Experts at the University of Colorado School of Public Health’s Department of Environmental and Occupational Health completed a review of hundreds of published, peer-reviewed scientific articles to examine what is known concerning the health effects of oil and gas drilling and production on neighboring communities. They also reviewed available empirical data regarding communities in western Colorado. They found that the many hazardous chemicals being used and produced pose a potential health risk for local residents, and recommend a thorough health impact assessment before future expansion of oil and gas activities. Their findings are detailed in these two papers. This work received partial financial support from the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Researchers find ‘acute problems with toxic emissions’
This is especially troubling considering the cavalier attitude taken by the Texas Railroad in protecting citizens. As reported by Vince and Capitol Annex: Railroad Commission Pillages Clean Up Fund To Speed Processing Of Drilling Applications
And more alarming news about the harmful effects of drilling:
1) According to SMU engineering professor Dr. Al Armendariz, emissions from gas drilling operations in the north Texas region are twice the ozone forming pollution as all the cars in the nine-county ozone non-attainment area.
2) In summary: Experts at the University of Colorado School of Public
Health’s Department of Environmental and Occupational Health completed
a review of hundreds of published, peer-reviewed scientific articles
to examine what is known concerning the health effects of oil and gas
drilling and production on neighboring communities. They also reviewed
available empirical data regarding communities in western Colorado.
They found that the many hazardous chemicals being used and produced
pose a potential health risk for local residents, and recommend a
thorough health impact assessment before future expansion of oil and
gas activities. Their findings are detailed in these two papers. This
work received partial financial support from the Natural Resources
Defense Council. The statements made in these papers are the work
product of the authors and do not represent the position of any
university or organization.http://docs.nrdc.org/health/default.xdl
Researchers find ‘acute problems with toxic emissions’
About Sharon Wilson
Sharon Wilson is considered a leading citizen expert on the impacts of shale oil and gas extraction. She is the go-to person whether it’s top EPA officials from D.C., national and international news networks, or residents facing the shock of eminent domain and the devastating environmental effects of natural gas development in their backyards.
- Web |
- More Posts(5121)
Remediation is not rocket science.
Instead of leaving a pool of nasty stuff–or leaving ground water polluted–clean the stuff up. The same amount of research you have already done would give you the resources to clean up the mess.
Be sure to build a real understanding of the techniques and options open to the land owner in your state. Remediation companies are an unbelievable ripoff–I know this because I worked in the business.
The cost of a dually pickup would cover the cost of some pretty heavy-duty DIY remediation. You need to know the laws, the documentation, sampling techniques, and a few other things.
Remediation should be a tax-write-off; so the net income should be the same.
Will it stink? Yes, but only for the length of time it takes to strip the volatile organic compounds from the mess (and/or ground water.) So long as there is not a concentration of metals–the remainder should be good for bio-remediation (which is a fancy word for a septic tank which has been precharged with some sewage and cultures which can be purchased from a laboratory.)
Yes, you have to drill wells to: find the plume, pull the polluted water for treatment, and to inject treated water above the plume to “flush” the pollutants from the contaminated areas. Depending upon the severity–treatment is pretty quick, measured in months rather than years.
If you are going to get $500,000.00 and you spend $50,000.00 to do an immediate clean-up–and are able to write off the costs on taxes–are you ahead or behind? Immediate clean-up is much cheaper than waiting and contaminating larger areas. Residues after cleanup will be broken down by naturally occuring organisms in the soil–if the techniques are followed.
Eric
Oh, and another thing. One has to read between the lines in studies and papers produced by researchers. The safest bet is to try to determine who is paying for the research, and the opinions and “bent” of the researchers.
The original studies in Florida, with regard to drilling for natural gas, were paid for by the people who owned Peoples Natural Gas–a monopoly in central Florida who wanted to stay that way. It got w-a-y out of hand.
Remediation is not difficult–and does not have to be expensive if done by a private individual.
Unfortunately, there are individual people who are POS–that doesn’t mean that an entire industry is evil.
In many cases, the cost of remediation done by an individual property owner is literally 1/10 of the cost for a company.
There are people who were able to get all of the resources to do the clean up–through the companies who did the polluting. How and why did that happen? The laws as written made the land owner–not the lease-holder–responsible for the clean up.
Laws, ordinances and regulations can be arcane and senseless.
Eric
maybe you could get someone to go educate folks in Shreveport?
they’re sitting on a natural gas bomb, too.
http://www.thesaintreport.com/saintblog/2008/10/shreveport-in-natural-gas-frenzy-looks-to-fort-worth-for-lessons-in-urban-drilling.html
Hey Greg! We are in contact with people in Shreveport. We just can’t educate them fast enough to compete with the massive PR campaigns of BIG OIL.
The gas and oil industry love it when they can come in and attack before anyone knows what is going on. I can’t say I am sorry they want to move out of North Texas. But, I am concerned for our neighbors to the East.