Resources:
Websites
* www.ogap.org - Oil and Gas Accountability Project
* www.endocrinedisruption.com - Endocrine Disruption Exchange (effects of chemicals in drilling/fracking)
* www.un-naturalgas.org - CDOG (local volunteer group for Chenango/Delaware/Otsego Counties)
* www.damascuscitizens.org - Damascus Citizens for Sustainability (volunteer group in the Delaware Basin NY/PA)
* www.chenangogreens.org - Chenango Greens (Chenango County)
* http://www.squidoo.com/fracbusters - Fracbusters
* http://splashdownpa.blogspot.com/2009/09/fracking-and-environment-natural-gas.html - SPLASH Down, PA (PA-based advocacy group)
Film
* www.waterunderattack.com - Watch clips from a film about impacts of drilling on water across the country
* http://www.splitestate.com/ - a film - Split Estate maps a tragedy in the making, as citizens in the path of a new drilling boom in the Rocky Mountain West struggle against the erosion of their civil liberties, their communities and their health.
* Rural Impact is a six-part video that discusses the impact of natural gas exploration in Colorado, with particular attention to the San Luis Valley and the Lexam exploration on the Baca National Wildlife Refuge. The video series is on youtube, and is also available for purchase as a DVD. Contact the San Luis Valley Citizens Alliance for more information and updates at slvcainfo@gmail.com.
* “What You Need to Know About Natural Gas Production,” Theo Colburn, Ph.D.
Studies
* Hancock and the Marcellus Shale: Gas Extraction Along the Upper Delaware, a project developed by the Urban Design Lab and a joint research seminar at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation
* REGIONAL SUMMARY - WHITE PAPER: PROPOSED GAS DRILLING IN THE UPPER DELAWARE RIVER BASIN WATERSHED. Prepared by Damascus Citizens for Sustainability, October 2008
* Shale Gas: Focus on the Marcellus Shale. By Lisa Sumi, for the Oil & Gas Accountability Project/Earthworks, May 2008.
* “Emissions from Natural Gas Production in the Barnett Shale Area and Opportunities for Cost-Effective Improvements,” by Al Armendariz, Ph.D., Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering. Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas
‘Natural’ Gas drilling discussion outline for speaking opportunities
Key questions are bolded, key points are underlined, and optional comments are italicized so that you can adjust your discussion depending on the audience’s interest and how much time you have. Some of the comments and all of the quotes have citations.
Introduction idea:
* The 20th century was the age of oil. The 21st will be the age of water.
o Water is a $400 billion dollar global industry; the third largest behind electricity and oil
o Water scarcity is now a bigger threat than the financial crisis
o Of the 6 billion people on earth, 1.1 billion do not have access to safe, clean drinking water
o New methods of natural gas drilling require vast amounts of water and poison drinking water
(CBS News, FLOW; http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/water-scarcity-now-bigger-threat-than-financial-crisis-1645358.html; www.charitywater.org; http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_47/b4109000334640_page_2.htm)
Summary (cited from “Hancock and the Marcellus Shale: Gas Extraction Along the Upper Delaware,” a project developed by the Urban Design Lab and a joint research seminar at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation).
Natural gas hydraulic fracturing, a new technique for extracting natural gas from within deep shale deposits, has the capacity to alter lifestyle and landscape at a scale not seen in the Catskills since the creation of the New York City Watershed system. Requiring almost a million gallons of freshwater per day (with chemical additives) for each operating well, natural gas hydraulic fracturing creates the ability to exploit large natural gas reserves in New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio, now estimated at 500 trillion cubic feet, which were previously considered inaccessible. In addition to providing a substantial increase in domestic energy supplies, natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale appears to be a viable solution to the economic challenges facing many rural communities in the region during this difficult economic climate. Revenue from gas leasing and potential income from royalties can offer relief to landowners on the brink of losing their property and their way of life.
However, natural gas extraction has significant impacts on the environment and potential impacts on the local and downstream water supplies. Gas well sites require about five acres of farm or forest land cleared and dedicated to drilling operations, considerably altering the landscape. Drill sites result in increased truck and construction traffic on local roads, thereby adding to the stress on infrastructure across the region. Drilling operations and related vehicle traffic result in significant increases in air, noise and light pollution, particularly for formerly remote, rural areas. Further, the process of hydraulic fracturing results in large volumes of wastewater, of which about a third is contaminated and requires specialized treatment. Local citizens and downstream inhabitants are concerned that improper handling of wastewater could result in the contamination of regional water supplies.
The region is therefore enveloped by a difficult juncture – “to drill or not to drill.”
What is natural gas? What’s wrong with natural gas?
* Natural gas is a fossil fuel – and is therefore dirty for our atmosphere and dangerous for our global climate future
* Natural gas extraction poisons our water, and destroys our communities
* We have to (and have the opportunity to) ban new methods of gas drilling in New York State
1. What is natural gas?
It’s methane trapped in rock, well beneath the earth’s surface.
How do we get it out?
We basically have to break into the rock and draw the gas up.
Optional (LNG):
I will be discussing natural gas extraction in the U.S., although much of our country’s natural gas actually comes from overseas. The greatest reserves of natural gas in the world are in Russia and the Middle East. Conventional natural gas actually peaked in the late 1980’s, around 10 years after conventional oil. This isn’t a new, green, fossil fuel.
To import natural gas from abroad, it is necessary to cool it to -260 degrees F, liquefy it, and ship it across continents. This is referred to as Liquefied Natural Gas, or LNG. LNG importation terminals are destroying communities in the U.S., now particularly in Oregon, where Russian gas is being imported and transported through Oregon farmland and communities to feed California. We need to fight LNG as well, but also make sure that anti-LNG groups (especially local groups in NY and NJ) are not using the argument that we should instead be exploiting natural gas reserves here in the U.S. Gas drilling is already affecting 32 states, and other countries. Environmental advocates need to speak to the threat of drilling as well as the threat of LNG, and together we need to push for more sustainable solutions – particularly conservation and efficiency.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas; http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/27/61031/618; http://www.ferc.gov/industries/lng/indus-act.asp)
2. What’s wrong with natural gas drilling?
Well, there are a few different kinds of drilling. The “conventional” process involves drilling vertically into the ground and drawing up “conventional” natural gas – which is easy-to-extract “trapped” gas. But a different method of drilling, called hydraulic fracturing (also known as hydrofracking), is more efficient in capturing “unconventional” gas, which is not easily flowing and is often absorbed/attached to the rock. “Hydraulic fracturing was developed and patented in 1949 by Stanolind (later known as Pan American Oil Company). Halliburton is the industry leader in hydraulic fracturing. The National Petroleum Council estimated that 60-80% of all wells drilled require hydraulic fracturing. Cheney’s energy task force report called it ‘one of the fastest-growing sources of gas production’ and noted that ‘each year nearly 25,000 oil and gas wells are hydraulically fractured.’” (http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/energybill.html)
Hydrofracking involves pumping between 2-9 million gallons of fresh water, sand, and some 250+ chemicals into the ground, first vertically, and then horizontally through the rock, creating fissures across the rock and drawing more natural gas than could be tapped by a vertical well. The problem with this is that it requires SO much fresh water, which is laced with harmful fracking fluids, and then travels underground; often leaking out of improperly cased bores into our groundwater or into ponds or wells. Hydrofracking also releases heavy metals that were (and should remain) buried in the shale (or other low-permeable stone) deposits. Basically, hydrofracking is about taking pure water and turning it into toxic waste! Hydrofracking technologies have caused a huge rush by drillers who want to get (what’s considered “unconventional”) gas from rock deposits otherwise un-tappable.
3. What are the consequences of this type of drilling?
Hydrofracking has been rampant out West (among the most drilled states are Colorado, New Mexico, and Wyoming). People in these states have documented severe environmental and public health impacts as a result of the drilling. Fracking fluid exposure can cause cancer, neurological and respiratory illnesses, organ damage, and birth defects. Reports of these and other sudden illnesses have been made in drilling areas. Especially at risk are those living on drilled properties, as well as the workers handling fluids and gas extraction-equipment.
Natural gas drilling releases carcinogens including benzene, hydrogen sulfide, and methane, into the air. Fracking fluids seep into the soil, affecting and poisoning food and agricultural industries. And perhaps most frighteningly, the fracking fluids contaminate ground water, making our tap and well water unsafe to drink. While civilians have been documenting water contamination all across the country, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) just recently released a study linking well-water contamination to fracking fluids used in drilling operations in Pavillion, Wyoming. Our government is catching up to reality, and it is time to make sure our voices are heard.
Optional (on climate impacts):
If we consider cradle-to-grave emissions of the drilling process, we should include: greenhouse gases emitted by the diesel fuel trucks required to carry raw materials (mostly water) and chemicals to drilling pads and truck the gas away; methane released by the gas well if proper capture and safety measures are not employed (this can result in gigantic fires which rage for weeks); and the burning of the natural gas itself which, while likely cleaner than coal, still contributes many times more to greenhouse gas emissions than renewable energies (such as solar, wind, and geothermal). Big “green” groups such as the NRDC and Sierra Club tout ‘natural’ gas as an important ‘transitional fuel,’ but cannot reference a single study pointing to the comparative advantage of gas, given the emissions entailed in the extraction process. Yet a recent study in Texas found that natural gas drilling operations from the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area release greenhouse gases equivalent to 2 new coal-fired power plants (Armendariz, Al, PhD. Emissions from Natural Gas Production in the Barnett Shale Area and Opportunities for Cost-Effective Improvements. Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering at Southern Methodist University, Dallas. January 26, 2009).
Plainly, there is nothing natural about ‘natural’ gas. When you factor in all of the work required to extract it, it starts to look very Dirty. Hydrofracked “shale gas, which would be used if coal is replaced by natural gas, should not [even] be referred to as ‘natural’ gas…because the negative environmental impact of shale gas extraction is so much greater than the much more easily gotten old natural gas resources that are now near going, going, gone.” (David Cyr. Delhi, NY. GPNYS SC member - Delaware County).
In addition to these public health and environmental impacts, drilling negatively affects quality of life. Marcellus wells can be spaced in 40-acre units (16 wells per square mile), with each well remaining active for up to 40 years. Each well requires a ‘pad’ of 5-15 acres.
Noise pollution from the drilling process can last up to a month per well, but wells also require compressor stations, which run constantly (day and night), and are extremely noisy. Each well also requires around 1,000 truck trips during drilling and fracking, to deliver fresh water and remove wastewater from the well. These trips can dramatically increase traffic, as well as put strain on local roads.
Despite all of this, if a landowner decides to discourage gas drilling in their neighborhood by refusing to sign a lease, he or she may be subjected to “compulsory integration” – a process by which drillers are given access by the state to the gas an owner does not wish to sell! As long as 60% of the spacing unit has been leased by other property owners (neighbors), the drilling company has the right to take the unwilling seller’s mineral resource, with some, non-negotiable, compensation.
Optional (Federal exemptions in 2005 Energy Bill):
How can they do this? Isn’t it illegal?
It’s actually completely legal, thanks to our friend Dick Cheney. In 2005, Vice President Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton (the industry leader in gas drilling) lobbied for the passage of the 2005 Energy Bill. This bill not only gives billions of dollars of taxpayer subsidies to the oil and gas corporations, but also grants them “sweeping exemptions from provisions in the major federal environmental statutes intended to protect human health and the environment. These include the:
* Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
* Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
* Safe Drinking Water Act
* Clean Water Act
* Clean Air Act
* National Environmental Policy Act
* Toxic Release Inventory under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
This lack of regulatory oversight can be traced to many illnesses and even deaths for people and wildlife across the country” (Kosnik, Renee Lewish, MSEL, JD. “The Oil and Gas Industry’s Exclusions and Exemptions to Major Environmental Statutes.” Oil and Gas Accountability Project, A Project of Earthworks. October 2007).
Optional (economic argument):
Gas companies and water-grabbing tycoons like T. Boone Pickens claim that natural gas is emblematic of our clean energy future. They say that the energy is cheap and abundant, so we are obligated to pursue it. But how cheap is it, really? Rarely are discussions of potential profits balanced with the high costs of insuring environmental protection during drilling, let alone conducting safe clean-up and removing hazardous materials from affected areas. Yet given that protection and disposal plans have not been elaborated by drilling companies or our regulatory agencies, we should not be surprised that all they are talking about is profit.
In fact, economic analyses of natural gas drilling in Western states prove that while energy development may create new economic opportunities, reduce unemployment, spur rapid in-migration, and raise wages for workers, it also exacerbates inflation, housing, and commuting pressures, contributes to a growing wage and wealth gap, and makes it difficult for other industries to thrive. Counties that have focused on energy have lost population, even as jobs in the energy industry increased – perhaps a result of the rising cost of living.
(http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/09-02-19/head1-economics.html; http://headwaterseconomics.org/energy/).
On a household scale, the comparatively lower rates we might temporarily pay in our energy bills do not make up for the higher costs we would have to pay to attempt to filtrate our water systems, buy bottled water, clean up environmental hazards caused by drilling, and take our children and ourselves to the emergency room when we get sick. Developing local renewable energy opportunities would create new green jobs, without the accompanying environmental devastation and public health consequences of fossil fuel extraction.
4. Why is this an issue in NY now?
Parts of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia sit on top of a rock deposit called the Marcellus Shale. The Marcellus spans across New York State’s Southern Tier. The Marcellus is also beneath small areas of Maryland, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. Natural gas speculators have made varying claims about the potential of the Marcellus, affirming that the gas from this shale alone could meet our whole nation’s energy needs for 10-15 years and have a wellhead value of a trillion dollars. And the numbers keep going up. Yet it’s impossible to know how much gas is really trapped there, and such speculations imagine that we extract every bit of it – dotting wells across each of those states.
So the gas companies really want to get under New York State. They’ve been drilling in Pennsylvania, where people are starting to get sick from drinking their tap water. Leases have been sold across New York State, but, very importantly, no permits for drilling in NYS have been issued (although the clock is ticking). This is because the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has just released their draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement, or SGEIS, to review methods used while drilling. This is mandated under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The initial 60-day public comment period on this document began on September 30th, 2009. Public hearings are scheduled in a few locations in the state. There will be a public hearing in New York City at 7pm on Tuesday November 10th, at Stuyvesant High School Auditorium (345 Chambers Street).
Now we have to comment, attend hearings, ask questions, and be vocal in our push for a ban of gas drilling by the Governor and/or legislature.
5. What happens if we don’t ban hydrofracking in New York State?
If we don’t ban hydrofracking in NYS, the public health of millions of New York State residents will be traded for seemingly cheap energy.
Additionally, gas drilling would affect the integrity of our local food supplies, cutting off needed revenue for many farmers, and leaving New Yorkers more and more dependent on imported foods (and on the fluctuating cost of oil needed to transport them).
Apparently that’s an acceptable trade for some, including those who are paid to protect our health. The Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA’s DEP) “acknowledged that some of the chemicals could be dangerous to human health but said that the risk has to be weighed against the benefits that will come from the exploitation of what he called the ‘enormous’ gas reserves contained in the Marcellus Shale” (Jon Hurdle: “Pennsylvania says natgas drilling risks inevitable.” Reuters, March 20, 2009).
We need to start thinking of ecological metrics in the same way we think about economic metrics. We need to put public health at the center of the debate.
Water sources across the state, including the water that gets sent to NYC, are at severe risk of contamination. NYC gets 90% of its water from the Catskill/Delaware watershed, which rests on top of the Marcellus Shale. There is no existing filtration process that could scrub out fracking chemicals. Estimates for a likely ineffective filtration plant to process that 90% of our tap water run upwards of $30 billion (which would ultimately be paid for with New York City resident’s tax dollars)!
Yet since groundwater, including contaminated groundwater, travels freely underground, ‘buffering’ zones from gas drilling operations does not promise that those waters will be free from fracking chemicals and un-locked heavy metals. “Geologic discontinuities, such as fractures and faults, can dominate fracture geometry in a way that makes predicting hydraulic fracture behavior difficult” (Schlumberger, “The Source for Hydraulic Fracture Characterization,” Oilfield Review, 2006: p.44).
We must therefore push for a statewide ban of the process, and work towards a regional, and federal ban. While we NYC residents share a huge watershed, everyplace is actually a watershed. The NYC watershed covers just 4% of the state’s Marcellus Shale deposits. We, as NYC residents, have the opportunity and obligation to stand in solidarity with people living with the fear and threat of natural gas drilling in their communities. We have to stand up to the gas drilling companies, as well as to the individuals seeking to profit off of their land to the detriment of their neighbors. Our very health and livelihoods depend upon it.
6. So what can we do about it? How do we stop it?
We need to push our legislators to demand a ban on horizontal drilling throughout the state (or a moratorium until much more is known, giving us time to prove how terribly ineffective drilling is, and build up alternative renewable technologies). There are well over 10,000 vertical drilling pads now active in NYS, but we have the opportunity to stop the hazardous horizontal hydrofracking before it really starts.
* We have to join forces and organize together in solidarity
o We have to avoid a divide-and-conquer strategy that saves NYC’s watersheds at the expense of the rest of the state
* We have to comment on the SGEIS and attend public hearings, making our voices heard
* We have to write to, talk to, visit, rally, and lobby our representatives and Governor Paterson.
* If you live in NYC, help us involve your community boards. Community Boards throughout NYC have released an excellent resolutions calling for a ban on hydrofracking throughout the state. NY-H2Ois working to engage all New York City Community Boards on this issue.
* If you live in NYC, push the NY City Council to keep language of a ban applicable to all of NYS.
* Representatives Maurice Hinchey, Diana DeGette, and Jared Polis have drafted the FRAC Act, a bill that calls for the reversal of industry exemptions to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Help us pressure an amendment of the FRAC Act to include ALL the exemptions in the 2005 Energy Bill, as the SDWA only covers municipal water sources, and not groundwater, aquifers, or wells (leaving out much of rural America’s water).
* And of course, join us in the fight! In NYC, you can hook up with the Safe Water Movement (SWiM), a coalition of people working towards the protection of our water from drilling. NY-H2O is another group in NYC solely committed to fighting hydrofracking and protecting our water. The Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter’s Gas Drilling Task Force is also doing really good work on this issue. If you live in Chenango, Delaware, or Ostego County, check out CDOG. If you live in the Ithaca area, look up Shale Shock. More groups have lots of outreach needs. The National Lawyer’s Guild’s Environmental Justice Committee (with the New York Environmental Law & Justice Project) is pushing for federal action on drilling. Email “safewatermovement@gmail.com” if you want more information or would like to be connected to any of these groups (or others)!
* Help us get the word out, give panel discussions, organize interaction between NYC and NYS residents, and persuade our politicians that natural gas drilling is NOT the answer to our energy needs. Help us research real solutions and open our eyes to the real cost of energy extraction.
Sign up to get involved in this cause, and we will give you the tools you need to get the word out! We have fact sheets to pass around, letters to legislators to send, and need volunteers for various events throughout the city. We also need new energy (literally!) and new ideas!
