.)
UNDERGROUND CONTAMINATION: A drilling rig in the town of Barton, in Tioga County, N.Y., (NYS December 2008).
Image: PROPUBLICA/ABRAHM LUSTGARTEN
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
New York's recently released review of the environmental risks (PDF) posed by natural gas production in the Marcellus shale offers the clearest picture yet of the chemicals used in the drilling process called hydraulic fracturing.
The document makes public the names of 260 chemicals, more than eight times as many as Pennsylvania state regulators have compiled. The list is the most complete released by any state or federal agency and could help answer concerns about hydraulic fracturing in Congress and in states where gas drilling has increased in recent years.
The review also takes another dramatic step by proposing that in certain situations companies that drill in New York be required to report the concentrations of the chemicals they use to state regulators, thereby creating a suite of information that environmental scientists say is essential to investigating water pollution from drilling. New York would be the first state to make such a demand.
The industry has been reluctant to release information about the chemicals it uses, because it considers them a proprietary trade secret. While New York has made the names of the chemicals public, it seems likely that the data about their concentration will be shared only with state officials.
The 800-page environmental impact assessment also proposes a slew of safeguards for well construction, waste disposal and water protection. If those rules are finalized after the ongoing public review period, New York's environmental protections for gas drilling would be among the strongest in the nation.
"In a number of areas these regulations are more stringent than in other states," said Kate Sinding, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "As commendable as that is, and wanting to give the department credit where credit is due, the bar set in most other states is so abysmally low, it still begs the question of whether stronger is strong enough."
Environmental scientists have long sought complete information about the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, saying they need it to thoroughly investigate water pollution. Contamination can occur when the chemicals are pumped underground, held in waste pits or trucked to water treatment plants before being discharged back into rivers and drinking water supplies.
Colorado passed regulations last year requiring companies to disclose the names of chemicals, but they apply only to chemicals held in 50-gallons drums or larger. Now the industry is suing Colorado to repeal the group of regulations that includes that clause. In Pennsylvania, environment officials told ProPublica that their list of chemical products used for drilling there was complete, but it names just 39 products and 31 unique chemicals. Congress has been debating a bill to require disclosure, but the industry is fighting the legislation with millions of dollars in lobbying efforts.
New York obtained the names of the chemicals by surveying drilling companies, their contractors and the manufacturers of the chemicals. The Department of Environmental Conservation identified 152 trademarked products and obtained the complete list of their ingredients; it gathered a partial list of ingredients for an additional 45 products.
See what we're tweeting about
9 Comments
Add CommentNice to see the work of ProPublica finding new readers on sciam.com.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat are the dangers? Not much, really. Just the same danger posed by burning coal or oil, just about... Burning a ton of carbon NO MATTER IN WHAT FORM!!!!!! will release 3-2/3 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes, coal contains some more pollutants, but they are small potatoes compared with the danger of CO2.... We are on the brink of environmental catastrophe as it is, if we haven't already slipped over the edge.
\
So why any sane person should want to drill for more natural gas is beyond me.
CO2 isn't a pollutant, it is a critical requirement of life. When CO2 drops to about 150ppm, nearly all plant life on Earth will die. The more CO2 we have in the atmosphere, the more plants grow. Humanity already benefits from the increase of CO2 by having raised agricultural production about 30%. And higher CO2 lowers the irrigation requirement because of reduced stomata.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is the carbon soot that has been found to cause most of the glacier and ice cap melt. And aerosol pollutants are a problem. But shifting manufacturing from the US to China only increases such pollution because their controls are less stringent. And where are the environmentalists and politicians going after East Asia for the 40,000,000,000 pounds of non-CO2 aerosol pollutants emitted every year? (2003 NASA data).
Natural gas is in fact 22X more effective as a GWG than CO2 so it is important to prevent leakage. But we can offset it by increasing biomass burning for energy because that bypasses the methane cycle.
Global Warming; Again? Still?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHey, guys, seen the weather? How 'bout you send some of the Global Warming to Michigan?
Granholm has made Consumers Energy to "sole" producer of electricity in Michigan, added a pre-pay tax for two new power plants, then put them on permanent *hold*. The tax? Still paying.
The weather? Coldest summer since the last ice age.
Drilling for Natural Gas? Why? Gannyholm probably won't let us use any of it.
Oh, Goobinator Jenny is a Toronto Beauty-Queen turned Detroit Lawyer turned Democrat. You've been warned.
I think that anyone who has looked at the waste pits in actively drilled gas and oil sites would want to regulate those practices. Many of the proposed CO2 mitigation techniques smack of perpetual motion schemes. There comes a time when the amount of energy in a system is exceeded by the amount that can be extracted safely. Net energy is the universal yardstick.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisClimate change is a whole different, though related, problem. I think the common misconception is that all places will get warmer, but many will get colder, drier, or wetter.
The good with gas is that it's less CO2 intensive per BTU than oil or coal are. The bad is that it's harder to transport, so it's best used locally or at least not transport it very far. Another problem as given here is that current efficient methods to loosen it from ground also too often make environmental problems like spoiled wells or other waste. So obviously this waste and pollution has to be minimized, but unless states make it happen, it's not primary concern for those that are acquiring that gas, by any means they can get by, unless supervised.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswell....looks like the idjits in New York are at it again....wait till we find out how much CO2 the average kid makes and we will have enough evidence to outlaw children....this is getting old and quite laughable. wait till the find out the scientist at the United Nations are half lemur.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisShooting seriously toxic chemicals deep into the ground, vertically and horizontally, with no real way to control where all of it goes, is environmentally immoral idiocy. This article will imply to those who favor gas drilling that the practice can be made safe. All of the disasters in other parts of the country suggest otherwise, even if you think the NYS DEC regs will protect us more effectively than weaker regs in other areas. The DEC document is full of loopholes and weak language that lets drilling companies off the hook, both in their drilling practices and in their responsibility for disasters when they occur. Anyone who thinks putting thousands of wells in the Fingerlakes area is a good idea is either deeply self-serving and cynical or they don't live here!!!!!!!!! Dick Cheney is responsible for pushing through an amendment that allows these drilling companies to be exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act, and his former company Halliburton is the dominant company in the industry. When will people wake up?!! The title of the legislation is the SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT, and these companies are exempt. Doesn't that mean something to you?!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSeveral of my dear friends and I watched a DVD entitled "Gas Lands", which we felt was an awakening to just one aspect of what is killing our world. We are also Bahai and believe we must all do what we can to bring awareness of this (and other problems) to our friends, neighbors, and communities. Please join this effort and awaken your communities to what greed and injustice are doing to our great country and inevitably, the world.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this