When we heard that our Berks County Commissioners were preparing to approve an ordinance that would allow Berks County to receive Impact Fees in the event that unconventional natural gas drilling would start in the Utica shale in NW Berks, we reached out to Commissioner Kevin Barnhardt. Following that conversation, we wrote and circulated the letter below to our members, supporters, and friends. In just 36 hours, we received 100 signatures to add to the letter.
That same day, Commissioners Barnhardt and Leinbach approved the ordinance. See my next post for what happened then!
BERKS GAS TRUTH
260 East Main Street
Kutztown, PA 19530
610-678-7726
March 28, 2012
Commissioner Kevin Barnhardt
Commissioner Mark Scott
Commissioner Christian Leinbach
633 Court Street
Reading, PA 19601
Dear Commissioners,
On behalf of the undersigned, we are writing to ask that you reconsider any plans to qualify for the Impact Fee in the event that unconventional natural gas drilling of the Utica shale would commence in Berks County. We would ask instead that you consider taking action to prevent drilling from coming here.
Unconventional natural gas drilling combines four relatively new technologies that, when done in combination, are only about a decade old. The rapid expansion of large scale operations has brought to light many unintended and profound consequences that have caused a number of organizations and concerned citizens to band together to call for a moratorium on drilling until cumulative impact studies are conducted in each of the three major watersheds in Pennsylvania and until a health impact study is conducted.
As you know, a moratorium on state forest drilling remains in effect in Pennsylvania, as does a moratorium on drilling in the Delaware River Basin. New York State’s moratorium is still in effect and many counties and municipalities are putting in place their own bans that are being upheld by NYS Supreme Court justices. New Jersey was close to banning the practice altogether after a bipartisan measure passed the legislature last June. Governor Christie vetoed the legislation, electing instead to impose a one-year conditional moratorium until environmental studies being conducted by the government have been completed. Maryland is considering a moratorium on drilling and an outright ban on accepting fracking waste from Pennsylvania.
Unfortunately, the eyes of the world are on Pennsylvania, widely considered to be the negative role model for unconventional drilling. I have personally been contacted by journalists and activists in Russia, France, Ireland, Bulgaria, Canada, and several other states who are trying to learn what not to do. The municipal bans on fracking put in place in this state are threatened by provisions in Act 13 that strip local governments of control of drilling operations, just as the ACRE law removed local control over the use of biosolids. When then-Attorney General Tom Corbett sued East Brunswick Township for its attempts to buck the ACRE law, he famously wrote, “There is no inherent right to local self-government.”
The adverse consequences of unconventional natural gas drilling are too numerous to list. Among the major concerns are the following:
Consumptive use of water – On March 15th, the Susquehanna River Basin Commission approved water withdrawals of 44 billion gallons of water per year from the river to use for fracking. That water isn’t coming back. Drilling wastewater, or produced water, is contaminated beyond reuse. Clean water is being removed from the water cycle all across this country and in every country where drilling is being done.
Handling and disposal of wastewater – Attempts to manage drilling wastewater are insufficient, at best. As recently as a year ago, P.O.T.W.s were receiving the wastewater and releasing it into rivers. By the way, some of it ended up in biosolids we spread on the land where we grow our food crops. In the past year, attempts have been made to find better methods of dealing with the contaminated water, including pumping the water into deep injection wells. A series of earthquakes linked to that process in Ohio, Arkansas, and other states not known for tremors has caused officials to rethink and sometimes suspend those operations.
Groundwater contamination – Research studies from Cornell and Duke have confirmed that methane and other substances released during the fracturing process are able to find their way into our groundwater. Because there is no baseline testing of water prior to drilling required anywhere in the United States, the industry is quick to deny responsibility when groundwater and water wells become contaminated, claiming that the methane was already there. Widespread occurrences of methane and radioactive contamination and mounting scientific evidence are proving the industry wrong.
Climate change – Methane is a greenhouse gas. In fact, it is more efficient at heating up the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. The same Cornell researchers who examined methane migration determined that, thanks to the amount of methane released into the atmosphere in addition to the enormous amount of fuel used by the thousands of trucks involved in a single well pad’s operations, natural gas is actually dirtier than coal and oil.
Halliburton loophole – The 2005 Energy Bill exempts manufacturers of fracking fluids from having to disclose the names and quantities of the chemicals they use. It is impossible to regulate something when you don’t know what you’re regulating. 596 chemicals have been independently identified. The list contains a number of known carcinogens. Senate and House bills at the Federal and State level that would remove the exemption have been lost in committee in every session since they were first introduced.
The full list of concerns is much longer and continues to grow as we encounter ever more unpleasant surprises at every turn.
We have attached a few sources you may want to consult. We invite you to visit the Resources page on our website, http://www.gastruth.org/?page_id=41. We would also welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the matter further. In the meantime, please don’t hesitate to contact us for more information on specific questions you may have.
We appreciate the opportunity to ask your consideration of our concerns.
Sincerely,
Karen Feridun
Founder, Berks Gas Truth
260 East Main Street
Kutztown, PA 19530
Hi, I’m reading all this resistance to Marcellus gas drilling and at the same time hearing all the uproar on how we need to stop importing foreign oil. My head spins trying to understand how we can do both. Without developing our own natural resources here we are hostage to foreign oil suppliers/OPEC and this is also hurting our economy. CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHAT IS THE ACCEPTABLE METHOD TO DRILL FOR THIS ENERGY?
Thanks for your question. First of all, there is one energy market. All the talk about foreign vs. domestic markets is hogwash. We’re already exporting our natural gas to other countries. Second, our political leaders have been hiding behind filthy energy sources like natural gas, “clean” coal, and tar sands to avoid getting serious about renewable energy. In fact, Governor Corbett took money OUT of alternative energy because we don’t need it, he says. We’ve got natural gas, he says. Third, the real trade-off here is not natural gas for oil. It’s water for natural gas. We’re already fighting wars on this planet over water, yet we continue to squander our clean water in a thousand ways. The consumptive use of water in gas drilling is just one of them. You can live without natural gas. You can’t live without water. Will there ever be a safe way to extract it from the shale? I don’t know the answer to that, but I can tell you that it’s not being done safely now and I doubt the companies involved would want to spend the money to do the job much better.