From the Western Environmental Law Center, January 2023

From the Letter of Mike Scott, National Oil and Gas Campaign Manager, Sierra Club, September 16, 2023

From 9 to 5, I’m the Sierra Club’s Oil and Gas Campaign Manager. When I’m not working, you can find me hunting, fishing, rafting, or hiking in Eastern Montana where I live. I love this place, and one of the reasons I live here is so that I can enjoy the outdoors.

Oil and gas production has long been a part of this region, which brings many problems. Radioactive waste from drill rigs, brine water (often saltier than the ocean), and even crude oil ends up in our rivers and on our land. Pumpjacks (those big pieces of equipment that look like a nodding donkey or horse head) sit idle and rusting on the landscape. I live between three large oil refineries, and my farm actually was covered in oil from the 2011 Silvertip pipeline spill in the Yellowstone River. Oil and gas is everywhere in my community and in this part of the country.

That is why we need stronger rules that limit oil and gas exploration!

When oil and gas companies are allowed to operate however they see fit, it leads to pollution and accidents that impact the land, wildlife, and people. For example, unsealed, abandoned wells can leak oil and other pollutants into the air and water. This means drinking water can become contaminated, and the fish we eat are riddled with toxins. It also means a visit to public lands near oil and gas production could expose us to pollutants in the air that can make us sick.

Right now, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is updating its oil and gas leasing rules. This is a big deal because the current rules are broken and outdated, leading to the terrible impacts I’ve seen in Montana and across the West. The proposed rules don’t fix everything, but they do start to make reforms that will hold oil and gas companies accountable for their operations. This proposal will also end some of the built-in subsidies that oil and gas companies hoard when they lease public lands. A more transparent process will mean that our perspectives are finally taken into account before dirty fossil fuel projects are dumped into our backyards.

Join me in telling the BLM to strengthen these rules and finalize them as soon as possible!

>> Thanks for all you do, Mike Scott, National Oil and Gas Campaign Manager, Sierra Club

#######+++++++#######+++++++#######

SUMMARY APPROACH ~ For decades, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has sold off public lands to oil and gas companies for pennies on the dollar. This broken system has locked up vast amounts of land from any use other than extraction and left thousands of dangerous and polluting abandoned wells with our communities footing the bill to clean them up.

The BLM just proposed an update to leasing rules that would finally hold fossil fuel companies accountable for the damage they cause, end subsidies for oil and gas producers, and add competition to the leasing process. Tell the BLM to strengthen these rules and finalize them as soon as possible!

Take Action Now!

Modern frack well pads may have 12 or more well heads at pressure

From a News Flash by John Lynch, WTRF News 7, Wheeling, on July 11, 2023

(WTRF) – Ohio Governor Mike DeWine announced on Tuesday the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management is responding to a natural gas release from a well in Columbiana County.

The incident happened on the Tarka Pad on Fairfield School Road near Columbiana. ODNR is coordinating with local first responders, the operator of the well (Hilcorp Energy Company), Ohio EPA and oil and gas emergency contractors to mitigate the situation.

Hilcorp Energy Company reported that a third-party contractor struck a wellhead on the pad around 9:00 a.m. Tuesday. Emergency shut-down devices for the remaining 12 wells on the pad were activated and all remaining wells and pipelines are shut-in. Hilcorp has secured the services of a well control specialist who is anticipated on site Tuesday evening to begin operations to regain control of the well.

Local emergency management officials instituted a one-mile evacuation zone shortly after the incident occurred and more than 450 people have been safely evacuated. No injuries have been reported.

Ohio EPA is on-scene providing incident support. Officials say baseline air monitoring is occurring and will continue until the situation is under control. Any updates regarding evacuations will be made by local emergency management officials.

ODNR says they will continue to work with all state and local authorities to monitor the situation until the operator regains control of the well. Unless you are ordered to evacuate, stay in your home with the doors and windows closed. If you can close the fresh-air intake of your air conditioning system, do so, according to officials.

>>> If you are experiencing unusual shortness of breath, dizziness, or clumsiness that you believe may be related to this contact a healthcare provider. A claims hotline has been established for those who have been affected by the incident. The number is (877) 872-1288.

Fracking waste disposal in Guernsey County, OH. (These activities are known risks of creating earthquakes.)

Environmental Essay by Lisa C. Lieb, Revelator Voices, March 27, 2023

Let’s Protect This Place: A region historically plagued by industrial pollution is overwhelmed with unconventional oil and gas development. The Allegheny Plateau is a lower-lying portion of the Appalachian Mountain Range that extends from southern and central New York to northern and western Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio, northern and western West Virginia, and eastern Kentucky.

Why it matters: The plateau consists of areas of gently sloping hills in the north and west of the region as well as rugged valleys in the south and east. It overlies the Marcellus Shale and Utica Shale, sedimentary rock formations. The region is rich in natural resources, including hardwoods, iron ore, silica, coal, oil and natural gas.

The abundance of these resources supported development in the region and were integral to the local steel, glass, rail and extraction industries.

Prior to widespread logging between 1890 and 1920, the area hosted old-growth forests containing red spruce, eastern white pine, eastern hemlock, sugar maple, black oak, white oak, yellow birch and American beech.

But the forest’s makeup is now different, favoring oaks, maples, hickories, American beech and yellow birch. Though fragmented and much less mature than the old-growth forests, today’s forests continue to play a vital role in ecosystems, serving as habitats for the federally endangered Indiana bat as well as locally endangered or at-risk species such as little brown bats, northern flying squirrels and blackpoll warblers.

The region hosts the Ohio River watershed and confluence, the Allegheny National Forest in New York and Pennsylvania, and the Wayne National Forest in Ohio.

The threat: Unconventional oil and gas development has boomed in the region over the past decade. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the Marcellus and Utica shale plays contain approximately 214 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, making the Allegheny Plateau a lucrative location for hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.”

Already more than 13,000 unconventional wells have been drilled in Pennsylvania. Fracking itself is a resource intense process, requiring between 2 and 20 million gallons of water per well. A 2014 study estimated that in Pennsylvania, 80% of the water used for fracking comes from streams, rivers, and lakes, thus potentially altering water temperature and levels of dissolved oxygen. This water is combined with sand and a mixture of hazardous chemicals, which may include methanol, ethylene glycol and propargyl alcohol.

Between 20-25% of the water that is injected into the well returns to the surface. This flowback water often has higher salinity and has been known to contain barium, arsenic, benzene and radium. While recycling of flowback is becoming more common, other methods of disposal include underground injection, application to road surfaces, treatment at public waste facilities, and discharging it onto rivers, streams and lakes.

Near fracking sites in West Virginia, elevated levels of barium and strontium were found in feathers of Louisiana waterthrushes, native songbirds who make their home in brooks and wooded swamps. In northwestern Pennsylvania, crayfish and brook trout living in fracked streams were found to have increased levels of mercury. Fish diversity is also reduced in streams that have been fracked.

Fracking consumes land, too. Each fracking well requires 3-7 acres. In Pennsylvania over 700,000 acres of state forest land are leased or available for gas production. Well pads, pipelines and other fracking infrastructure fragment forests, alter their ecology, and reduce biodiversity. Appalachian azure butterflies and federally threatened northern wild monkshood — purple-flowering herbaceous perennials found in New York and Ohio — are both sensitive to forest fragmentation.

In addition to the direct impacts of fracking, the availability of natural gas in the Marcellus and Utica shale plays attracts petrochemical development to the region. Shell Polymers Monaca initiated operations in November 2022 at a newly constructed 386-acre petrochemical complex in southwestern Pennsylvania, along the Ohio River.

The plant manufactures virgin polyethylene pellets, which will be largely be used for production of single-use plastic products. In addition to releasing hazardous air pollutants, volatile organic compounds and particulate matter, this ethane “cracker” plant will emit 2.2 million tons of carbon dioxide per year.

The plant’s existence will also fuel fracking in the region; it is anticipated that it will require between 100 and 200 new wells each year in order to supply natural gas for its productions. Other petrochemical companies, including Exxon, PTT Global and Odebrecht, have reportedly been considering building similar complexes in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia.

My place in this place: I was born and raised in the area, and my family’s roots in southwestern Pennsylvania go back several generations. Some of my most cherished memories involve Pennsylvania’s forests, rivers and streams. As a child I loved my family’s summer pilgrimages to our cabin, a rustic building that had been converted from a one-room schoolhouse in the Pennsylvania Wilds. At “camp” we fished for yellow perch, smallmouth bass and walleye in the Sinnemahoning Creek and caught crayfish by hand. We sunned ourselves on the rocks along the river bank when the water was warm. In the evenings we walked on quiet, narrow roads in hopes of spotting an eastern elk in a grassy field.

I now live in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, one mile from the Shell cracker plant. I can observe the plant’s flaring from my kitchen window, which often creates an ominous orange glow in the night sky. To me the plant doesn’t symbolize job creation or a rebounding local economy, despite the assertions of local and state politicians. I see the plant as the perpetuation of a hopeless dependence on fossil fuels and corporate profit at the expense of ecological integrity. I worry that fracking and an associated petrochemical buildout will destroy already fragile ecosystems throughout my home in the Allegheny Plateau.

Who’s protecting it now: There are a variety of environmental groups located in the region. No Petro PA is an organization that resists fracking and pipeline development in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. More locally the Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Community in western Pennsylvania opposes fracking and seeks to protect local community members from its harmful effects.

With the rise of the Shell cracker plant, the group also formed Eyes on Shell, a community organization that aims to hold Shell accountable for its activity and advocates for the surrounding communities’ health and safety. These are just three of the many grassroots organizations working to protect the air, soil, water, wildlife and communities in the region.

The national organization, FracTracker, also provides extensive data on oil and natural gas wells, pipelines, legislation and environmental health.

What this place needs: Ideally Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia will follow in the footsteps of New York and institute a ban on fracking in light of the environmental and health risks associated with unconventional gas and oil development. However, given their strong ties to the fossil fuel industry, it is unlikely that this will occur. Banning fracking on public land in the region, such as in state forests and county parks, in a practical first step in combatting forest fragmentation and pollution.

At a regional level, regulations should be put in place to protect the water quality of the Ohio River. The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, a multistate organization working with the federal government, could ban fracking in the Ohio River Basin in order to protect the river and its watershed. The Delaware River Basin Commission has successfully prohibited fracking within the Delaware River Basin; the rules developed by the commission could be adapted for use by the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission.

Additional government oversight would help to protect water quality in the region. Presently fracking is exempt from the Safe Water Drinking Act and therefore isn’t regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ending this exemption could increase water quality and safety within the Allegheny Plateau.

Increased transparency from oil and gas companies is also required to protect the region’s water. As of July 2022, California is the only state in the country that requires full public disclosure of all chemicals used in fracking. Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio must implement policies that require full public disclosure of chemicals used in all phases of the fracking process.

Coal miners ‘black lung’ and frackers ‘white lung’ are examples of such ailments

From an Article by Eglė Krištopaitytė, Health News, January 20, 2023

Climate change impacts all aspects of our lives, including our health. From inflammation caused by wildfire smoke to diseases-carrying vectors migrating to new areas, the threats associated with changing climate are here to stay. [It can get worse! See Paul Brown’s challenge.]

This past year 2022 was the world’s 6th-warmest year on record since 1880, according to the latest report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Millions of Americans have experienced the consequences of climate change firsthand, as the country endured 18 separate disasters, including hurricanes and droughts, damages of which exceeded $1 billion. Moreover, these disasters resulted in the deaths of 474 people.

In 2021, an international group of medical professionals suggested that rising temperatures due to climate change was the greatest threat to global public health. Scientists expect temperatures to continue increasing this year. In 2024, they could set a new global record.

In an interview with Healthnews, Juan Aguilera, MD, PhD, MPH, a director of Translational Environmental and Climate Health at Stanford University, explains how climate change damages our mental and physical health.

Wildfire smoke causes inflammation; wildfires also cause public displacement and property damages.

Aguilera says that climate change impacts different aspects of our lives. For example, rising temperatures prolong drought periods, leading to the drying of the forests’ soils. When weeds and bushes are not hydrated enough, the fires tend to expand and cover wider areas.

“Smoke contains many different particles that are harmful to human health, with some being small enough to go into the respiratory system and even to penetrate deeply into the circulation,” he told Healthnews.

Once in blood circulation, particles cause inflammation which, in the long term, could lead to heart diseases, stroke, hardening of the arteries, and even cancer. According to Aguilera, scientists are now learning that wildfire smoke may also affect the immune system, making people weaker against any other types of diseases.

The effects of climate change are also linked to mental health problems. For example, living in an area where wildfires may occur can be a source of anxiety. “You never know when a wildfire will occur, how big and wide it is going to be. You may be in danger and need to evacuate your home. Following the news also might be a source making anybody feel anxious,” Aguilera, MD, added.

Moreover, harmful particles from wildfire smoke may affect neurons and, therefore, mental health.

“As we learn more about how these smaller particles affect our entire bodies, we can also explain issues related to mental health,” he says.

Extreme climate events are more frequent now. Climate change also exacerbates extreme weather events, such as hurricanes and thunderstorms, eventually leading to flooding. This causes more humidity within the homes, which can result in mold, Aguilera explains. For some, mold may cause mild symptoms, such as sore throat, coughing, or wheezing. However, those with asthma or people allergic to mold may have severe reactions, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In 2022, flooding caused by Hurricane Ian led to a spike in potentially deadly infections caused by Vibrio vulnificus, also known as “flesh-eating” bacteria. Over 60 cases of infections and 11 deaths were reported in Florida.

“Mosquitos and other vectors are getting adjusted to conditions where the climate is changing. They reach areas where there usually aren’t mosquitos, ticks, or any other vectors,” Aguilera added. Researcher says that as climate changes, the pollen season is expanding to up to ten months; therefore, pollen allergies will become more frequent.

How to protect yourself from pollution? Air pollution is one of the drivers of climate change. In 2021, about 67 million tons of pollution were emitted into the atmosphere in the U.S. Unsurprisingly, research reveals more or more harm of pollution to human health. For example, a study from last year found that unborn babies have black carbon particles in vital organs, such as the liver, lungs, and brain, as early as the first trimester.

Another study demonstrated that women in their late 40s and early 50s who were exposed long-term to air pollution with nitrogen dioxide and ozone saw increases in their body size and composition measures.

So how to protect ourselves from toxic pollutants? Aguilera says that while not everybody will be able to move out of regions that are exposed to air pollution, we can take some lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the steps is to follow the air quality index, which allows tracking of real-time air pollution conditions on a certain day.

“Vulnerable groups, such as pregnant, elderly people, children, and people with asthma, may want to consider some personal barriers, such as wearing a mask. Depending on your situation, it might be an N95 mask,” he says. In addition, air purifiers may help to trap these particles and reduce the amount of pollution inside the houses.

Aguilera explains that in the United States, some low-income communities live closer to freeways and roads, meaning that there are higher levels of air pollution coming from the traffic.

“Some homes don’t have proper insulation, and because of impending climate change, people who live there may suffer from heat stress or heat stroke. Measures to protect themselves, such as better cooling devices or air purifiers, cost money and are not necessarily accessible to everybody,” he adds.

Researcher says that the first step in achieving health equity is an awareness that our actions do affect not only ourselves but also people in other countries. “In Africa, they deal with severe droughts and shortages of food because of how climate changes make soils less fertile in some areas,” he says.

References & Sources ~

1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2022 was world’s 6th-warmest year on record.

2. The New England Journal of Medicine. Call for Emergency Action to Limit Global Temperature Increases, Restore Biodiversity, and Protect Health.

3. The University of Aberdeen. Babies have air pollution in their lungs and brains before they take their first breath.

4. The University of Michigan. Air pollution tips the scale for obesity in women.

5. Kaiser Family Foundation. Climate Change and Health Equity: Key Questions and Answers.

An Article, an Audio CD Set, and a best selling Book by Elizabeth Kolbert

Scientific Article by Giavonni Strona & Corey Bradshaw, Science Magazine, Dec. 16, 2022

ABSTRACT ~ Although theory identifies coextinctions as a main driver of biodiversity loss, their role at the planetary scale has yet to be estimated. We subjected a global model of interconnected terrestrial vertebrate food webs to future (2020–2100) climate and land-use changes. We predict a 17.6% (± 0.16% SE) average reduction of local vertebrate diversity globally by 2100, with coextinctions increasing the effect of primary extinctions by 184.2% (± 10.9% SE) on average under an intermediate emissions scenario. Communities will lose up to a half of ecological interactions, thus reducing trophic complexity, network connectance, and community resilience. The model reveals that the extreme toll of global change for vertebrate diversity might be of secondary importance compared to the damages to ecological network structure.

INTRODUCTION ~ The planet has entered the sixth mass extinction (1–5). There are multiple causes underlying the rapid increase in observed and modeled extinction rates in recent times, of which land-use change, overharvesting, pollution, climate change, and biological invasions figure as dominant processes (6). However, assessing the relative importance and the realistic impact of such drivers at the global scale remains a challenge. Another aspect rendering assessment difficult are the synergies between drivers — a species might go extinct for multiple, simultaneous reasons, and in such contexts, ecological interactions play a fundamental role in predicting its fate (7). Growing recognition of the importance of species interactions in promoting the emergence of biodiversity in complex natural communities implies that an additional, fundamental component of biodiversity loss is represented by the amplification of primary extinctions across ecological networks. Coextinction — the loss of species caused by direct or indirect effects stemming from other extinctions — is now recognized as a major contributor to global biodiversity loss, strongly amplifying the effect of primary (e.g., climate-driven) extinctions (8–11).

Networks of ecological interactions are central to global patterns of diversity loss not only because coextinctions can be triggered by other extinction drivers, but also because network structure and dynamics might modulate several processes that can either reduce or increase extinction rate. For example, it is intuitive that a species’ success in colonizing a new area depends strongly on its ability to exploit local resources while simultaneously escaping enemies (predators and parasites). The addition of the new species might also initiate substantial changes to and have important cascading effects in the local network. Ignoring the structure of ecological networks and how they reconfigure as their constituent diversity changes therefore gives a possibly misleading view of the future of global diversity.

Previous attempts to predict the future of global diversity in the face of climate change and habitat modification have only considered the direct effects of these drivers on species (typically on single taxonomic groups), without explicitly accounting for ecological interactions. For instance, Thomas et al. (12) used projections of species’ distributions and species-area relationships to predict extinction rates for 20% of Earth’s surface, and Malcolm et al. (13) applied both species-area and endemic-area relationships to predictions of biome shift under climate change in Biodiversity Hotspots. van Vuuren et al. (14) also applied species-area relationships to vascular plants to project extinctions under different land-use and climate-change scenarios within the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, and Jetz et al. (15) used a similar approach for birds. Others have applied analogous techniques to many other taxa, including lizards (16), crop wild relatives (17), chelonians (18), bird, amphibians, and corals (19). Later, Warren et al. (20) applied point-process and global circulation models to predict climate change–induced shifts in species’ distributions, and Urban (21) did a meta-analysis (including many of the studies cited above) to predict extinction rates of various taxa under several climate-change scenarios. Despite this extensive research foundation, future inferences of biodiversity’s fate over the coming century are likely to underestimate extinctions arising from global change (11).

Apart from the obvious modeling and computational challenges to incorporate interactions among species, the main reason why there are few studies accounting for interactions is that obtaining sufficient data in most communities is intractable. Therefore, global-scale modeling of entire ecosystems appears to be the only viable solution, even if a challenging one (11, 22). Recent developments in network approaches have shown that potential ecological interactions can be derived by applying different techniques (e.g., machine learning) to available datasets on species distribution and ecology (23, 24). In previous work (11), we built on that idea to generate global-scale models of biodiversity by including species interactions using virtual species constructed to follow real-world archetypes. In such synthetic approaches, a virtual species is a plausible ecological entity that has a combination of ecological traits consistent with real-world species despite not corresponding exactly to them.

There are several advantages in using virtual species in this manner. The first is that once the rules have been set to generate virtual species, current gaps and biases in biodiversity sampling cease to be a limitation; we can use virtual species to populate the entire Earth and generate plausible ecological communities, even in areas where data on local diversity are scarce or missing. Second, virtual species avoid preconceptions (and biases) about current biodiversity patterns, permitting instead a focus on the processes involved in change. Here, we can populate an entire virtual planet with species, let them develop communities based on a modest set of realistic ecological rules and assumptions, and then explore the emerging patterns. With such an approach, real-world data serve as a template for generating the virtual species and for identifying the basic ecological rules controlling community dynamics and as a benchmark with which to validate the realism of modeled predictions.

We previously demonstrated how coextinctions increase the pace of annihilation of life on Earth by up to 10 times relative to primary extinctions, but only in the face of catastrophic, no-return environmental change modeled as either extreme planetary heating or cooling (11). Although an instructive proof of concept, that model contained many simplifications and was applied to (hopefully) unrealistic scenarios of global change. Building on that original approach, here we developed a more complex, and ecologically realistic dynamic model to represent all terrestrial vertebrate communities with which we project future biodiversity trends. By accounting for both primary extinctions and their resulting coextinctions, the model predicts the cumulative toll on global biodiversity of different climate and land-use change projections up to 2100 at a spatial scale of 1° × 1° and at a monthly temporal resolution. In addition to providing estimates of potential global diversity loss, the model quantifies the relative contribution of the different extinction drivers at the global scale for the first time.

This Article continues in Science Magazine.

#######+++++++#######+++++++########

See also: The Sixth Extinction? | Elizabeth Kolbert, The New Yorker Magazine, May 18, 2009

The Halliburton Exclusions have exempted Drilling & Fracking for far too long

​——→ Check out the schedule and events here​

Speakers from the following Groups: Beyond Petrochemicals Campaign, Beyond Plastics, Beyond Extreme Energy, Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan, Communitopia, Concerned Citizens of Navarro County, Damascus Citizens for Sustainability(DCS), Earth Dog Films, Fracking the System, Earthworks, Environmental Health News, FracTracker Alliance, Keep It Wild, Lisa Johnson and Associates, OJI:SDA’ Sustainable Indigenous Futures, Ohio River Valley Institute, Park Foundation, Physicians for Social Responsibility Pennsylvania, Property Rights and Pipeline Center, ReImagine Appalachia, Sierra Club, The Natural History Museum, Yale School of Public Health and Yale Cancer Center

Topics / Presentations: Precautionary approach to fighting oil & gas; Playing the long game: Overcoming defeat and setting new goals in the oil & gas fight; Telling the truth about plastic pollution;Pushing back against the Bitcoin Empire in Texas; “We Refuse to Die” – On our exhibition, movement building, and media campaign to stop the petrochemical expansion; Stopping gas exports to protect public health and avert the worst impacts of the climate crisis!; Shared Prosperity in the Ohio River Valley; Using maps to inspire action; Journalism on plastic, toxic chemicals, and oil & gas pollution; Victory against the Epiphany Allegheny corporation and the ongoing battle against the Northern Access Pipeline in NY; Building power across labor, environmental advocates, faith leaders, and racial justice leaders in Appalachia; The Beyond Petrochemicals Campaign; Colorado’s oil and gas wars – Upcoming documentary film; FLIR Cameras – Making the invisible visible; Skill building for grassroots organizers; Legal advocacy for fracking victims and learning industry tactics; Getting a statewide fracking ban on the ballot in Michigan; Protecting landowners’ rights against pipeline development; and Addressing the Health Impacts of Fracking

Full details and guest speaker profiles are underway and will be added soon!

At the conclusion of the summit you’re invited to participate in a National Strategy call to discuss what is next and needed for the anti-fracking movement to be successful. Please participate and share what you’re working on with others.

Please register and invite your colleagues at https://lu.ma/2022-network-summit

Sincerely, Ryan Clover, Halt the Harm Network

Northwestern West Virginia is of primary interest for natural gas development

ATTN: Wade Stansberry, Environmental Resources Specialist, Office of Oil and Gas, WV. Department of Environmental Protection, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston WV

Re: Permit Number: 061-01914, Well Number: Dolls Run 1H, County: Monongalia, Operator: Northeast Natural Energy

For many years, two separate households of friends who live in Cassville have told me how the noise coming from the Boggess and Lemley fracking well pads made it impossible for them to get a good night’s sleep or to function fully. I have often heard the noise from the Boggess well pad while walking along Sugar Grove Road, several miles away.

So it was with alarm that I saw the permit application for a fracking pad that will be 1.4 miles from our home, situated on a ridge top where the sound will travel directly down Dents Run, along Mel Brand Road and Gallus Road, where we live. We work from home so will be subject to the noise 24/7.

A study done by the WVU School of Public Health (May 28, 2013) for the WVDEP, as requested by the WV State Code: Chapter 22-6A-12(e) regarding the impacts of noise, light, dust and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) generated by the drilling of horizontal wells inconclusively said: Due to the transient nature and/or frequency of sound, the agency recognizes that noises may be perceived as a nuisance, even though measurements indicate no harm.

The noise tests were done between July and October, 2012, when leaves on the trees will dampen noise. Clearly the noise will be worse during the six months when leaves are not on the trees. The acoustics of our valley are such that we could hear our neighbor, whose house was about 200 yards away, when she was talking on her front porch.

An official chart may say that noise levels are within safe decibel levels, but our perception of it could be quite different, depending on many factors. How will this be addressed?

Given how many people live in the Cassville, Sugar Grove and New Hill area, a lot of people will have their health, sleep and ability to function adversely impacted by the constant noise. New Hill has a high density of housing. What noise abatement procedures will be put in place? I saw no mention of this in the permit application.

Further, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) and other toxic hydrocarbons, such as formaldehyde, released from oil and gas operations and equipment can lead to health impacts ranging from irritation of eyes, nose, mouth and throat to aggravated asthma and other respiratory conditions, blood disorders, harm to developing fetuses, immune system-related diseases, and cancer (e.g., leukemia, non-Hodgkins lymphoma and Ewing Sarcoma).

A study commissioned by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection found that, at many sites, a 625-feet distance from oil and gas activity—above the distances set by many states—still resulted in benzene concentrations above levels the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers “the minimum risk level for no health effects.” At least one of the BTEX compounds was found at all of the seven drilling sites examined. from: West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, “Air, Noise, and Light Monitoring Results For Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Drilling Operations (ETD‐10 Project),” Charleston, WV.

Today, October 5, a community meeting in Canonsburg, PA is scheduled to update residents on PA Health & Environment Studies and to discuss health impacts of shale gas development. Residents are concerned that fracking may be to blame for the spike in rare childhood cancers and other health impacts in Southwestern Pennsylvania. According to the maps provided in the NNE permit application, we will be down wind of the well pad. While we are just beyond the one-mile radius, how can we know that a strong wind won’t carry VOCs over our house?

More importantly, it should be obvious that a warming climate is a threat to everyone on earth. How much money must we spend on the enormous damage done by hurricanes and wildfires, which have all gotten bigger and more frequent as a result of putting more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Natural gas may be cleaner to burn than coal but extracting it is much dirtier. Investment in clean energy is the only viable way forward.

In 2012-14, we got a front row seat to a strip mine directly across our fence line and were subjected to blasting, dust and back-up beeping noise. I documented at least 139 times that our house was shaken by blasts from the Bucy 1, 2 and 3 strip mines. Bucy 3 Mine, in front of our house, is still sitting there, abandoned. Why do we have to keep fighting theses battles? Why do so many people have to pay the price so that a handful of people can make money?

Why does this new well pad have to be placed on a ridge top where it will have maximum impact in all directions? I request that this permit be denied, based on how many people will be negatively impacted by the noise and pollution. I would also request written notice of the permit decision.

Sincerely, Betsy Lawson, Monongalia County, WV

#######+++++++#######+++++++#######

See Also: A Guide to Every Permitted Natural Gas Well in West Virginia by Al Shaw (ProPublica) and Kate Mishkin (Charleston Gazette-Mail), March 6, 2019

Natural gas is primarily methane, i.e. CH4

From the Republican & Herald, Pottsville, PA, October 18, 2022

Schuylkill County, Penna — Cleaner air, progress against dangerous climate-warming and well-maintained highways all are in the public interest, which means that there is no guarantee that any of them will materialize in Pennsylvania — where polarization and parochial politics are more important.

The state government faces a December 16 federal deadline to adopt regulations controlling emissions from gas wells. Although the rules apply primarily to a class of smog-forming gases known as volatile organic compounds, the regulation also would result in reducing emissions of methane — one of the most potent gases responsible for trapping heat in the atmosphere.

Methane is what drilling companies sell as natural gas. Any captured methane would be sold, generating revenue for the companies.

Gas escapes from two types of wells in Pennsylvania — “conventional” vertical wells characteristic of the state’s older drilling industry, and new “unconventional” deep, horizontally drilled wells that mark drilling across the Marcellus Shale fields.

Regulations to better reduce those emissions are required by federal law. Likewise, the federal sanction for not doing so is mandatory rather than discretionary. If the state misses the deadline, the federal government will withhold from Pennsylvania about $450 million in highway funds for this fiscal year. If the delay carries into the next fiscal year, that year’s federal highway funding will be at risk.

This should be an easy one, but this is Pennsylvania. The Department of Environmental Protection broke the regulation into two parts — one covering conventional wells and the other applying to modern wells — after majority Republicans on a House environmental committee objected to the combined rule.

In June, the Environmental Quality Board approved the rule applying to modern wells. And Wednesday, by a 15-3 vote, it approved the regulation for unconventional wells.

But two of the “no” votes came from chairmen of House and Senate committees. They don’t have the power to void the regulation, but they can order a six-month review. That would cause the state to miss the December 16 deadline, putting $450 million in highway funds at risk.

Operators of older wells don’t want to assume the cost of long-overdue environmental regulations. But that narrow interest should not exceed that of Pennsylvanians in healthy air and roads. The obstructionists should get out of the way.

Flares involve incomplete combustion of VOCs & pollution

Plastic Pollution Crisis from “beyondplastic.org”

Article by Randi Pokladnik, Ph.D. (Environmental Scientist), 10/12/22

As consumers become increasingly aware of the health risks and environmental issues associated with a world drowning in plastics, the petrochemical industry is advocating another false solution to address the plastic crisis facing the planet: advanced recycling or chemical recycling.

Chemical recycling uses incineration processes including pyrolysis, gasification, and solvolysis to break down plastic waste. The industry claims this will make plastic production “circular” by using plastic to make more plastic and keeping hard-to-recycle plastic waste out of landfills. A 2019 study by the U.S. Department of Energy estimated the US discarded 44 million metric tons of plastic, and 86 percent of this plastic ended up in landfills.

The PR departments of the plastics industry and the American Chemical Council are working overtime to convince politicians and citizens that chemical recycling is the answer to the enormous problem of plastic wastes. However, like carbon capture and “blue hydrogen”, this process is just another way to greenwash an industry that is responsible for 400 million tons of plastic waste each year. From cradle to grave, the entire process of plastic production has a significant carbon footprint. Even the United Nations has declared plastic wastes as a serious threat to humanity and the planet.

By using the term “recycling” the industry is misleading consumers and decision-makers. Recycling means ‘”to return a material to a previous stage of a cyclic process.” If the waste plastic material was indeed turned back into a similar plastic, it would provide a benefit to the environment by reducing the need for fossil-fuel-based feedstock to create virgin plastic. But this is not the case with chemical recycling where the majority of plastic wastes are being converted and used as a fuel source.

The technology of chemical recycling can be grouped into two main categories: heat-based and solvent- based. There are two primary methods that use heat and pressure to break down the long chain plastic polymers: pyrolysis and gasification. Both apply high temperatures to the waste plastic in a low oxygen setting or an oxygen-depleted reactor. Solvent-based depolymerization is a bit more complicated as it relies on heat as well but also includes various steps and solvents to break bonds, to strip out impurities, or to retain in-tact polymers.

A study released in September 2022, shows that reuse and mechanical recycling of plastic packaging are both better choices when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. “Emissions from mechanical recycling are lower than those from chemical recycling by a factor of 9.” The study also points out that reducing the amounts of unnecessary packaging will also help move the world towards a zero-emission economy.

Other factors to consider, aside from the fact that the majority of facilities are not truly recycling any plastic, are the large quantities of hazardous waste generated, the amounts of toxic air pollutants released, and the fact that facilities are “disproportionately located in communities of low income or people of color, or both.”

Agilyx, located in Tigard, Oregon is one of the few commercial-scale facilities in operation. It uses pyrolysis to turn polystyrene into the monomer styrene, which is used to make more polystyrene. Much of the styrene however is used as a fuel source. The plant released 500,000 pounds of hazardous waste in 2019. Styrene is made from benzene, a known carcinogen. PureCycle located in Ohio is also a large-scale hazardous waste producer with more than 2200 pounds of hazardous waste generated per month.

Chemical recycling requires a considerable amount of energy and obtains this by burning fossil fuels, thus adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. “In 2019 alone, the global production and incineration of plastic accounted for more than 850 million metric tons of greenhouse gases released to the atmosphere, approximately equal to the emissions from 189 five-hundred megawatt coal power plants.”

Additionally, when plastic is burned, the carbon portion of the polymer is combusted but other toxic additives used in plastic production remain in the residue. If the plastic is used for fuels or chemical feedstocks, the non-combustible materials will remain intact. These toxins can be carcinogenic or endocrine disruptors and include: dioxins, furans, heavy metals, flame retardants, PAHs, VOCs, phthalates, bisphenol A, chlorine and fluorine. The “EPA provides little information about emissions and relies heavily on self-reporting by the industry.”

The American Chemistry Council has promoted chemical recycling and is “actively trying to influence state and local governments and decision-makers to approve new plastic expansion projects, remove regulatory obstacles, and award public monies or tax breaks to pass some of the needed investment on to taxpayers.” The ACC and other trade associations support bills which would allocate money (HR 5115) for recycling infrastructure including chemical recycling as well as funding dollars for research (HR 7728) on the technology.

A 2020 Greenpeace report “Deception by the Numbers” looked at financial investments for 51 chemical recycling projects. They found since 2017, $506 million had been awarded via public funds such as bonds, loans, grants, tax credits and other incentives. Of that $506 million, “89 percent was spent on waste-to-fuel/plastic-to-fuel.” Taxpayers are not paying for plastic recycling but rather paying for fuels for the petrochemical industry.

One of the major sticking points when it comes to regulations is the classification of chemical recycling. It is being defined as a manufacturing process rather than a waste incineration process. This means facilities are subject to less stringent air and water quality requirements. Currently, there are twenty signed state laws, including HB 166 in Ohio and SB 4084 in West Virginia, that redefine waste to exclude “advanced/chemical recycling”. One of the few states to kill an industry-backed bill was Rhode Island. A June 27, 2022 issue of “Plastic News” reported that two senior Democrats had “significant questions about the bill.” Environmental groups in the state argued that the state should focus on reducing single use plastics. The Conservation Law Foundation said “there was no evidence to support the claim that new plastics were being made, and instead materials were being burned creating climate-changing gases and air pollution.”

A final concern with these dangerous facilities is where they are located. In most cases, poor communities of color seem to be the sites for the majority of waste to energy plants. You will not see a chemical recycling facility in a rich suburb. Many lawmakers admit this is clearly a case of environmental injustice. They are writing and passing laws hoping to address the disproportionate amounts of hazardous facilities, like chemical recycling, located in poor communities, near schools, close to water sources, and adjacent to parks and public lands. (Rhode Island HB 5923).

SOBE Thermal Energy Systems is proposing a “recycling facility for tires and plastics” in Youngstown, Ohio. Basically, they will be using gasification to create a fuel that will be burned to create steam to heat some downtown buildings.

When the CEO of SOBE, Dave Ferro, was questioned about this facility his reply was, “his plant would be as clean or cleaner than natural gas.” Any peer reviewed analysis of the incineration of plastics/tires will point out the toxic air pollutants created in the process (dioxin and furans) as well as all the plastic additives that will not be fully destroyed. This facility will subject the community to a constant stream of toxins in their air, land and water. I urge anyone who thinks this is a good idea to do the research, read the scientific studies. Do not buy into industry claims that this is recycling. It is simply a dirty waste-to-energy project.

Fracking operations which take many acres are increasing in numbers

>>> From an Article by Reid Frazier, StateImpact Pennsylvania, October 1, 2022

The University of Pittsburgh and the Penna. Department of Health are no longer participating in a public forum next week to discuss a series of state-funded studies about fracking and public health. The forum will still take place on Wednesday, October 5th in Canonsburg.

The Center for Coalfield Justice, one of the environmental groups involved in the forum, said in a statement this week that Pitt and the department of health had pulled out of the public event. Both the university and the department of health were slated to take part in the event, “to explain the study process to the public and take questions from community members,” according to the center.

In a statement, Maureen Lichtveld, Dean of the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health and Professor of Environmental and Occupational Health, said that the studies are still “ongoing” and that “no data are available to share publicly.” Licthveld said the school was “willing to answer questions from the community as the studies progress. When we are prepared to release the results of these studies, we will do so publicly in a timely manner.”

Pitt has set up a web site with more information on the studies’ methodologies.

Barry Ciccocioppo, a spokesperson for the department of health, said the agency pulled out of the event only after Pitt did. “(A)fter Pitt withdrew its participation in the meeting it became clear that the department would be unable to provide anything more than background information and an overview of what led to contracting for these two studies,” Ciccocioppo said, in an email. “We will be providing that information to the organizers before the meeting.”

Ciccocioppo said the department will try to answer questions and solicit feedback through an online questionnaire it has set up. This survey will be open for two weeks after the Oct. 5 meeting.

“Parents deserve to hear from these institutions,” said Heaven Sensky, organizing director at the Center for Coalfield Justice, in a written statement. “Participating in this public forum was the bare minimum these agencies and research institutions could do to provide information to grieving parents and concerned community members. But now, they won’t even do that.”

Sensky and three other community members have resigned from the studies’ external advisory board, over what they say are Pitt’s and the agency’s “resistance to accountability and transparency to community members.”

“It is reasonable for community residents and pediatricians like me to be concerned that fracking may be to blame for the spike in rare childhood cancers and other health impacts in Southwestern Pennsylvania,” said Ned Ketyer, one of the former advisory board members, and president of Physicians for Social Responsibility Pennsylvania. “Community members are demanding answers. Unfortunately, the decision by the PA DOH and University of Pittsburgh to withdraw their commitment and not attend the public meeting on October 5 effectively silences those important voices and keeps the community in the dark.”

The forum will include perspectives from the former external review board members. The studies in question are examining the relationship between fracking and diseases like cancer, asthma, and poor birth outcomes. The state funded the studies after pressure from families of patients of a rare cancer in Washington County.

Dozens of children and young adults have been diagnosed with Ewing sarcoma and other forms of cancer in a four-county area outside Pittsburgh, where energy companies have drilled more than 4,000 wells since 2008, according to state records. The cases were first reported by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Several of the cases included teenagers who died of Ewing sarcoma, who had all attended one school, Canon-McMillan High School in North Strabane Township, Washington County.

Ewing sarcoma has no known environmental cause. But the families nevertheless suspect that drilling and hydraulic fracturing, the method that energy companies use to extract natural gas from shale rock, played a role. A state study found there was no cancer cluster in Washington County, but that study did not include several newer cases of Ewing sarcoma.

In August, researchers at Yale School of Public Health found children living close to fracking sites in Pennsylvania have a higher risk for a common form of childhood cancer.

The health department says on its website that oil and gas “infrastructure may present potential exposure hazards to residents living nearby as well as to oil and gas workers.” The studies are expected to be completed by the end of the year, according to the Department of Health.

#######+++++++#######+++++++########

October 5 Community Meeting Scheduled to Update Residents on PA Health & Environment Studies and to Discuss Health Impacts of Shale Gas Development

September 29, 2022 — On October 5, a public meeting in Canonsburg, PA, will offer residents an opportunity to learn more about a pair of studies being conducted by the University of Pittsburgh titled the “PA Health and Environment Studies.” The studies are exploring potential health impacts of the shale gas industry on residents of Southwestern Pennsylvania, including potential connections between this heavy industry and a spike in childhood cancers in the region.

Members of the media are invited to attend. There will also be a virtual option.

Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2022 Time: 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.
Place: Town Park (Yoney Pavilion), VFW 191 Drive Canonsburg, PA 15317

Attendees will hear from persons who formerly participated as members of the studies’ External Advisory Board and who will discuss the studies and help to prepare the community to understand the scope and limitations of the results. Additionally, the Environmental Health Project will present information families can use to identify impacts and protect their health. The PA Health and Environment studies are ongoing, and results will not be shared at this meeting.

Representatives of the Pennsylvania Department of Health and the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health had originally committed to being on hand to explain the study process and to take questions from community members. However, the agency and the school have now decided to pull out of the meeting. Meeting organizers released a separate statement on this development, which can be viewed here.

In 2019, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s administration allocated $3 million to the studies, taking action after months of impassioned pleas by the families of childhood cancer patients who live in the most heavily drilled region of the state. The studies have been underway for two years.

The studies cover the entirety of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Region, including Allegheny County, Armstrong County, Beaver County, Butler County, Fayette County, Greene County, Washington County, and Westmoreland County.

To register for either the in-person or virtual option, please follow this link:

https://secure.everyaction.com/qLXO2p_7C0uyKwJJ_e3Iag2?ms=coalition