Impact of hydrofracking warrants close study, in view of scientists

MILLBROOK, N.Y. — The Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies hosted a forum May 5 on the potential environmental and social dangers of hydraulic fracturing, or hydrofracking, a controversial method of extracting natural gas from rock buried a thousand feet or more beneath the surface of the earth.Two of the speakers at the forum were from Pennsylvania, where hydrofracking is legal. Currently, New York state has a moratorium on the practice as a task force appointed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo investigates how it could impact the environment and the economy here. New York and Pennsylvania are states that fall under jurisdiction of the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Connecticut and the rest of New England have taken on primary enforcement responsibility, or primacy, meaning their regulations are at least as strong as those of the federal program. Vermont this week was set to become the first state to ban hydraulic fracturing for natural gas, the State Assembly forwarding a bill to the governor’s desk.In his introductory remarks at the forum, William Schlesinger, president of the Cary Institute, said he feels there hasn’t been enough scientific rigor applied to the study of the practice, in part because of cuts in government funding.“I would argue that there is pathetically little science out there in what we regard as quality peer-reviewed journals of scientific work so that policy makers could make a completely informed decision,” he said. Environmental effects The first speaker, Avner Vengosh, was from Duke University in Durham, N.C. “I’m going to focus on some of the water issues,” he said, but noted that the biggest problems aren’t just with potential chemical spills and methane contamination in drinking water. He said hydrofracking also creates air pollution, changes the landscape and land uses and brings increased truck traffic.There is no evidence yet that the flowback water from fracking can contaminate groundwater, he said. But there are beginning to be signs fracking in Pennsylvania is affecting ecological systems and waterways. Wastewater management The second speaker, Radisav Vidic, chairman of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh, said one of his main concerns is how to dispose of wastewater from the process. No one seems to know exactly what to do with the “flowback”water, he said.Mark Boling, general counsel for Southwestern Energy, a natural gas production company, spoke about air pollution emissions. He said no one is sure what the exact emission levels are at hydrofracking sites. Between the EPA and the industry, everyone is saying something different. “The fact of the matter, is we need to get raw data; we need to actually measure,” he said. “I don’t want this to turn into the same kind of trench warfare.”Boling said Southwestern Energy was approached by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) to participate in a collaborative study with seven companies, including Pioneer and Shell, to find out what the actual emission levels are.“We are working with academic institutions like the University of Texas and other advisers who will review all the data, so it’s not reviewed by the industry, it’s reviewed by academics who know about air emissions,” he said.His company is striving to set its own high clean and green standards, and investing money into putting those standards into practice, he said.Boling said there needs to be public trust and public acceptance of hydrofracking and that debating the issues and creating regulations without politics could accomplish that. Potential health impacts Bernard Goldstein, a doctor and the dean emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, spoke about potential public health impacts. He warned that it’s important for industries to know which chemicals are present and to share that information — but that too often they do not.The final speaker was Simona Perry, a research scientist at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y. Perry spent two years living in Bradford County, Pa., documenting the environmental, economic, social and psychological changes resulting from rapid development of shale gas.“Many people think I am anti-fracking,” Perry said. “I am not anti-fracking and I am not pro-fracking. All I am is pro-community and I am pro-deliberative democracy, dialogue and discussion around these issues. Broad issues impact these communities and will impact communities where this development hasn’t started.”She described what she called the boomtown phenomenon in towns where fracking is practiced, with economic cycles of rapid growth followed by stagnation. Such rapid changes can make residents of these communities feel like victims, she said, because they feel they must rely on their political leaders to handle problems that are so complex they can’t understand them. Perry said people in these small rural communities need to move beyond this victim mentality to self-fulfillment, which will give them “the opportunity to develop social cohesion, social capital and long-term resiliency,” she said. “However, in order for these communities to find fulfillment they need to first find the courage to speak and then find an audience that will listen and take them seriously.” A question-and-answer session followed, moderated by Emma Rosi-Marshall, aquatic ecologist at the Cary Institute. Audience members were urged to write their legislators, particularly their state senators, and urge them to support the funding of a health impact assessment.