Dear ...

The recent tragic events at BP's Deepwater Horizon platform are a terrible reminder that accidents can and do happen at drilling sites, and that safeguards do not always work as planned.

The shale gas industry plans to drill thousands of wells in New York's Southern Tier. I fear that if that many wells are drilled, it will only be a matter of time before our region will be in the news because of a tragic accident. I have seen little attention being paid to the very real possibility of a blowout or some other serious accident occurring at a well site in a populated area. New York law allows drilling in areas zoned residential, and the setbacks from inhabited buildings are outrageously small. I have not even heard of any realistic plans addressing the question of emergency vehicles being hampered by roads that have been heavily damaged by drilling traffic.

Chesapeake's Aubrey McClendon was quoted in a May 2, 2010 article in The Philadelphia Inquirer as follows:

New York needs and deserves a much more comprehensive and well researched SGEIS on shale gas drilling, and that new SGEIS should incorporate the findings of the current, ongoing study of hydrofracturing that is being undertaken by the EPA.

New York also needs and deserves a thorough, comprehensive, unbiased assessment of the net economic effects of gas drilling. That study should take a hard look not just at the benefits of drilling, but also at the economic, environmental, and human costs.

I ask that you not begin issuing permits for shale gas drilling in 2011. There are far too many serious questions surrounding the shale gas extraction process that have not yet been thoroughly examined, including the question of whether it is in New York's best interest to permit shale gas drilling in the state.

Here's a beautifully written letter that showed up in the morning mail.
The writer sent it to Paterson, Cuomo, Hinchey, Schumer, NYSDEC, EPA, and others.

Dear ...

Government's first responsibility is to the safety of citizens.
Sadly, we have a model of "what could go wrong" when we are drilling. The Gulf Coast is the example that we wish would not have happened.
What do the "experts" say about "what went wrong"??
They say equipment failed.
They say repairing the damage is like performing open heart surgery at 10,000 feet (the reason many of us feel uncomfortable about fracking).
Obama says BP will need to "pay the cost" for the damage.
Money isn't the answer--it will "fix" little.
I heard one reporter say that "mother nature wasn't co-operating" !!????? That sounds like the thinking of a rapist.
The scope of the accident may be unprecedented, and it has changed the lives of people in the Gulf of Mexico, not to mention the destruction of life and habitat of the natural world.
This was an "accident". Indeed.
The experts somehow imply, before the fact, that they have safeguards in place to maintain safety.
The very definition of an accident is an unforeseen incident.
No safeguard can be in place for an accident, because the very nature of an accident is that something happened that couldn't be foreseen.
I hope I'm not redundant, but I feel I need to speak slowly and distinctly--someone seems to have a reasoning problem.
The accident that could happen in the southern tier, due to fracking, cannot be imagined today.
The accident that can happen in the southern tier due to fracking can cause the same destruction the people in the Gulf of Mexico are now preparing for.
I, as a life-long resident of the southern tier, object to the danger in which we are being positioned, by our local government.
If the insight and wisdom of our local government is so feeble that they cannot look at the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and choose safety for the Southern Tier region, I submit the action isn't stupidity, but rather criminal.
I am demanding protection for our now clean and relatively unpolluted natural environment.
The local government does not have the right to put at risk the lives and well-being of the southern tier people and environment.
The example from which the local government may draw, of the Gulf of Mexico disaster, is similar to a teacher holding the hand of a 5-year-old as the 5-year-old attempts understanding the process of writing their first "A".
I hope the local government officials will learn from this experience. Until now, our local government officials have had the petulant refusal to learn of a willfull child.
Please listen to the adults in the room who plead for wisdom in our choices.
Money is not more important than clean and unpolluted environment.
We cannot image what could go wrong after we have allowed ubiquitous fracking in our beautiful region.
I don't want to see a fossilfuelindustry/bushadmin representative droning on, on the local news, of their inability to perform heart surgery at 10,000 feet in our Upstate NY Region, after something unprecedented and unimagined has happened.
We are now in the enviable position of being able to make the decisions that will retain our clean natural environment.
For these reasons, please withdraw the dSGEIS as fatally flawed.
Don't risk our environment to facilitate the greedy.
Thank you.

Here's a letter that NYRAD co-chair Yvonne Lucia sent to State Assemblywoman Donna Lupardo after Lupardo stated in a Press Connects Guest Viewpoint that she was NOT supporting a moratorium at this time. It could be adapted to send to any official who is supporting drilling:

Dear Donna,

I am saddened by your public stance in favor of "Safe" drilling.  There really is no such thing, as mounting evidence from across the country (see article below)  clearly demonstrates.  Do you want part of your legacy as a NY State Assembly person to be that you did nothing to try to stop the invading abomination of Big Gas? My heart is breaking at the thought of what may be in store for us in this heretofore beautiful valley.   Visionary thinkers from around the globe are calling all of us out of our stupor of belief that unbridled development equals progress.  Claiming that horizontal drilling can be done safely is like rearranging the furniture in a burning building. The paradigm is shifting and the time is NOW to move toward a more  sustainable way of life.  Where are the leaders who have the courage to speak this truth, even at the risk of their political careers? 

Sincerely, Yvonne Lucia

Attached article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/15/AR2007091500893_pf.html

Dear Gov. Paterson / Commissioner Grannis / Administrator Enck,

I am dismayed to learn that the DEC is willing to exempt New York City and Syracuse drinking water reservoirs from proposed Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracking regulations (thereby implying that there won't be drilling in those areas) while failing to provide equal protection for other communities threatened by that practice.

The DEC's proposal is a tacit admission that its draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (draft SGEIS) cannot adequately protect public health. If the draft SGEIS cannot protect drinking water for New York City and Syracuse, it is inadequate for the rest of the state.

The DEC must provide equal protection for all New Yorkers.

I request that the draft SGEIS be withdrawn and revised, to safeguard the health of all New Yorkers threatened with the prospect of horizontal hydrofracking in the Marcellus Shale region.

Dear Ms Fiala,

I am writing to ask you to carefully reconsider your pro-drilling stance for Broome County.

There is increasing evidence, from locations as nearby as Dimock, Pennsylvania, of the potential detrimental effects that hydrofracking can have on a resident's well water. The fact that Pennsylvania's DEP has pulled drilling permits for Cabot oil due to the contamination of private wells on Carter Road contradicts the gas company's propaganda that there has never been an incidence of water contamination due to its drilling operations. Furthermore, the degradation of numerous rural roads, due to increasing heavy truck traffic related to drilling, has been well documented.

Dear ...

I am writing to ask you to take a stand against natural gas drilling in New York State.

There is increasing evidence, from as nearby as Dimock Pennsylvania, of the potential detrimental effects that hydrofracking can have on a resident's well water. The fact that Pennsylvania's DEP has pulled drilling permits for Cabot oil due to the contamination of private wells on Carter Road contradicts the gas company's propaganda that there has never been an incidence of water contamination due to its drilling operations. Furthermore, the degradation of numerous rural roads, due to increasing heavy truck traffic related to drilling, has been well documented.

I believe that as an elected official it is imperative that you take a leadership role and support a moratorium on the issuing of drilling permits in New York State, so as to protect the health, welfare, and well-being of your constituents.

Dear ...

I am writing because I do not think that Broome County should be encouraging New York to proceed with shale gas extraction in our area. Due consideration has not been given to the many risks the shale gas extraction process would pose to our county's residents, its natural resources, and its economy.

The DEC has recently announced that the final version of the draft SGEIS—expected later this year—will not apply to the watersheds that provide unfiltered water to New York City and Syracuse. Instead, special consideration will be given to those areas. In making this decision, the DEC is admitting the possibility that serious, drilling-related water contamination could occur. I believe that New York should provide effective and equal protection to all of its residents, including those in Broome County. We all deserve clean, safe water.

To date, no one—not the gas industry, not the DEC, and not the EPA—has provided evidence of any comprehensive, unbiased, scientific studies showing that our water supplies would be safe if drilling were to proceed. On the contrary, there is evidence from numerous locations around the country that strongly suggests that we can expect at least some degree of serious water contamination. The report "Potential Economic And Fiscal Impacts From Natural Gas Production In Broome, County, New York," prepared for the County by Bernard L. Weinstein and Terry L. Clower, projected that 2,000 to 4,000 gas wells would be drilled in our 700-square-mile county, a density of about three to six wells per square mile. If technological failures or human errors should occur at just 1% of the wells in the county, that would lead to potentially dangerous situations at 20 to 40 gas wells. A single gas well failure can have very serious consequences for a wide area surrounding the well.

The water contamination issue is just one of a long list of potential problems associated with the drilling. I am also concerned about:

• Health-threatening air pollution due to heavy truck traffic and fugitive emissions from gas wells and compressor stations
• Explosion hazards due to methane contamination of water supplies
• The long- and short-term health effects of drilling wells close to homes and schools
• Devaluation of residential properties
• Long periods of high noise levels
• Loss of green space
• Severe road damage
• Clear-cutting of trees for well pads (a typical multi-well pad occupies four to five acres or more)
• Erosion
• Habitat fragmentation
• Illegal dumping of toxic waste (there is currently no viable plan for disposing of the contaminated cuttings and wastewater generated by the shale gas extraction process)
• The possibility of pipeline and gas well explosions and fires
• Damage to vegetation near gas wells, pipelines, and compressor stations
• Gas well flaring and its attendant air pollution
• The introduction of invasive species
• Damage to farmland
• Disruption of wildlife
• Pipeline leaks
• Chemical spills
• The ability of emergency response vehicles to quickly navigate through heavy drilling-related truck traffic on damaged roads
• The need for hiring many additional emergency personnel and the source of funding for those personnel

The long-term, net effect of drilling on Broome's economy should also be considered. The Weinstein/Clower report looked only at the economic benefits of gas drilling, not at the costs. Because gas drilling is likely to have negative effects on some parts of the economy, some economists question whether gas drilling would actually result in a net economic benefit. See for example: www.damascuscitizens.org/Economic_Paper.pdf       

The federal Environmental Protection Agency is undertaking a new, comprehensive study of hydrofracturing in an attempt to determine its effects upon the environment and human health. Results from that study are not expected until 2012. Surely, the prudent, common-sense approach would be to allow sufficient time for the EPA's study to be completed and duly reviewed.

It would also seem prudent for Broome County to commission a study to examine the short- and long-term negative economic consequences of drilling. Any negative consequences are likely to be far-reaching and long-lasting. Certainly, if our water supplies are damaged, repairing that damage may be extremely costly or even impossible.

I want Broome County to thrive and prosper, not just in the immediate future, but for generations to come. For the sake of current and future Broome County residents, I ask you to please reconsider your position on shale gas extraction.

Dear ...

I am writing because I am deeply concerned that New York is about to proceed with shale gas extraction without due consideration of the risks it poses to the state's residents, natural resources, and economy. While some parts of the technology employed to extract gas from shale have been in use for a long time, the technology as a whole is relatively new. It is far too early to know what the long-term effects of this new technology may be. The federal Environmental Protection Agency is undertaking a new, comprehensive study of hydrofracturing in an attempt to determine its effects upon the environment and human health. Results from that study are not expected until 2012, yet New York is planning to proceed with drilling in 2011. This is a grave mistake.

Evidence from other states strongly suggests that the heavily industrialized shale gas extraction process can and does cause a wide variety of problems, including:

• Health-threatening water and air pollution due to heavy truck traffic and fugitive emissions from gas wells and compressor stations
• Explosion hazards due to methane contamination of water supplies
• Devaluation of residential properties
• Long periods of high noise levels
• Loss of green space and clear-cutting of trees for well pads
• Severe road damage
• Habitat fragmentation and disruption of wildlife
• Erosion and damage to vegetation near gas wells, pipelines, and compressor stations
• Illegal dumping of toxic waste
• The possibility of pipeline and gas well explosions and fires
• Gas well flaring and its attendant pollution
• Damage to farmland and the introduction of invasive species
• Pipeline leaks and chemical spills

The scale of the contemplated development is also cause for grave concern. Shale gas wells deplete rapidly; this creates a need to drill more and more wells. In order to recover anything approaching the hoped-for quantities of natural gas from shales in New York, tens of thousands of wells would be needed, along with an infrastructure of access roads, compressor stations, and pipelines. Well pads are not completely reclaimed until after production stops, which may not be for decades. Even if the entire process were carefully regulated, and even if each well pad contained multiple wells, it would be impossible to construct this huge industrial gridwork without severely and permanently altering the landscape and character of much of the state. Moreover, as the number of wells increases, the likelihood of accidents also increases.

New York is to be commended for putting Marcellus drilling on hold during the preparation of the draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (dSGEIS) . However, the scope of that document was limited, and some of the issues that were within its scope—such as the cumulative effects of drilling thousands of wells—were addressed in an extremely superficial manner. In addition, some of the conclusions reached in the dSGEIS were based upon insufficient data and/or data not specific to New York. The DEC has recently announced that the final version of the draft SGEIS—expected later this year—will not apply to the watersheds that provide unfiltered water to New York City and Syracuse. Instead, special consideration will be given to those areas. In making this decision, the DEC is admitting the possibility that serious, drilling-related water contamination could occur. Surely, it is in New York's best long-term interest to provide effective and equal protection for all state water supplies and the health of all state residents. 

The ability of the state to protect our water supplies is just one of numerous serious concerns surrounding the shale gas extraction process. New York is poised to begin drilling in a large area of the state even though scant attention has been paid to such critical topics as:

• The myriad public health issues that would accompany shale gas extraction, including a comprehensive study of the potential impacts of naturally occurring radioactive materials in drill cuttings and wastewater
• Management of the huge volume of toxic wastewater that would be generated by the drilling
• The greenhouse gas contributions of the energy-intensive shale gas extraction and production processes, including contributions due to methane leaks
• Establishing how many additional emergency response personnel are likely to be required, what special training they would need, who would bear the added costs of the extra personnel and training, as well as the response time for emergency vehicles in areas experiencing heavy, drilling-related traffic and road damage
• The short- and long-term threats posed by drilling shale gas wells near homes and schools
• The impact of round-the-clock, drilling-related noise on adults and children, including its impact on their ability to function at work and school
• The impact of shale gas extraction on other businesses, particularly those businesses that depend on clean water and/or a setting that is attractive to potential employees
• The need to formulate realistic estimates of how many additional employees and how much additional funding the DEC would require to responsibly oversee the drilling and hydrofracturing operations
• The question of how fluctuations in the price of natural gas will affect the economy of a region that is heavily dependent upon gas production
• The accuracy of estimates of anticipated revenue—it is in the gas industry's interest to inflate these figures, so they should be independently verified

Amazingly, there has not even been a comprehensive analysis to determine if, in New York's case, the economic benefits of shale gas extraction would outweigh the costs. To proceed with so many critical questions left unanswered would be sheer folly.

We are at a pivotal point in New York's history. We have an obligation—not just to ourselves, but to our children and to our grandchildren—to take the time required for thorough, measured, well-informed deliberation. As that deliberation continues, we must carefully consider not just how we should plan for and regulate shale gas extraction, but whether it is truly in New York's best interest to allow shale gas extraction to occur at all.

It is time for New York to shake off its gas-rush fever and take a hard, realistic, data-based look at the probable consequences of shale gas extraction. Our state cannot thrive and prosper if its natural resources are endangered and its people's health and lives are threatened. Please do everything in your power to prevent drilling from beginning in 2011 and to seek answers to the many questions that still surround the shale gas extraction issue.