fracking

The MIT Energy Initiative’s recently released Future of Natural Gas study is a comprehensive and balanced examination of this essential resource.  It contains much information that I will be digesting and using in future posts.  Today, I want to focus on the report’s analysis of environmental risks associated with natgas fracking.  I want to thank Robert Bryce, whose tweets (@pwrhungry) tipped me to this report.

The authors of the report acknowledge that there are risks associated with natural gas drilling in general, and fracking in particular, just as there are in any resource extraction activity.  These risks need to be accounted for and the industry must take steps to mitigate them going forward, especially as drilling expands into regions of the nation that do not have experience with natural gas drilling and where, therefore, the regulatory and oversight functions will be underdeveloped.  That being noted, it is also important to examine the actual occurrence rate of environmental problems.  Over the past ten years, the authors note, there have been over 20,000 wells drilled and very few incidents of groundwater contamination.  In those cases where contamination has occurred, it has usually been gas contamination not, as most commonly feared, contamination with fracking liquids (p. 39).  The chart below (reproduced without permission) shows the low frequency of incidents over the 5 year period of 2005-2009.

So, in the thousands of wells drilled in that period, there have been just 20 incidents of groundwater contamination.  Thus, while it is a legitimate concern and regulators and drillers alike must be aware of the issue, the fear (sometimes bordering on hysteria) surrounding groundwater contamination is simply not supported by the data.  Can it happen?  Yes.  Is it likely to happen on any given well?  Statistically, no.  Is the reported level of incidence worth ceasing development of this vast resource?  In our opinion, definitely not.

Source: http://energeopolitics.com/2011/07/07/fracking-and-groundwater-contamination-the-data-naturalgas-natgas/

July 28, 2011

TO:  The Dryden Town Board

FROM:  Ron Szymanski

I am writing to the Board to ask that you vote “NO” to amending Article XXI of the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance which, if enacted, will prohibit natural gas drilling in the Town of Dryden.  Such a prohibition carries with it a number of serious consequences for the residents of Dryden.

1. ILLEGAL.  The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has jurisdiction over natural gas drilling in the State.  The DEC underwent a rigorous, 3-year process involving all stake-holders to produce its 1095 page report on High Volume Hydro Fracking.  The DEC is now considered the world expert in this area.  The report directly addressed the concerns of Barbara Lifton (D-Tompkins/Cortland), Legislature Chairperson Martha Robertson (D-Dryden) and County Legislator Mike Lane (D-Dryden).  The Board knows and confirmed by the Town Attorney on June 15, 2011 that the preemption law gives jurisdiction of natural gas drilling to the state by way of the DEC.  Section 5 of the ban claims power to override state and federal law.  You don’t have to be a lawyer to know that towns can not override federal and state law.
2. ANTI-TAXPAYER.Banning natural gas drilling eliminates this new and substantial source of tax revenue, continuing to place an ever-increasing burden on the local taxpayer.  In addition, the taxpayer willbe liable in federal and state court to class, group, or individual actions by landowners, the DEC, the Department of Agriculture and Markets, the US Government and the natural gas drilling companies to an estimated $125,000 in legal fees per lawsuit and more significantly, exposure to hundreds of millions in damages for an uncompensated taking of the entire interest in mineral rights.  The damages will not be shared by other towns.
3. ANTI-BUSINESS.  The natural gas drilling ban limits opportunities for local businesses, from trucking to restaurants.  The County recently dropped a road ordinance because of its unintended consequences on local businesses.  In addition, it denies Dryden residents access to jobs and further compromises our tax base.
4. ANTI-FARMING.  A ban on natural gas drilling specifically targets farmers and agricultural zones since drilling occurs on open land.  It eliminates an important energy and cash flow source needed for our farmers to survive.  This law is opposed by the Farm Bureau and the Department of Agriculture and Markets.  Prosperous farms are the key to keeping agriculture healthy in Dryden and preserving the character of our community.
5. ANTI-EDUCATION.  A ban on natural gas drilling denies our schools the benefit of the increased tax revenue they need to not only survive but to grow, innovate and excel.  Also, we learned the Auburn City School District for one uses the natural gas from their property for the school district.  The State will likely enact a gas separation tax which will enable the State to better provide aid to schools.  Finally, it is estimated that the taxes derived from one well will fund 10 teaching positions.

There is clearly no consensus in the Town of Dryden regarding natural gas drilling.  The process of considering this new amendment has proven one thing:  regardless of which side of the issue they are on, the residents of Dryden love our town, want clean air and water and want to live in a safe community.  I urge you to take the needs and interests of ALL Dryden residents into consideration and vote “NO” on the amendment to Article XXI.  Then, the Board should work with the DEC and all area residents to provide for the safe operation of natural gas drilling in the Town of Dryden.  Allow us to take advantage of this transforming opportunity.

Respectfully,

Ron Szymanski