Environmentalists Split Over Marcellus Shale Hydrofracking
Clean air vs. contaminated water in latest plan to meet state energy demands
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:18:00
For years, environmentalists have been big boosters of natural gas drilling, seeing it as a way to wean the state off dirty fuels like coal and oil.
But not in the case of the controversial proposal to drill in New York’s Marcellus Shale gas reserves, a geologic formation stretching across New York through Pennsylvania and estimated to contain enough to supply the entire country’s natural gas demands for 15 years. But with the shale in the same part of the state that supplies much of downstate’s water supply, many green groups are opposed to the project, prompting an internal debate about competing environmental priorities.
Despite the Natural Resources Defense Council’s general support of natural gas drilling, the organization is opposed to drilling the Marcellus Shale said Kate Sindig, a senior attorney at the organization.
“There are certain areas where we take a strict no-drilling stance, and the New York City watershed is one of those,” she said, suggesting the state instead use more efficiently the state’s existing 13,000 conventionally drilled wells. “All gas is not created equal.”
At the heart of the concerns is the method of drilling known as hydrofracking, or hydraulic fracturing, in which huge quantities of water treated with powerful chemicals to help release the gas are injected into the ground.
Hydrofracking has not been used in drilling the state’s other wells, but the depth of the Marcellus Shale and the density of its rock demand the non-traditional method, experts say. According to environmentalists, though, the chemical-infused hydrofracking water could seep outward and contaminate the New York City watershed. Also raising concerns: naturally occurring radioactive material in the Marcellus Shale rocks could be released into the water and the surrounding environment.
Since New York City is one of only a handful of major United States cities that does not pre-filter its water, there is no safeguard against dirty drinking water.
In Pennsylvania, where hydrofrack wells have been used in the Marcellus Shale since 2005, many towns are suing drillers over water that is so contaminated that water mains and drinking wells have exploded from the methane that is captured in the process.
Constructing a filtration plant to purify the contaminated water could cost $10 billion, according to New York City’s Department of Environmental Protection—an agency already struggling under the weight of spiraling capital debt. There are also concerns in the Finger Lakes region, where residents fear their water supply could also be contaminated by Marcellus Shale wastewater.
Nonetheless, Dan Hendrick, of the New York League of Conservation Voters, said that even as his organization shares these concerns about water quality, it should not be environmentalists’ only concern. Given the broader goal of combating global warming, he said environmental groups should not simply reject the idea of drilling the Marcellus Shale out of hand.
“If we just go status quo and don’t drill in the Marcellus Shale, won’t the air quality be worse than if we had a natural gas source close to home and online?” Hendrick said. “For organizations that take a broad view on sustainability, I think you’re going to see more splits on this issue.”
But not in the case of the controversial proposal to drill in New York’s Marcellus Shale gas reserves, a geologic formation stretching across New York through Pennsylvania and estimated to contain enough to supply the entire country’s natural gas demands for 15 years. But with the shale in the same part of the state that supplies much of downstate’s water supply, many green groups are opposed to the project, prompting an internal debate about competing environmental priorities.
Despite the Natural Resources Defense Council’s general support of natural gas drilling, the organization is opposed to drilling the Marcellus Shale said Kate Sindig, a senior attorney at the organization.
“There are certain areas where we take a strict no-drilling stance, and the New York City watershed is one of those,” she said, suggesting the state instead use more efficiently the state’s existing 13,000 conventionally drilled wells. “All gas is not created equal.”
At the heart of the concerns is the method of drilling known as hydrofracking, or hydraulic fracturing, in which huge quantities of water treated with powerful chemicals to help release the gas are injected into the ground.
Hydrofracking has not been used in drilling the state’s other wells, but the depth of the Marcellus Shale and the density of its rock demand the non-traditional method, experts say. According to environmentalists, though, the chemical-infused hydrofracking water could seep outward and contaminate the New York City watershed. Also raising concerns: naturally occurring radioactive material in the Marcellus Shale rocks could be released into the water and the surrounding environment.
Since New York City is one of only a handful of major United States cities that does not pre-filter its water, there is no safeguard against dirty drinking water.
In Pennsylvania, where hydrofrack wells have been used in the Marcellus Shale since 2005, many towns are suing drillers over water that is so contaminated that water mains and drinking wells have exploded from the methane that is captured in the process.
Constructing a filtration plant to purify the contaminated water could cost $10 billion, according to New York City’s Department of Environmental Protection—an agency already struggling under the weight of spiraling capital debt. There are also concerns in the Finger Lakes region, where residents fear their water supply could also be contaminated by Marcellus Shale wastewater.
Nonetheless, Dan Hendrick, of the New York League of Conservation Voters, said that even as his organization shares these concerns about water quality, it should not be environmentalists’ only concern. Given the broader goal of combating global warming, he said environmental groups should not simply reject the idea of drilling the Marcellus Shale out of hand.
“If we just go status quo and don’t drill in the Marcellus Shale, won’t the air quality be worse than if we had a natural gas source close to home and online?” Hendrick said. “For organizations that take a broad view on sustainability, I think you’re going to see more splits on this issue.”
