costs associated with drilling, fails to propose any new regulations governing drilling, fails to remember history and consider the past experiences of states that already have dealt with drilling, and even fails to adequately analyze whether the New York State government will have the resources to enforce its laws and issue permits properly. New York's proposed regulations are terrible, but federal regulations are surprising even worse. Even though there are many good environmental laws on the books, the gas companies have managed to wriggle out of most of them like worms. Gas and oil companies are exempt from the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Superfund Law. So who is protecting NY from greedy gas companies? Not the government.
Its up to the people to stop hydrofracking in New York. On January 25th I attended a rally in Albany against hydrofracking. Over 600 ordinary New Yorkers took a day off work to fight for a cause they believed in. I met a mother who was fighting to protect her young child from harmful chemicals. I talked to teachers from the city who were worried about the quality of their drinking water. Landowners feared their properties would lose value. One artist was simply fighting for his state. Together, maybe the people can defeat the powerful.
Do Something: If you live in New York, you can get involved to oppose hydrofracking. Read up on the issue. Write to Governor Paterson to tell him how you feel. Attend rallies. Meet with your legislators. Good luck!
Resources: For more information, go to http://www.riverkeeper.org/, http://www.catskillmountainkeeper.org/, or http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/marcellus.asp.
This article espouses misinformation at its finest. It goes so far as to insinuate that drilling fluids used in hydrofracking contain readioactive materials! Fracking fluid is mostly water, with sand, and 0.5% common chemicals found around the house.
Fracking occurs thousands of feet below water aquifers. It is inconceivable to (rationally) think that these minute traces of chemicals will migrate, in opposition to gravity, through rock formations, and into drinking water. The only danger from hydrofracking is to George Soros' offshore investments, and Vladimir Putin's hold over Europe.
I am sorry but you are misinformed. Everything I wrote in this essay is completely factual; I challenge you to expose anything more than a typo. Please don't insult my credibility unless you can back up your statements.
Fracking does release radioactivity. Normally occurring radioactive material (NORM) deep underground often can be brought to the surface on drilling equipment and fracking fluid. This toxic substance has been known to accumulate as sediments in holding tanks and ponds used by drilling companies.
http://www.catskillmountainkeeper.org/node/290
http://wri.eas.cornell.edu/gas_wells_waste.html
(Notice that I can back up my statements).
Secondly, why is it ok if fracking fluid is only .5% or even .05% harmful chemicals? Many of these chemicals are poisonous at extremely low concentrations, and are often regulated as parts per million.
Thirdly, your statement about common kitchen chemicals isn't completely truthful. Some of the chemicals used in fracking (like formaldehyde or benzene--a carcinogen) are rarely if ever used by the average cook or cleaner. And even if your statement was true, would you want high volumes of toxic kitchen chemicals leaking into your groundwater?
Lastly, there are many recorded incidents of toxic fracking fluids polluting wells or contaminating groundwater or streams. Many of these instances were self-recorded by gas drilling companies. Therefore, please don't try to tell me groundwater won't be contaminated.
There are equally compelling arguments that run counter to yours. A recent Congressional hearing into environmental hazards of fracking brought into evidence not one instance of confirmed groundwater contamination. Your citations are "suspected."
http://thehayride.com/2009/12/are-congressional-democrats-aiming-to-shut...
10,000 dead fish can't be wrong.
http://catskillmountainkeeper.org/node/993
Are you kidding the United States Congress is a subsidiary of oil and gas companies!! Of course they havent found any problems. LOL
I think its a really brilliant idea to leave a couple thousand toxic ponds under our feet for future generations. Let them deal with the environmental consiquences....... STUPID HUMANS!
These solvents used in HydroFracking fluids may be toxic to our health initially... But you have to understand that they will not readily leach out into the water table. These solvents are injected literally 4,000 - 9,000 feet below the surface. Most often these solvents are more dense than water and will not advectively flow. These solvents instead drop out and "sorb" or "cling" to soil particles where they will then undergo bio-degradation, based on anaerobic conditions long before they will ever enter our water table. Also these solvents are not "radioactive". The radioactivity you are referring to is the black shale that is broken apart in the hydrofracking process, that is "radioactive" Radioactivity is everywhere... Smoke Alarms, Carbon Monoxide detectors, etc... The real problem arises with hydrofracking is not properly sealing wells once they have been "closed". Another problem is the fact of recycling these hydrofracking fluids once they have been withdrawn from the well. That is the focal point that many people miss to address. The hydrofracking process is a relatively safe, it's what occurs in the aftermath (mishandling and improper sealing) which is a problem.
-Currently taking Contaminant Hydrogeology
-Issue was a public debate at my school three days ago
-I live 30 minutes away from Marcellus, NY
Thanks for the insightful comment, Snizzle. However, I disagree with your point that the radiation is safe because it is natural. In fact, when the DEC tested 12 vertical wells in Marcellus Shale in 2008 and 2009, they found that "the wastewater at 10 of them also contained a radioactive derivative of uranium at levels hundreds of times as high as the federal limit for people to drink safely."( Is New York’s Marcellus Shale Too Hot to Handle?). As well, I agree that in a perfect world, hydrofracking would be "relatively safe." However, because of human error, spills can happen. Because of the hazardous chemicals and the volume of water used, even one spill could be extremely harmful to the aquifer.
On the other hand, I argee that the disposal of the wastewater is a huge problem. In PA, wastewater has been dumped into streams after minimal treatment, causing levels of total dissolved solids (TDS)to increase. Although mostly harmless to people, TDS can increase stream salinity, and negatively affect the color, odor and taste of the water. Radium and other harmful chemicals are often also not removed during processing. Unfortunately, drilling in NYS could release about 3 billion gallons of wastewater annually, and the state right now would be unable to treat or store it properly.
http://www.propublica.org/feature/drill-wastewater-disposal-options-in-n...
http://www.propublica.org/feature/is-the-marcellus-shale-too-hot-to-hand...
Is it not time to stop ruining every thing good we have left? We have clean water here in the finger lakes and beautiful scenery. Our farm lands and vineyards are healthy. The lakes provide fresh drinking water to millions. It is time to conserve and be careful with our resources. Stop driving that huge SUV and heating your house to 75 degrees. What happened to people wearing sweaters and layers of clothes in the winter instead of walking around like it's perpetual summer. Try to drive a vehicle that doesn't weigh so much it ruins the roads and takes up to two parking places. And to all the people who signed leases, why should those who did not have their lives impacted by your greed.
i challange all of you who oppose natural gas drilling to find us and alternative source of energy, 2 marcellus shale horizontal wells produce more energy than all of the windmills east of the mississippi!
Thanks for the article on hydrofracking in New York... The threat is moving south - down to Virginia now ...
Greedy energy companies do not care - Just like the pristine white beaches of Northwest Florida are getting hit by the BP oil spill... now large natural gas drilling companies are heading into the beautiful Shenandoah Valley of Virginia to hydrofrack.
Contamination of our water supply and destruction of our land lies ahead unless we take action. States must make regulations to control natural gas drilling (hydrofracking), a few years ago, the Federal government awarded natural gas drilling companies energy an exemption from adhering to Safe Drinking Water Act. Sounds pretty cozy to me.
Read more about the spread of hydrofracking to the Shenandoah Valley - possibly in Bergton, VA:
http://7bends.com/2010/05/24/county-decision-natural-gas-drilling-in-vir...
Can we all just agree to disagree, but STOP destroying the earth? Can Big Business and Government work towards finding solutions aside from searching for fossil fuel in and around human habitats? Surely BP Oil considered the risks of offshore drilling in our Gulf, along with potential for cataclysmic ecologigal demise in the event of a disaster. Too bad their "numbers" included "0.5%" on the downside. Hydrofrackers, are YOU LISTENING? Do you see any connection? Can you say: Not within human habitat?
Dear Mr. Bloodgas,
I hope you have watched gasland on HBO. And maybe someday as the gas companies frac around your house, you too may be able to light up your tap water to heat your home. That is as your family, pets and other associated living beings die from the multiple diseases caused be the crud in your drinking water.
Please be a responsible player in this discussion and provide the entire context of the "fact" you relate to about the congressional panel . . . when later pressed on his "fact" by the Pennsylvania congresswoman, he clarified that that examination only pertained to testing in 6 of the 34 states where this type of natl. gas fracking was occurring. Hence, both his and your logic is far from conclusive and just plain in err: you can't make a clear cut and conclusive correlation here!
As a concerned land owner and resident of nys. I am against hydrofracking. I will never let these money hogs on my land. I will stand up as much as possible. They tell you it is non harmful but any chemical put in the ground unnaturally is harmful either to the soil, water, and wildlife. They are going to tell you that as they want the almighty dollar. Money only talks so long when there is no more natural resources then what?
Interesting video on the issue from Earthworks:
Stand up NY!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rO9UqJCmhw
tales of your impending demise are wildly exaggerated.
Come visit Chautauqua Country NY. We over 3000 producing gas wells- all of which have been hydraulically fractured.
It's not exactly an industrial hell-scape here. It's actually pretty nice (albeit cold in the winter).
Admittedly, our wells have smaller frac jobs - usually 40K-80K gallons. But, if you look at the total density of drilling (40 acre spacing vs 640 acre spacing - the frac density isn't too far off - particularly since our wells are much shallower (2000-4000 feet deep). We don't pay much attention to gas drilling here, but its been here for over a hundred years. Fredonia NY is where it all got started.
People out east seem to have worked themselves into a panic. The Marcellus will neither be the "best thing ever" nor the total destruction of the upstate environment.
Y'all need to relax - roll with it. Some people will make a bunch of dough. Others will get decent jobs. Most of y'all won't be affected.
"In the woods, we return to reason and faith. There I feel that nothing can befall me in life, -- no disgrace, no calamity (leaving me my eyes), which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground, -- my head bathed by the blithe air and uplifted into infinite space
..."In the woods, we return to reason and faith. There I feel that nothing can befall me in life, -- no disgrace, no calamity (leaving me my eyes), which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground, -- my head bathed by the blithe air and uplifted into infinite space, -- all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eyeball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part and parcel of God. The name of the nearest friend sounds then foreign and accidental: to be brothers, to be acquaintences, master or servant, is then a trifle and a disturbance. I am the lover of uncontained and immortal beauty. In the wilderness, I find something more dear and connate than in streets or villages. In the tranquil landscape, and especially in the distant line of the horizon, man beholds somewhat as beautiful as his own nature"(Emerson)
"Think globally, act locally."
More Close