You are here
Marcellus Shale Press Coverage
Secondary tabs
Strong positions on either side of "fracking" at EPA hearing
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. - Armed with placards and clever slogans, hundreds of supporters and opponents of natural-gas drilling descended here Monday in a passionate display of just how fractious the process known as hydraulic fracturing has become.
Wearing shirts that urged policymakers to "Pass Gas Now," supporters of Marcellus Shale drilling faced off peacefully with activists who announced their opposition to hydraulic fracturing with chants of "Frack, No!"
The occasion was the first of two public sessions conducted Monday by the Environmental Protection Agency to gather public comment on its study of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," a technique for unlocking natural gas from rock formations thousands of feet underground with high-pressure injections of water, chemicals, and sand.
Anti-drilling activists hope the EPA's study of hydro-fracking will prove it is an environmental danger that should be federally regulated, if not banned. The practice is currently regulated by states' oil- and gas-drilling laws.
"Everywhere this drilling is practiced is at grave risk," said James Barth, of Damascus Citizens for Sustainability, a Pennsylvania anti-drilling group.
The gas industry and its supporters said the EPA study could inspire restrictions that might impair an industry that is one of the few economic bright spots in Pennsylvania and surrounding states.
"Now is especially not the time to further limit energy-job opportunities for those in need," testified John E. Harmon, of the African American Chamber of Commerce.
Two more sessions will be held Wednesday in this city 60 miles north of Scranton, the last of four locations where the EPA has had hearings in recent months.
The agency says public input will help it determine the scope of its study, expected to be finished in about two years. Regional administrator Judith Enck said the EPA was seeking suggestions "about the design of the study, not about the merits of hydraulic fracturing."
But that did not stop impassioned speakers from offering their opinions, which were joyously applauded in the cavernous Broome County Forum Theater.
Nearly all urged the EPA to base its study on science, rather than emotion or political pressure - as long as it was the science that supported their position.
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D., N.Y.), a drilling opponent who campaigned for the new EPA study, called fracking an "unconventional, harm-causing drilling technique" that has been linked to "numerous reports of water contamination" nationwide.
He denounced a 2004 EPA examination that concluded hydraulic fracturing posed no risk. That study examined fracturing for natural gas in coal seams, which is conducted at shallower geologic depth and theoretically should pose more environmental risk than drilling in the Marcellus Shale, which is located a mile deeper than groundwater sources.
"Fortunately, now we have a new EPA which understands things a lot more clearly and is being more honest and open about this process," Hinchey said.
But gas-drilling advocates repeated their argument that there are no documented cases in which the hydraulic-fracturing process has contaminated groundwater - and that numerous studies have said there is little chance for contaminated fluids to escape from a properly constructed natural-gas well.
"A Hollywood actor holding a glass of cloudy water proves nothing except that fear-mongering and emotion will always trump science and logic," said Brad Gill, executive director of the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York State.
Gill said that 14,000 of the 75,000 wells drilled in New York in the last two centuries were still producing, and that many of them were hydraulically fractured. But New York currently has a de facto moratorium on fracking while the state Department of Environmental Conservation studies new drilling regulations.
"Billions of dollars in economic impact to New York and its citizens is at stake here," he said. "The positive impact is staggering, but it doesn't come at the expense of environmental protection."
Opposition to drilling in New York is strongest in the Delaware and Hudson River watersheds, which provide New York City with its unfiltered drinking water.
But public sentiment in New York's southern tier is mixed. This economically depressed region lies across the border from Pennsylvania's most productive Marcellus areas, which are also the scene of several dramatic cases where drilling activity - though not necessarily hydraulic fracturing - caused contamination.
Broome County Executive Barbara Fiala declared fracking "safe" and expressed frustration with the slow pace of development in New York. "All we ask is that this study be focused and not take forever to complete," she said.
Binghamton Mayor Matthew Ryan urged regulators to take their time and examine not just fracking, but all aspects of gas drilling. "To date," he said, "I have heard only one refrain from those who want to speed up the gas play: We need the money."
Outside, where the street drama was taking place - police kept the rivals separated by barricades - land owners such as Chris Ostrowsky expressed exasperation that Pennsylvanians a few miles away in Susquehanna County were striking it rich, while New Yorkers were in limbo.
Last week, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection released its first detailed Marcellus production figures. Susquehanna and Bradford Counties accounted for 55 percent of the 179 billion cubic feet of Marcellus gas produced in the year ending June 30, a Powell Barnett Shale Newsletter analysis says.
"It's real frustrating to see what's going on across the border, how the economy is booming in Pennsylvania," Ostrowsky said.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 Phil-Inq_EPA Hearing_100914.pdf | 44.8 KB |
EPA told gas drilling does, does not taint water
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. — Rep. Maurice Hinchey told a federal hearing Monday that the Environmental Protection Agency must regulate hydraulic fracturing, the natural gas extraction process that he said has contaminated water near drilling sites around the country.
"There are numerous reports of water contamination related to hydraulic fracturing in states across the country," said Hinchey, D-N.Y. "Despite the fact that EPA is, in many ways, precluded from taking regulatory action in response to these reports, I believe EPA must investigate to understand what is being done — to keep water supplies safe and secure."
The process, also known as fracking, blasts millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals, some of them carcinogens, deep into the earth to free gas from dense shale deposits. As a gas rush sweeps parts of the vast and lucrative Marcellus Shale region that underlies New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, environmentalists are concerned for the watershed that provides drinking water for 17 million people from Philadelphia to New York City.
Environmentalists fear the process, which leaves as much as 90 percent of the post-fracking water known as "produced water" deep underground, will irreversibly taint aquifers.
No water supplies have been poisoned by fracking, the petroleum industry says, and the process — which promises lucrative industry profits and thousands of jobs in economically depressed areas — is safe.
"Billions of dollars in economic impact on New York and its citizens is at stake here," said Brad Gill of the Independent Oil and Gas Association, with drilling promising more than 60,000 jobs in New York alone. "The positive impact is staggering but it doesn't come at the expense of environmental protection."
John Harmon of the New York-New Jersey African American Chamber of Commerce said full development of the Marcellus Shale would create 280,000 jobs over the next 10 years, jobs sorely needed in the black community.
"This is not the time to further limit energy job opportunities for those in need," Harmon said.
Congress has ordered EPA to conduct a new fracking study and EPA is considering how broadly to construct it, since the agency's 2004 study that declared the technology safe was widely criticized as flawed. The earlier study had enabled passage of 2005 energy legislation exempting fracking from federal regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, leaving regulation to individual states.
"The EPA must do all it can to insure that its scientists and researchers are not influenced by industry or by politics as they were influenced back in 2004," Hinchey said, "so that the public can be assured that this study is being carried out in the public interest."
Hinchey is one of the authors of the so-called FRAC Act in Congress, which would put fracking under EPA regulation.
The petroleum industry is strongly opposed to federal regulation — which it says would be more costly than complying with adequate state rules.
Gill said "strict state regulations" for decades have governed fracking and the industry has "a stellar environmental record" to show for it.
In New York, he said, there are about 14,000 producing natural gas wells, thousands of which were begun by the fracking process. New York has not seen one case of groundwater contamination by fracking fluids, he said.
"A Hollywood actor holding a glass of cloudy water proves nothing except that fear-mongering and emotion will always trump science and logic," he said, taking aim at the recent critical TV documentary "Gasland," by Josh Fox.
The Marcellus rush is barely two years old in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, where thousands of wells have been fracked. Some geologists estimate the Marcellus contains more than 500 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, of which fracking could recover 50 trillion cubic feet — enough to supply the entire East Coast for 50 years. The proximity of the gas stores to the large East Coast energy market makes it particularly valuable.
Hundreds of people on both sides gathered for the last of four public hearings on a pending EPA study of fracking. The Binghamton hearings, twice postponed because of anticipated large crowds, are split into double sessions on Monday and again on Wednesday.
"Kids can't drink gas" and "Protect our water. Stop fracking America," were some of the signs carried by opponents. Supporters, including union workers eager for jobs, carried signs that said "Yes to science, no to paranoia" and chanted "Pass gas now!"
New York's Department of Environmental Conservation has halted issuing drilling permits until it draws regulations to govern the process. Complaints of wellwater contamination and surface spills of post-fracking water have forced revision of state rules in Pennsylvania, where more than 1,600 wells have already been drilled in the Marcellus Shale and more than 4,000 permits have been granted.
Drilling companies have used fracking to release natural gas from other shale reserves around the country. EPA earlier held hearings in Colorado, Texas and Pennsylvania.
Paul Rush of New York City's Department of Environmental Protection noted that half the state's population, residing in New York City and its environs, depend on unfiltered water from the Catskills-Delaware watershed that is in the Marcellus Shale region. Two DEP studies showed serious risks to the watershed if gas drilling is allowed there. He urged the EPA to read the studies posted on the DEP's website.
"There's no way this can be done safely. It will toxify the air, water and soil," said protester Kathy Shimberg, 73, of Mount Vision, N.Y., wearing a T-shirt that read "Love N.Y.? Don't frack it up."
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| PDF Version of Article | 42.92 KB |
Fracking for natural gas: EPA hearings bring protests
Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is a controversial process for extracting natural gas from shale. Critics of fracking question the environmental and health effects of pumping thousands of gallons of water and chemicals underground.
Public hearings over hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" brought hundreds of protesters to Binghamton, N.Y., Monday, carrying signs and shouting slogans either opposing or favoring expansion of the controversial process for extracting natural gas from shale.
The Environmental Protection Agency's public hearings are part of a broad investigation, begun in March, into the human health and environmental effects of fracking – focusing on air pollution and water pollution. The chemical effects that fracking fluids may have on water supplies after being injected into the ground to extract gas are a special focus.
But a new study conducted for the American Public Power Association (APPA) suggests that if wider use of natural gas in electric power production comes to pass nationwide – as many analysts now expect – such controversies may be just beginning.
"Even if fracturing continues, serving a much larger market will require even more drilling that is already at record levels," the APPA study found.
In Pennsylvania, for instance, at least 1,600 fracking wells have been drilled with about 4,000 permits granted, the Associated Press reported Monday. But the new study suggests that as the flood of gas drives prices down, electric power generators will increasingly see it as a good alternative to burning coal. That, in turn, would mean vastly expanded fracking.
Lying beneath New York, Pennsylvania, and other parts of the Northeast, the rich Marcellus shale beds could supply the region with trillions of cubic feet of natural gas for decades, according to some estimates. But opponents say the process that involves pumping tons of toxic chemicals into the ground under pressure can pollute groundwater and greatly increase air pollution.
Thanks to expanded use of fracking, however, US natural-gas reserves have soared. Proven natural gas reserves have increased by more than enough to cover annual production for each of the last 15 or so years, the APPA report says. Natural-gas reserves now total 245 trillion cubic feet – enough to meet 2009-level demand for more than 10 years, it says.
The APPA study also recounts environmental impacts found by other groups. It said a recent study by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, for instance, found that fracturing a single well could involve “pumping three to eight million gallons of water and 80 to 300 tons of chemicals" into it at high pressure over several days.
"Half or so of the injected solution returns back up the well," the New York City study said. "The water that flows back up the well also tends to contain hydrocarbons and dissolved solids such that it must be disposed of via underground injection or industrial treatment." Conventional wastewater treatment was "not feasible," it said.
With injection water typically trucked in, the NYC study estimated "1,000 or more truck trips per well to haul in water and equipment and then haul out wastewater." But that's not the end of it, since as production falls off, the fracturing process is repeated on a well. Some shale gas wells need fracking every five years over a period of 20 to 40 years. The New York study calls fracturing "an ongoing process rather than something that occurs only when the wells are originally drilled."
The EPA hearings are likely to increase debate as more information about the chemistry of the fracking process emerges, environmentalists and energy analysts say.
"They have never done a hydraulic fracking study as comprehensive as the one now beginning," says Scott Anderson, a senior policy adviser for the Environment Defense Fund. "The results of this study will inform future congressional decisions on whether to continue to exempt hydraulic fracturing from the federal Safe Drinking Water Act."
Little is known about the chemical composition of fracking fluids – and the state of New York has held up permitting until more information emerges. While the natural-gas industry says many of the chemicals in such fluids can be found under a kitchen sink, the industry has long resisted identifying those chemicals. That could be changing soon, too.
That's because the EPA hearings could cause Congress to require that fracking fluid chemicals be identified, and could remove fracking's exemption from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, according to Kevin Book, an energy analyst with energy market research firm ClearView Energy Partners.
"On August 31, EPA quietly released interim results of its ongoing review of possible drinking water contamination at several sites near Pavilion, Wyoming," he writes in a new analysis. "Although EPA’s latest data did not conclusively link contamination to fracking, EPA’s guidance that residents should avoid drinking their water may offer Congressional fracking opponents a valuable sound bite to use when calling for mandatory disclosure rules."
While the Energy Policy Act of 2005 prevents the EPA from explicitly regulating fracking wells under the Safe Drinking Water Act, "the Agency already possesses considerable regulatory authority under other existing laws," writes Mr. Book. As a result, he contends, even without Congressional action, the EPA could, under other federal laws, "investigate other reports of fracking-linked contamination."
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| CSM-Fracking-EPA_100913...pdf | 67.2 KB |
'No Fracking Way' serves as theme for anti-drilling faction
BINGHAMTON -- They beat on bongos and shook tambourines as they danced to their own song. Decorations could be seen from down the block.
It wasn't a party, but an anti-drilling rally outside The Forum before and during parts of Monday's EPA meeting.
Their song? "No Fracking Way," which began as a chant but, as the day continued, morphed into a rhythmic melody echoing down Washington Street.
Their props? A mock drilling rig adorned with a roulette wheel offering the two chances of gas or water, a skull and hazard signs. There were costumes, too, like the man clad in a HAZMAT suit and gas mask. Oh, and there was Frackin'stein.
Though Craig Sautner wore jeans and a T-shirt, he brought a prop -- a half-full gallon jug of murky water to the event. It was labeled Dimock, Pa., and came from his well -- the well he and his family drank from for a year, and though it was filtered at the time, he said it was unsafe.
"My kids were getting sick," Sautner said of the contaminated water resulting from extensive drilling nearby. "They were getting eczema over their elbows, down their legs and everything from the well water. My daughter would get in the shower in the morning and she would have to get out and lay on the floor because she thought she was going to pass out cause of all the methane sucking the oxygen out of the air."
Sautner said his family isn't anti-drilling or pro-drilling, but just wants to educate people on the possible repercussions of hydraulic fracturing -- something he hoped to do at Monday's event.
Politicians who spoke during their allotted two minutes inside The Forum also took the opportunity beforehand to get anti-drillers revved up.
Binghamton Mayor Matthew Ryan said more money should have spent on a green alternative to fracking.
"This is about environmental justice, this is about environmental racism," Ryan said. "It's about protecting our ecology, it's about making sure our infrastructure's protected if drilling ever does come to this area. It's about making sure the EPA (does) the types of things they're supposed to do. The Environmental Protection Agency: that's what they're called."
Martha Robertson, chair of the Tompkins County Legislature, argued the economic benefit has been overplayed.
"They say it'll bring prosperity to upstate New York," Robertson said. "But you know what? In Pennsylvania, 90 percent of the jobs are going to out-of-state workers."
Susan Multer, a social worker from Horseheads, came to voice her opinion, and said she was glad to see the turnout from many in areas where drilling has gone wrong, such as Dimock.
"I think the public is waking up, and maybe some public officials," Multer said. "Sad to say, but the more accidents that happen ... when you read about these real events, you can't ignore it anymore."
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| IJ-No Fracking Way-protesters_100913.pdf | 37.62 KB |
Shale-Drilling Fight Comes To Head At EPA Forum In NY
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. (Dow Jones)--Hundreds of people gathered as here Monday to debate the safety of a gas drilling method called hydraulic fracturing, with critics campaigning against the industry and urging federal regulators to halt the practice.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which organized the forum, said that the depth at which the practice occurs in the East Coast -- thousands of feet below the surface -- provides protection against contamination of groundwater. But the agency also warned about the volume of water used in shale-gas drilling and said that it would evaluate the integrity of some individual wells as part of a high-profile study -- a shot across the bow to the industry, which has been pushing the agency to keep the study narrowly focused.
"Depending on the type of well that is used for a hydraulic fracturing operation -- particularly these newer horizontal wells -- you can use as many as five million gallons per well," said Robert Puls, the EPA's technical lead on the hydraulic-fracturing study. With companies drilling as many as 16 wells from a single well pad, "that's 80 million gallons of water. Where is that water coming from? Is it competing with other uses, in particular drinking water?"
The gas industry says that golf courses use more water in New York state than shale drilling would.
"If all the wells expected to be drilled are drilled, water usage for natural gas operations in the state could grow to 28 million gallons a day," said Cathy Landry, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute. "In contrast, golf courses in New York state use more than double the water -- or a seasonal average of 58 million gallons a day."
The EPA's stated purpose is to get input on its study of hydrofracking in the U.S. shale regions, which are home to gas resources that the energy industry estimates could last a century. Accessing shale gas has become a growth area thanks to technological advancements, including more sophisticated uses of hydraulic fracturing. The technique involves pumping water, sand and chemicals underground to crack open the rock, releasing the gas within.
A big concern is that the chemicals used in fracturing could taint water supplies, through spills at the surface or through faulty wells or problems in processing spent fracturing fluid. But the forum on Monday also provided evidence that the concern is broadening beyond chemicals and touching on the entire process of high-volume shale drilling.
"Over the last few years I've developed many serious concerns about hydrofracking in tight shale," said Lou Allstadt, who described himself as a former vice president of Mobil Oil Corp. Shale-gas wells "are going to have to be fracked many times over their lives," he said. One problem: "such successive fracking increases the risk that the frack will break out of the target shale zone and into fissures that communicate with aquifers."
Perhaps nowhere is skepticism as deep as in New York. New York City draws fresh water from reservoirs in the Catskills, which sit atop a swath of the Marcellus Shale. High-volume shale gas drilling has yet to come to New York, as it has to other states, amid concern about contaminating the city's water supplies.
"There's a big difference between a 100,000 gallon hydrofrack and a three million to five million gallon hydrofrack," said Neil Woodworth, executive director of the Adirondack Mountain Club. He warned that the Northeast probably lacks the capacity to clean up the chemical-laden hydrofracking fluids. "Water in New York State is the most precious resource we have and we can't afford to contaminate it," he said. Applause broke out in the theater.
The industry is increasingly concerned by signs that the EPA is taking seriously the concerns of drilling critics that fracking puts drinking water at risk. On Friday, the API organized a conference call and publicized a study highlighting that if drilling in the Marcellus Shale -- which stretches from New York to West Virginia -- begins in 2011 under a middle-range scenario, production could reach 9.5 billion cubic feet a day in 2020, generating more than 180,000 jobs and almost $4 billion in additional tax revenue.
The forecasts resonate with some people in the southern tier of New York, where jobs are in short supply.
"Rich people do not want gas drilling or any economic development in their backyard," complained Douglas Lee, a resident who spoke at the forum. "They have no concern about how our people make a living. Our communities are poor. We have a high unemployment. Our young people are forced to move away to find work."
Brad Gill, executive director of the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York, said that "there hasn't been a single case of groundwater contaminated by frack fluid in New York" and complained that "fear-mongering and emotion will always trump science."
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| WSJShale-Drilling Fight_100913.pdf | 92.22 KB |