Dear Friends:
I am writing to thank you for your support in stopping fracking
in New York and also alert you to an urgent situation at the federal
level that we are moving on. This email is only received by
organizational leaders, and it's crucial that you take action and share
this with your networks.
First, the great news from New York, where the Commissioner from the Department of Health just put the brakes on fracking, saying that, "...the impacts on the public health are properly considered before
a state permits drilling." Our thanks to Governor Cuomo and Dr. Shah
for listening to the concerns of countless scientists and health
professionals, not to mention the will of the people. This campaign is
far from over and New Yorkers Against Fracking will continue to keep the
pressure on, but this is a major development. This success came right
on the heals of our running an ad in the Des Moines Register signed
onto by over 100 of your organizations, which called on Governor Cuomo
to proceed with, "NOT ONE WELL." The ad was covered in Politico, the New
York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and elsewhere and sent a strong
message that fracking is a major issue that national leaders must
respond to our growing movement.
Americans Against Fracking, thank you!
We now have another looming and urgent challenge on the horizon: The Obama Administration is about to tap Ernest Moniz, a fracking cheeleader, as his Energy Secretary.
Moniz serves as director of MIT’s Energy Initiative, whose founding
members include Shell, Saudi Aramco, ENI and BP Technology Ventures,
Inc. He supports fracked natural gas as a “bridge fuel” and has
testified to congress that the environmental problems associated with
fracking are “challenging but manageable.” This appointment could come as early as later today.
On Monday, while 50,000 people were marching in Washington DC opposing the Keystone pipeline, fracking, and climate change, the president was enjoying a day of golf with gas and oil executives at a private club in Florida. If this is a sign of things to come, we're in big trouble.
Take action - and share this in your networks! We need to get
the word out and send a strong message to President Obama that if he is
serious about climate change, he should not appoint someone who promotes
our reliance on fracked gas. Below are two action alerts from Food
& Water Watch and CREDO Action. We encourage you to circulate one
of these alerts, or create a petition of your own to put a stop to
this disastrous decision!
See Food & Water Watch's alert here.
See CREDO Action's alert here.
Also, click to share this meme on your organization's Facebook page.
As this decision could be imminent, we are going to submit the
letter below later today to President Obama to tell him that we need a
climate leader in the Department of Energy - and Ernest Moniz is not
that leader.
Finally, we are a young coalition and we have a lot to figure
out, but in the coming weeks, we will be sending out a survey to help
determine how we can increase our impact and more fully involve all the
organizations that make up Americans Against Fracking! Stay tuned.
Thanks for all you do!
David and the Americans Against Fracking Team
Here is the Letter to President Obama:
Dear President Obama,
We are writing on behalf on Americans Against Fracking, a national
coalition of over 190 national, state and local organizations, to oppose
the rumored appointment of Dr. Ernest Moniz to the position of
Secretary of Energy. While we appreciate your recent public comments
about the need to address climate change, appointing Dr. Moniz, a
proponent of hydraulic fracturing with close ties to the oil and gas
industry, would be a major step backwards.
Fracking and drilling for gas and oil gas pose direct threats to our
water, air, health, and climate. The risks and impacts on air and water
have been well documented and are supported by extensive research (see
attached partial list of citations). While effects on air and water are
reason enough to reject fracking, research shows that drilling and
fracking for natural gas contributes to climate change. The carbon
dioxide emitted from burning natural gas contributes significantly to
greenhouse gas emissions driving global climate change (Myhrvold and
Caldeira, 2012). And, in addition to carbon dioxide, high-volume
hydraulic fracturing releases significant amounts of methane into the
atmosphere during the extraction, transport and processing of the gas.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, 33 times more efficient at trapping
heat than carbon dioxide over 100 years, and about 100 times more potent
than carbon dioxide over 20 years (Shindell et al. 2009).
As such, even small amounts of gas leaked into the atmosphere make
enormous contributions to global warming. (Myhrvold and Caldeira, 2012).
Increasing evidence, including a study
led by researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, indicates that methane emissions from high volume
hydraulic fracturing and related operations have been significantly
underestimated by both the gas industry and the Environmental Protection
Agency (Petron et al. 2012). The widespread use of natural gas is not a solution to climate change.
This is why your rumored appointment of Dr. Moniz is so disturbing.
Moniz serves as director of MIT’s Energy Initiative, whose founding
members include Shell, Saudi Aramco, ENI and BP Technology Ventures,
Inc. The rest of the sustaining and associate members read as a who’s
who of the oil and gas industry. Moniz views natural gas obtained by
drilling and fracking as a key piece of our energy plan over the “next
couple of decades.” In testimony before Congress in July 2011, he called
“environmental risks, which arise from shale development” including
“contamination of groundwater aquifers with drilling fluids or natural
gas” “challenging but manageable.” He referred to natural gas as “a
cost-effective bridge to…a low carbon future,” but we know based on
research that natural gas is a bridge to nowhere.
Mr. President, we were heartened when you proclaimed your intention to
act quickly to combat climate change in your 2013 inaugural address,
stating that “we will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing
that failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”
Those words were inspiring, and last weekend 50,000 people came to
Washington D.C., to support you in those efforts. But actions speak
louder than words and appointing a strong proponent of extracting dirty
fossil fuels as our nation’s energy secretary will lead us in the wrong
direction.
The person you choose as Secretary of Energy will be key to charting
how we address climate change. We desperately need to move away from
dirty fossil fuels towards a clean energy future, and we need an energy
secretary who has the vision and the independence to do this. Please
select someone who will fill that vision and do not appoint Dr. Ernest
Moniz.
Citations for documentation of risks and impacts to air and water:
Bamberger, Michelle and Robert E. Oswald. “Impacts of gas drilling on human and animal health.” New Solutions, Scientific Solutions, vol. 22, iss. 1. January 2012 at 51 to 77
Colborn, Theo et al. “Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective." International Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, vol. 17, iss. 5. September 2011 at 1041 and 1042
Entrekin, Sally et al. “Rapid expansion of natural gas development poses a threat to surface waters.” Frontiers in Ecology, vol. 9, iss. 9. October 2011 at 503
Finley, Bruce. “Drilling spills rise in Colorado, but fines rare.” The Denver Post. September 9, 2011.
Gilman, Jessica B. et al. “Source signature of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from oil and natural gas operations in northeastern Colorado.” Environmental Science & Technology. Accepted for publication January 14, 2013.
Kusnetz, Nicholas. “North Dakota’s oil boom brings damage along with prosperity.” ProPublica. June 7, 2012.
Lustgarten, Abrahm. “Buried Secrets: Is natural gas drilling endangering U.S. water supplies?” ProPublica. November 13, 2008.
McKenzie, Lisa M. et al. “Human health risk assessment of air emissions
from development of unconventional natural gas resources.” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 424. May 2012 at 79 to 87
Myers, Tom. “Potential contaminant pathways from hydraulically fractured shale to aquifers.” Ground Water. April 17, 2012 at 3 to 4
Osborn, Stephen G. et al. “Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 108, iss. 20. May 17, 2011 at 8173 and 8175.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Dangers of Hydrofracking
Dangers of hydrofracking revealed
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2013
I expect our elected officials to do the right thing
and look out for our common welfare. I also expect the press to call
officials on their “stuff” when they try to deceive the public. So I was
(once more) appalled by all the information that we have not been told
about hydrofracking. For those who haven’t watched it, I am referring to
the information shown on Canadian TV. The program was “the Nature of
Things.” The show was “Shattered Ground.” I recommend that everyone who
hasn’t seen it try to get a copy of this show.
I can’t go into all the issues, but I do want to mention the most important facts presented. The gas drillers do not know which wells will shatter as planned and which wells will shatter vertically into an aquifer. The drillers do not know how to clean up the contamination once it enters the aquifer. They do not know which wells will have their cement liners crack under the force of the high pressure water used in the process. What we do know is that contaminated water can’t be cleaned properly and changed back into drinkable water. I had thought that the water was being sent to filtration plants, but apparently it didn’t work.
We know that vast amounts of our drinking water are used to drill each well, and it is brought in by an army of huge trucks. This water must then be trucked away and buried deep underground, where it is lost for human consumption forever. This process has caused earthquakes. We are talking of whole lakes’ worth of our water gone forever with no one saying “No, we can’t afford to lose this much drinkable water!” Why is only this lone Canadian show talking about this?
The show also reported that the poisonous fumes from the operating wells are allowed to release over 1,300 tons of toxic fumes including neurotoxins into the air every day, and wells can be within 350 feet of a residence. Kids are coming down with all kinds of respiratory symptoms. No one has done any long-term studies of health effects. What has happened to environmental impact studies?
According to the show, methane gas levels reached explosive levels in homes after a well as put in..
The industry has rushed in for profits before the technology is ready and only Vermont has banned hydrofracking. Who really benefits from the drilling, and who is really paying the price?
The madness must end. The problems need to be solved first. Please write our state officials.
Claudia Smith
Watertown
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
NYS Health Commissioner Shah: DOH Needs More Time
Shah: Fracking health review needs time (updated)
E-mail
Print
From the letter:
The time to ensure the impacts on public health are properly considered is before a state permits drilling. Other states began serious health reviews only after proceeding with widespread HVHF.Here’s Martens’ statement in response:
In my view, that is not the right approach for New York to take if we are serious that public health is the paramount question in making the HVHF decision. And as Health Commissioner, protecting the public health is my primary job.
The Department of Health review of the EIS is on-going. In particular we are focused on the relationship of HVHF to the health impacts of drinking water contamination, but also other areas such as air quality and community impacts.
In recent weeks, work has been initiated or published by the scientific community to analyze these health impacts and which may help in addressing these areas. These are the first comprehensive studies of HVHF health impacts at either the state or federal level. They include:
As we have been reviewing the scope of these studies, I have determined — and prudence dictates — that the DOH Public Health Review will require additional time to complete based on the complexity of the issues. My team and I will be in Pennsylvania and Washington in the coming days for first-hand briefings on these studies and their progress, which will assist in informing the New York review. I have also extended the term of the DOH outside expert researchers to continue to assist my review. I anticipate delivering the completed Public Health Review to you within a few weeks, along with my recommendations.
- The US EPA hydraulic fracturing study. This is a study of potential impacts of HVHF on drinking water resources. Commissioned by Congress, this includes 18 research related projects. The EPA published a 278 page progress report a few weeks ago which we are reviewing.
- Geisinger Health Systems study. Geisinger, which cares for many patients in areas where shale gas is being developed in Pennsylvania, is undertaking studies to analyze health records for asthma and other respiratory diseases, accidents and injuries, as well as birth outcomes.
- University of Pennsylvania study. A study of HVHF health impacts was recently announced, led by researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and in collaboration with scientists from Columbia, Johns Hopkins and the University of North Carolina.
From the inception of this process, the Governor’s instruction has been to let the science determine the outcome. As a physician and scientist, I could not agree more.
Whatever the ultimate decision on HVHF going ahead, New Yorkers can be assured that it will be pursuant to a rigorous review that takes the time to examine the relevant health issues.
Commissioner Shah advised me today that the Public Health Review of the Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS) of high-volume hydraulic fracturing is still on-going.
The Department of Health’s (DOH) Public Health Review, which was undertaken at my request, is important to our consideration of high-volume hydraulic fracturing and I will not issue a final SGEIS until that review is complete and I have received Dr. Shah’s recommendations. He has indicated he expects his review to be complete in a few weeks after he has had an opportunity to review recent studies underway which are pertinent to the evaluation of high-volume hydraulic fracturing impacts on public health.
The previously proposed high-volume hydraulic fracturing regulations cannot be finalized until the SGEIS is complete. However, this does not mean that the issuance of permits for high-volume hydraulic fracturing would be delayed. If the DOH Public Health Review finds that the SGEIS has adequately addressed health concerns, and I adopt the SGEIS on that basis, DEC can accept and process high-volume hydraulic fracturing permit applications 10 days after issuance of the SGEIS. The regulations simply codify the program requirements.
If, on the other hand, the DOH review finds that there is a public health concern that has not been assessed in the SGEIS or properly mitigated, we would not proceed, as I have stated in the past.
In either event, the science, not emotion, will determine the outcome.
Monday, February 11, 2013
OH FRACK!
Frackin’ Andy. Cuomo Gets Sued
Cuomo Refuses to Release Science that Proposed Frack Regulations are Premised Upon
As the DEC and Governor Cuomo contemplate their next step in the ongoing sham of a fracking review process, the DEC continues to refuse to release the scientific reports that the proposed high volume horizontal fracking regulations are required to be premised upon. Under New York law, the DEC must release within thirty days after being asked all scientific studies that are used as the basis for a proposed rule. On this past January 11th, we requested copies of all reports that formed the basis for the proposed fracking regulations.The DEC had until today, February 11th, to respond, and has failed to. Today CEDC sent a letter to the DEC demanding that the records be made available immediately and put the DEC on notice that if it fails to respond that we will bring a suit to compel production of the reports and to stop the proposed regulations from being enacted.Read the letter here: CEDC Letter to DEC
Saturday, February 9, 2013
Towns Will Face Significant Fiscal Impacts
Is hydrofracking an unfunded mandate? (video added)
The group, which includes 612 members and includes outspoken officials such as Thompson County legislator Martha Robertson just held a press conference. Some of their concerns echoed those issued on Tuesday by the state Association of Counties, which is calling for the state to analyze local government costs of hydrofracking if it begins.
The process, of course, isn’t currently allowed in New York and the debate over whether it should or shouldn’t be allowed is taking much of the air out of broader environmental discussions such as the budget hearing earlier this week.
Update: Here’s video from the press conference:
Here’s their release:
On the heels of a statement from the New York State Association of Counties calling fracking a new mandate and questioning how fracking will impact municipal budgets, Elected Officials to Protect New York (EOPNY) held a press conference detailing the costs of fracking on local governments and economies and called fracking a new unfunded mandate. EOPNY is a nonpartisan, geographically diverse group of 612 local elected officials from all 62 New York State counties. New York State’s fracking review has exhaustively considered – and significantly inflated – potential benefits of fracking but has entirely neglected to analyze negative municipal and economic impacts, leaving local governments and communities in a dangerous position as a key fracking decision deadline closes in. They concluded that, given the many remaining unanswered questions, there should be no decision by the arbitrary deadline of February 27. But if a decision must be made by then, there is enough information to say “no” to fracking in New York, but not enough to say “yes”.
EOPNY also revealed that after 7 months of requesting a meeting to discuss their concerns, Governor Cuomo formally rejected their request, even though he met with representatives of the gas industry on May 9, 2012, yet to public knowledge has not met with anyone with concerns about fracking. They also revealed (attached) back and forth letters with DEC Commissioner Martens, in which the elected officials have been met with a frustrating level of secrecy.
“There are major costs associated with fracking that the state has acknowledged but not analyzed or planned for,” said Tompkins County Legislature Chair Martha Robertson. “Those include significant municipal, community, economic, public health, and environmental costs. As it stands, fracking stands to jeopardize our constituents’ health and well-being, meanwhile creating a new unfunded mandate on local governments.”
The elected officials noted that predictions of economic benefits have not held true in Pennsylvania and other states where fracking is already happening, and that they are based on inflated and outdated shale gas reserve estimates.
“The gas industry’s claims of job creation are wildly overstated and most of the drilling jobs go to non-local workers. Estimates of jobs and tax revenues are based on gas reserve estimates significantly greater than what the latest U.S. Geological Survey study shows,” said Town of Rochester Supervisor Carl Chipman. “It is unconscionable that New Yorkers are being asked to accept so much risk based on the pivotal promise of jobs and tax revenues, when the promises appear to be spin and propaganda.”
The DEC’s own study, consulted out to Ecology & Environment, Inc., identifies that local governments would experience “some significant negative fiscal impacts” due to fracking including “road construction, improvement, and repair expenditures…expenditures on emergency services such as fire, police, and first aid…additional expenditures on public water supply systems…local governments would be required to increase expenditures on other services, such as education, housing, health and welfare, recreation, and solid waste management to serve the additional population”.
Shockingly, that is where the state’s report ends, with no analysis and no numbers. There is no analysis or evaluation to inform a decision about fracking and there is no plan to avert heavy burdens on local governments and economies.
“Fracking is a new unfunded mandate on local governments. The DEC’s own report said so,” said Albany County Legislator Bryan Clenahan.
The officials noted that they have long called for the state to do a thorough socioeconomic analysis. Town of Otsego Councilmember Julie Huntsman said, “The DEC has failed in its responsibility to property analyze the socioeconomic impacts of fracking and as such does not fulfill basic SEQRA requirements.”
EOPNY has pursued a meeting with Governor Cuomo since June, as his partners in government who are concerned about fracking. They objected to the fact that the governor has met with representatives of the out-of-state oil & gas industry but will not meet with representatives of a group of 600+ elected officials from across the state. Town of Pulteney Supervisor Jane Russell said, “We question the Governor’s priorities if he has time to meet with representatives of the fracking industry but no time to meet with the representatives of our mutual constituents, the people of New York.”
Binghamton Mayor Matt Ryan, Owego Mayor Kevin Millar, and Elmira Mayor Sue Skidmore released this joint statement, “As mayors from the largest cities in the Southern Tier, we are greatly concerned about the municipal costs and economic impacts of fracking. The Cuomo administration’s review noted potential impacts but entirely neglected to study them, instead only presenting potential benefits based on outdated and inflated gas reserve estimates. Governor Cuomo does not have the economic information to make an informed decision about fracking, and fracking threatens to jeopardize already-struggling local governments’ economic vitality, and the public health of our citizens.”
The officials also raised grave concerns about the secrecy and inadequacy of the state’s health review. EOPNY has called for a comprehensive health impact assessment, as well as for public comment and participation on the current review.
“Many health professionals have raised essential questions on this topic, but the administration has failed to answer them,” said Village of Cooperstown Trustee James Dean. “What are they hiding? We believe that a health review done in secret, with no public participation whatsoever, is insufficient to address the significant concerns to public health from fracking.”
The officials revealed a letter they received in January from DEC Commissioner Martens in response to a letter EOPNY sent him in early December. Martens’ letter was filled with empty assurances, continued the state’s secrecy around fracking, and contained no substantive responses to the concerns raised.
EOPNY released their January 28, 2013 letter responding to Martens, which ended, “We believe that New York State has not met its legal responsibility or its good government responsibility to thoroughly study all concerns related to fracking, allow public participation, and give adequate consideration to concerns raised by the public. For these reasons we believe the state does not have the grounds to allow fracking. If you must make a decision at this time, the precautionary principle dictates that your agency must choose to prohibit it.”
After the press conference, the officials delivered a letter to Governor Cuomo on behalf of EOPNY that raises concerns about speculation that the state is considering allowing ten to forty fracking wells potentially described as a demonstration project.
The letter states, “We do not see this as a viable option. We believe that under such a plan the gas industry or other entities would sue to open up other areas of the state, and that you would in effect leave the fate of all our constituents in the hands of the legal system. It is highly questionable that the state could have the ability to pick and choose permits for even a small fracking pilot program in the Southern Tier. Against your best intentions, we fear that opening the door to the gas industry for even one well could turn into an uncontrollable situation.”
Other elected officials at the press conference included Town of Clay Supervisor Damian M. Ulatowski, Albany County Legislator Doug Bullock, and Albany County Legislator Charlie Dawson, Albany Common Councilmember Dominick Calsolaro.
Monday, February 4, 2013
SANE ENERGY PROJECT FEBRUARY 4, 2013
|
||||||||||||
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)