Impacts of Marcellus drilling questioned

In what can hardly be called a banner year for energy companies, researchers and policy… In what can hardly be called a banner year for energy companies, researchers and policy makers, including one Pitt professor, have raised concerns over the safety of drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale formation in Pennsylvania.

Conrad Dan Volz, an assistant professor at Pitt’s Graduate School of Public Health, directs the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities. Founded in 2005, the center includes Volz, four other members of Pitt’s faculty and half a dozen graduate students and interns.

Volz said the center partly uses community suggestions to direct its research. Much of that research is directed at the effects of Marcellus Shale drilling, but the center has other projects researching coal-fire air pollution and fishery pollution in the state.

The center recently launched a blog, fractracker.org, to track drilling permits and the issues around drilling in Marcellus Shale, a rock formation that runs under parts of West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York state that contains trillions of cubic feet of natural gas.

Some of that gas escaped during a well blowout in Clearfield County, Pa., on June 3, raising alarm flags across the state. The blowout released tens of thousands of gallons of natural gas and fracturing fluid before being capped on June 4, prompting an investigation by the state’s Department of Environmental Protection.

Fortunately, the natural gas released didn’t catch fire — something that would have been much more likely near a populated area, Volz said. Safety concerns had arisen before the Clearfield incident, but the blowout brought the topic to the forefront of the Marcellus Shale debate.

Volz said he thinks the blowout is indicative of larger issues in Pennsylvania drilling.

“There are problems in this entire industry that haven’t been entirely addressed,” he said.

The environmental and public health effects of air pollution, wastewater disposal and drilling on local watersheds still need further study, Volz said.

The Marcellus Shale Coalition, which advocates on behalf of many natural gas drilling companies in Pennsylvania, did not respond to calls for comment.

Actions that have been proposed in the state legislature about drilling run the gamut from a year-long moratorium on future drilling to a tax that would offset costs, thereby aiding the state’s budget problems.

The process of gas drilling involves the pumping of liquid at high pressure into the shale formation to break up the rock, freeing the natural gas, in a process called hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.”

The fracking liquid, more than 90 percent water and sand before being pumped into the well, contains a number of chemicals like hydrochloric acid, methanol and boric acid. After breaking up the rock, the liquid needs to be disposed of carefully. Some of it can be recycled back into the process.

In Pittsburgh, Councilman Patrick Dowd introduced legislation Tuesday that would regulate drilling for natural gas in the city area. Should the bill pass, it would provide specific space, testing and application requirements on new drilling within the city.

No drilling has occurred in the city, but the press release mentions proposals to drill in Lawrenceville, the neighborhood Dowd represents The legislation includes measures that preclude building a well within 1,000 feet of any residential or public structure, like schools, churches and recreation centers.

In a statement issued about the legislation, Dowd raised concerns over the quality of drinking water in Pittsburgh and said he might favor an outright ban.

While Marcellus Shale drilling has taken place in Pennsylvania since 2005, New York state enacted a moratorium on new drilling until studies on environmental and health impacts can be finished.

State Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Allegheny, proposed a one-year moratorium on drilling in Pennsylvania until the environmental and health impacts of drilling can be studied. Some of the issues he raised were similar to the research Volz has done, including the impact on rivers, the water table, air pollution and communities.

Ferlo’s chief of staff, Stephen Bruder, said Ferlo called for a moratorium to “take a step back for a reasonable amount of time” to study the effects of the drilling.

Ferlo’s proposed moratorium has only landed two co-sponsors so far, and Bruder said they meant to write the legislation by the end of the week.

Ferlo said the reaction from constituents had generally been positive, and that his office received several positive calls since circulating his co-sponsorship memo.

Some lawmakers have expressed reluctance to placing taxes or limitations on drilling, citing the influx of jobs into the state that drilling might bring.

Volz has a different viewpoint on the issue.

“I don’t care if they can do it profitably,” he said. “My first priority is to advocate for the health of the community.”

Volz, a Pitt alumnus, became director of the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities in 2008. He works with different community groups throughout the region, including a presentation at the Coalition to Protect New York Summit last weekend.

The Summit focused on the environmental effects of Marcellus Shale drilling, as well as potential environmental hazards.

He said part of his role in the Marcellus debate is to research and provide input from his point of view — protecting the public’s health. He said he thinks he can be more objective, without any economic stake in the issue.

“I’m neutral on this,” Volz said. “Everyone else seems to have a dog in this hunt.”