Hydrofracking is the greatest environmental threat to New York - in history.
Resist and keep our water pure... or 80,000 of THESE will wreck it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Stiles - RIP
(Bradford Co. - PA) Carl and his wife Jude abandoned their home last November at the urging of a toxicologist who found barium, arsenic and VOC's (volatile organic chemicals) in Carl's blood. He had intestinal cancer which be blamed on Chesapeake's shale-gas drilling. In the short video below, he's on the right.
_
Oneida County Considers Ban
__ January 24, 2012 (Utica O-D) Members of the Oneida County
legislature are proposing that the county ban high volume hydraulic fracturing,
known as hydrofracking, on county owned property until more is known about the
long term impacts of the process, a release from two county legislators said.
The bill, sponsored by Republican Emil Paparella of Utica, and Democrat Chad Davis if Clinton, along with several other legislators, will go before the Board’s Ways and Means Committee Feb. 8.
Davis and Paparella said too many unanswered questions still remain about the entire process and that there is a real need to further identify, study and evaluate the environmental, cumulative, financial and public health impacts that hydrofracking will have in Central New York.
Members of the Oneida County legislature are proposing that the county ban high volume hydraulic fracturing, known as hydrofracking, on county owned property until more is known about the long term impacts of the process, a release from two county legislators said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact your county legislator and ask them to support the hydrofracking ban on county land.
Albany Demonstration
Rock solid agreement on BAN - not regulation.
January 23 (HRW) Approximately 800-1000 people assembled in Albany on Monday to rally and lobby the Governor and legislature for a state-wide ban on the dangerous form of methane shale-gas extraction known as hydrofracking. HRW sent a deligation of eight people. Sen. Avella forcefully said that this is a process that can not, even under the best circumstances, be regulated by the state - it must be prohibited. To that end he is encouraging support for his bill S-4220A which would modify the state's environmental law so as to ban the permitting of this activity and others like it - the processing and dumping of fracking waste water, for example. Some would like to see legislation that would hold corporate executives personally responsible for any violations - that is to criminalize fracking and make violations a class C felony.
Here's a good audio report by Karen DeWitt
The bill, sponsored by Republican Emil Paparella of Utica, and Democrat Chad Davis if Clinton, along with several other legislators, will go before the Board’s Ways and Means Committee Feb. 8.
Davis and Paparella said too many unanswered questions still remain about the entire process and that there is a real need to further identify, study and evaluate the environmental, cumulative, financial and public health impacts that hydrofracking will have in Central New York.
Members of the Oneida County legislature are proposing that the county ban high volume hydraulic fracturing, known as hydrofracking, on county owned property until more is known about the long term impacts of the process, a release from two county legislators said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact your county legislator and ask them to support the hydrofracking ban on county land.
Albany Demonstration
Rock solid agreement on BAN - not regulation.
January 23 (HRW) Approximately 800-1000 people assembled in Albany on Monday to rally and lobby the Governor and legislature for a state-wide ban on the dangerous form of methane shale-gas extraction known as hydrofracking. HRW sent a deligation of eight people. Sen. Avella forcefully said that this is a process that can not, even under the best circumstances, be regulated by the state - it must be prohibited. To that end he is encouraging support for his bill S-4220A which would modify the state's environmental law so as to ban the permitting of this activity and others like it - the processing and dumping of fracking waste water, for example. Some would like to see legislation that would hold corporate executives personally responsible for any violations - that is to criminalize fracking and make violations a class C felony.
Here's a good audio report by Karen DeWitt
_Public Hearing - Whitestown
This is an important meeting in preparation for the passage of a moratorium - please mark your calendars:
Wednesday - February 1st 7:00PM Town Hall.
Wednesday - February 1st 7:00PM Town Hall.
You can't drink shale gas
Excellent new article from the "Forth Worth Weekly" on the EPA proven pollution of well water in Pavillion WY. See INFO - Pavillion
_Bulgaria Bans Hydrofracking
By Elizabeth Konstantinova and Joe Carroll
Jan. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Bulgarian lawmakers banned hydraulic fracturing and established a 100 million-lev ($65 million) fine for offenders, thwarting Chevron Corp.’s plans to explore for natural-gas deposits in the Balkan country.
Lawmakers voted 166-6 to prohibit the drilling technique known as fracking. That makes Bulgaria the second country in the European Union after France to ban the process, which uses a mixture of water, sand and chemicals to open fissures in shale rocks and release gas and oil.
Jan. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Bulgarian lawmakers banned hydraulic fracturing and established a 100 million-lev ($65 million) fine for offenders, thwarting Chevron Corp.’s plans to explore for natural-gas deposits in the Balkan country.
Lawmakers voted 166-6 to prohibit the drilling technique known as fracking. That makes Bulgaria the second country in the European Union after France to ban the process, which uses a mixture of water, sand and chemicals to open fissures in shale rocks and release gas and oil.
NYS Bar Association warns how shale gas extraction could effect home bank loans. see "info" link for full report
NEW - Town-by-town update.
See "Campaigns" link above.
Keuka Citizens offer their Congratz
_ Kudos go to colleagues in
Oneida County in New York State for the powerful grassroots action that has
resulted in citizens in all but 5 of 28 municipalities being under the
protective umbrella of a ban, prohibition or moratorium against high volume
slick water hydrofracking. Action is
pending in 4 towns in the county.
A new tally approximates that over 27% of the population of central and western New York are protected.
Once again it has become crystal clear that the ability to protect citizens’ health, welfare and safety resides in home rule and local leadership. This message is reaffirmed after the President stated his ill-advised position on gas drilling that he proclaimed just this week in his state of the union address. “Safe drilling” as measured by vetted scientific research and actual experience by legions of our neighbors who have lived through the nightmare of fracking counters articulately the argument of the chief executive and his industry-tainted advisers.
As totals rise in increasing numbers of concerned and action-oriented communities, our resolve remains strong.
Best regards,
Joe Hoff, Chairman
Keuka Citizens Against Hydrofracking
A new tally approximates that over 27% of the population of central and western New York are protected.
Once again it has become crystal clear that the ability to protect citizens’ health, welfare and safety resides in home rule and local leadership. This message is reaffirmed after the President stated his ill-advised position on gas drilling that he proclaimed just this week in his state of the union address. “Safe drilling” as measured by vetted scientific research and actual experience by legions of our neighbors who have lived through the nightmare of fracking counters articulately the argument of the chief executive and his industry-tainted advisers.
As totals rise in increasing numbers of concerned and action-oriented communities, our resolve remains strong.
Best regards,
Joe Hoff, Chairman
Keuka Citizens Against Hydrofracking
About 600 attend presentation by Dr. Anthony Ingraffea in Clinton at HRW sponsored event.
Dr. Ingraffea is one of the small group of pioneers in the field of hydrofracking process by which methane is extracted from shale formations deep under the surface of the earth. He speaks with a scientific and engineering authority that few possess. His talk on November 28th in Clinton, exposed the dis-information of gas companies and revealed the real risks to the environment and human health that the large-scale roll-out of these industrializing processes would involve.
CPNY Videos
The Real Cost of Fracking- Jenny from CPNY on Vimeo.
Joe Wilson of DRAC Discusses Dryden
Ban Challenge
1. How do you feel about the energy company, Anschutz, suing Dryden? Angry—this is Goliath pushing David around
A super majority of Dryden residents want fracking banned from Dryden; so this is a Multi millionaire Ancshutz and multinational energy company trying to tell citizens of Dryden what to do and trying to make us forfeit our rights as U.S citizens
2 . Why do you think Dryden was sued?
Has to do with our Town Board election. A majority of the seats on the Town Board are up for election this November, and there is clear line between them. The Democrats, Mary Ann Sumner, Joe Solomon, and Linda Lavine are for the ban while the Republicans want fracking.
There is also an election in nearby Caroline which has the same issue; Most people are afraid of law suits of any kind, so Anschutz and the energy companies are trying to scare the voters...
3 . Why do you think Anschutz sued now when neither the SGEIS nor drilling regulations are in place?
Sure, the SGEIS says that energy companies will have to certify to the State that fracking is consistent with a Town’s Zoning Law; so if they were to be in place, it seems to me Anschutz would either have to lie or admit that fracking wasn’t permitted and not even try for a permit in Dryden.
4 . Do you think there is a connection to November's Town Election?
Again, I think it is about trying to bully voters into voting for people who favor fracking. Luckily in Dryden, neither the current Town Board nor the Democratic candidates are frightened. They know the majority of the citizens of Dryden don’t want fracking in our Town, and they will stand up for the ban.
5 . Is fracking a partisan issue in Dryden?
It wasn’t until the Republicans came out for fracking. When we gathered petitions in the Town asking the Town Board to pass a ban on fracking, independents, Republicans, and Democrats signed it. When the Board voted, the Republican member and the Independent member both voted along with the Democrats to make it unanimous.
6 . The fracking industry says that fracking will bring jobs and tax revenue to Upstate New York Towns like Dryden. Do you agree?
That’s what the energy companies’ advertising says, but the history of fracking in PA and out west demonstrates that the high paying jobs go to out of staters who travel around the country dong the drilling or who sit in Houston or overseas and do the layering and the money investing. The short-‐term and low paying jobs go to locals—usually they are hired away from local agriculture, tourism, or from local businesses.
As to generating tax revenue, New York is one of only two states in the US—PA is the other one—which has no tax on companies who take gas, oil, or other minerals out of the ground. So, the only taxes we locals might get are from property tax and that comes only two or three years after the fracking has started and then at a big discount compared to regular property taxes.
These taxes should in no way compensate for the damage to roads, the reduction in residential property values, the increased demand for health, emergency, police, fire, court, jail, school, and social services, and the environmental destruction all of which have occurred in PA. It is we local taxpayers who pay for that.
The former head of the PA D.E.P. was quoted as saying that the energy companies are experts at privatizing profits and socialize the costs. Another quote is that at the local level you don’t get a Boom before the bust; you just get one Bust after another.
7 . A group who opposes the fracking ban in Dryden, the "DSEC" (Dryden Safe Energy Coalition), has issued a press release quoted in Saturday's Ithaca Journal claiming taxes will go up because of the law suit. What do you know about them, and what do you think or this claim?
I think that is preposterous. If we don’t ban fracking we will pay all the costs that I just mentioned for sure, no doubt about it. If we had fracking in Dryden, the costs of environmental damage, infrastructure damage, and expanded services will swamp any amount of legal fees paid to defend the ban.
To me, the DSEC is just a front group for Anschutz and the energy companies. If you look at their website, you see that anyone can join whether you’re from Dryden or not. We know Republican politicians from other Towns are members, and we know, because they said it on their website, the leaders of SEDC went to an “invitation only” meeting with fracking companies right before this law suit was filed.
8. Is a fracking ban really necessary with the Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC) on the job?
Absolutely, the last three Governors including Cuomo have each down-‐sized the DEC. The last time heads were counted; there were only 11 inspectors for the about 11,000 gas wells which already exist in NYS. If thousands more wells are dug, who is going to do the inspections and enforcement? The DEC itself just said it needed 225 more staffers to do the work iffracking comes to the State. Who is going to hire them with what money?
The ban at the local level was the only reasonable step to take for any Town Board faced with fracking and that is the step that Dryden’s Town Board took. By the way, I know for a fact because I went to most of their meetings for the past almost two years, they had been studying how to protect Dryden and whether a ban was the best alternative for all that time. When push came to shove, it was their only alternative and I thank them as a citizen and taxpayer for doing what made the most sense and was in the best interest of the majority of the residents of Dryden.
9 . DSEC (Dryden Safe Energy Coalition) says they are speaking for those whose property rights have been taken away by the ban. Have their property rights been taken away?
First, let’s talk about who “they” are. The only survey done to see how many land owners in Tompkins County had leased their land found that the total number represented only six percent of all the adult residents in the County. So, it is only a tiny minority of people in the County who are stopped from fracking their property.
Second, their land has not been confiscated, They can use it for farming, and they can live there, depending on where it is, they can conduct business on it, and, were they allowed to have wells
Third, what history in PA and across the country shows is that residential property values and the values of many traditional businesses are lowered when fracking is done in their vicinity. So when you have to strike a balance and limit someone’s rights in order to reserve the rights of many, many others, you put small limits on the few so that the many can keep their fundamental rights.
1. How do you feel about the energy company, Anschutz, suing Dryden? Angry—this is Goliath pushing David around
A super majority of Dryden residents want fracking banned from Dryden; so this is a Multi millionaire Ancshutz and multinational energy company trying to tell citizens of Dryden what to do and trying to make us forfeit our rights as U.S citizens
2 . Why do you think Dryden was sued?
Has to do with our Town Board election. A majority of the seats on the Town Board are up for election this November, and there is clear line between them. The Democrats, Mary Ann Sumner, Joe Solomon, and Linda Lavine are for the ban while the Republicans want fracking.
There is also an election in nearby Caroline which has the same issue; Most people are afraid of law suits of any kind, so Anschutz and the energy companies are trying to scare the voters...
3 . Why do you think Anschutz sued now when neither the SGEIS nor drilling regulations are in place?
Sure, the SGEIS says that energy companies will have to certify to the State that fracking is consistent with a Town’s Zoning Law; so if they were to be in place, it seems to me Anschutz would either have to lie or admit that fracking wasn’t permitted and not even try for a permit in Dryden.
4 . Do you think there is a connection to November's Town Election?
Again, I think it is about trying to bully voters into voting for people who favor fracking. Luckily in Dryden, neither the current Town Board nor the Democratic candidates are frightened. They know the majority of the citizens of Dryden don’t want fracking in our Town, and they will stand up for the ban.
5 . Is fracking a partisan issue in Dryden?
It wasn’t until the Republicans came out for fracking. When we gathered petitions in the Town asking the Town Board to pass a ban on fracking, independents, Republicans, and Democrats signed it. When the Board voted, the Republican member and the Independent member both voted along with the Democrats to make it unanimous.
6 . The fracking industry says that fracking will bring jobs and tax revenue to Upstate New York Towns like Dryden. Do you agree?
That’s what the energy companies’ advertising says, but the history of fracking in PA and out west demonstrates that the high paying jobs go to out of staters who travel around the country dong the drilling or who sit in Houston or overseas and do the layering and the money investing. The short-‐term and low paying jobs go to locals—usually they are hired away from local agriculture, tourism, or from local businesses.
As to generating tax revenue, New York is one of only two states in the US—PA is the other one—which has no tax on companies who take gas, oil, or other minerals out of the ground. So, the only taxes we locals might get are from property tax and that comes only two or three years after the fracking has started and then at a big discount compared to regular property taxes.
These taxes should in no way compensate for the damage to roads, the reduction in residential property values, the increased demand for health, emergency, police, fire, court, jail, school, and social services, and the environmental destruction all of which have occurred in PA. It is we local taxpayers who pay for that.
The former head of the PA D.E.P. was quoted as saying that the energy companies are experts at privatizing profits and socialize the costs. Another quote is that at the local level you don’t get a Boom before the bust; you just get one Bust after another.
7 . A group who opposes the fracking ban in Dryden, the "DSEC" (Dryden Safe Energy Coalition), has issued a press release quoted in Saturday's Ithaca Journal claiming taxes will go up because of the law suit. What do you know about them, and what do you think or this claim?
I think that is preposterous. If we don’t ban fracking we will pay all the costs that I just mentioned for sure, no doubt about it. If we had fracking in Dryden, the costs of environmental damage, infrastructure damage, and expanded services will swamp any amount of legal fees paid to defend the ban.
To me, the DSEC is just a front group for Anschutz and the energy companies. If you look at their website, you see that anyone can join whether you’re from Dryden or not. We know Republican politicians from other Towns are members, and we know, because they said it on their website, the leaders of SEDC went to an “invitation only” meeting with fracking companies right before this law suit was filed.
8. Is a fracking ban really necessary with the Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC) on the job?
Absolutely, the last three Governors including Cuomo have each down-‐sized the DEC. The last time heads were counted; there were only 11 inspectors for the about 11,000 gas wells which already exist in NYS. If thousands more wells are dug, who is going to do the inspections and enforcement? The DEC itself just said it needed 225 more staffers to do the work iffracking comes to the State. Who is going to hire them with what money?
The ban at the local level was the only reasonable step to take for any Town Board faced with fracking and that is the step that Dryden’s Town Board took. By the way, I know for a fact because I went to most of their meetings for the past almost two years, they had been studying how to protect Dryden and whether a ban was the best alternative for all that time. When push came to shove, it was their only alternative and I thank them as a citizen and taxpayer for doing what made the most sense and was in the best interest of the majority of the residents of Dryden.
9 . DSEC (Dryden Safe Energy Coalition) says they are speaking for those whose property rights have been taken away by the ban. Have their property rights been taken away?
First, let’s talk about who “they” are. The only survey done to see how many land owners in Tompkins County had leased their land found that the total number represented only six percent of all the adult residents in the County. So, it is only a tiny minority of people in the County who are stopped from fracking their property.
Second, their land has not been confiscated, They can use it for farming, and they can live there, depending on where it is, they can conduct business on it, and, were they allowed to have wells
Third, what history in PA and across the country shows is that residential property values and the values of many traditional businesses are lowered when fracking is done in their vicinity. So when you have to strike a balance and limit someone’s rights in order to reserve the rights of many, many others, you put small limits on the few so that the many can keep their fundamental rights.
Shale-gas plays are "ponzi" like
_What "...a retired geologist from a major oil and gas company" says about other companies invested in shale gas: "They want to bend light to hide the truth."
Read report here!
Read report here!
Colorado Study: Fracking health impact underestimated
GARFIELD, CO. - A large-scale study done in Garfield County investigating the potential health and environmental impacts of a proposed fracking facility near a residential development is raising eyebrows around Colorado.
Some regional environment and conservation advocates say the Health Impacts Assessment study conducted by the University of Colorado School of Public Health may hold answers to questions La Plata County residents have been facing for decades.
“Any study that’s this comprehensive is extremely informational for policymakers and citizens,” said Mike Meschke, environmental health director for the San Juan Basin Health Department. “It gives us a good example of the kinds of things we should be reviewing, what we should be sensitive to and what our discourse should revolve around.”
The study was designed to help address possible health impacts of an impending Antero Resources proposal that would put 200 wells within 500 feet of Battlement Mesa. Among its many findings, the draft report indicates that residents who live within a half mile of a well pad are more likely to experience health effects than residents farther away, with air-pollution impacts being an important concern. The researchers recommended 78 possible actions to reduce the identified impacts.
After reportedly spending about $250,000, Garfield county officials opted to end the research project on the second draft, saying they have enough information already to make decisions on the project.
Bruce Baizel, an oil and gas accountability attorney for Earthworks, said in addition to identifying several “significant public health issues related to natural-gas development,” the study revealed the lack of data available to assess impacts.
Josh Joswick, an energy issues organizer for the San Juan Citizens Alliance, said, “There’s no doubt in my mind there are health concerns for people who live near oil and gas wells.”
Like some Garfield County community members, Joswick expressed disappointment that commissioners there didn’t extend the research contract to get it finished.
“It just shows how much influence the industry has,” Joswick said.
Baizel concurred, saying the industry not only worked to undermine the study, but some state agencies refused to participate in its development and then later criticized it.
The debate rages at the national and international levels, though, he said.
“The disconnect between the refusal to address the impacts and the increasing number of people simply calling for a ban on further natural-gas development seems to have escaped most decision-makers here in Colorado,” Baizel said.
Antero Resources has questioned the report’s findings in letters to Garfield County officials saying its problems are “extensive.” The company also voiced concerns to state officials, whom some news outlets have indicated might be eyeing the report as a potential model for evaluating drilling impacts.
Local industry representatives also discount the potential implications.
Christie Zeller, executive director of the La Plata Energy Council, said it “doesn’t have a lot of weight” in addressing local impacts because of the differences in geology and gas development between here and Garfield County. She said state regulations are rigorous enough, and “it’s probably time to quit spending money on studies and just ensure the enforcement of good regulations,” which she said can be the most effective way to reassure the public.
But for Joswick and other like-minded residents, studies such as this confirm health risks they suspected all along. And with La Plata County commissioners aiming to push future gas and oil well development into areas where well pads and other gas and oil infrastructure already exists, some worry their health risks will grow.
County officials said the goal is to cut down the number of new well sites in the future to prevent further surface and resident disturbances.
Baizel said further “downspacing” of wells will mean more wells near homes and schools, and it will increase the need for large-scale assessments similar to the one in Garfield County.
Meschke said the San Juan Basin Health Department could play a greater role – as the Garfield County health department did – in looking at gas development’s impacts on children, schools, homes, day care centers and water supplies.
“There’s a lot to examine from an environmental standpoint on these proposals, but we’re not currently examining them,” Meschke said.
Heather Scofield Herald Staff Writer
Some regional environment and conservation advocates say the Health Impacts Assessment study conducted by the University of Colorado School of Public Health may hold answers to questions La Plata County residents have been facing for decades.
“Any study that’s this comprehensive is extremely informational for policymakers and citizens,” said Mike Meschke, environmental health director for the San Juan Basin Health Department. “It gives us a good example of the kinds of things we should be reviewing, what we should be sensitive to and what our discourse should revolve around.”
The study was designed to help address possible health impacts of an impending Antero Resources proposal that would put 200 wells within 500 feet of Battlement Mesa. Among its many findings, the draft report indicates that residents who live within a half mile of a well pad are more likely to experience health effects than residents farther away, with air-pollution impacts being an important concern. The researchers recommended 78 possible actions to reduce the identified impacts.
After reportedly spending about $250,000, Garfield county officials opted to end the research project on the second draft, saying they have enough information already to make decisions on the project.
Bruce Baizel, an oil and gas accountability attorney for Earthworks, said in addition to identifying several “significant public health issues related to natural-gas development,” the study revealed the lack of data available to assess impacts.
Josh Joswick, an energy issues organizer for the San Juan Citizens Alliance, said, “There’s no doubt in my mind there are health concerns for people who live near oil and gas wells.”
Like some Garfield County community members, Joswick expressed disappointment that commissioners there didn’t extend the research contract to get it finished.
“It just shows how much influence the industry has,” Joswick said.
Baizel concurred, saying the industry not only worked to undermine the study, but some state agencies refused to participate in its development and then later criticized it.
The debate rages at the national and international levels, though, he said.
“The disconnect between the refusal to address the impacts and the increasing number of people simply calling for a ban on further natural-gas development seems to have escaped most decision-makers here in Colorado,” Baizel said.
Antero Resources has questioned the report’s findings in letters to Garfield County officials saying its problems are “extensive.” The company also voiced concerns to state officials, whom some news outlets have indicated might be eyeing the report as a potential model for evaluating drilling impacts.
Local industry representatives also discount the potential implications.
Christie Zeller, executive director of the La Plata Energy Council, said it “doesn’t have a lot of weight” in addressing local impacts because of the differences in geology and gas development between here and Garfield County. She said state regulations are rigorous enough, and “it’s probably time to quit spending money on studies and just ensure the enforcement of good regulations,” which she said can be the most effective way to reassure the public.
But for Joswick and other like-minded residents, studies such as this confirm health risks they suspected all along. And with La Plata County commissioners aiming to push future gas and oil well development into areas where well pads and other gas and oil infrastructure already exists, some worry their health risks will grow.
County officials said the goal is to cut down the number of new well sites in the future to prevent further surface and resident disturbances.
Baizel said further “downspacing” of wells will mean more wells near homes and schools, and it will increase the need for large-scale assessments similar to the one in Garfield County.
Meschke said the San Juan Basin Health Department could play a greater role – as the Garfield County health department did – in looking at gas development’s impacts on children, schools, homes, day care centers and water supplies.
“There’s a lot to examine from an environmental standpoint on these proposals, but we’re not currently examining them,” Meschke said.
Heather Scofield Herald Staff Writer
HRW now working with our neighbors in Madison and Lewis counties
Reports are upcoming.