U.S. Gas Drilling Boom Stirs Water Worries
Reuters
24 February 2009
By Jon Hurdle
HICKORY, Penn. (Reuters) - On a snowy hillside in rural southwest
Pennsylvania, Larry Grimm drives his truck up a steep gravel track to a
hilltop reservoir surrounded by orange plastic fencing and "keep out"
signs.
The pond supplies water pumped from a local creek to the natural gas
wells that are springing up throughout Mount Pleasant Township, where
Grimm is the municipal supervisor.
Range Resources Corp, the Texas company that has drilled 68 wells in
the township, needs millions of gallons of water for "hydrofracking," a
process that forces a chemical-laden solution deep into the rock,
allowing natural gas to be released.
The technique is being repeated at hundreds of other sites in
Pennsylvania and parts of surrounding states as energy companies
scramble to exploit the Marcellus Shale, one of America's biggest
natural gas formations, which some geologists believe contains enough
recoverable gas to meet total U.S. needs for a decade or more.
At a time when America is stepping up efforts to reduce its dependence
on foreign energy, the Marcellus appears to offer an abundant
alternative close to America's biggest natural gas market, the
northeast.
But Grimm and others in Hickory say they have already paid a high price
for the development of their quiet community from the noise of drills
and compressors, heavy truck traffic damaging local roads, and air
pollution from flaring or escaping gas.
They also say that Range, one of the biggest players in Marcellus
drilling, appears determined to tap the vast reserve regardless of
local concerns.
"They have lied to us so much," Grimm told Reuters. He said the company
has exceeded the promised number of workers on its drill sites, and
flared, or burned, excess gas when it said it wouldn't.
"This was almost a pristine township. They have taken the innocence off
it," he said.
Grimm said he has no evidence that drilling is contaminating
groundwater, but is aware of concerns that the "fracking" fluid may
escape -- either above or below ground -- and that the chemicals in it
have the potential to cause cancer, damage human immune and
reproductive systems, and trigger other illnesses.
Ron Gulla, another township resident, blames drilling on his land for
the death of vegetation and fish in his pond.
KEY WATERSHED UNDER THREAT?
According to the Endocrine Disruption Exchange, a research organization
in Paonia, Colorado, 30 percent of 54 tested chemicals used in the
fluid are carcinogenic; 74 percent can cause respiratory damage, and 54
percent pose a danger to the blood and cardiovascular systems.
The group tested soil and water after spills in Colorado and Wyoming
where gas drilling is more advanced than in the Marcellus.
In northeastern Pennsylvania, drilling also threatens the Delaware
River watershed, the source of water for 15 million people living in
New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, according to Damascus Citizens
for Sustainability, a group that opposes the development.
According to the organization, 245 chemicals including methanol,
benzene, glycol ethers and biocides are used in the fluid.
Matt Pitzarella, a spokesman for Range Resources, said the fracking
chemicals could be dangerous in high concentrations but are heavily
diluted and so pose no threat to human health. Wells have several
layers of steel and concrete to stop the fluid escaping into aquifers
where they could contaminate drinking water, he said.
About 80 percent of the fracking fluid remains about a mile underground
-- thousands of feet below drinking-water aquifers -- where it
"dissipates" into the rock after drilling, Pitzarella said. The
remainder is treated on the surface and then returned to local water
sources.
Scott Anderson, a senior policy adviser with the nonprofit
Environmental Defense Fund, agreed with Range's assertion that the
fracking chemicals are sufficiently diluted not to pose an immediate
threat to health, and he said energy companies have improved safeguards
against spills.
But Anderson said he is concerned about the safe disposal of fracking
concentrate that is separated from waste water after drilling, and says
there is still a risk that the original fluid may be spilled before it
is put in the ground. "Dilution isn't the solution to pollution," he
said.
Joyce Mitchell, owner of a 133-acre (54-hectare) farm near Hickory,
said she has "mixed feelings" about having leased her land to Range
Resources for gas drilling.
Although she has welcomed the extra income from the lease and
production royalties, she complains about a constant smell of gas, and
no longer drinks the water from her well because she is concerned about
its safety.
Mitchell said Range took over more of her land than she expected, and
though she was advised by her lawyer that the company was within its
leasing rights to do so, she found the company's attitude overbearing.
"They are arrogant," she said.
Now Mitchell has asked an independent testing company to make sure her
water is safe. "I do feel the compulsion to make sure this operation
does not do horrible things to us," she said.
(Editing by Eric Walsh)