Some 5,000-plus diesel truck trips for each horizontal well

From an Article by Kristina Marusic, Environmental Health News, June 5, 2020

Scientists say spikes in particulate matter pollution near wells are cutting lives short. Particulate matter pollution emitted by Pennsylvania’s fracking wells killed about 20 people between 2010 and 2017, according to a soon-to-be-published study.

Pennsylvania is the second-largest producer of natural gas in the U.S. after Texas. Between 2010 and 2017, there were 20,677 permitted fracking wells in the state, about half of which had been drilled. Fracking, another name for hydraulic fracturing, is a process of extracting oil and gas from the Earth by drilling deep wells and injecting liquid at high pressure.

One of fracking’s byproducts is particulate matter pollution, also referred to as PM 2.5, which consists of tiny, airborne particles of chemicals that, when inhaled, make their way into the lungs and bloodstream, increasing cancer risk and causing heart and respiratory problems. Exposure to PM 2.5 kills an estimated 20,000 Americans each year.

Previous studies have found that heavily-fracked communities face higher rates of numerous health effects including preterm births, high-risk pregnancies, asthma, and cardiovascular disease—but this is the first to investigate the direct relationship between the local increase in PM 2.5 caused by fracking and deaths from respiratory and heart issues that can be attributed to that increase.

“Our study is not only looking at negative health outcomes, but investigating how fracking actually caused these deaths through increased air pollution,” Ruohao Zhang, a researcher at Binghamton University who specializes in environmental economics and the study’s lead author, told EHN.

Zhang and a team of four other researchers used satellite data from NASA to calculate daily PM 2.5 emissions from all fracking wells in the state over the seven-year period between 2010 and 2017. To determine how many people died as a result of exposure to those emissions, they used county-level mortality data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention paired with established methods for calculating how many of the deaths seen in Pennsylvania during that time period were caused by increases in PM 2.5 exposure.

“The levels of increased PM 2.5 concentrations that came from fracking wells in the state are associated with about 20 additional deaths during that time period,” Zhang said. These are deaths that presumably would not have occurred in the absence of air pollution from fracking. The estimated economic loss caused by these additional deaths is around $148 million, according to the study.

Washington County was the most heavily affected county in the state, with an additional 4.26 deaths caused by PM 2.5 emissions caused by fracking between 2010 and 2017.

“When we accounted for airborne spillover of pollution from multiple wells in the same area we found that, overall, fracking made the particulate matter pollution of a three-kilometer area around each well [roughly 1.8 miles] higher by between 1.27 percent and 5.67 percent,” Zhang said, explaining that the high end of that spectrum usually reflected a higher density of wells in the area.

While the increase in PM 2.5 was highest closest to the fracking wells, Zhang noted that increased levels of the pollutant were also detectable at least as far as 10 kilometers (about 6 miles) downwind of emission sources.

The study also found that without accounting for “spillover,” each individual well caused an increase in PM 2.5 in the surrounding three-kilometer area of between 1.35 percent and 2.19 percent. The higher end of that spectrum generally represents wells in the active drilling phase, while the lower end generally reflects the pollution caused by wells that are already up and running, or in the “production” phase.

The NASA satellite data the researchers used became available about two years ago. Without it, Zhang said, it would have been impossible to calculate the specific air pollution increase caused by fracking in the state due to a lack of continuous, on-the-ground air monitoring systems.

“In the U.S., air quality regulations are highly dependent on ground-based monitors, which only cover a small portion of the whole country,” Zhang said, noting that this is especially true in rural areas that tend to be home to lots of fracking. Even in places that are covered by ground monitors, he added, monitoring is rarely continuous—they often only take samples every six, eight, or 16 days.

“There are huge monitoring and data gaps there, allowing for what’s referred to as ‘unwatched pollution,’” Zhang said. “But this satellite data allows us to continuously monitor air quality everywhere.”

The NASA satellite data itself doesn’t directly relay air pollution data. Researchers like Zhang look at the degree to which aerosols in the air prevent the transmission of light to determine concentrations of PM 2.5. While this method has previously been used to estimate PM 2.5 levels across the globe or over specific countries or continents, Zhang said, it’s most accurate when used to calculate air pollution in a smaller area, such as a single state.

Based on their findings, Zhang said he would encourage local and state elected officials to regulate the shale gas industry to reduce PM 2.5 emissions and protect the health of residents. In the meantime, he said, people living near fracking wells who are concerned for their health can minimize the impacts of PM 2.5 exposure by keeping their windows closed and not exercising outdoors in close proximity to operational wells.

“I would also tell residents in Pennsylvania that if they learn they have shale gas under their property, they should be aware that their decision about whether or not to lease their land for drilling may impact not only their own health, but the health of their neighbors as well,” he added.

Zhang also pointed out that while their study focused on deaths caused by PM 2.5 pollution from fracking, the extraction also generates many other kinds of pollution—such as volatile organic compounds and radioactive waste—that can endanger the health of residents and should be accounted for.

“We think it’s important to know how every kind of pollutant caused by fracking impacts human health,” he said. “We hope that future studies will help us more fully understand the impacts of fracking on local communities.”

#########################

See also: Fracking Fumes: Air Pollution from Hydraulic Fracturing Threatens Public Health & Communities, NRDC Issue Brief IP-14-10A, Dec. 2014

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also: On Health Effects, Blame the Trucks, Not the Fracking? – The Allegheny Front, Reid Frazier, June 16, 2017

############################

See also: CMU Study Shows Natural Gas In The Region Has Brought Economic Benefits, But Also Premature Deaths, Julie Grant, Allegheny Front (90.5 WESA), Dec. 12, 2019

Deep drilling and horizontal drilling & hydrofracking have many i$$ue$

From an Article by Renee Cho, Earth Institute, Columbia University, January 28, 2020

Over the last 10 years, the U.S. has become the largest oil and gas producer in the world, largely due to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. From 2005 to 2018, U.S. natural gas production rose by 70 percent, and greenhouse gas emissions rose accordingly; between 2016 and 2018 alone, greenhouse gas emissions from US petroleum and natural gas production increased 13 percent.

But this increase in greenhouse gas emissions is headed in the wrong direction, since this year countries around the world will revisit the Paris Climate Accord to ramp up their pledges to reduce carbon emissions. This year 2020 might also install a new President in the White House — perhaps one who seeks to limit or ban fracking. Could this year determine fracking’s fate?

Fracking has always been controversial. Those supporting it cite the benefits of lower energy prices, job creation and energy security; those against it raise issues about negative environmental and health effects, and methane leaks, which contribute to global warming. An online poll found 48 percent of Americans in favor of fracking and 52 percent against.

The “benefits” of fracking: oil, natural gas & NGL

The “fracking revolution” has enabled the US to become the world’s supplier of most of the new oil produced since 2008 and end OPEC’s control over oil prices. As a result, fracking has increased energy security and lowered energy prices in the US. The fracking boom also strengthened the economy. A 2015 study found that a fracking-driven expansion in US oil and gas production added 725,000 jobs between 2005 and 2012; it also spurred manufacturing of equipment and demand for raw materials such as steel.

Some contend that natural gas is key to fighting climate change because it produces about half the greenhouse gas emissions that coal does per unit of energy. Natural gas has now replaced coal as the main source for generating electricity. The International Energy Agency estimated that since 2010, the substitution of gas for coal has saved 550 million tons of CO2 emissions globally. This switch has also resulted in less air pollution.

Natural gas has helped renewable energy use double since 2008. Romany Webb, who studies climate and energy at the Earth Institute’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, said, “The key benefit of the surge in natural gas-fired generation is it is a lot more flexible, so it’s a lot easier to use with intermittent renewables that come in and out—it’s a backup resource to ramp up and down to meet demand when the wind’s not blowing or the sun’s not shining.”

Under the Trump administration, permits to drill on public land have increased 300 percent. In 2019, Department of Interior revenues from leasing public lands to oil and gas companies and collecting royalties reached $12 billion, double the amount in 2016. These revenues get disbursed back to the federal treasury, the states and American Indian tribes and mineral owners to fund schools, public services and other projects.

The many downsides of fracking

1. Public Health & Occupational Health Issues

There is increasing evidence that fracking can potentially harm health. A 2019 report by the Concerned Health Professionals of New York and Physicians for Social Responsibility reviewed numerous studies on fracking’s impacts: 69 percent of water quality studies found the potential for water contamination, 87 percent of air quality studies found significant air pollution, and 84 percent of studies on human health risks found signs of harm or potential harm.

The water used for fracking is mixed with a variety of chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic or toxic; companies usually refuse to identify the chemicals, claiming they are trade secrets. If well casings crack, these chemicals can seep out and potentially contaminate aquifers and drinking water supplies, exposing local residents to toxins.

A 2016 study by Beizhan Yan and Steven Chillrud, geochemists from Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University’s Earth Institute, found chemical changes in drinking water near fracking sites. The substances they detected were not at hazardous levels, but the discovery suggested that fracking could potentially cause groundwater contamination.

Once natural gas flows to the surface, the water that was used to frack—containing chemicals, salt and radioactive materials that occur naturally in shale—returns to the surface too. This wastewater, also called brine, often contains high levels of radium, which is exposing oil and gas workers and truck drivers who handle the brine and waste materials, and potentially the public, to carcinogens.

An investigation (soon to be published as a book) by science journalist Justin Nobel into oil and gas radioactivity found numerous cases of cancer linked to radioactivity in Louisiana’s conventional oil and gas industry.

A 2017 University of Chicago study determined that babies born within a half-mile of fracking sites were 25 percent more likely to be born at a low birth weight, making them more vulnerable to infant mortality, ADHD, asthma and learning problems. Researchers do not know if the cause is air or water pollution, chemical exposure or pollution from increased traffic.

A 2019 study of the effects of the shale gas boom in the Appalachians in the early 2000s found that air pollution resulted in 1,200 to 4,600 premature deaths. And in December 2019, a spike of rare Ewing sarcoma cases in teens and young adults in two heavily fracked counties in southwest Pennsylvania has prompted an investigation by the CDC and the state of Pennsylvania.

Colorado has extensive well pads tightly spaced

See Part 2, scheduled for tomorrow, for a continuation of this Article.

Should WV-DEP provide safety guidelines?

Industrial site explosion kills McDonald fire chief

From an Article by Andrew Goldstein, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, June 20, 2017

The chief of the McDonald Volunteer Fire Department died Tuesday in an explosion at an industrial site in West Virginia while working a contracting job.

Scott Albertini, 53, had been a member of the fire department for about 35 years.

“Very sad day for us here,” said borough Councilwoman Marilou Ritchie, who added that Chief Albertini had grown up in the community.

Chief Albertini, a contractor for Specialized Professional Services, was working to depressurize a tank at the Midland Resources Recovery industrial site in Arden, W.Va., when the tank exploded, killing him and injuring another worker, according to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. Arden is in Barbour County, about 130 miles south of Pittsburgh.

Ms. Ritchie and fire department president Joe Rehak confirmed Chief Albertini had died in the explosion. “He’s been a member since he was 18 years old,” Mr. Rehak said. “We’re devastated, everybody is. He was very well-liked.”

Chief Albertini was working to disassemble the empty, 30-gallon tank when it exploded shortly after 10 a.m., according to the DEP. Officials late Tuesday had not said what the tank had contained or why it exploded.

The West Virginia DEP, the state fire marshal and the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration were investigating. The Barbour County sheriff’s office and West Virginia State Police were among the agencies that responded to the scene.

Chief Albertini was part of a crew from Specialized Professional Services that was attempting to make safe tanks at the site after an explosion there killed two workers in May, according to the DEP.

MetroNews of West Virginia reported that an explosion at the site May 24 killed Midland Resources Recovery president Jan Strmen, 72, of Canada, and Justin Marsh, 19, of Philippi, W.Va.

Mr. Rehak said Chief Albertini rose through the ranks of the department before being named chief several years ago. Mr. Rehak said the department has 128 members, but only about 35 who actively fight fires. Members of the department and community were shocked when they heard the news of the chief’s death, Mr. Rehak said.

“We just sat there, numb,” Ms. Ritchie said. Ms. Ritchie said Chief Albertini also served the community as a paramedic. “He was our fire chief, and very well liked — a good kid,” Ms. Ritchie said.

He is survived by a wife and two daughters. Arrangements for his funeral and a possible memorial service were incomplete Tuesday night.

See also:  Hazardous Chemical Safe Storage Compliance

Bird's Eye View: Frac Sand Mine in Wisconsin

COURAGEOUS CITIZENS RAISE ISSUES AND QUESTIONS

EXPANDED FRAC SAND MINING IN THE TOWN OF BRIDGE CREEK IN EAU CLAIRE COUNTY IN WISCONSIN

READ THEIR COMMENTARIES!

KUDOS TO THESE PEOPLE FOR ALLOWING THEIR MESSAGES TO BE PRINTED IN THE FRAC SAND SENTINEL, ISSUE 132, APRIL 5, 2017.

>>> On April 6, 2017, Frac Sand Sentinel wrote:

Address to Hi-Crush at Bridge Creek Town Public Hearing, March 18, 2017

EVERY LIVING THING IS DEPENDENT UPON FRESH AIR, CLEAN WATER AND FOOD SOURCE.  THE SAND MINING PROCESS IMPERILS ALL THREE.  For the past  five years every living thing in Bridge Creek has been affected by the mining process and now Hi-Crush is asking our local government to expand and to continue consuming the basic necessities of life.   I SAY NO.

I say no because Hi-Crush Mine:

>> depletes our ground water faster than nature can replenish it;

>> cannot and does not control nor ensure the air quality around the mine;

>> sand particulates are not captured and over time impact health;

>> blasting the hill sides impacts the stability of homes, wells and peace of mind;

>> destroys the ecosystem;

>> reclamation of the land to return to productive crop land has not been demonstrated;

Hi-Crush has not been forth coming to local government regarding its business plan for expansion on contiguous land; I SAY NO TO EXPANSION BECAUSE:

I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS SAND MINING:

>> will  drive people and other living things away from the land due to its nuisances;

>> perils of blasting, trains night and day, loud conveyors, fugitive sand particulates;

>> that private wells will collapse and property values will continue to devalue as the mine expands due to blasting, noise and transport methods;

>> that the history of Hi-Crush’s disregard for following the rules will continue with no regard to the impact on every living thing (ie: hi-capacity well violation, fugitive sand for one year when not in operation, etc).

>> that nothing will grow of any value on this land for decades.

I SAY NO TO EXPANSION BECAUSE: EVERY LIVING THING IS IN RELATIONSHIP TO EACH OTHER AND THE EARTH.  IF BASIC NEEDS FOR LIFE ARE CONTINUOUSLY IMPERILED FROM OVER USE, OUR LIVES, THAT OF OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN ARE IMPERILED TOO.  CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE.  THEY HAVE NO VALUES NOR ETHICS AND CONTINUE TO SEEK OUR RIGHTS AS CITIZENS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.  LOGIC DOES NOT ALLOW CITIZENS TO TRUST THE JUDGEMENT OF CORPORATIONS THAT WILL NEVER BE HUMAN.  MONEY IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BASIC NEEDS OF EVERY LIVING THING.

>>> Christine Yellowthunder, resident, tax payer, land owner in the Town of Bridge Creek, WI

Source: Save The Hills Alliance, Inc. | S6650 County Road G, Augusta, WI 54722

Web Site: www.ccc-wis.com

Various chemical facilities cause pollution

Chemical Plant Boom Spurred by Fracking Will Bring Smog, Plastic Glut and Risks to Workers’ Health

From an Article by Sharon Kelly, DeSmog Blog News, 2/14/2017

On the heels of the shale gas rush that’s swept the U.S. for the past decade, another wave of fossil fuel-based projects is coming — a plastic and petrochemical manufacturing rush that environmentalists warn could make smog worse in communities already breathing air pollution from fracking, sicken workers, and expand the plastic trash gyres in the world’s oceans.

“Thanks to abundant supplies of natural gas, the U.S. chemical industry is investing in new facilities and expanded production capacity, which tends to attract downstream industries that rely on petrochemical products,” the American Chemistry Council’s President and CEO, Cal Dooley, said in a January press release. “As of this month, 281 chemical industry projects valued at $170 billion have been announced, about half of which are completed or under construction.”

A new Food and Water Watch report, How Fracking Supports the Plastic Industry, calls attention to the dark side of those plans, warning of air and water pollution and the risk to people’s health, especially for those taking jobs in the plastics industry.

The Pollution and Health Risks of Petrochemical Plants

“The petrochemical boom does more than generate plastic that is overfilling our landfills and spilling into the oceans; the manufacturing process itself releases numerous pollutants into our air, water and land,” the report finds. “On top of that, many of the proposed new ethane cracker projects are co-located with fracking and drilling operations, potentially compounding the pollution problems that residents already endure.”

Converting ethane, a by-product of shale gas drilling, to plastic requires ethane “crackers” – massive plants that use heat or steam to “crack” the ethane gas into ethylene, which is then converted to polyethylene, generally sold in plastic pellets.

Shell plans to start construction of one of the nation’s largest ethane crackers this year in Pennsylvania, home to the Marcellus shale drilling rush. “It is the first new facility of its type to be constructed outside of the Gulf Coast in two decades,” the report points out.

“Although the cracker plant will bring pollution to the region, the industry, its supporters and Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf all tout that it will bring jobs,” the report adds. “What they fail to mention is that these jobs are potentially dangerous and hazardous to health.”

Petrochemical plant workers suffer from higher rates of brain cancer than workers in other industry, the report says, noting that workers are exposed to known carcinogens and neurotoxins like benzene, toluene, and xylene and may have an elevated risk of liver disease and other ailments.

Emissions from petrochemical plants have also been linked to elevated levels of toxins in the blood of people living nearby. Allen LeBlanc, a resident of Mossville, Louisiana, with high levels of dioxin in his blood — which researchers traced to nearby petrochemical plants and refineries — described his disabling health problems to the Intercept in 2015.

“Living here has messed me up,” he said. “If I could have another life, I’d take it.”

In Louisiana, the Food and Water Watch report notes, 13 petrochemical plants released 4.9 million pounds of toxic materials into the environment in 2015, according to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) records. But that’s nothing compared to Texas, where the state’s 28 petrochemical plants reported over 13.8 million pounds of toxic releases the same year to the EPA.

The air pollution from the plants can make breathing more difficult for people living nearby, the report adds, and increase their chances of developing cancer. “Several studies have demonstrated that people’s exposure to petrochemical facility pollutants is associated with heightened cancer risks, acute irritative symptoms (such as nausea and eye and throat irritation) and respiratory-related illnesses, especially for children,” the report says.

From Fracking Boom to Cracking Boom

The shale gas targeted by drillers is mostly made of methane gas — the fuel purchased by power plants and used for home heating and cooking, which is also a powerful greenhouse gas. However, what comes out of a gas well isn’t pure methane, but a blend that also includes chemicals like butane, propane, and ethane — and ethane is a key building block for plastics.

Since the shale rush began, U.S. ethane production numbers have soared, with the Energy Information Administration now projecting production of over 1.7 million barrels of ethane a day in 2018, up from less than a million barrels a day just five years earlier. North Dakota’s Bakken shale formation is so ethane-rich that leaks and venting from drilling and fracking there was responsible for a spike in ethane levels in the Earth’s atmosphere, researchers concluded last year.

Twenty new or expanded ethane cracker projects have been proposed since the shale rush started, the new Food and Water Watch report says.

“The proposed cracker projects could conceivably boost polyethylene production by as much as 50 percent, taking it to more than 42 billion pounds a year,” On Earth reported in 2014 — when just 10 new plants had been proposed. “That’s fully six pounds of this one particular form of plastic for every man, woman, and child on earth.”

The Glut of Cheap Plastic to Come

Cheap new plastic discourages recycling — which means more trash winds up in landfills or contaminating the seas. For years, scientists have warned that the world’s oceans are becoming a plastic soup, with ocean gyres where plastic and other debris build up (also known as “garbage patches“) covering a quarter of the earth’s surface. By 2050, the world’s oceans are predicted to contain more plastic than fish (by weight), an Ellen MacArthur Foundation report concluded last year.

“The fracking-driven industry expansion will likely generate even more ocean plastics as more ethane crackers come online and produce more plastic resins,” the Food and Water Watch report concludes.

Making all that plastic also creates enormous amounts of smog, the report points out. “In 1999, when Houston’s ozone levels were the highest in the nation, the state of Texas conducted several studies that found large industrial leaks,” the report notes. “The worst originated from cracker plants producing ethylene and propylene.”

“In addition to asthma, long-term exposure to smog has been connected to premature deaths in adults and to low birth weight in babies,” it adds.

That’s a particular problem in states that already suffer from smog problems. Shell’s ethane cracker will be built about 30 miles outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It’s projected to emit 522 tons of volatile organic compounds [VOCs] — precursors to smog — which would mean that it would be western Pennsylvania’s largest source of VOCs.

Nonetheless, Shell’s ethane cracker was granted multiple tax breaks — including the largest tax break in state history, worth $1.65 billion over 25 years — by state officials who argue that the economic benefits to the region make it all worthwhile. Shell predicts that the plant will employ 600 workers — a powerful message in a swing state where a thirst for job creation is often cited as a key reason that Donald Trump won Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral college votes in November.

For its part, Food and Water Watch argues that fracking has already harmed the state’s drinking water, air quality, and increased the speed of climate change. “The last thing that Pennsylvanians need is another way for the oil and gas industry to capitalize on shale at the expense of their health and well-being,” the report concludes.

SHARON KELLY –Sharon Kelly is an attorney and freelance writer based in Philadelphia. She has reported for The New York Times, The Nation, National Wildlife, Earth Island Journal and a variety of other publications. Prior to beginning freelance writing, she worked as a law clerk for the ACLU of Delaware.

Prof. Lenore K. Resnick, PhD, CRNP, FNP-BC, FAANP, FAAN

Public health professionals seek more protections from fracking

From an Article by Michael Bradwell, Washington PA Observer-Reporter, March 30, 2016

Health care professionals want to create a statewide registry to record risks they said are associated with hydraulic fracturing. The registry would document symptoms from those living near natural gas well pads and compressor stations.

But a trade group representing Marcellus Shale exploration and production companies said the industry in Pennsylvania follows some of the most stringent environmental regulations of any fracking state.

During a brief conference call Wednesday sponsored by PennEnvironment, three speakers – a physician, a certified nurse practitioner and a registered nurse – also said they would like to see setbacks of a least a mile in radius imposed on drilling operations and associated infrastructure that are near schools, nursing homes, hospitals and daycare centers.

In addition, the group said it supported “priority policies” that include:

• Training of health professionals, including those employed by the PA state Department of Health, about the health impacts of natural gas;

• Removal of the health professional “gag rule” from PA Act 13;

• Removal of exemptions of the fracking industry from key environmental laws;

• Addressing what it calls the known public health risks posed by fracking, including banning open-air waste pits.

While PennEnvironment fracking campaign organizer Allie DiTucci noted progress has been made toward some of the goals, including the state Department of Environmental Protection’s efforts to get Chapter 78 fracking regulations finished, her group has joined with numerous Pennsylvania health groups, including Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, Physicians for Social Responsibility, SEIU Healthcare and Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project to pursue the goals it listed Wednesday.

Dr. Walter Tsou, former president of the American Public Health Association and former health commissioner of Philadelphia, who represented Physicians for Social Responsibility, stated that fracking “has been linked to groundwater contamination, air pollution, radioactivity in flowback water and even earthquakes.” He said nosebleeds, skin rashes, asthma and respiratory difficulties are commonly found in areas where fracking occurs.

“What we know from our work at Southwestern Pennsylvania Environmental Health Projects is that activities associated with unconventional oil and gas development predictably result in air emissions and sometimes result in water contamination,” said Dr. Lenore Resick, who represents the project. She said her group has documented 200 people who live within a kilometer of natural gas production sites complaining of certain symptoms she said are caused by airborne and waterborne contamination.

According to Resick, a public health registry for health-care professionals and affected residents is needed to report health impacts associated with fracking.

The Marcellus Shale Coalition on Wednesday blamed PennEnvironment for misleading people about health concerns from drilling with hydraulic fracturing.

“This activist organization has a long and checkered history of intentionally misleading Pennsylvanians when it comes to tightly regulated natural gas development,” said MSC spokeswoman Erica Clayton Wright. “Pennsylvania has some of the most robust environmental regulations of any oil- and gas-producing state, and that’s something that as an industry we are proud to have supported over the years.

“According to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy,” Wright continued, ‘natural gas has been a game changer with our ability to really move forward with pollution reductions that have been very hard to get our arms around for many decades.’ We agree.”

PM-2.5 Airborne Particulates Near Frac Sand Operations

By Kristin Walters, Jeron Jacobson, Zachary Kroening, and Crispin Pierce, PhD, University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire

Abstract

The rapid growth of hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas extraction in the U.S. has led to 135 active “frac” sand mines, processing plants, and rail transfer stations in Wisconsin. Potential environmental health risks include increased truck traffic, noise, ecosystem loss, and groundwater, light, and air pollution. Emitted air contaminants include fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and respirable crystalline silica. Inhalation of fine dust particles causes increased mortality, cardiovascular disease, lung disease, and lung cancer. In the authors’ pilot study, use of a filter-based ambient particulate monitor found PM-2.5 levels of 5.82 to 50.8 micro-grams per cubic meter in six 24-hour samples around frac sand mines and processing sites. Enforcement of the existing U.S. Environmental Protection Agency annual PM2.5 standard of 12 μg/m3 is likely to protect the public from silica exposure risks as well. PM2.5 monitoring around frac sand sites is needed to ensure regulatory compliance, inform nearby communities, and protect public health. 

See the full report here:
http://files.ctctcdn.com/e5446506501/99b2f2d3-fb0f-437d-b362-32f62bc4e360.pdf

Conclusion

With rapidly increasing frac sand mining, processing, transportation, and use in hydraulic fracturing, health departments and elected officials face unanswered questions about potential health risks. This research, together with other data of a similar nature we have collected, is suggestive of an increase of ambient PM2.5 levels as a result of these activities. We propose the establishment of longer-term PM2.5 monitoring with both direct reading and FRM particulate samplers, as well as silica- specific monitoring efforts, to ensure regulatory compliance, inform nearby communities, and protect public health.

Source: Journal of Environmental Health, Volume 78, Number 4, pp. 8 – 12, November 2015

See details on the frac sand industry in Wisconsin at:
http://www.ccc-wis.com

Commentary: Scientific Case for banning fracking on federal land

By Larysa Dyrszka, MD and Mary Menapace, RN

Larysa Dyrszka, MD, of Sullivan County is co-founder, and Mary Menapace, RN, of Syracuse is a member, of Concerned Health Professionals of New York, www.concernedhealthny.org, an organization dedicated to researching and raising awareness about the public health risks of high-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing.

The final fracking review has been released and the paperwork has been completed to make New York’s long-awaited fracking ban official. We are proud to celebrate Governor Cuomo’s bold and necessary decision, which confirms what many of us working in healthcare already knew – fracking anywhere in New York would put public health and safety at great risk. As a doctor and a nurse, we can speak to the objective, scientific examination of shale drilling and fracking from a public health standpoint, on which Governor Cuomo wisely based his decision in order to protect the health and water of all New Yorkers.

In the past four years, the number of peer-reviewed studies on shale drilling and fracking has gone from almost zero to more than four hundred, according to the Physicians Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy public database. That’s a lot of data, with topics including health impacts, air pollution, water contamination, seismic impacts (including earthquakes), wastewater, engineering issues, climate impacts, and economics.

And the overwhelming consensus from this thorough, objective, independent and rigorous analysis is that fracking has serious dangers and the best course of action is to prohibit fracking. Given that, we are among hundreds of doctors, scientists, health professionals and medical organizations who applaud Governor Cuomo’s decision to ban fracking anywhere in New York. It’s the only scientifically responsible course, and the necessary action to protect the health and water of all New Yorkers.

We are both among a group of New York State scientists and health professionals who have closely followed the science for years, Concerned Health Professionals of New York. Last summer, and again this past December in an updated second edition, we took the approach of looking at trends in the data, releasing a compendium of key findings organized into sixteen areas of concern, written in a manner designed to inform the debate by making technical data more accessible to the public, journalists, elected officials, as well as researchers.

Our report concludes that, “A growing body of peer-reviewed studies, accident reports, and investigative articles is now confirming specific, quantifiable evidence of harm and has revealed fundamental problems with the drilling and fracking.” In short, the trends in the data raise grave concerns about the public health impacts of shale drilling and fracking.

The scientific community has come a long way in our understanding of the impacts of shale drilling and fracking since 2010, with a growing body of empirical data showing harms where we previously only had anecdotal evidence. Additionally, many more studies are currently under way, including a number of major studies that are looking at some of the cumulative impacts that have yet to be examined.

This much is clear, however: hundreds of studies – the best science we have – show that shale drilling and fracking pose a threat to public health, our water, and the environment. In their own examination of the science, the New York State Department of Health likewise concluded that drilling and fracking pose “significant public health risks.”

Unfortunately, the federal government is not being as cautious as Governor Cuomo’s administration. President Obama’s administration recently issued regulations which will allow fracking on federal land – including in national parks. Putting people and our public lands at risk makes no sense.

The people of New York overwhelmingly support our state ban on fracking. Our United States senators and members of Congress have an opportunity to protect our public treasures and our health by working to ban fracking on federal lands. They should listen to the science and the public health experts and do it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Also, see “The Human and Environmental Impact of Fracking: How Fracking Shale for Gas Affects Us and Our World,” Physicians, Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy.”

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

Many issues with large scale drilling & fracking

Response to “Police and Gas Industry Monitoring Fracking Activists”

By S. Tom Bond, Retired Chemistry Professor & Resident Farmer, Lewis County, WV

The FrackCheckWV article published on Wednesday deals with law enforcement in the Marcellus region. And, last night a former Marcellus worker called me to talk about what he knows.  He was working for Chesapeake in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, on the border with New York.  The County Seat is Towanda, PA.

Chesapeake hired the Sheriff out of Bradford County and perhaps 6 or 7 of his Deputies to form a sort of “Chesapeake police force.”  The Sheriff became the head of Chesapeake’s security team. They continued to draw pay for their original duties and got an additional  hourly sum to add to it.  Sometimes they would drive out to a well site in Sheriff’s uniforms and change before going on the second job.

Most drillers use rotating shifts of workers and have men work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week for 6 weeks, then take 6 weeks off, for example.  The former Chesapeake worker said Chesapeake only gave 2 weeks off, but after a couple of days rest he began to do lease work for another company.  It turned out the other company was in competition with Chesapeake, so Chesapeake fired him.

The man who came on the job to conduct the firing and dismissal was the Sheriff, and he brought along many assistants as police-security. But the fired man had never had a fight or threatened anybody.  The Sheriff seemed particularly proud that Aubrey McClendon (then the President of Chesapeake Energy) had chosen him to do the job.  It felt like intimidation as the Sheriff stayed with him to go to his locker and every step he made until he left the well site.

Apparently, the usual procedure for the gas company was to make a substantial donation to the police department where salaries were in the $25,000 to $30,000 a year range, and hire these individuals in the $25 an hour range for the company work.  Companies are still allowed to hire police, so far as we know.

A second effect of this hiring of policemen or sheriff’s deputies or other local officials may have been to inhibit the usual police work.  The cops could be afraid of losing their extra pay if they vigorously pursued gas field workers for civil offences.

The crime rate effectively tripled as drilling & fracking & pipeline activities ramped up.  Bar fights were frequent. Drugs followed up from the South, where many of them had been employed previously.  My informant said a house of prostitution was established, patronized primarily by gas field workers.  In his words, “The ‘ladies’ relocated from Oklahoma.”  His telling reminded me of the notorious “high plains drifters” of cattle days in the West.

The “rent-a-cops” approach helped the gas company directly by providing a security force.  It also freed up their other employees to get the high paying drilling & fracking jobs involved. But, to some degree, the taxpayers were robbed of the peace and quiet for which they pay law enforcement officers, to say nothing about the conflict-of-interest that prevails.

In conclusion, he said, nothing has been learned from the days of the Coal Mine Wars of owners against workers.  These early miners organized a march of protest in Charleston WV back to the coal fields in southern WV . Thirteen years after the Battle of Blair Mountain, miners got the right to organize because of the sympathy they gained with the public. The current issues primarily involve the working conditions on the well pads, the working schedule and hours as well as safety and health conditions.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Oil workers on strike in Houston and across the United States

From a Report of Eyewitness News, Houston (abc13.com), February 1, 2015

Oil workers from coast to coast are on strike. They started to walk off the job around midnight when their union failed to reach a deal with the energy industry. It’s not clear how many workers are on strike.

The contract in dispute covers about 30,000 workers at refineries, pipelines, oil terminals, and petrochemical plants across the country, including about 5,000 workers here in Houston. A representative for the United Steelworkers Association, which is the union for the workers, say there are work stoppage at these facilities in the Houston area: LyondellBasell in Houston, TX; Marathon Galveston Bay Refinery in Texas City, TX; Marathon Houston Green Cogeneration facility, Texas City, TX; Shell Deer Park Refinery, Deer Park, TX; and Shell Deer Park Chemical Plant, Deer Park, TX.

At the LyondellBasell plant in southeast Houston, workers started to protest around 6am. Last night, more than a dozen workers walked off the job shortly after midnight. “It’s about health, safety. It’s about issues that confront our workers every day,” said Director of the United Steelworkers, Ruben Garza.

Garza explains why the national union called a strike at midnight at specific refineries, many of them in here in Southeast Texas. “We have a lot of health and safety issues we have overtime issues, fatigue standards that the companies manipulate,” he said.

Shell is representing the energy industry in labor talks with the United Steelworkers Association. Shell hasn’t commented on what caused talks to break down. The USW sent a message to its members calling the latest offer from oil companies “insulting.”

USW International Vice President Gary Beevers, who heads the union’s National Oil Bargaining Program, said, “This work stoppage is about onerous overtime; unsafe staffing levels; dangerous conditions the industry continues to ignore; the daily occurrences of fires, emissions, leaks and explosions that threaten local communities without the industry doing much about it; the industry’s refusal to make opportunities for workers in the trade crafts; the flagrant contracting out that impacts health and safety on the job; and the erosion of our workplace, where qualified and experienced union workers are replaced by contractors when they leave or retire.”

See also:  www.FrackCheckWV.net