A Chesapeake Bay Foundation infrared video investigation of natural gas drilling and processing sites in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia found invisible air pollution rising from almost three quarters of them. Here is a link to the video
Pennsylvania law exempts gas drilling and well site activities from the need for state air pollution control permits, and therefore state regulation. That exemption was approved more than five years ago, before the Marcellus shale drilling boom started. Now that drilling has dramatically increased, it is time for the state to re-examine that exemption.
Findings in the recent EPA report directly contradict longstanding arguments by the drilling industry for why the fracking process is safe: that hydrologic pressure would naturally force fluids down, not up; that deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals towards the surface; and that the problems with the cement and steel barriers around gas wells aren’t connected to fracking.
It seems that the gas industry just can't keep the facts from seeping into the fracking debate.
Ms Deborah Rogers, a financial analyst turned entrepreneur, discusses the myths and realities of shale gas profitability with host Bill Podulka. Is shale gas drilling a financial bubble? Why has it swelled so much? How much longer can this go on, who gets hurt and who profits from the party?
Emily Wurth Food and Water Watch observed, the energy portion of President Obama's speech sounded like it could have been written by the oil and gas industry. Quote: "He cited the industry's deceptive claims and grossly inflated the jobs numbers, rather than actual labor statistics. President Obama needs to hear the truth about shale gas. Agreeing with the President that gas companies should disclose the chemicals they use in fracking, simply telling us which chemicals gas companies use will not prevent contamination from happening in nearby communities. It falls far short of removing the oil and gas industry's exemption from key environmental regulations like the Safe Drinking Water Act, which the President should agree would be "regulations to prevent irresponsible behavior" by the oil and gas industry."
President Obama believes we can "develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk," but the research increasingly shows that it is not possible
NYRAD EMERGENCY ACTION ALERT!!!
Governor Cuomo says a decision to allow Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracking might be made in as little as 8 short weeks!!!
The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which has two seats on the Governor’s Gas Advisory Panel has suggested 2 disturbing alternative actions:
1) – A “Demonstration Project in which up to 300 wells could be drilled in 3 years
2) – A “Special Places Off Limits to Drilling” that would protect NYC, Syracuse, Catskills, Fingerlakes, Delaware River Water Gap and Cooperstown Corridor BUT NOT PROTECT THE SOUTHERN TIER.
1. Tell them you want them to join with the grassroots and
publicly declare opposition to ANY Demonstration project, anywhere in NYS,
in an open letter to Governor Cuomo.
2. Request that they sign the Defacto Moratorium Pledge. Accept No Excuses: Tell them that if they are truly interested in protecting us there is no reason for them to NOT sign the pledge!!!
The de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
The full coalition letter with over 22,000 signatures can be found at:
Please Call and Email all contacts below.
(Send a copy of your email to NYRAD as well at [email protected])
Tell them you want them to sign THE PLEDGE to protect all New York State citizens from the dangers of High Volume Horizontal Hydrofracking. Be polite but firm:
1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Esq, NRDC
Phone: 914-422-4343 - ask for his Secretary, Mary Beth
Email: webform: http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/contact.html
2. Kate Sinding, Esq, NRDC
Email: [email protected]
3. Eric A. Goldstein, Esq, NRDC
Email: [email protected]
Additionally, Please Contact New York State Congressional Members from the Southern Tier who are on the Gas Advisory Panel and request that they sign THE PLEDGE:
1. Assemblywoman Donna Lupardo, NYS Assembly Rep.
Email: [email protected]
2. Senator Thomas W. Libous, NYS Senator, 52nd District
Email: [email protected]
Please direct questions or comments to:
Catskill Mountain Keeper is alerting NY residents to call NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY SPEAKER SHELDON SILVER TODAY. HERE IS WHY.
Negative impacts on human health have accompanied gas drilling using hydrofracking wherever it has been done. Despite that, the permit conditions proposed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to “govern” fracking makes little mention of the health impacts of fracking.
That is why Catskill Mountainkeeper and our coalition partners are demanding that the legislature require that an independent comprehensive Health Impact Assessment (HIA) be done prior to any further discussions of shale gas.
In October 2011, 250 physicians and medical professionals wrote a letter to Governor Cuomo calling for a comprehensive public health impact assessment. This was sent because the concerns outlined in a previous letter sent to The department of health and the Governor were clearly ignored in the draft Supplemental generic environmental Impact statement (SGEIS) .
A health impact assessment, which is defined by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, "INCLUDES MANY TOOLS THAT HELP ENSURE THE VALIDITY OF THE FINDINGS AND HAVE MULTIPLE PLACES FOR PUBLIC INPUT TO THE DOCUMENT."
This will tell New Yorkers what the “true” costs of gas drilling are.
Certainly the risk to the human and animal health in New York State justifies that such a health Impact assessment be done.
On Tuesday our allies in the Assembly worked to have this attached to the budget as a resolution.
Now the industry is pushing hard to have it removed.
The Cuomo administration keeps calling for science not emotion. This is the science. Call Assemblyman Sheldon Silver today!
Thank him and ask him to continue the fight to keep a Health Impact Assessment in the Budget. It is very important that he hears from you now.
New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver Contact Information:
New York, NY 10007
Albany, NY 12248
Come join the facebook virtual lobby day, and tell NY leaders to end special exemptions for natural gas companies. Close the loophole and force the gas industry to play by the same rules enforced upon all other industries in NY state.
Small doses can have big health effects.
That is a main finding of a report, three years in the making, published by a team of 12 scientists who study hormone-altering chemicals.
Dozens of substances that can mimic or block estrogen, testosterone and other hormones are found in the environment, the food supply and consumer products, including plastics, pesticides and cosmetics. One of the biggest, longest-lasting controversies about these chemicals is whether the tiny doses that most people are exposed to are harmful.
The first challenges to Pennsylvania act 13 are being filed. We have only to read the minor newpaper blurbs to see where this is heading. For the people, by the people. Hello people? You can bet big gas doesn't think this is last page news.
HARRISBURG, Pa. — A state judge will hear a request for an immediate injunction against Pennsylvania’s new Marcellus Shale law filed by a group including seven municipalities that says it unconstitutionally takes away local powers to control land use.
The Commonwealth Court hearing was scheduled for Wednesday in Harrisburg. The approximately 120-page lawsuit was filed March 29.
Opponents of the sweeping, six-week-old law say it prevents municipalities from protecting homes or businesses, and possibly even schools or parks, from drilling activity that could damage a community’s quality of life and property values. Land-use provisions are scheduled to take effect in a few days.
Gov. Tom Corbett’s office says the administration is confident that courts will uphold the law, and members of the natural gas industry say overturning it would hurt them.
PITTSBURGH (AP) -- A coalition of oil and gas industry companies is challenging a group of municipalities who are suing the state of Pennsylvania over a new law that aims to regulate gas drilling.
The Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association, the Marcellus Shale Coalition and several companies filed a legal petition Thursday morning, seeking to intervene in the lawsuit filed by municipalities last week.
The municipalities want an injunction stopping the law from taking effect and, ultimately, for it to be struck down.
The new petition from the oil and gas industry groups says that overturning the new state law, known as Act 13, would negatively impact the industry.
Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican, supports the industry's objectives in Act 13, which is scheduled to take effect in mid-April.
For those who are still not aware the law prohibits medical professionals from discussing health impacts, but that's not all! Please read this informative link courtesy of the Pennsylvania Medical Society
Despite the proliferation of questions regarding health and safety, Governor Cuomo's administration is poised to finalize regulations that would allow fracking in New York – we must stop it!
Join us for our statewide day of action May 3. Please, click on the link below to find an event near you.
What do clean air protections have to with the steep rise in gasoline prices? Absolutely nothing. But Big Oil and their allies in Congress are pushing legislation, under the guise of addressing rising fuel prices, to rollback health-based standards of the Clean Air Act and block the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from adopting future clean air protections. They call this bill the Gasoline Regulations Act (H.R. 4471); we call it the Gutting Air Standard Protections Act – the GASP Act.
New Coalition Letter Requests Governor Cuomo to Block A Possible Fracking Demonstration Project in the Southern Tier and Fulfill Executive Order No. 41 Mandates
Great information courtesy of
Multi-Million Dollar Landmark North American Lawsuit on Hydraulic Fracturing and Its Impact on Groundwater
I heard this interview today, I am very grateful that Ms Ernst is endeavoring to take on this huge legal fight for all of us
“There is a lot of science to do to determine how and whether inherently risky shale gas drilling can be done safely, and the state hasn’t done it yet,” said Dusty Horwitt, senior counsel for Environmental Working Group. “Producing thousands of pages of text is no substitute for figuring out whether toxic wastewater can be safely disposed of or how far drilling pollution can spread underground.”
The ten most significant deficiencies in the draft plan drawn up by the state Department of Environmental Conservation are:
- No empirical scientific data on drilling and fracking risks
- Drilling allowed too close to sensitive water supplies
- No plan for disposing of millions of gallons of toxic wastewater
- Radioactive pollution from drilling underestimated
- Outdated studies to estimate greenhouse gas emissions from shale gas operations
- No assessment of the impact of shale gas development on New Yorkers’ health
- Little basic data on the location of underground water supplies, faults and flood plains
- No review of siting plans and risks of potentially explosive natural gas pipelines
- No provisions to protect sensitive areas from vertical drilling and lower-volume hydraulic fracturing
- Too few inspectors to enforce scientifically rigorous regulations
The New York Times reported that Governor Cuomo is on the verge of lifting New York’s current ban on fracking, and allowing the gas industry free reign across a huge area of our state—specifically targeting economically disadvantaged communities with this toxic practice.
Call Governor Cuomo right now, and every day, to tell him that no part of New York State should be sacrificed for fracking: (866) 961-3208.
Fracking- Is Public Health a RIGHT or a PRIVILEGE?
The American Academy of Pediatrics-
Update on Fracking Chemicals http://www.facebook.com/groups/214363638643294/#!/NurseRiseNursesforSafeWater
The following list briefly summarizes common effects of exposure to a wide spectrum of additional fracking chemicals. ■Neurological – behavioral and/or cognitive symptoms, may be associated with autistic disorders, behavioral and psychosocial disorders 18
■Cardiovascular – congenital heart disease, thickening of peripheral vessels
■Gastrointestinal – nausea, vomiting and diarrhea
■Renal – acute and or chronic renal insufficiency
■Urological – Arsenic increases the risk of bladder cancer 19
■Reproductive – infertility, stillbirth, congenital deformities, decreased sperm production and poor sperm mobility
■Immunological – allergies, autoimmune diseases and immunosuppressant disorders
■Mucocutaneous / Dermatologic – irritant to eyes, ears, oro-pharynx, nose and sinuses
■Hematopoietic – blood dyscrasias
■Oncological – some chemicals are direct mutagens, laying the groundwork for later onset of various cancers. Other carcinogens, while not directly mutagenic or genotoxic, support the carcinogenic process by down-regulating tumor suppressor genes or by up-regulating tumor promoter genes.
■Endocrine – endocrine disruptors mimic the action of hormonal tissues or, alternatively, block endogenous hormonal activity of the thyroid, ovaries, testes
(Note From Nurse Rise: It has been noted by researchers that
Chronic nosebleeds, severe rashes, respiratory problems, tremors, memory loss, and losing the ability to walk are common symtoms of environmental poisoning. This is due to the accumulation of neurotoxins the the blood, the same substances found present in natural gas production & that the chemicals lay the grounddwork for later onset of various cancers. http://www.thefrackingtruth.org/?page_id=6)
(Additional Note: The photo is a 13 yr old boy whose family was forced out of their home on MD recommendation for health reasons some time after drilling began nearby
American Academy of Pediatrics Source info:
Is it okay to balance anticipated "economic benefits" against anticipated "possible public health issues?" What if those who get the money are not the same people as those who get the health issues?
What about the economic costs of the health issues themselves? Preliminary research from Pennsylvania finds evidence of harm to newborn babies whose mothers spent their pregnancies living near drilling and fracking operations. Should we not insist on definitive research before we place New York's infants at risk? If nothing else, developmental problems in newborns are expensive and often necessitate lifelong medical and educational interventions.
There is still plenty of time to comment on NY states health impact review Sandra has made commenting so much easier. Please share
Please NY mama (and daddies) send in a comment www.thirtydaysoffrackingregs.com/dec12reg.php
Here is mine
Our family enjoys a priceless, quite quality of life here in the hills of Broome county. The proposed leases of my neighbors, bring with them the promise of air pollution. That is why I am writing today to voice my concern over regulation number 556.2(b) My parents live in Bradford county PA. In 2009 gas production began. Over the course of months, my mother became very ill. In the beginning we noticed she kept loosing her voice several times a day. She developed respiratory distress, and chest pain. Her body was retaining fluid. Her symptoms escalated to episodes in which she lost of consciousness. My dad would return from work and find her 270 pound body on the floor. She began having serious hallucinations. No cause was ever established for this "event". After months in the hospital, she was simply diagnosed with dementia. She was quietly placed in a nursing home. With the passage of Act 13 on page 99, it requires oil and gas companies to tell medical professionals what chemicals are used in drilling fluids—but only after they sign “a statement of need and a confidentiality agreement.” However those details—the chemicals in drilling fluid and medical significance—it states a page later, are secret and “shall not be a public record.” We will never know for sure if fugitive gas caused my mothers condition. We know gas production in residential neighborhoods is a crime. Under these proposed regulations, New Yorkers would know neither the identity nor quantity of venting gases from the wellheads that would surround us. Please let the precautionary principle dictate NY regulatory policy
Just found out in the local independent newspaper today that fracking has been approved in the George Washington National Forest, on the border between Virginia and West Virginia. The rivers in this area (the beautiful Shenandoah sisters) are already so polluted that we can't eat the fish out of them. Now we have to be worried about our deep-drilled wells, too. My 7-year-old was very upset when she read the newspaper article, and is thinking about putting a website up and getting kids to agitate about this; she's wondering what there will be left to drink if we have contaminated both ground water and aquifer water.
We can't even blame short-sighted landowners for this, since it's the Department of the Interior!
We are hurting together. Our Susquehanna is suffering,too. Our kids are old enough to start learning about spiritual activism. We are not religious, but it's a good fit for us. They are great at it. I am very willing to rally and speak out as a family. But on the quantum level, a call for right action fee ls really empowering. We are going to change the fossil fuel paradigm. Truth defends itself, it's happening.
Some of these chemicals alter sexual development. Some undermine intelligence and behavior. Others make our bodies less resistant to disease. Sometimes the effects don't appear until a child reaches puberty or afterward, even though the exposure took place in the womb.
These chemicals pose the greatest hazard in the earliest phases of life because hormones orchestrate development and because fetal development is exquisitely sensitive to tiny variations in hormone signals.
For a fetus to grow up according to its genetic blueprint, the right hormone message has to arrive at the right place in the right amount at the right time.
The emerging science we present in Our Stolen Future is about what happens when something interferes with the delivery of that message. A signal doesn't arrive because it is blocked. One that was small becomes large. One that shouldn't have been there at all shows up nonetheless.
The first nine chapters of the book examine a chain of evidence that extends from wildlife populations to laboratory experiments to the epidemiology of exposed groups of people. There's not a lot in these sections that is controversial.
We are working from a data base of over 4,000 scientific publications. Over 100 scientists have participated directly in deliberations that have produced a series of consensus statements about the nature of the problem. Many scientists reviewed their sections of the book word-by-word to ensure that we did not misrepresent their findings. This is not fringe science. After we examine in Our Stolen Future the basic science from wildlife, lab animals and relevant human studies we then ask a larger set of questions. Given these findings, given the the uncontested observations that endocrine contaminants are ubiquitous and given that at least in some places in the world those background levels of contamination are within the ranges in which effects are seen in the laboratory and in people.Given all that, what signals should we look for in human populations? We could have stopped before this. We knew that going on would be controversial.
But as we thought about the implications of these basic findings and their potential ramifications, we concluded that the only responsible course was to go on and find out what science was able, and not able
to say, given the current even you have read this section, you will find it replete with all sorts of cautionary statements, with many comments to the effect that data on one issue or another are as yet inadequate to reach a judgement.In sum, however, the weight of the evidence says we have a problem.
Human impacts beyond isolated cases are already demonstrable. They involve impairments to reproduction, alterations in behavior, diminishing of intellectual capacity, and erosion in the ability to resist disease. The simple truth is that the way we allow chemicals to be used in society today means we are performing a vast experiment, not in the lab, but in the real world, not just on wildlife but on people.