I have corresponded with the NRDC a number of times concerning the hydrofracking issue, most recently in connection with Walter Hang's request that the members of the NY state advisory panel sign his moratorium pledge and his request for withdrawal of the rdSGEIS. Today I received an email from Walter containing the following quote from an email you apparently sent to him in regard to this matter:
As you are well aware, Walter, there is no practical difference between what we have asked DEC to do in our comments and our public statements and what you are asking us to sign, other than that the latter was penned by you.
I have always been the first to praise the grassroots for their extraordinary work on this issue, and nothing in my email implies that NRDC is primarily responsible for the fact that the de facto moratorium remains in place. We are partners in the effort.
With all due respect, you are targeting the wrong enemy.
NRDC stands with the grassroots in our mutual effort to ensure that no new risky fracking proceeds in New York on the basis of the deeply flawed analysis performed by DEC. I will continue to devote my energies to that end.
You may forward this email to all those you bcc’ed on your response to me.
All the best,
Kate
My question for you is, if there is "no practical difference" between what the NRDC has asked the DEC to do and what Walter Hang is asking, then why won't you sign his pledge and coalition letter? This is not an attempt at sarcasm--I am honestly wondering why you will not sign if signing would represent no change in your current position.
Please understand: For almost four years now my husband and I have been living with the constant stress of wondering if gas drilling will soon force us from our home of almost 30 years. Every day we wake up wondering where we will go if we must leave and whether we will even be able to sell the home that represents a major portion of our assets. Every day I look at the forest and the creek and the abundant wildlife in my neighborhood, at the clear air, and at the Susquehanna River, which is just a short walk from our home, and I wonder what state this environment will be in a year from now. During these four years, I have watched the destructive practices of the shale gas industry despoil more and more of my beloved native state of Pennsylvania. I grew up in Scranton, PA amid mine flushing projects, subsidence incidents, strip mining, bad air, and burning culm dumps. It seems that the shale gas industry is intent on converting the entire Marcellus Shale region into the sort of disaster zone that I endured as a child. I do not have words to describe how nightmarish these last four years have been.
During these four years my husband and I have looked to our state government and to the national environmental organizations for help, and while some help has been offered it has fallen short of what we hoped for and what we believe we deserve. We are particularly cynical these days in light of the recent disclosure about the Sierra Club's acceptance of $26 million from the gas industry and we are wondering if we should ever bother to support any national environmental organizations again. (So far I have canceled three different subscriptions to national environmental organizations that I had supported for years. I have also stopped giving gift subscriptions at Christmas. I sent the money to grassroots organizations instead.)
Two years ago I and more than 60 signatories to a letter I had written reached out to the NRDC to ask for help on the shale gas extraction issue. I received a defensive and not terribly helpful reply in return. Make no mistake: I know that the NRDC has done some good work on this issue and I do appreciate that. But I truly believe that without the grassroots effort--without the countless hours of completely volunteer work involved in that effort--I would be staring out my window right now at a sea of gas wells. Why won't the NRDC fully support the "praiseworthy" and "extraordinary" work that the grassroots volunteers have engaged in for years now? I think that if national environmental groups like the NRDC wish to regain the trust of many thousands of disillusioned New York residents, they have some hard work to do. Asking for a continuation of the de facto moratorium and asking also for the incredibly flawed rdSGEIS to be withdrawn would be a good place to start.
Sincerely,
Mary S
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 10:01:50 -0800 (PST)
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
We are writing you because we have been staunch supporters of the Natural Resource Defense Council for many years. We are deeply concerned about the recent developments regarding hydrofracturing and your role as an Advisory Panelist in suggesting that a demonstration project is an acceptable way forward for natural gas development in the state of New York. We view hydrofracturing as a grave threat to the health and safety of our family, community and our ecosystem! It is actually a much larger issue because hydrofracturing entails the loss of millions of gallons of fresh water at a time when water access is becoming a global crisis. This is but one of our concerns.
We do not want a demonstration project in the Southern Tier where we live or in any other part of the state. We urge you to live up to the name of the Natural Reources Defense Council- defend us by saying no to this demonstration project, and sign the coalition letter to request the withdrawal of the Revised Draft SGEIS. New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Since 2008, there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
We believe the NRDC is failing to provide critical leadership on the hydrofracking issue and the threat it poses to the citizens of New York. We will put our energy and financial support into other environmental groups who will speak for us if the NRDC is unwilling.
We look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 16:00:25 -0500
Dear Mr. Goldstein :
Moving In Congregations Acting in Hope (MICAH) is a faith-based community organization that consists of eleven member congregations representing more than five thousand residents in Cortland County. MICAH believes in the dignity of each person and seeks to provide families and individuals with the tools to become effective and engaged citizens. MICAH supports everyday people of faith so they can redefine democracy and improve the quality of their lives. MICAH does this by training people to identify and research issues of inequality, mobilize resources, build leadership capacity, and address community concerns with public leaders.
Among the major concerns for MICAH clergy and leaders is the issue of New York State’s proposed energy policy that would allow slick water hydro-fracturing (known as hydrofracking) to be used as a method of gas drilling. As people of faith, we hold the words of our sacred texts close to heart, and believe that hydrofracking is inherently contradictory to the biblical concept of stewardship for our environment and our community. While we believe that a strong renewable energy policy, freedom from dependence on fossil fuels, and establishing industries that will benefit our community economically are critical at this time in New York’s history, we adamantly also believe that God did not give humans the authority to degrade and destroy the earth or the human communities that have become part of it in order to advance technologically.
Two biblical examples that ground our belief in the sanctity of our earth and of our people come from the book of Genesis—the first is the story of creation and the second is the commandment to Noah after the “Great Flood.” In the creation story, the Hebrew text uses the word “shamar” which means "to exercise great care over." In the context of Genesis 2:15, it expresses God's wish that humankind "take care of," "guard," or "watch over" the garden. A caretaker maintains and protects his/her charge so that he/she can return it to its owner in as good or better condition than when it was received. After the flood, God also gives a similar command to Noah. Once again God gives humanity dominion over all other life on the earth, and with this renewed authority comes the implicit “responsibility” to tend and keep what was explicitly given to us.
MICAH clergy and leaders believe our elected officials, department commissioners, and the advisory panels they create, now bear the responsibility to “exercise great care over” our communities in the form of protecting our public health, water, air, dairy and food industry, infrastructure, and economy.
With that in mind, we remind you that since 2008 there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). That policy has allowed New York to avoid widespread gas drilling problems experienced in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
As I’m sure you know, more than 850,000 residents near Pittsburgh had to drink bottled water after public supplies were contaminated by massive gas drilling wastewater discharges into the Monongahela River. And in Ohio, underground injection of gas drilling wastewater has been linked to earthquakes.
New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, MICAH clergy and leaders request that you sign the following de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Subject: Marcellus Shale
Mr. Mark Brownstein
Dear Sir,
As a retired professor of Chemistry from CUNY, I have been following with great concern the intention of the hydrofracking industry to exploit the Marcellus shale in the state of New York without addressing first all the EPA recommendations. I am appalled to know that the hydrofracking industry has not been regulated by the safe water drinking act and has not been forced to disclose the chemical composition of the aqueous solutions used in hydrofracking. I am also appalled by the fact that the hydrofracking industry does not address the increasing number of incidents (please see below) that illustrate the negative impact of hydrofracking on the environment.
Since 2008, there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). That policy has allowed New York to avoid widespread gas drilling problems experienced in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
More than 850,000 residents near Pittsburgh had to drink bottled water after public supplies were contaminated by massive gas drilling wastewater discharges into the Monongahela River.
In Ohio, underground injection of gas drilling wastewater has been linked to earthquakes.
New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Dear Robert B. Catell,
I would like to drink clean water, breath clean air, live in a safe environment, and enjoy a long life with my family (including my new grandson) in Central New York. The idea of extensive fracking in New York State is in direct conflict with my wish. It's a simple wish. I don't ask to have huge sums of money, or a glamorous life, or anything unreasonable. Why should these gas companies be able to visit such environmental and economic catastrophe upon those of us who want to live our lives here?
I appreciate your time to read this email. It would be a great help if you could read and sign the coalition letter linked below, and do all that you can to protect us from gas companies who only want to make huge profits for a few, while those who live here could potentially, and quickly, lose the safe wonderful environment that sustains us.
Since 2008, there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). That policy has allowed New York to avoid widespread gas drilling problems experienced in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
More than 850,000 residents near Pittsburgh had to drink bottled water after public supplies were contaminated by massive gas drilling wastewater discharges into the Monongahela River.
In Ohio, underground injection of gas drilling wastewater has been linked to earthquakes.
New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
I read your note, but as a member of the Advisory Comm that's not our mandate
Bob Catell
Robert,
I certainly appreciate a personal response from you, but I'm surprised to hear that it's not your mandate.. I disagree. Please stand for the principals and the recommendations that will protect our safety, while taking chances and playing politics with the lives of our grandchildren.
respectfully, ####
Subject: Re: Fracking in New York
The role of the Advisory Committee is to deal with the resources necessary for implementation of the regs in a safe and appropriate manner
The DEC has the responsibility for the regs
Bob Catell
Subject: Re: Fwd: another Re from robert Catell. Fracking in New York
Mr. Catell obviously does not understand what his responsibilities are as a member of the Advisory Panel:
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Commissioner Joe Martens today announced the members of the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel that will be charged with:
developing recommendations to ensure DEC and other agencies are enabled to properly oversee, monitor and enforce high-volume hydraulic fracturing activities;
developing recommendations to avoid and mitigate impacts to local governments and communities (emphasis added); and
evaluating the current fee structure and other revenue streams to fund government oversight and infrastructure related to high-volume hydraulic fracturing.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/press/75416.html
Best,
w
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 19:11:58 -0500
I have heard that NY, and the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel, are considering a "demonstration project" of 300 hydrofracked wells over 3 years.
If this is true, it in unconscionable. The panel is charged with protecting all NYS residents. To pick out some residents as sacrificial lambs is unjust. This project would be "demonstrating" with people's lives. The current draft of the sGEIS makes no serious attempt at a cumulative impact study. Rather than do such a study, is the idea now to find out what the impact is by trying it out? I do not see how this is consistent with the requirements of the law.
If the panel is considering this a compromise, it will not feel like a compromise to the area(s) impacted by these wells. It will be devastating: to the environment, to the climate, the public health and safety, to quality of life, and to our economy (boom-and-bust, and even the boom has large costs).
(It's also not a compromise because the DEC does not have the staff to oversee 100 wells per year in a remotely adequate way. Have you paid any attention to what has happened in Pennsylvania and other states? You cannot count on self-regulation and self-reporting by the drilling companies to protect us. They need to be watched every second, at every step of the process.)
I live in the Southern Tier, and I am guessing that most or all of the "demonstration" would take place here. Tom Libous does not speak for all Southern Tier residents, and does not have the right to force this on us. For reasons I do not understand, he has been rabidly pro- drilling from the beginning, and has never listened to or engaged with his constituents who oppose drilling (about half of his constituents, according to polls).
To the environmental groups I say: Is this what was envisioned when your group was founded? What would your founders (and current members) think? Look how far down the slippery slope of accommodation you have gone. You are being co-opted by the gas companies.
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 21:02:32 -0500
I sent the following message today to Mr. Goldstein and Mr. Kennedy from NRDC:
Dear Mr. Goldstein:
I am a long time member of NRDC and part of your "Council of 1000." I am so disappointed in what I am hearing about NRDC's part in the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel .
Since 2008, there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). That policy has allowed New York to avoid widespread gas drilling problems experienced in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia.
More than 850,000 residents near Pittsburgh had to drink bottled water after public supplies were contaminated by massive gas drilling wastewater discharges into the Monongahela River.
In Ohio, Arkansas, and Oklahoma, underground injection of gas drilling wastewater has been linked to earthquakes.
As a public health official, I have personally talked to several people who have suffered serious health problems as a result of nearby gas well drilling. I spoke with the Vice President of a children's hospital that conducted a health survey revealing that 25% of the 8-year-olds in the gas drilling areas of north Texas had asthma, compared to 11% statewide. He said they had no money to prove a connection but that they were "highly suspicious" of a connection. Not one single comprehensive health study on the effects of unconventional gas drilling has been conducted! It is unconscionable to think that NRDC can condone what is essentially an experiment on human health using non-consenting subjects. You would scream about that being done to wild animals! Do you realize how many medical societies and organizations have signed resolutions asking for a moratorium on any gas drilling until health studies have been done? Have you heard of endocrine disruption and do you realize that many of the chemicals to which people will be exposed are endocrine disruptors?
New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Subject: "demonstration project" in the Southern Tier
Dear Senator Libous,
Please do Not approve of the "Demonstration Project" proposed for the Southern Tier precisely because NONE of the issues identified in response to the RDSGEIS have been addressed and resolved. Therefore, drilling and horizontal hydrofracking could proceed without regard for the health and safety of Southern Tier residents.
This "Demonstration Project" would be in violation of the moratorium itself. It would also be discriminatory to some in NYS, specifically those in your district! This "Demonstration Project" would be a blatant ploy to circumvent legitimate environmental concerns as it puts your constituents at risk.
I am one of your constituents and, therefore, would be effected by this project. I also ask that you support Governor Cuomo in a withdrawal of the RDSGEIS since it does not address ALL pertinent issues involved with gas drilling and hydrofracking. As a participant on the Advisory Panel, you are responsible for protecting our state from any drilling until ALL environmental issues are resolved satisfactorily.
I look forward to your reply.
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 21:16:58 -0500
Dear Mr. Moore:
I am a supporter of your Water Rangers program. I am so disappointed in what I am hearing about Environmental Advocates of New York's part in the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel .
Since 2008, there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). That policy has allowed New York to avoid widespread gas drilling problems experienced in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia.
More than 850,000 residents near Pittsburgh had to drink bottled water after public supplies were contaminated by massive gas drilling wastewater discharges into the Monongahela River.
In Ohio, Arkansas, and Oklahoma, underground injection of gas drilling wastewater has been linked to earthquakes.
As a public health official, I have personally talked to several people who have suffered serious health problems as a result of nearby gas well drilling. I spoke with the Vice President of a children's hospital that conducted a health survey revealing that 25% of the 8-year-olds in the gas drilling areas of north Texas had asthma, compared to 11% statewide. He said they had no money to prove a connection but that they were "highly suspicious" of a connection. Not one single comprehensive health study on the effects of unconventional gas drilling has been conducted! It is unconscionable to think that Environmental Advocates can condone what is essentially an experiment on human health using non-consenting subjects. Do you realize how many medical societies and organizations have signed resolutions asking for a moratorium on any gas drilling until health studies have been done? Have you heard of endocrine disruption and do you realize that many of the chemicals to which people will be exposed are endocrine disruptors?
New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Dear Mr. Moore,
Thank you for your time and involvement with the Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel. I appreciate your commitment to safeguarding New York, and urge you to use your heart and voice on behalf of our state and our children, to protect our land and water from horizontal hydrofracturing. As a mother of three children, I feel great concern about the dangers of hydrofracking. Since 2008, there has been a de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York's Marcellus Shale pending adoption of a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). That policy has allowed New York to avoid widespread gas drilling problems experienced in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
More than 850,000 residents near Pittsburgh had to drink bottled water after public supplies were contaminated by massive gas drilling wastewater discharges into the Monongahela River.
In Ohio, underground injection of gas drilling wastewater has been linked to earthquakes.
New York's Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS just received thousands of blistering comments from elected officials, business leaders, environmental and civic groups and citizens. Region 2 of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency submitted 26 pages of detailed comments that identified dozens of major inadequacies.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes EPA's concerns and requests that Governor Cuomo Withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign that coalition letter:http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de factomoratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Date: 2/3/12
Hi Mark,
I read the article in the Huffington Post in October 2011 by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and I'd like to discuss it with you. It was a good article and raised many points on the dangers of hydrofracking and the gas industry program to discredit the NY Times research.
Despite all the negatives, Professor Kennedy, Eric Goldstein, and Kate Sinding, (the NRDC members), along with the rest of the NY State DEC Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel, have so much confidence in the integrity of one gas company CEO that they "might allow ...... fracking to proceed in NY State".
Specifically, in the article " The Fracking Industry"s War on The NY Times--And The Truth", Professor Kennedy says "...the panel's confidence in his (Mark Boling of Southwest Energy) integrity is the one thing that might allow us to go forward with recommendations regarding a regulatory scheme that could allow certain kinds of fracking to proceed in NY State".
Wow! How could confidence in one CEO count more that all the negatives for allowing fracking to occur?
None of the members of the panel have answered any communications from Walter Hang of Toxics Targeting. I have called Robert Kennedy's clinic at Pace University to register concern. No answer from the secretary yet.
We need some assurance that the panel will not cave in and allow even 300 horizontal wells to be drilled in NY State, because the hazards are known and cannot be controlled. We have written the Governor and DEC and asked that they not allow horizontal hydrofracking to proceed.
Why would NRDC go along with this Demonstration Project (300 wells in the Southern Tier) in the face of all the red flags we see in Pennsylvania and the southwest?
What might be our next step? We count on NRDC to help protect NY State from the hazards of fracking!
Thanks, Mark.
As your constituents, we are writing to express our concern and outrage over NRDC’s proposed “’Demonstration Project’ Alternative.” When my husband and I first learned of this proposal late last week, the first thing that popped into our heads was “Guinea Pig Project,” and we strongly suspected that the Southern Tier, my [Julie’s] birthplace and our home by choice after twenty-five years of living elsewhere, would be drawing the short stick for this experiment.
Whether the Southern Tier were to be picked for this “project” or not, the discrimination in NRDC’s proposal is blatant and disturbing. Particularly alarming is the assertion that “[t]his alternative would help the state to establish whether in fact HVHF drilling could be accomplished [emphasis added] in a manner consistent with Governor Andrew Cuomo’s pledge that ‘if and when the Shale’s natural gas is obtained, it does not come at the expense of human health or have adverse environmental impacts.’”
In other words, because the current RDSGEIS does not contain any provision for a cumulative health impact study of HVHF before it goes forward and has in no way resolved the issue of how to safely dispose of fracking wastewater, members of the NRDC (and perhaps others on the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel) would find it acceptable to go forward with HVHF anyway and analyze the impacts later—after certain people in certain parts of New York State have very likely had their aquifers and air contaminated and their quality of life destroyed from other as yet unanalyzed impacts (traffic, changes in local demographics and crime rates, mortgage and rent issues, noise pollution, etc., etc.).
The NRDC's belief in the integrity of one CEO of one energy company is completely beside the point: the point is the integrity and safety of the fracking process itself, as it is right now. And right now, there is more than enough evidence to conclude that that process, on many levels, comes with too many risks to be acceptable (see Coalition Letter link below).
As a member of the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel, you are accountable for safeguarding New York—particularly the people of your district—from horizontal hydrofracturing hazards, and you are charged by the DEC to produce recommendations regarding "measures to minimize socioeconomic and other impacts on local governments and communities...[emphasis added]." The panel is not tasked with making recommendations to test whether or not HVHF actually does come at the expense of human health and environmental integrity by experimenting on vulnerable communities before an acceptable final SGEIS is created that resolves all of the documented deficits in the current draft version (per Executive Order No. 41).
A Coalition Letter with more than 22,000 signatories echoes the EPA's concerns about HVHF and requests that Governor Cuomo withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS due to at least 17 critical shortcomings and send it "back to the drawing board" for yet another do-over.
You are invited to sign the Coalition Letter: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Given the Revised Draft SGEIS' well-documented concerns, I request that you sign this de facto moratorium pledge:
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
____________________________________________________
Date: ______________________
I look forward to receiving your prompt reply.
Yours truly,
Please do NOT approve of the "Demonstration Project" proposed for the Southern Tier of NYS. In spite of the Advisory Panel's confidence in the integrity of Mark Boling, Senior VP of Southwestern Energy, the fact remains that NONE of the issues identified in the responses to the RDSGEIS have been addressed and resolved. Therefore, drilling and horizontal hydrofracking could proceed via this "Demonstration Project" without regard for the health and safety of Southern Tier residents.
Furthermore, proceeding with this "Demonstration Project" would be a violation of the moratorium itself and discriminatory to SOME in NYS. It would be a blatant ploy to circumvent legitimate environmental concerns such as those specified in the coalition letter and as presented through the many other comments submitted in response to the RDSGEIS.
I am a resident of the Southern Tier and do not wish for myself and my fellow Southern Tier residents to be used in a "Demonstration Project" in which we already know the outcomes in other states, including NYS, PA and Ohio, where those outcomes were not addressed!
Please sign the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS coalition letter and the pledge to maintain the de facto moratorium until all concerns in the coalition letter are resolved.
I would expect from you, an environmental advocate, understanding and support of the concerns expressed in this letter and look forward to your reply.
Thank you,
This letter is coming to you today because you have taken on the responsibility of considering the issue of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in New York State. Although New York State currently has a de facto moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for natural gas and there are thousands of people pushing for a withdrawal of the Revised Draft SGEIS, there are still factions who are pushing for allowing fracking in New York. As a concerned New Yorker, I'd like to make you aware of some issues related to hydraulic fracturing so that you can make an informed decision to prevent fracking in New York. We need only look at our neighbor, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as an object lesson in what fracking can do to the economies and communities of a state.
Many towns and cities in Pennsylvania have embraced gas company employees (or "pipeliners" ) for the money they bring to local economies. Economically, in theory, pipeliners use the services provided in a town (coin laundries, gas stations, restaurants, and rental properties, to name but a few) and the companies offer jobs to local men and women. But because fracking is a "boom" industry, these benefits are short-term. Already, for example, some gas companies in your area have begun to develop living quarters for their workers, complexes that provide laundry and exercise services as well as dining and recreation areas. I would also point out that many of these workers do not pay local or state taxes, as they are residents of other states. Therefore, they do not contribute directly and individually to the tax base, but they do use municipal services such as the court system, law enforcement, and emergency services, all of which are funded by the taxpayers of each community.
And, while fracking does provide jobs for local workers, by nature of the work required these jobs are often hazardous and temporary. In a report presented by the Cornell University Cooperative Extension in April 2009, studies of drilling projects in the Northern Tier of Pennsylvania showed that while there was a temporary increase in work for local men and women (11.53 jobs per well in the development phase of drilling), the number of permanent jobs for local workers dropped to a mere .17 jobs per well for the long-term production phase of the wells. In other words, when the development phase of fracking is done, the jobs for local workers disappear, leaving an unemployed workforce. What jobs are provided in the development phase are mostly unskilled and often dangerous (i.e. driving heavy wastewater trucks on unpaved mountain roads or hosing out wastewater trucks, exposing the worker to contaminants).
The other benefits that towns see during the development phase, benefits such as increased profits for local businesses, increased property values because of demand, and increased tax revenues, are offset by costs.
- The infrastructure of the town suffers from an increase in heavy truck traffic.
- Property values decline along main roads because of an increase in noise and air pollution.
- Traffic accidents increase exponentially.
- Local emergency services experience a significant increase in activity.
- Local law enforcement agencies and the local court system see a rise in use.
These are the immediate costs of the development phase of fracking. The long-term costs are even more dire and have been well-documented in cases in southern Pennsylvania (Clearville, PA, for example) and in other states that have already seen the gas boom come and go (Texas and Oklahoma, to name two).
The long-term costs of fracking include:
- Groundwater contamination and contamination of reservoirs, aquifers, and watersheds
- Contamination of waterways (streams, rivers, ponds, and lakes) from the disposal of fracking wastewater or the use of high-salt, radioactive wastewater on roadways for dust control and/or de-icing
- Methane pollution in wells, town water supplies, and major waterways (as in the Susquehanna River in Fall 2010)
- Sharp decline in property values for those properties on which there are active wells and/or containment ponds
- Loss of land use on properties with active wells
- An increase in health problems related to contamination
In other words, once the boom has passed and active wells are at work, towns are left with pervasive problems that cannot be easily cured by what money was initially injected into local economies by the fracking industry, and by nature of the leases signed by private and public entities, locals have no recourse for clean-up and recovery projects that can cost millions of dollars.
Thus far, this letter has not addressed the less tangible damage done to communities by fracking. The impact of fracking on the environment and on citizens' health is matched by the social damage caused by “man camps†and the influx of hundreds of people who have no real investment in making New York State communities better places to raise families. As problems with fracking begin to surface, townspeople take sides, and communities that were once peaceful and more or less stable are torn apart by dissension.
But don't take my word for any of this. Do your homework. Examine the evidence. A recent series of articles in the New York Times, a database of information available at the Cornell University Cooperative Extension, anecdotal evidence provided by countless individuals who have already fallen victim to fracking, and the Academy Award nominee for Best Documentary, Gasland, directed by Josh Fox, a native of Milanville, Pennsylvania, are but a few of the resources you can consult in making better decisions for the town of Troy and Troy's fine people.
New Yorkers are looking to you to make the right decision for the majority of people, not for outside interests and conscienceless corporations. We've made your work our collective concern and expect to see positive progress on your part in protecting New York State and its people.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Peace,