Say Drilling Method Too Toxic
Following a damning report from state agencies about potential health and environmental risks, the Cuomo Administration banned last Wednesday, Dec. 17, high-volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF, or hydrofracking) in gas mining practices across New York State.
For years, environmentalists campaigned for permanently prohibiting the drilling technique, in which a slurry of water and chemicals is injected at high pressure into the earth, cracking into subterranean shales in order to retrieve natural gas or oil.
Energy companies and upstate interests countered that the process is not as risky as claimed, and that permitting hydrofracking would prove a boon to the state and national economy. Much of upstate New York sits atop the Marcellus Shale, which is known to contain one of the largest natural gas supplies on Earth.
During Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s cabinet meeting, the state Health Department presented a report which found many “uncertainties” about potential health and environmental risks, both short- and long-term, from the use of HVHF. There were also questions as to whether the state could provide adequate mitigation measures to protect the public.
“I have considered all of the data and find significant questions and risks to public health which as of yet are unanswered,” Acting State Health Commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker said in a statement last Wednesday that coincided with the governor’s declaration. “I think it would be reckless to proceed in New York until more authoritative research is done.”
“I asked myself, ‘Would I let my family live in a community with fracking?'” Zucker added. “The answer is no. I therefore cannot recommend anyone else’s family to live in such a community either.”
In light of the Health Department report, Joseph Martens-commissioner of the State Department of Environmental Conservation- announced he would issue a “legally-binding findings statement” outlawing HVHF in New York State.
“DEC’s own review identified dozens of potential significant adverse impacts of HVHF. Further, with the exclusion of sensitive natural, cultural and historical resources and the increasing number of towns that have enacted bans and moratoria, the risks substantially outweigh any potential economic benefits of HVHF,” Martens said.
‘Can’t afford to roll the dice’
Locally, many city residents feared the chemicals used in hydrofracking-including known carcinogens-would spread via runoff into the upstate reservoirs that serve as the city’s drinking water source. In 2009, Community Board 5 and the Queens Borough Board approved a resolution urging the state to ban hydrofracking in the city’s watershed area.
Numerous Queens lawmakers followed suit and publicly called for moratoriums on hydrofracking. Many of them publicly hailed the ban in statements sent to the Times Newsweekly.
“Although I understand the need for job creation in New York State, I will not risk the health and safety of our citizens and perhaps future generations to achieve that goal,” Assemblyman Mike Miller said last Wednesday.
“The potential environmental and health impact of allowing fracking in our state has remained a great unknown, even after several years of study,” noted Assemblyman Francisco Moya, who chairs the Subcommittee on Renewable Energy. “We simply can’t afford to roll the dice with the health and well-being of our residents.”
“I have been an opponent of fracking ever since my start in the Senate, and my opposition grew as more and more constituents educated me on the issue,” State Sen. Joseph Addabbo stated. “The more we find out about fracking, the more dangerous we realize it is. We cannot see into the future to predict how fracking would affect the environment and the potential, irreversible health problems are simply not worth the risk. We need to work today to protect our community for generations to come, and because of that I plan to continue my work to shield our state from fracking.”
“I’m very relieved the state banned [fracking] simply because I think it poses significant risks to the areas where the fracking is taking place,” Board 5 District Manager Gary Giordano told the Times Newsweekly last Friday, Dec. 19, “because fracking involves mixing water with sand and hundreds of chemicals, many of which are cancer-causing.”
“To be putting that into the earth is a risk in and of itself, and then capturing the wastewater and being able to do anything with that leaves huge question marks,” he added.
Unease over full ban
Though Board 5’s previous resolution called for prohibiting hydrofracking in the city’s watershed area, it did call for an overall statewide ban, Board 5 Chairperson Vincent Arcuri told the Times Newsweekly in an interview last Wednesday. This, he indicated, left the door open to potentially allow hydrofracking elsewhere in the Empire State and for potentially using less risky, updated drilling techniques in the future.
“Originally, I was against fracking within five miles of the New York City aquifer,” he said, but noted that many bodies of water north of the Catskill Mountains are already heavily polluted from years of heavy industry and farm waste.
Dairy farms are scattered across that region, but Arcuri claimed the industry appears to be no longer viable. Milk prices are fixed, he said, and as a result, the farmers-while “land rich”- live in abject economic poverty.
“There’s nobody with money at all there,” Arcuri said. “If you don’t work for the county or state, you don’t have a job. Something has to be done-and it’s not going to be casinos. This would have been good in those areas where land and water were already polluted.”
Arcuri believes land owners- and energy companies who entered into leasing and mineral rights agreements with them- will take the state to court to have the ban lifted.
For his part, Giordano concurred that the state needed “to do more to provide economic opportunity upstate, but in my opinion, we should do a lot better than hydrofracking and casino gambling.”
“We need to do a lot better than those two things being our options,” he concluded.
