Don’t Frack Up Central New York
Spencer Noyes
There is no doubt that our country is dependent on non-renewable
resources, especially petroleum products. This vast global supply is
slowly dwindling, and newer forms of energy to quench our insatiable
thirst for energy are on the rise. Of these, one of the most hotly and
widely debated is natural gas. Underneath our domestic soils are upwards
of five hundred trillion cubic feet of natural gas trapped in a geologic
formation called the Marcellus Shale, which stretches underneath New York,
Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio at about 1000 feet below the surface.
At first glance, natural gas looks like our solution to energy demands;
it burns more cleanly and has a lower carbon footprint than oil, we can
extract it, and there is said “…to be enough of it to power the entire
East Coast for fifty years.” (“Fracking” Debate Draws Hundreds” 1) To
date, the only process to effectively extract the natural gas is called
hydraulic fracturing, or “hydrofracking,” combined with horizontal
drilling in the shale. What these truths about the benefits of natural
gas fail to reveal is that the process of hydrofracking is contaminating
fresh ground water that tens of millions of people depend on.
Contamination is due mostly to chemicals used in fracking fluid and loose
regulations of those chemicals. When combined with horizontal drilling
(the only way to get at gas in the Marcellus Shale), hydrofracking has
been causing widespread contamination of groundwater in Pennsylvania
(Fox).
This essay will concentrate on several view points of the issue such as a
general overview of the hydrofracking process, a worst-case scenario of
what could happen to my family’s land in central New York and my proposal
plan to raise awareness in my area about the dangers of hydrofracking.
The process of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling is an
ingenious method of extracting natural gas. A vertical drill bit is used
to drill all the way down to the Marcellus Shale formation, up to 8,900
feet under the ground. Once the shale is reached, the drilling continues
horizontally, therefore allowing maximum surface area to be fractured.
Then, a liquid mixture of water, sand and chemicals are pumped down into
the shale at extremely high pressure. (“Fracking” Debate Draws Hundreds”,
CBSnews.com) This causes the shale to crack or fracture, therefore
releasing the natural gas that was once trapped in the layers of shale.
On the surface, this process seems benign. What makes hydrofracking so
harmful is the chemicals used in the fracking fluid. Through a loophole
in the Clean Water Act, disclosure of chemicals is not required. This
gives natural gas companies the leeway to put any chemical in the ground
and not have to tell what it is. There is debate about how much and how
many chemicals are actually used in the fracking fluid, but it is a known
fact that carcinogenic chemicals like benzene have been found in the
contaminated groundwater. Reports vary widely from 90 to over 500
chemicals found in the fluid. No matter what the number of chemicals may
be, just one of those chemicals has enough power to contaminate an entire
watershed. Chemicals could seep into ground water and wells, polluting
drinking water. One of the biggest problems with the fracking fluid is
storage. There is no way to safely store used fluid, or “residual fluid”.
Current methods of storage include metal holding tanks and dug out catch
ponds, where the fluid sits stagnant. (Fox, Josh. Gasland) [CITE ALL
THIS INFO]
Natural gas companies are starting to buy up lease rights from central New
York landowners. One company in particular that I will focus on is Mason
Dixon Natural Resources, LLC, from West Virginia. This company contacted
my family in regards to leasing mineral rights on our 201 acres of land in
Madison County, New York. They were first going to do seismic testing to
determine if our land lay above a concentration of gas-bearing Marcellus
shale and was suitable topographically for drill placement. The lease
agreement was for five years. They paid us $596.58 per calendar year; if
a commercially viable gas layer was found, developed and separated, we
would be paid a per annum royalty, as well as payments of a similar
royalty to the other owners of our lease section on which our land was
situated. Seismic testing showed the best site to drill was on our
neighbor’s property less than five miles down the road. They drilled a
test well there and hit a pocket of natural gas, creating a spectacular
flare out the top of the well site, but the flare died out in half an
hour. It turned out to be an “erratic” pocket. At the time, we were all
bummed out because we had heard stories of landowners turning into
“overnight millionaires” if natural gas was found on their land. Then,
most everyone viewed natural gas drilling as the next best thing. Little
did we know how wrong our views were. Our views started to change when
water contamination in Pennsylvania started to surface in the news and
came into the public spotlight.
Most of the state of Pennsylvania lies over the Marcellus Shale formation.
Hydrofracking with horizontal drilling has been going on there for a few
years and people’s drinking water has been contaminated. Folks have even
been able to light their faucets on fire due to hydrofracking fluids and
methane gas leaking into the water table. (Fox, Josh. Gasland) An example
of this can be seen in Dimock, PA. Eight thousand gallons of left over
fracking fluid were spilled into the ground. (ProPublica, “Fracking Fluid
Spill in Pennsylvania) It seeped into a local creek, causing a massive
fish kill. (ProPublica, “Fracking Fluid Spill in Pennsylvania) Last
winter, tests done on residents’ drinking water revealed metals and
methane gas present. The company responsible, Halliburton, released a
data sheet that supposedly reported all chemicals in the spilled fluid and
said it was basically harmless. It says, ”…the mixture that spilled is
99.5 percent freshwater," and "…is not dangerous or hazardous” (Mall).
Though these quotes don’t directly spell out all chemicals used, they
blatantly admit that “some” fluid was spilled. It doesn’t matter if 99.5%
was fresh water, because .5% in toxic chemicals is enough to contaminate a
large amount of water. They are using the number closest to the
psychological comfort number of “100%”. They want us to think that .5% is
nothing to be worried about. This is just one of the many reported cases
of water contamination throughout Pennsylvania and other sates.
Instances like Dimock have made the outcry on banning hydrofracking so
intense that an affected resident named Josh Fox made a documentary called
Gasland. This documentary hit theatres in October of 2010. Though fairly
new, it has caused quite a stir. It brings to light how environmentally
harmful hydrofracking is and condemns the alleged corruption of natural
gas companies.
While watching Gasland, it became more and more apparent to me just how
easily my own backyard could be destroyed just like Fox’s. All the
geographical landscapes in the documentary looked eerily similar to mine
at home: the rural, rolling hills in his small Northeastern Pennsylvania
hometown looked like the landscape I am accustomed to and have grown to
love at home in Oneida, NY. I decided to think of what a worst-case
scenario would look like if hydrofracking were to occur on my land. This
is what I came up with.
My family owns 201 acres of land. About 135 are tillable, the others
forested. The land is divided onto two farms, called Tiller farm and Hexa
farm. Each parcel of land is very special to me in different ways. It is
on these two farms that I learned to love and appreciate the natural world
through hunting and fishing. On the Tiller farm is a small four acre pond
that I still love to fish to this very day. The Hexa farm is where I
harvested my first animals such as whitetail deer and wild turkeys. These
two farms are a personal religious retreat. They allow me to be intimate
with nature. Without these two pieces of land, I would be a changed
person. I love who I am right now. I do not want to change. I sure as
hell am not going to put the fate of my personality in the hands of an
energy company.
This past Thanksgiving vacation, I spent much of the time up at the Hexa
farm hunting. Many times while sitting in my tree stand or blind, I would
look out into the open fields and try to picture what a drill site would
look like on my land. Each image I would conjure up made me cringe. I
pictured my land pock-marked with drill rigs, strewn with dozens of
tractor-trailers and covered with roads and storage containers. These
images made me upset. I became more and more attached to my property. I
couldn’t imagine destroying such a beautiful piece of land. During the
last hour of the last day of vacation I shot a decent sized buck. As I
was basking in the pure adrenaline rush that overcame me, I began to
wonder, could this hunt have happened if a well site were on my land? Is
receiving royalties from energy companies worth losing the freedom to hunt
deer? How can I convince others that hydrofracking will ruin the land and
contaminate water? These burning questions made me realize that I needed
to take action.
The land I hunt is sacred to me. I know and appreciate almost every
square inch of it. I have spent countless hours patterning deer movement,
where they feed, bed and hide. It is my sanctuary. It’s a place where I
can escape the hectic, fast paced lifestyle forced upon us and live on
nature’s time clock. Drilling for natural gas would shatter all of this I
have come to love. These two sacred grounds could be forever altered and
essentially destroyed if hydrofracking occurred in my area. I would never
even think about giving up my land to energy companies and having passions
yanked right out from underneath me. What really scares me is that
whatever damage is done is almost irreversible. Forever changing my
personal sanctuary would kill me inside and take a chunk of out of my
heart, not to mention ending the possibility of hunting on my land.
Conjuring up an image of dozens of fish such as bass, perch and bluegills,
belly up on the Tiller farm pond is horrifying to me. That stuff only
happens in movies, right? This scene could all too well happen, just like
fish kill in the creek in Dimock, PA if hydrofracking fluid were spilled
on my land. It could also affect residences several miles away that lie
within the local watershed. Hundreds of chemicals, some known to be
carcinogenic, would absolutely wreak havoc not only on my beloved Tiller
pond, but also all the creeks and streams that flow down from the East
hill in Madison County, NY. Drinking water supplies would be contaminated
for my family and thousands of others.
Other people in my area are connected to their land just like I am. I
know this because I encounter them during the hunting and fishing seasons.
Our paths will cross while in the field. These encounters almost always
end up in trading stories of the year’s triumphs and failures. I have
also fished on the Tiller pond with fathers and their sons, witnessing the
age-old tradition of the father showing the right of passage to their
young ones. These lessons and conversations are essential parts of my
experience. They are some of my earliest memories. What I learn from
these conversations and connections is that most locals love and deeply
care for the natural world. Building connections through nature gives me
peace of mind. I do not want to see hydrofracking destroy my land, nor
does the next guy who lives in my town. A majority of locals share a
common, almost unspoken, bond to the land.
On the Hexa farm is where I really worry about the effects of
hydrofracking. The water quality issue isn’t so much a factor, but the
topographical landscape might change. As mentioned earlier, the well site
would be relatively small. The small sizes of the well sites do not
represent the enormity of the entire process though. Drilling just one
well site requires millions of gallons of water and chemicals to
hydrofrack. This requires a constant stream of tractor-trailer sized rigs
supplying the site. Imagine what thousands of eighteen-wheelers driving
on farmland would do to it. It would scar the land immensely. If
drilling were to happen on my land, it would drive away all the animals I
love to hunt. I could not live with this scenario. This is why I am so
scared of what hydrofracking can do if it is allowed in my area. As a
family, we are one hundred percent against hydrofracking. Unfortunately,
the same can’t be said for some other residents in my area.
Dairy farms dominate the area, and if the contamination got bad enough the
entire industry could falter, further harming central New York’s
struggling agricultural economy. This presents a catch-22 for struggling
dairy farmers. Farmers in need of money can sell their mineral rights and
collect royalties, while leaving their land vulnerable to fracking fluid
contamination. If they don’t decide to sell mineral rights, family income
will be solely from selling dairy products, which is not sufficient enough
these days. Their land will be “protected” but still risk water
contamination from another well site.
As with any controversial issue, there are two sides to the argument.
Hydrofracking is no different. Both sides have legitimate arguments.
These points have been argued in public forums across New York State,
giving New York citizens a chance to be heard. People in favor of
hydrofracking have only one main point to argue. They are in favor of it
because there is a potential for them to become rich off the royalties
from the mineral leases. Borderline poverty farmers and landowners in the
southern-tier of New York State have become very wealthy overnight thanks
to natural gas found under their land. If the moratorium on drilling for
natural gas is lifted, then drilling could become widespread in central
New York, because an abundance of people in borderline poverty are farmers
looking to make money at any cost. To sugar coat this personal economic
argument, other arguments have been made such as: Drilling for natural gas
will bring jobs to the area. Natural gas is a good, clean energy. Some
go as far to say that hydrofracking is a safe practice.
An example of this can be seen in my local newspaper, The Oneida Daily
Dispatch. In recent months there have been full-page advertisements by a
pro-drilling group called ANGA (America’s Natural Gas Alliance). These
ads are aimed at people in my area. One ad has a picture of a roughneck
man wearing the stereotypical navy blue Dickie’s work shirt. The heading
of the ad reads, “Meet Michael Austin. Cambell native. Dad. Small
business owner. Supporter of natural gas.” (Advertisement in Oneida Daily
Dispatch. October 25th, 2010. 16. Print.) This man is a snapshot of a
majority of male residents in my town: a hard worker and family oriented.
What this ad is trying to do is persuade people like “Michael Austin”
that supporting natural gas will relieve financial stress. The other ad
by ANGA is a picture of a middle-aged woman dressed like a stereotypical
soccer mom. The ad uses the same style as the ad mentioned above, just in
a different town. This woman, Julie Amsden, is trying to persuade the
female community to support natural gas. She argues, “It will bring huge
economic benefits to the area and help families with income problems.”
(Advertisement Oneida Daily Dispatch. October 23rd, 2010. 16. Print.)
On the flip side of the argument, citizens say that the long-term
contamination of groundwater outweighs the short-term economic gain
argument. Another argument is the fact that natural gas companies don’t
have to reveal what chemicals are used in the fracking fluid due to the
loophole in the Clean Water Act. Those chemicals will poison the
groundwater and the waste water they inhabit cannot be safely stored.
Trucks used to supply the drill site will also have a considerable impact
on the environment. Each well site requires millions of gallons of fresh
water. This will have an enormous impact on the availability of fresh
drinking water for area residents. I fully agree with all of these
arguments.
I have come up with a plan to raise even more awareness in my area about
the dangers of hydrofracking. I have two angles of attack. First, I will
try to inform farmers directly about the dangers of hydrofracking. Energy
companies are promising royalty payments if they are allowed to drill on
privately owned land. Money is a powerful and influential tool that I
plan to squash by speaking directly with farmers about what their land and
lives could become if they allow drilling. I will use my father’s
connections to local landowners. He has been renting out our land to
local farmers for over forty years. Over those years he has made some
tight connections. Naturally, he is “in the loop” with area farmers,
often catching word of what’s going on socially in our area. I will use
these connections and personally go talk to these farmers, some of whom I
know well, and inform them of what could possibly take place in the near
future. I will be using these connections for a specific purpose.
Farmers tend to live a low-key lifestyle, and this is no different in my
area. They keep to themselves and work extremely hard just to make ends
meet. Over the years, of accompanying my father when he talks to our
renters, I have noticed one thing: they genuinely care about the land.
That is why, when I talk to the farmers about hydrofracking, I will focus
in on water contamination. I will explain how hydrofracking could and
will contaminate fresh water, a lifeline to their wellbeing. Without
fresh water, the cows won’t be able to drink. If the cows can’t drink,
then they will die of dehydration. Dead cows can’t produce the milk,
which farmers sell to generate income. Hopefully, this very real and
scary picture will outweigh the pledges natural gas companies promise to
pay and convince the farmers to not let them drill. The farming community
in my area is closely knit, so I am betting that word will spread about my
activism and will lead to more one-on-one talks with farmers/landowners.
Secondly, I plan to hold a screening of the documentary by Josh Fox,
Gasland. This documentary is based on a Dimock, PA native and landowner,
Josh Fox. Fox’s family was approached by a drilling company seeking
mineral rights to his land. Unsure of what his land might become, Fox set
out on a cross-country journey interviewing people in different states
whose situations are like his. He wanted to know first hand what damages
hydrofracking was capable of. In the documentary, Fox uncovers horrific
stories of just how malign hydrofracking is. He uncovers families who
can’t drink their water anymore because it is contaminated. Family
members show him water samples from their faucets that are brown, grey and
orange in color. It also shows how energy companies responsible for
contamination will lie and deny that contamination resulted from
hydrofracking. An example of this is when Fox tries interviewing a
family, but he can’t get their perspective on hydrofracking because the
energy company paid the family not to talk about the water contamination.
One of the most compelling scenes of the movie is when Fox shows an
infrared image of one of the residual fluid holding tanks. The infrared
shows radioactive “waves” and “smoke” billowing out of the enclosed steel
tanks. To the naked eye, though, these tanks seem harmless. You aren’t
able to see what’s inside. In reality, extremely dangerous fluid occupies
these holding tanks.
Having watched this documentary myself, I know how powerful it is. It
does an amazing job of showing just how damaging hydrofracking is. It
also encourages political activism from the citizens, which can be
extremely effective. I believe this angle of attack to be most potent
because a vast majority of people in my area do not know about Gasland. I
know for a fact that it will turn some heads. I believe this because the
affected people in Gasland are just like people in my area; hard working
American farmers and citizens; the backbone of America. We can all relate
to their struggles. We will feel sympathy for them. We will not let
natural gas companies drill in our area.
Along with these efforts of mine to raise awareness, Gasland will really
drive home my solution plan of keeping hydrofracking out of my area.
Gasland is the cornerstone to my solution plan. I will tell the residents
and landowners in my area to come see this film. It is paramount that
they come watch it because it is my credibility source if farmers and
landowners doubt me. The affected Pennsylvania citizens in Gasland are
just like Oneida, NY residents and they live just a few hours from us!
Most of the documentary focuses on Northern Pennsylvania, which is less
than three hours from my hometown. Seeing the jars of brown water, people
lighting their faucets on fire and families being screwed over by natural
gas companies can all refute any doubt. What would make this plan of
attack even better would be for Josh Fox to actually come and speak in my
town. He is passionate about keeping the environment clean and exposing
natural gas companies for whom they really are. All of this will
hopefully make local residents say NO to hydrofracking on their land.
Activism can be effective when done the right way. It takes passion,
commitment and determination to make waves, but it’s possible. As shown
in Gasland, local forums and the widely covered E.P.A forums in Binghamton
and Syracuse, average citizens can make a difference. Standing up to
natural gas corporations may seem like a daunting task, but, if enough
voices are heard, changes can be made.
This can be seen in the town of Skaneateles, NY. The town board passed a
law banning natural gas drilling within the town for 6 months.
(“Skaneateles Bans”) If more and more towns act like Skaneateles did,
energy companies will have a tough time obtaining drilling rights. The
town of Skaneateles, NY is wealthy. It is an affluent town mostly
inhabited by Syracuse business employees. They have access to money. My
town is made up of mostly middle class workers and farmers. Admittedly,
it will be harder to organize my town than a wealthier Skaneateles-caliber
town. Farmers and middle class workers just don’t have the time or money.
However, one thing working in their favor is that they have an iron will.
Their moral strength and determination is unmatched, in my eyes. If push
comes to shove, action will happen. We are a tightly knit community and
activism will become infectious, especially if the farming community
spearheads it. On the whole, farmers in my area are respected for their
rigorous lifestyle. We will feel empathy for their passion and hop on the
bandwagon even if it means sacrifice. Oneida, NY can be the next
Skaneateles. Writing to locally and state elected officials is another
way to start getting our voice heard. Since they are elected by us
citizens, it is in their interest to fight for what’s right.
As of now, there is a moratorium in New York State on natural gas drilling
while scientific research is done to determine whether or not
hydrofracking with horizontal drilling is safe enough. During this
moratorium, the Environmental Protection Agency held a public forum in
Binghamton. The Binghamton forum was widely covered due to its geographic
location near Pennsylvania where hydrofracking has damaged the
environment. One Dimock, PA resident brought a jug of yellowish water
collected from his well to show the contamination from hydrofracking.
What the E.P.A said at the forum was that hydrofracking does and doesn’t
contaminate water. (EPA. “Hydrofracking Research Study.”) Under perfect
conditions and tight regulations, yes, hydrofracking can be safe. On the
other hand, current regulations and conditions give hydrofracking the
potential to contaminate water due to the loophole in the Clean Water Act.
This public forum did a good job of informing citizens and bringing the
issue into the spotlight, but it failed to produce a clear view of the
EPA’s stance.
A study done in 2004 by the EPA ruled that hydrofracking was an inherently
safe practice. This cleared all obstacles for the exemption of natural
gas companies from any requirement to disclose chemicals used in the
fracking fluid. Today, we see that the 2004 report was critically flawed.
Recently, Congress required the EPA to conduct new research on the
affects of hydrofracking. The EPA wanted to do a more thorough job this
time and held public forums in Binghamton and Syracuse to hear different
opinions.
The recent political elections have perhaps changed the likelihood of one
side or the other prevailing. If the New York State Assembly does return
to Republican hands, there is an increased chance that hydrofracking
advocates will prevail. Governor-elect Cuomo’s position on the issue is
as yet unknown. Although the EPA and DEC have been urged by some
anti-fracking activists to control regulation of hydrofracking, so far no
law has been passed federalizing such regulation. Thus, New York State
and Albany politics are still in the driver’s seat.
If one word could describe the current state of natural gas drilling, it
would be “uncertain”. Out of all this uncertainty, though, there is one
thing that is certain: if the moratorium is lifted and natural gas
drilling does get the green light, I will do my absolute best to try and
stop it from happening in my area of Central New York. There is too much
at risk and too much beautiful land at stake just to drill for another
non-renewable energy source that certainly will not cure our energy
problems.
Resources Consulted:
“Natural Gas “Fracking” Debate Draws Hundreds.” CBSnews.com. September
2010. Web. November 2010.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/13/national/main6862186.shtml
“Natural Gas Hydrofracking.” Citizenscampaign.org. 2010. Web. November 2010.
http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/hydro-fracking.asp
Drever, James I. The Geochemistry of Natural Waters: Surface and
Groundwater Environments. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
Inc., 1997. Print.
“About Natural Gas.” Energytomorrow.org. 2010. Web. November 2010.
http://energytomorrow.org/About_Natural_Gas.aspx?gclid=CM-T7u7njqQCFctw5QodQDI_YQ
EPA. “Hydrofracking Research Study.” Web. October 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/pdfs/hfresearchstudyfs.pdf
NPR. Fox, Josh. Living in the Middle of a Gasland. June 10, 2010. Web.
November 2010.
Lal, Rattan. Encyclopedia of Soil Sciences. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC P,
2006. Print.
“Lawsuit.” Syracuse.com. September 2010. Web. October 2010.
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/09/lawsuit_hydrofracking_flui
Mall, Amy. “Dimock, Pennsylvania: A community paying the price for natural
gas production with hydraulic fracturing fluid spills.” Blog entry for
NRDC.org. Web. October 2010.
Oneida Daily Dispatch. October 25th, 2010. Print
Oneida Daily Dispatch. October 23rd, 2010. Print
“Skaneateles Bans Hydrofracking.” 9wsyr.com. July 2010. Web. October 2010.
http://www.9wsyr.com/news/local/story/Skaneateles-bans-hydrofracking-for-six-months/y5CdmjtfKU-EPaUkqlF3LA.cspx
No comments:
Post a Comment