Plastic pollution of micron size has spread throughout our lives

From a Video Presentation by Dr. Sherri Mason, Penn State — Erie Campus, March 1, 2021

Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans has been publicized widely; we’ve heard about the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch.” Lesser known is the prevalence of microplastics in freshwater systems, which are conduits from land to the sea.

Dr. Sherri Mason, cutting-edge plastic pollution researcher and Sustainability Coordinator at Penn State Erie, will present an overview of what plastic is, its proliferation in our society, and its emergence as one of the most prominent environmental pollutants.

Dr. Sherri A. Mason completed her doctorate in Chemistry at the University of Montana as a NASA Earth System Science scholar. Her research group is among the first to study the prevalence and impact of plastic pollution within freshwater ecosystems. Among her many accolades Dr. Mason earned the Heinz Award in Public Policy in 2018.

>>>>>>>>………………>>>>>>………………>>>>>>>>

See also: Microplastics: An emerging threat to the Chesapeake Bay, David Alan, VRBO News Now, April 8, 2021

“You can see everything from water bottles to plastic bags,” said Chris Moore with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. We found a sneaker, dozens of construction hard hats, even a traffic drum. Every bit of trash we saw as we walked the shoreline was the ugly side of our reliance on plastics. The bigger problem is some of these larger plastic objects will break down here in the hot sun. Some of the trash will end up back in the bay to be torn apart by tides, forming microplastics.

The tiny specks of plastic — some invisible to the naked eye — pose a significant risk to a host of juvenile finfish found in the Chesapeake Bay. There are concerns that oysters and clams may be trying to filter microplastics and cannot. Microplastic contamination is not just a concern for the environment. A 2016 study showed the commercial seafood industry in Virginia and Maryland contributed $1.4 billion in sales and 30,000 jobs to the local economy.

www.appalmad.org

New Appeal to Defend Ban on Fracking Waste in Fayette County, WV

From an Article by the Appalachian Mountain Advocates, August 17, 2016

Yesterday we filed an appeal to help defend Fayette County’s ban on underground injections of fracking wastes. The County passed the ban on the disposal, storage or use of oil and gas waste within its borders earlier this year. The ban would prevent injection of fracking wastes county-wide, keeping the waste from leaching into the County’s water. Despite the ban’s overwhelming public support, it has been challenged by two companies that own disposal wells.

We are representing the Fayette County Commission in appealing a June federal court ruling deeming the county’s fracking waste disposal ban invalid.

Read the Register-Herald’s full story below (here).

>  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

 Fayette appeals federal decision on fracking waste ban

From an Article by Sarah Plummer, Beckley Register-Herald, August 17, 2016

The Fayette County Commission will appeal a June federal court ruling deeming the county’s fracking waste disposal ban invalid because such regulations are pre-empted by state and federal law.

Appalachian Mountain Advocates Senior Attorney Derek Teaney filed the notice of appeal Aug. 15.

In June, Judge John T. Copenhaver granted Pennsylvania-based petroleum company EQT Production Company’s motion for summary judgment, and the ruling was issued just hours before the hearing was scheduled.

Copenhaver ruled provisions in the ordinance that supersede state or federal permits, like those issued by the Department of Environmental Protection, and allow residents to sue violators in circuit court, are not enforceable.

Fayette County’s ordinance is rooted in state code that allows commissions to develop regulations to eliminate hazards to public health and to abate nuisances.

During past interviews with The Register-Herald, Commission President Matt Wender said the commission has increasing concerns over the health and safety of underground waste injection wells as studies conducted near one of the county’s wells operated by Danny Webb Construction shows fracking waste fluids have migrated into a nearby creek, which feeds into the New River.

In April 2016, two studies led by the U.S. Geological Survey confirmed waste from oil and gas disposal was found in surface waters and sediments near a controversial underground injection control well in Lochgelly operated by Danny Webb Construction.

One of those studies is on endocrine-disruption, which can cause adverse health effects in aquatic organisms.

These 2016 studies confirm a 2014 Duke University study near the same well which found injectate in Wolf Creek, signaling a well as a leak or breach.

EQT and Danny Webb Construction operate the only underground control injection wells in the county. Webb has also filed a suit challenging the ordinance. EQT operates 200 oil and natural gas producing wells in Fayette and one waste disposal site.

The commission is being represented pro bono by Charleston firm Appalachian Mountain Advocates and Rist Law Offices, Fayetteville.

Prof. Susan C. Nagel

Fracking Chemicals Can Cause Endocrine Disruption and Illness, Says Study

From an Article by Jan Lee, Triple Pundit, September 21st, 2015

There is mounting data to suggest that hydraulic fracturing (fracking) can have adverse affects on the environment. A new study, however, suggests that populations living close to fracking sites also have a higher incidence of health complications.

Researchers at the University of Missouri studied data to determine whether residential populations living near what they called “unconventional oil and gas operations,” or UOGs, were at a higher risk for endocrine-disruption from exposure to fracking chemicals. The scientists examined case studies and peer-reviewed publications and concluded that each of the chemicals needed a more intensive case-by-case study when used near human populations.

“We recommend a process to examine the total endocrine disrupting activity from exposure to the mixtures of chemicals used in and resulting from these operations in addition to examining the effects of each chemical on its own,” said Susan C. Nagel and Christopher D. Kassotis. Nagel, a professor in obstetrics, gynecology and women’s health, and Kassotis, a doctoral student in the division of biological sciences, worked with colleagues from across the country to determine the impact of the chemicals — which have largely not been studied for their impact on the human endocrine system.

“More than 700 chemicals are used in the fracking process, and many of them disturb hormone function,” Nagel said. Their studies were directed at understanding the human impact of endocrine disrupting chemicals, or EDCs, that were released as a result of chemical spills.

This isn’t the first study in which Nagel and Kassotis have collaborated with other researchers and found fracking chemicals interfered with metabolic processes.

In 2013, the researchers studied 12 substances suspected of being endocrine disruptors, and tracked their ability to block or mimic female or male hormone activity. They used surface and ground water from well sites in heavily-impacted areas in Garfield County, Colorado, and compared them with the results from water in areas in Colorado and Wyoming that did not have a high density of drilling sites. By doing so, they were able to determine that the water samples at drilling sites had a higher level of endocrine-disrupting chemical activity that would not normally be found in the water table and ground water.

What is more, the Colorado River, the adjacent drainage basin for the Garfield County drill sites in western Colorado, showed evidence of EDCs as well, which means that populations that rely on its water source as far away as California (a main recipient of the Colorado River’s water source) could potentially be exposed to the chemicals. Drainage basins near areas that didn’t have wells did not show levels of these chemicals.

The team determined that areas which had experienced spills were at a higher risk for contaminating water sources and exposing populations to endocrine-disrupting chemicals than those areas that did not have wells or employ these chemicals.

“Fracking is exempt from federal regulations to protect water quality, but spills associated with natural gas drilling can contaminate surface, ground and drinking water,” said Nagel. “This could raise the risk of reproductive, metabolic, neurological and other diseases, especially in children who are exposed to EDC. The US EPA been exploring a number of steps to improve protections against health and environmental impacts of fracking. To date, there are no established federal regulations addressing the potential exposure and health impacts of EDCs through fracking, and fracking spills.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net