Drilling in Dallas
Low Birth Weight Pregnancies 25% More Likely Within 1.5 miles of Fracking
A mother's exposure to fracking increases the chance a a low weight birth by 25%, according to a new study by Elaine Hill, a doctoral candidate at Cornell University. Hill's research also found a 17% increase in "small for gestational age" births and reduced health scores among newborns whose moms lived close to fracking sites.
“Unconventional Natural Gas Development and Infant Health: Evidence from Pennsylvania” is the working title of the study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed or journal-published. Hill used data from 2010 and focused on those living up to 1.5 miles from gas development sites. Pennsylvania increased its unconventional natural gas wells from 20 in 2007 to 4,272 by the end of 2010.
Hill publicized her findings at a public hearing in New York state, which is considering new regulations for fracking. She decided to come forward now, rather than wait for up to two years for the review process to accredit her research because she believes her study has implications policy makers need to incorporate into those regulations.
“My study is robust across multiple specifications and it indicates that our future generation may be seriously harmed. I couldn’t possibly value my career over their well-being,” Hill said by email last Thursday.
We already have a Colorado School of Public health study released in March that shows a 66% higher chance of getting cancer if you live within a half mile of a fracking site. Hill's study is the first to track health effects up to a mile and a half away.
These reports are in addition to the hazard of earthquakes now officially linked to fracking waste injection wells by the US Geological Society, and the risk of getting silicosis from breathing in illegal levels of sand particles noted by industrial hygienists – both from earlier this year. All of this is new research that didn't exist before 2012. What other hazards are we ignorant of this year?
Just another reason why you should be at Dallas City Hall at 9 am on Wednesday, August 1st for the Thrilla on Marilla.
State Farm Sending Letters To Johnson County Residents Offering Earthquake Insurance
Following up on our follow-up….while no insurance companies offer homeowners protection against the hazards of fracking out right, State Farm seems to have figured out how to make money selling insurance for the symptoms of disposing of fracking waste. Buried deep inside this story on the recent wave of Johnson County earthquakes and their possible link to the County's numerous high-pressure injection wells for "fracking fluid" is the news that the Insurance giant sent out letters to Johnson County residents urging them to buy earthquake coverage.
If, as recently as five or six years ago, an enterprising insurance agent had tried to sell a Cleburne resident earthquake insurance, he would have been investigated for fraud. This is how fracking has changed North Texas.
Green Source Coverage of Dallas Drilling Fight
The folks over at Green Source continue to up their current events coverage of local environmental issues. This week it's a feature on the local "supergroup" of Dallas Residents at Risk, of which Downwinders is a proud member. DRR membership, whch also incudes the Dallas Sierra Club, Texas Campaign for the Environment, and the Mountian Creek Neighborhhood Alliance, has been instrumental in moving the fracking debate out of environmental circles and into Dallas neighborhoods. It's also set the agenda for the debate with its "five protections" proposal to improve the proposed new gas ordinance. This is going to be a close vote no matter what. Don't forget to be there at Dallas City Hall on August 1 for the next round.
Be There
What Ray says.
Energy Dependence: Fracking in Texas Relies on Guar From India
Because "without guar, you cannot have fracturing fluids," and 85% of the world's guar is grown in a large desert in india. So to exploit American natural gas, operators must rely almost completely on a foreign import.
Follow-up: Homeowners Insurance Won’t Cover Fracking Losses
In the light of Nationwide's decison to quit writing policies for those who lease land to frackers, the Hartford Courant did a quick round of call
s and discovered that homeowners were already up a creek when it came to any damge from gas drilling they might incur:
"If the ground shifts at a fracking site and breaks the foundation of a nearby home, or if the chemicals taint a drinking-water well, standard homeowner and commercial-property policies won't cover the cost, said Robert Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute, a property-casualty resource and trade group. Standard property-insurance policies cover a specific set of calamities, such as fire, lightning, thunderstorms, ice and hail.
"There's really no distinction here between fracking or any other, say, mining, operation here," Hartwig said. "This sort of thing is not covered by the policy and it never was."
Nationwide Insurance Makes It Official: Fracking is a Bad Risk
After circulating on citizen group blogs in upstate New York for a day or two, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company confirmed that an internal memo outlining new prohibitions on insuring individuals or businesses who lease land for natural gas fracking was authentic and reflected company policy. With the disclosure Nationwide becomes the first insurance company to say it won't cover damages caused by horizontal fracturing.
According to the memo,
“After months of research and discussion, we have determined that the exposures presented by hydraulic fracturing are too great to ignore. Risks involved with hydraulic fracturing are now prohibited for General Liability, Commercial Auto, Motor Truck Cargo, Auto Physical Damage and Public Auto (insurance) coverage.”
This prohibition applies to landowners who lease land for shale gas drilling, and contractors involved in fracking operations, including those who haul water to and from drill sites; pipe and lumber haulers; and operators of bulldozers, dump trucks and other vehicles used in drill site preparation. That's a lot of the gas fuel cycle suddenly not covered.
Nationwide is the first to de-couple itself from fracking, but we bet it isn't the last. Some analysts were suggesting that negative publicity surrounding the fracking process influenced Nationwide's decision. Given the discovery rate of new hazards associated with fracking over the last two years, that's not a factor likely to get better with time.
It may be that at by the time all the dust settles, the gas industry will have to depend on some kind of massive government bailout to even be able to get fracking insurance. This is the same problem the nuclear power industry faced 50 years ago. No sane insurance company would offer coverage for a nuclear power plant, so the federal government stepped in and subsidized it in the form of the Price-Anderson Act. Without this literal Act of Congress, there wouldn't even be one nuclear power plant in the U.S.
Insurance companies aren't politically bias. They aren't partisan. They aren't treehuggers. They operate according to cold hard stats. And now those stats say fracking is a very bad risk. So bad that at least one major carrier has stopped even offering policies that cover damage from it.
If, like the City of Dallas, you were hoping to lease your land for natural gas drilling, this is something that should concern you.
As Gas Mining Moves East, So Do Smog Violations
Failing the Test on Smog
This is a response to statements in this.
1) "The downward trend" that Mr Clawson of TCEQ says has only been "interrupted," is, in fact continuing, and he knows this because it's TCEQ monitoring that's proving it. This last March saw the highest ozone levels ever recorded for that month since TCEQ air quality monitoring began in 1997. It's only June, and there are already two monitors whose three-year runing average "Design Value" is above the old 85 ppb standard. The "best ever" ozone summer we were supposed to experience this year, according to TCEQ's prediction to EPA submitted in December, is completely off the rails.
2) The "87 ppb" Design Value Mr. Clawson cites is from 2010. Last year it was 92 ppb – at the Keller monitor. This year so far, the Keller monitor is already at a Design Value of 87, a violation of the old standard and something TCEQ said would not happen.
3) The NCTCOG claim that,"the DFW region has a tougher time than other metropolitan areas in the U.S. because of its climate plus its position downwind from outside sources of pollution" is also misleading. Houston is a hotspot for bad air, and yet last year DFW exceeded the number of bad air days and the severity of the violations in that city. Other metropolitan ares downwind of power plants as well as DFW, and yet they've all managed to do better in achieving cleaner air. Atlanta, Phoenix, and other Sunbelt cities that started out at the same smoggy spot a decade ago have all conquered the old 85 ppb std. DFW has not. It's already blown it again this year. Instead of blaming climate or coal plants, it is more realistic to blame DFW's air quality failure on a lack of political will by local and state officials to get serious about decreasing air pollution.
However, there is one large area of policy where the excuses of lack of will and new downwind sources collide – in the official lack of attention paid to the rise of Barnett and Haynesville Shale gas pollution as a source of smog in DFW.
4) The statement that only "5 percent" of the smog-forming emissions in DFW come from oil and gas drilling and production is also highly misleading. First, we know this is one of the fastest-growing categories of air pollution over the last decade. The increase in gas pollution is erasing decreases in emissions from other sources. Second, according to the information submitted by TCEQ to EPA last December, oil and gas emissions are the second largest source (20%) of smog-forming Volatile Organic Compounds, or VOCs in the 9-county DFW non-attainment area. That's more than the total VOCs produced by all on-road vehicles in the same 9 county area. Based on recent field studies by NOAA and others, this is probably an underestimate.
This statement also ignores the impact of gas emissions to the south and east of DFW, like Freestone County's, that are not included in the 9-county area inventory, but are probably influencing air pollution here.
What's always left out of this pie chart is the fact that cars now have a removal efficiency of approximately 90%. No other major sources come close to that kind of effort, despite technology being available to achieve it – at cement kilns, gas operations. and coal plants. That's where "the lowest hanging fruit" remains. But since all those industries are large contributors to the politicians directing the status quo, there's no political will to target them. Exhibit A: the 2011 DFW clean air plan submitted by the state, which relies primarily on marketplace forces to replace old cars with new ones, instead of any new round of pollution controls for any industry sources.
5) The NCTCOG claim that "monitors in the north Dallas and Frisco areas have had the highest readings of the region but the plume seems to be shifting west" is also based on old data. In fact, the opposite is occurring. Violating monitors are moving EAST (just like gas mining). And there are more of them. From 2008 to 2010, Eagle Mountain Lake and Keller were the epicenter of smog in DFW. But in 2011, while Keller tripped the std, EML did not. Moreover, during that same 08-10 period there were only 1-3 monitors in violation of that std. Last year, there were seven. And they included not just Keller and Parker County, but Denton, Grapevine, Pilot Point, Frisco and North Dallas – directly in contradiction to the NCTCOG claim.
This year, the very first monitor to record four "exceedances" of the 85ppb std was located near Mockingbird and I-35 in Central Dallas – the first time that monitor has done so since 2005. Moreover, the fourth exceedance came in June – the earliest that has happened since 2006, when 12 out of 19 monitors were in violation at the end of the summer.
As much as the officials and agencies would like us all to ignore the summer of 2011 and think of it as an aberation, it would be more prudent to see it as another warning sign that DFW needs to do much more to get safe and legal air.
CDC Issues Health Alert on Silica in Fracking
Last Thursday an arm of the Centers for Disease Control issued a "Hazard Alert" concerning exposure to Silica pollution at fracking drilling site. This comes after nationwide tests by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health at 11 well pads showed alarmingly high Silica levels in the air.
Silica is tiny sand particles. Breathe too many of them and you get Silicosis, a disease that literally suffocates you to death by putting down a layer of cement between you and your alveoli.
All the tests were at and around the drilling pad sites, not off-site, so we don't know what kind of hazard Silca pollution poses to surrounding residents. But the levels were so high at the pads that it's hard to believe it's never a factor. Reportedly, the amount of sand being used in fracking has significantly increased over the last decade.
For people west of DFW, that means more sand mining, and sand mining pollution in the Brazos and Red River valleys. For people near drilling sites, it could mean more air pollution nobody was trying to inventory until now.
Silica pollution wasn't even an issue of concern with fracking until somebody at the NIOSH decided to go looking for it. Who knows how many other fracking hazards are waiting to be discovered?