Hydrofracking

[hobkyl]

More false statements.

A theater director, and an actor going after NG. Show me some REAL facts from people who actually study the enviornment.

[Brenda]

False statements? How do you know that his statements are false? I know for a FACT how just regular gas drilling can affect well water! How can hydrofracking possibly be any safer?

Cornell doesn't "actually study the environment?"

“We know there are significant risks associated with ... the pollutants involved in fracking,” says Anthony Ingraffea, a rock-fracture mechanics expert at Cornell University. “These drilling techniques result in amounts of toxic matter so large – in solid, gas, and liquid states – that, in effect, everybody is ‘downstream.’ You can’t get far enough away.”

[hobkyl]

Whether or not it has been determined that fracking imposes an unreversible environmental hazard is yet to be seen. Is their cons? Sure. Am I Pro Drill Now Baby? No.

What I don't agree with is seeing article after article from non scientists making claims of what hazards it poses. Every single anti fracking article makes the claim that the companies don't divulge the chemicals used...however this is false. What else are they lying about?? There are false statements in Garland, and in these articles. The FACT is there was no baseline data from before wide scale drilling began...so how can they determine these claims weren't apparent prior to drilling. I also love how most of the people claiming foul are people who accepted large payments up from as well as continue to collect generous royalties. If they were so concerned about the enviorment then why did they lease their land.

Just as a study by Cornell can be conducted saying fracking is bad...a SU enviormental scientist can say it isn't. http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/ ... edir=false

[Brenda]

Whether or not it has been determined that fracking imposes an unreversible environmental hazard is yet to be seen.

Are we supposed to wait until it happens to make that determination? It seems so blatantly obvious to me that the risks outweigh the rewards. As I said, we had a gas well drilled a mile up the road and it negatively affected every single well in our neighborhood. That well wasn't even done using horizontal fracking. Did chemicals leach into my well water? Not that I'm aware of, but our water quality was certainly impacted.

What else are they lying about?

I honestly don't think that anyone's lying except the gas companies. I don't believe the employment figures that you previously posted, nor do I believe the claims of major economic benefits.

I also love how most of the people claiming foul are people who accepted large payments up from as well as continue to collect generous royalties.

Have you ever been wooed by one of the gas company representatives? I have, on numerous occasions! They make all sorts of promises. They've even offered to take me out to dinner. Fortunately, I haven't been taken in by them--many people have been though. There may well be people who are living large off the money paid to them, but there are also people who would say that no amount of money is worth the destruction of their land and their family's health.

[Brenda]

DEP fines Chesapeake $1 million
Decision cites contaminated water wells in Bradford County
12:43 AM, May. 18, 2011
Written by
Marc Levy
Associated Press

HARRISBURG -- One of the most active companies in Pennsylvania's natural gas drilling boom was fined more than $1 million on Tuesday, including a penalty that state officials called the single largest fine for an oil or gas operator in the state.

The state Department of Environmental Protection said the action stems from Chesapeake Energy Corp.'s contamination of private water supplies with methane in Bradford County and a February tank fire at a drilling site in Washington County in southwestern Pennsylvania.

"It is important to me and to this administration that natural gas drillers are stewards of the environment, take very seriously their responsibilities to comply with our regulations, and that their actions do not risk public health and safety or the environment," DEP Secretary Michael Krancer said in a statement.

Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake said it had voluntarily entered into two separate agreements with the DEP and improved its well construction practices, although it did not assume blame for methane gas migrating into wells.

"Even though the results of our joint review remain inconclusive at this time, we believe proceeding with an agreement and taking prompt steps to enhance our casing and cementing practices and procedures was the right thing to do," Chesapeake official Brian Grove said in a statement.

Chesapeake will pay $900,000 in the gas migration case and $188,000 for the tank fire.

Bradford Co. wells

The DEP said that improper well casing and cementing allowed natural gas to seep into groundwater and contaminate 16 families' drinking water wells in Bradford County in Tuscarora, Terry, Monroe, Towanda and Wilmot townships near Chesapeake's shale drilling operations.

The department began investigating the complaints last year. In November, it won approval of stronger well-casing and cementing rules that a top DEP official has said would have prevented the gas migration.

The agreement requires Chesapeake to create a corrective action plan for the contaminated wells and clean up the contaminated water supplies. Chesapeake also will have to report water supply complaints to the DEP.

However, Mike Phillips, whose well in Terry Township was contaminated by Chesapeake, according to the DEP, said Tuesday that the fine doesn't resolve the ongoing and serious problems with his household water supply. He said a whole-house treatment system installed recently by Chesapeake didn't work, and instead made his young family sick.

His family, he said, is back to using a "water buffalo," a large plastic tank that supplies water for washing dishes and flushing toilets.

"They are paying the fine, but they, in my opinion, are still legally allowed to contaminate my water," said Phillips, who was hosting a meeting in his home Tuesday evening with Krancer of the DEP.

In Avella, in southwestern Pennsylvania, three condensate separator tanks caught fire on Feb. 23, injuring three subcontractors working at the site, the DEP said.

The agency blamed improper handling and management of condensate, a wet gas, and is requiring Chesapeake to submit condensate-management plans.

Federal scrutiny

The fines come as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is looking closely at how Pennsylvania is regulating the rush to explore the lucrative Marcellus Shale formation, considered the nation's largest natural gas reservoir, and putting pressure on state regulators to toughen enforcement.

For instance, the EPA has asked for a full accounting of operations of a Chesapeake well blowout in April in Leroy Township in Bradford County.

Any potential violations from that blowout are not included in the fines announced Tuesday. The accident spilled thousands of gallons of chemical-laced water and prompted officials to ask seven families to temporarily evacuate.

Chesapeake is perhaps the most active company in the Marcellus Shale, with more than 360 wells drilled. It has received more than 1,200 well-drilling permits -- the most of any operator -- or about one in six issued on the Marcellus Shale in the last three years, according to state records.

In 2010, Chesapeake was also one of Pennsylvania's most-penalized Marcellus Shale drillers, with 134 violations and 25 enforcements, state records say.

Private lawsuits

Chesapeake also is facing lawsuits over the tank fire and gas migration.

Peter Cambs, a lawyer who represents several plaintiffs in Bradford County who have sued Chesapeake over methane contamination, said the fine is the latest indication that gas drilling can be hazardous.

"I think it clearly shows there are problems and I don't think the DEP would just willy-nilly assess a fine of that magnitude based on a whim or speculation," Cambs said.

"They wouldn't have done so without careful investigation or analysis. I think you're going to see more and more of these findings."

http://www.theithacajournal.com/article ... |FRONTPAGE

[hobkyl]

Im sorry I turned this into an arguement; wasnt my intention...just trying to play devils advocate and I also really get annoyed when I read false claims, and stories touted as the truth by a director and an actor with no scientific knowledge of the impacts posed.

I understand that there has been spills and other issues. That happens with all harvesting of raw materials from the earth. Nothing is fool proof. BP is constantly paying fines and being sued for oil spills/explosions that occur on their watch.

Again, what is the proposed viable alternative? When push comes to shove...they are gonna drill anyway. Might not be for 50 years...but they will eventually.

We will just agree to disagree on this The thread is yours.

[Brenda]

Im sorry I turned this into an arguement; wasnt my intention...just trying to play devils advocate and I also really get annoyed when I read false claims, and stories touted as the truth by a director and an actor with no scientific knowledge of the impacts posed.

I really get annoyed when you assume that just because he's "a director and an actor" that he doesn't have any "scientific knowledge of the impacts posed." Why does someone have to have a degree in a certain field to gain knowledge about it? He started this journey because much like myself he was approached about leasing his land and he wanted to know more. It's not as if he hasn't researched the subject and consulted with experts.

I don't mind you playing devil's advocate at all. I can handle it.

[Brenda]

N.Y. to sue over hydrofracking study
Attorney general tells federal agencies to examine Delaware River basin
6:00 AM, Jun. 1, 2011
Written by
Jon Campbell

ALBANY — Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced Tuesday he is suing a handful of federal agencies in an attempt to force a full study of the potential environmental impacts of natural gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing in the Delaware River basin.

The attorney general's office contends the government is obligated under the National Environmental Policy Act to undertake such a study because several federal agencies are part of the Delaware River Basin Commission. The law requires an Environmental Impact Statement when a federal agency takes a "major action."

Schneiderman delivered an ultimatum to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in April, telling them to launch a study within 30 days or face a lawsuit.

"Before any decisions on drilling are made, it is our responsibility to follow the facts and understand the public health and safety effects posed by potential natural gas development," Schneiderman said Tuesday in a statement. "The federal government has an obligation to undertake the necessary studies, and as I made clear last month, this office will compel it to do so."

The river basin covers parts of four states, includes portions of Broome, Delaware, Chenango and Ulster counties in New York, as well as a significant chunk of the New York City watershed.

In a letter sent last week to Schneiderman and obtained by Gannett's Albany Bureau, Army Corps Division Commander Peter DeLuca said he disagrees with the attorney general's assessment. DeLuca contends that since the federal government is only one of five entities in the Delaware River Basin Commission — along with New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey — it is not subject to the National Environmental Policy Act as Schneiderman claims.

Several federal agencies participate as part of the commission, with the Army Corps playing a lead role. The Army Corps is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, along with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Interior, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service.

On Tuesday, a spokesman for the Army Corps' North Atlantic Division referred inquiries to the U.S. Department of Justice, which will defend the federal agencies in court. Wyn Hornbuckle, a Justice Department spokesman, said the department had received the complaint and was in the process of reviewing it.

Read more here: http://www.theithacajournal.com/article ... |FRONTPAGE