New Study Shows Increased Rate of Birth Defects near Gas Wells

Yesterday, the Joint Landowners Coalition of NY threatened to sue the state if DEC doesn't hurry up and release the SGEIS to allow drilling - and fracking - in New York. This was in response to DEC chief Joseph Martens' comment a couple days earlier that the state had no plans to issue permits for fracking. DEC is waiting for Dr. Shah to complete the health impact review.

While the delay irks some landowners, many others appreciate the extra time, as new findings continue to come in regarding water, air and health impacts related to gas drilling.

On the same day the landowners emailed and Fed-Exxed their demands to permit fracking, Colorado researchers released their findings that show that babies born near gas wells have increased rates for certain birth defects.

The new study shows that women living near gas wells in rural Colorado are more likely to have babies with neural tube and congenital heart defects. These findings add to the already growing concern about health impacts from air pollution at drilling sites, compressor stations and other infrastructure.

Lisa McKenzie and her research team from the Colorado School of Public Health analyzed birth defects among nearly 125,000 births in rural Colorado. They chose towns with fewer than 50,000 residents and examined records from 1996 - 2009, paying particular attention to how close the mothers lived to gas wells.

What they found: babies born to mothers who lived in areas with the highest density of wells (more than 125 wells/ mile) were more than twice as likely to have neural tube defects as babies born to mothers living at least 10 miles away from gas wells. Babies in the high-well density zone also had a 38 percent greater risk of congenital heart defects as children born in areas with no wells.

"Taken together, our results and current trend in natural gas development underscore the importance of conducting more comprehensive and rigorous research on the potential health effects of natural gas development," McKenzie et al wrote in their article published in the journal, Environmental Health Perspectives.  The researchers admit that their study was limited in that they didn't have access to the mothers' health information, socioeconomic information, or actual exposures to air pollutants. They also knew only if a gas well existed in the year of the births - not how active it was - and they assumed that the address of the mother at time of birth was the same as during her first trimester.

Given that the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission estimates that 26 percent of  wells in Colorado are located within 150 to 1,000 feet of homes, these findings offer yet one more reason for DEC to overhaul - or withdraw - their proposed fracking regulations.

Bad Air, Bad Water, Bad Health

Fracking a well near home in PA

Yesterday NY State Senator David Carlucci told the press that the state senate is considering a delay of fracking until some health studies are complete. He told AP reporter Michael Gormley, "We have to put science first; we have to put the health of New Yorkers first."

Meanwhile:

• NY  Dept. of Health Commissioner Dr. Nirav Shah is still working on the health review that should determine whether the final draft SGEIS (Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement) adequately identifies potential public health impacts of fracking;
• Geisinger Health System in PA is studying the impact of Marcellus shale gas mining on health;
• DEP investigators have found two new cases in Dimock, where methane concentrations in private water wells pose an explosion hazard.

But while the NY legislators await results from those studies, there is a wealth of data indicating that gas drilling is not healthy for children and other living things. Especially living things that depend on breathing.

Consider: Pennsylvania recently completed an air pollution study. The overall results weren’t bad. But pollution from shale gas activity has brought pollution to areas that were previously unpolluted.

This reflects what’s been happening in rural areas out west. Vernal, UT saw high levels of ozone and other pollutants resulting from gas drilling. And last July, Sublette County and portions of Lincoln County WY were declared to be in marginal “non-attainment for ozone” under the Clean Air Act. That means they exceeded the federal 8-hour average threshold of 75 parts per billion (ppb), a standard meant to protect human health.

Certainly these impacts aren’t going to hit everyone equally. “Healthy” people in Fort Worth, TX for example may not feel any ill effects, but susceptible populations – children, elderly, people with chronic respiratory and/or cardiac problems – will feel the impacts. And, as has happened in a number of cases, one neighbor’s well may be contaminated while another well escapes harm – at least for a while.

As a wise and compassionate teacher reminded those who were blessed: care for the least of these (who are not so blessed)… for whatever you do for them, you do for me.

Landowners Threaten to Sue NY if there's No Fracking

New York has done it again: missed another fracking deadline. And this time the Joint Landowners Coalition of NY (JLCNY) is putting its feet down; they're going to sue the state for not allowing fracking.

Why?Because, says JLCNY attorney Scott Kurkoski, "We've been denied all economic benefit to our property."
At issue is the delay of promulgating fracking regulations because, well, the Commissioner of Health is still working on a health study to determine whether - and how - highly industrialized unconventional drilling requiring high-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing affects the public health. And the governor is waiting for him to complete the study before he decides whether or not to permit fracking.

This doesn't faze the JLCNY because.... well, because  apparently economic gain trumps health. The idea that the state might want to ensure that public health is not endangered is, to the JLCNY, a "takings". The fact that gas may not even be worth extracting doesn't seem to enter this equation.

Ensuring the health of the public now and for future generations apparently doesn't enter the equation either. Because, says JLCNY president Dan Fitzimmons, the "futures of our children, our communities and everything..." will be taken away if gas drilling isn't allowed.

Ironically, gas drilling IS allowed in NY. It's just one kind of gas drilling that isn't - and, by god, that's the kind JLCNY wants or it will sue. All they're lacking are the plaintiffs.


Meanwhile, other landowners who would prefer to breathe clean air, drink pure water, provide healthy pasture and forage for livestock, and grow nutritious food, wonder if drilling on their neighbor's land might not deny them "all economic benefit" to their property.

NY Fracking Decision Delayed - But Permits Might be Issued Anyway?

New York landowners hoping to cash in on gas leases will have to wait a few more weeks for the final decision on whether to allow high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing. That’s because a key health impact study won’t be completed by this week’s deadline.  

Today NY Dept. of Health Commissioner Dr. Nirav Shah, sent a letter to Dept. of Environmental Conservation Commissioner Joe Martens saying: we need more time to finish the health review.

The Department of Health review asks whether the final draft SGEIS (Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement) adequately identifies potential public health impacts of high-volume horizontal hydro-fracking. It also considers whether DEC needs to add mitigation measures beyond those already proposed in the SGEIS.

The decision to permit fracking “involves complex questions about the impact of the process on public health,” Shah wrote in his letter to Martens. “The time to ensure the impacts on public health are properly considered is before a state permits drilling.”

According to Shah, the DOH review focuses on the relationship of hydro-fracking to the health impacts of drinking water contamination, air quality and community impacts. His department is reviewing recent studies published by the scientific community including:

• The US EPA hydraulic fracturing study (EPA published a 278 page progress report a few weeks ago)
• The Geisinger Health Systems study in PA (plans to analyze health records for asthma and other respiratory diseases, accidents and injuries, and birth outcomes)
• A University of Pennsylvania study in collaboration with scientists from Columbia, Johns Hopkins and the University of North Carolina.

 Shah concluded with a reminder that “…the Governor's instruction has been to let the science determine the outcome.”

With the health review incomplete, the DEC will not be able to issue the thousand-page-plus environmental impact statement tomorrow – a requirement to meet a Feb. 27 deadline for its regulations. Missing that deadline could mean that DEC would have to reintroduce the fracking rules, a process that would re-open then to public comment.

But maybe not, says DEC Commissioner Martens. In response, Martens reiterated that he would not issue a final SGEIS until the health review is complete. He admitted that, indeed, the proposed high-volume hydraulic fracturing regulations cannot be finalized until the SGEIS is complete.

But, says Martens, “this does not mean that the issuance of permits for high-volume hydraulic fracturing would be delayed.” IF the Health Review determines that the SGEIS adequately addresses health concerns, and IF Martens adopts the SGEIS on that basis, then “DEC can accept and process high-volume hydraulic fracturing permit applications 10 days after issuance of the SGEIS.”  If, on the other hand, the health review determines that there are health concerns that still need to be addressed, DEC won’t issue permits.

It all sounds very “iffy”. Meanwhile, lawyers on both sides of the issue are sharpening their pencils…

Now We're Worried about Health?

In a "better late than never" approach, it appears that NY state regulators are now considering a health study as part of the environmental review on fracking. According to NY Times blogger Mireya Navarro, environmental groups met with "top officials" from NYS Dept. of Health and Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC). They discussed possible impacts such as air pollution (from drilling rigs, compressors, traffic), potential water contamination (spills and accidents) and the higher number of accidents given increased traffic drilling brings.

However, the state might simply decide to monitor health impacts once fracking gets underway - a far cry from the health impact study that Assembly members and the public have called for since the beginning of the environmental review. Other states have already documented increased asthma rates and higher incidences of cardiovascular events. And two Pennsylvania healthcare systems, Guthrie and Geissinger, announced last month that they're teaming up to study the health impacts of Marcellus Shale drilling.

New Yorkers don't need a study that shows what happens when drilling occurs; we just have to look over the border to see that. Emergency services directors in Bradford and other PA counties have spoken numerous times about the increase in traffic accidents, delayed response times, emergency evacuations and other impacts.

What we really need is a health impact study prior to drilling, something that would inform how - and whether - fracking happens.