An e-mail from one citizen & taxpayer to Barbara Fiala:

I am writing in regard to Broome County’s decision to hire a lobbyist
to urge Albany not to get “bogged down” in its environmental review of
drilling in the Marcellus Shale.

The shale gas drilling techniques that have come into use over the
last decade were developed in an atmosphere of very poor regulatory
control. A May 19 press release on hydrofracturing from Congressman
Maurice Hinchey
(see http://www.house.gov/list/press/ny22_hinchey/morenews/051909HydraulicFracturing.html)
states:

“More than 1,000 cases of contamination have been documented by
courts and state and local governments in New Mexico, Alabama, Ohio,
Texas, Pennsylvania, and Colorado. In one case, a house exploded after
hydraulic fracturing created underground passageways and methane
seeped into the residential water supply.

A 2004 EPA study, which was haphazardly conducted with a bias
toward a desired outcome, concluded that fracturing did not pose a
risk to drinking water. However, Hinchey noted that the more than
1,000 reported contamination incidents have cast significant doubt on
the report’s findings and the report’s own body contains damaging
information that wasn’t mentioned in the conclusion. In fact, the
study foreshadowed many of the problems now being reported across the
country. ”

We have recently seen drilling-related methane contamination of water
wells in nearby Dimock, PA. Questions still remain as to exactly how
the water in Dimock became contaminated. Once an aquifer is
contaminated, it may be extremely difficult or even impossible to
clean it up. Fortunately, so far, no one has been killed by the
drilling-related explosions that have occurred in water wells, and, in
one case, in a home. But there is certainly no guarantee that we will
continue to be that lucky.

It is often said that New York’s environmental regulations regarding
drilling are superior to those of other states, but a review of the NY
regulations does not bear out that claim. For example, NY’s setbacks
from residences and bodies of water are much smaller than those in
many other areas. Water is becoming increasingly precious as shortages
occur around the world and in other parts of our own country. Areas
possessing clean water are likely to be increasingly desirable in the
future. Our water is our area’s most valuable natural resource and we
should not endanger it.

Last summer and fall, the NYSDEC demonstrated that it did NOT have a
good grasp of the multiple issues involved in shale gas drilling.
Rather, it was members of the public and of local environmental groups
who researched the damage that has occurred from this type of gas
drilling in other areas and then made the NYSDEC aware of that damage
through the informational meetings and draft scope SGEIS hearings held
by the NYSDEC. The NYSDEC received thousands of comments on its draft
scope. Many, many of those comments were NOT in support of drilling.

I do not believe that the NYSDEC is getting bogged down in
bureaucracy. They are understaffed and do not have the resources
needed to deal with this issue in a truly thorough manner. Even if
they had sufficient resources, the environmental review would still
require a great deal of care and time. This is an extremely complex
and technical issue; the drilling’s impacts will be long-lasting and
wide-ranging and are likely to negatively affect not only our water,
but our air, the health of our forests and farmlands, the nature and
desirability of our communities, and the health of our people.

Many Broome County residents are not in favor of this drilling. While
the pro-drilling landowners’ groups may be well organized, it is
important to recognize that most of the residents of this county do
not own large tracts of land, will see little or no financial gain
from the drilling, and may suffer serious personal and financial
losses if their quality of life, their health, and/or the value of
their homes are negatively impacted by the drilling.

I would also like to point out that the current price of natural gas
is quite low, that some experts expect it to remain low for some time,
and that the first few years of production are usually the highest for
any given shale gas well. It is therefore quite likely that if Broome
County’s land is drilled in the near future, the county will be
selling a large fraction of its recoverable gas at bargain-basement
prices.

We have all seen the results of the TCE contamination in Endicott. Our
area does not need more of the same. Frankly, given the track record
of the gas industry and the high well density needed to recover
appreciable amounts of gas from the Marcellus Shale, it seems
extremely likely that Broome County will end up with a number of
seriously contaminated drilling sites, several areas in which homes
have no reliable water supply, poor air quality, a loss of green
space, lowered residential property values in areas where drilling
occurs, a loss of residents who prefer not to live in an
industrialized area, difficulty attracting new and highly skilled
residents to the area, additional costly health problems among its
residents, and probably a whole host of unforeseen problems as well.

We should not rush into this. The gas is not going anywhere. And I
would add that, in any case, the gas industry is well able to afford
its own lobbyists.

For all of the reasons explained above, I do not think it is in Broome
County’s best interest to spend taxpayer dollars to hire a lobbyist to
push for gas drilling.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,



I am the State Committee Member for the Green Party of New York State, representing Delaware County; and a member of Chenango, Delaware, Otsego Gas (CDOG).

[Extemporaneously: Is the DEC staff still here? Are you awake to hear this? The People are speaking, and it’s clear that Halliburton’s process is not drilling they can believe in.]

[While holding up a copy of the dsGEIS, displaying the last page, Page 42]: Alternative Actions Section 7.0 (1) “the prohibition of development of Marcellus Shale and other low permeability reservoirs by horizontal drilling and high-volume hydraulic fracturing” is very appropriately placed, there at the bottom of the last page, where a conclusion belongs… and it [pointing to 7.0 (1)] is the conclusion the DEC should have.

I’m not going to talk here about technicalities.

I’m here to both ask and answer some fundamental questions.

Is horizontal well drilling water fracking necessary?

No! No, it is not. That high-volume high-pressure water fracking is not necessary. Its purpose is to quickly maximize private short-term corporate profits, while externalizing the long-term costs to the public… privatizing the temporary gains for a few, while spreading the permanent losses around to everyone else; with a corrupt legislature ignoring later consequences because it gets a “taste” too, in a very temporary injection of revenue… leaving future generations with yet another costly mess for them, that our generation has created.

Just because water fracking can be done, should it be done?

Our society condones natural sexuality between consenting adults, but we forbid pedophilia. likewise, the provision of a greener fuel (natural gas) is something entirely acceptable, but the practice of removing fresh water (our most precious and most needed resource) from the natural water cycle, by making toxic waste out of enormous quantities of pure water, should be, as pedophilia is, absolutely forbidden.

Can regulation make water fracking acceptable?

If a father’s sexual molestation of his child is wrong (an evil act), when it is done unseen by anyone else, it isn’t made good (a blessed sacrament) by having police provide official approval, permitting it on condition that they, the police, can join in the father’s depravity, by occasionally peeking in his window to watch.

Is New York City exceptional?

If water fracking is not safe to be done within one watershed, it is not safe to be done in any watershed.

What is the best use of land?

The traditionally agricultural soils of the Southern Tier, above the Marcellus Shale, are currently undergoing a transition toward a relocalization of sustainable organic food production, which constitutes the best use of what remains of agricultural land… especially for this agricultural land, which, if not environmentally molested, is blessed with a reliably replenishable water supply, that does not exist in most of those places where unsustainable over intensive industrial agribusiness has located. Those places are running out of water. A proliferation of toxic waste producing shale gas drilling here is absolutely incompatible with that organic food production, which is needed to provide a sustainable and actually healthy source of food to eat. We can produce clean food here, or extract gas dirty, but we cannot do both.

Must we use up all the fossil fuels ourselves, or should we leave some to our children?

In the last 100 years, half of all the oil on the planet has been used up… the easy to find and easy to get half. The remainder will be gone, fully depleted, within a few decades. The just as mindless as a metastasizing cancer energy extraction industry’s goal, in its new “Energy Independence” push, is to quickly use up all the other available fossil fuel as well… to get it all, and to burn it all, as fast as possible.

If we cannot now turn stone into gas, without also converting massive quantities of potable water into poison, then we should have the ecological wisdom to leave that gas way down there where it is so tightly trapped, until some future generation can find a truly environmentally sound means of collecting it. We should leave that resource to our children to be retrieved and used more responsibly by them, than we — the Greediest Generation — are capable of now.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,