Industry tried to get ‘Gasland’ disqualified
Film is still contender for Oscar documentary; sequel planned.
The natural gas industry has spent months attacking the documentary “Gasland” as a deeply flawed piece of propaganda. After it was nominated for an Oscar, an industry-sponsored PR group asked the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to reconsider the film’s eligibility.
The reply: Let Oscar voters have their say.
“We do not have the resources to vet each claim or implication in the many (documentary) films that compete for our awards each year, and even if we did there would be no shortage of people disputing our conclusions,” Bruce Davis, the academy’s executive director, wrote in a reply obtained by The Associated Press.
“Gasland” is up for best documentary at Sunday’s Academy Awards ceremony. Director Josh Fox’s dark portrayal of greedy energy companies, sickened homeowners and oblivious regulators has stirred heated debate among the various stakeholders in a natural gas boom that is sweeping parts of the U.S. The film has galvanized anti-drilling activists while drawing complaints about its accuracy and objectivity.
In a letter to the academy, Lee Fuller, the executive director of an industry-sponsored group named Energy In Depth, called “Gasland” an “expression of stylized fiction” with “errors, inconsistencies and outright falsehoods.”
He asked the academy to consider “remedial actions” against the film.
Davis, the executive director, wrote to Fuller that if the academy were to act on every complaint made about a nominated film, “it would not be possible even to have a documentary category.” He said the academy must “trust the intelligence of our members” to sort out fact from fiction.
“If facts have been suppressed or distorted, if truth has been twisted, we depend on them to sniff that out and vote accordingly,” he wrote.
The letter was given to the AP by Energy in Depth, whose spokesman, Chris Tucker, said the group had no expectation that “Gasland” would actually be disqualified from Oscar consideration. The point, he said, was to educate academy voters.
“I think it’s a fairly good bet that a large majority of the folks who are going to be voting on this film don’t have a background in petroleum engineering,” quipped Tucker, who put together a 4,000-word rebuttal of “Gasland” last summer.
Fox said the industry’s campaign against “Gasland” has backfired.
“What they’re doing is calling more attention to the film, so I think it works against them,” the director said from Los Angeles. “But I think it shows how aggressive they are, how bullying they are, and how willing they are to lie to promote the falsehood that it’s OK to live in a gas drilling area.”
The documentary category is no stranger to controversy. Michael Moore films like “Bowling for Columbine” and “Sicko,” as well as Al Gore’s 2006 global-warming tale, “An Inconvenient Truth,” have likewise been attacked as biased and inaccurate.
Like Moore, Fox defends his film as accurate. But he rejects comparisons to the bombastic, ideological director.
“What they’re trying to do is make (’Gasland’) look like a liberal, elite, Michael Moore thing, which of course it isn’t. It’s bipartisan,” he said.
Fox, a 38-year-old New York City theater director, took an interest in drilling after a gas company approached him in 2008 about leasing his family’s wooded 20-acre spread in Milanville, near the Delaware River in northeastern Pennsylvania, where he has lived off-and-on since childhood.
Camera in hand, he went on a cross-country tour of places where large-scale drilling is already under way, interviewing residents who say they were sickened by nearby drilling operations and aiming his lens at diseased livestock and flammable tap water that he also blames on gas industry malfeasance.
February 26, 2011
MICHAEL RUBINKAM Associated Press
http://www.timesleader.com/news/Industry_tried_to_get__lsquo_Gasland_rsquo__disqualified_02-26-2011.html
Polarized hearing brings drilling debate to the Delaware River Basin
HONESDALE – Natural gas drilling in the Delaware River Basin will either save or devastate a region whose fate is in the hands of the interstate commission that regulates water quality there, according to the polarized testimony given by representatives of both sides of the drilling debate during hearings at Honesdale High School on Tuesday.
About 90 people spoke at an afternoon session attended by more than 300 people. It was one of four hearings held by the Delaware River Basin Commission in Honesdale and Liberty, N.Y. on Tuesday about proposed natural gas drilling regulations that would apply to the 13,539-square-mile watershed where drilling has largely been on hold while the commission develops its rules.
The basin contains most of Wayne, Pike and Monroe counties as well as slivers of Lackawanna and Luzerne.
If adopted, the regulations will complement rules in place or being developed by state environmental agencies – a necessary overlap because “the Delaware River Basin is a special place,” commission Executive Director Carol R. Collier said before the hearing: it provides drinking water to more than 15 million people and contains waterways whose exceptional value demands extra protection.
But the “redundancy” of regulations was one of the primary criticisms raised by speakers at the afternoon session, when comments were predominantly made by those who welcome the drilling.
Drilling supporters repeated concerns that the commission’s proposed regulations are so stringent that they will prevent drilling in Wayne County, they fail to balance economic concerns with environmental ones, and they take away private property owners’ rights.
“You have the audacity to claim that your proposed regulations prevail over our commonwealth, disregarding our own laws,” Wayne County landowner Carol Woodmansee yelled into the microphone in the high school’s auditorium. “Your true agenda is to never cut a tree, put Wayne County out of business and condemn us to an existence of bucolic poverty.”
The sole gas drilling industry representative – David Callahan of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, which represents most of the major operators in the state – gave an outline of the industry’s opposition to the proposed rules, especially a centerpiece of the regulations that would require drillers with more than five well pads to detail in advance their foreseeable activity in a defined geographic area, including each well pad, access road, pipeline and compressor station.
“The requirement of a ‘Natural Gas Development Plan’ is unworkable, mandating our industry to detail infrastructure plans years prior to any development,” Mr. Callahan said. “Few industries can provide such plans that far in advance.”
The gas drilling coalition also questioned the power the draft regulations give to the DRBC executive director to set standards on a case-by-case basis and whether the commission even has the legal authority to set standards for the siting, design and operation of gas well pads.
Drilling opponents, many wearing “Don’t Drill the Delaware” stickers, expressed frustration that the commission developed the draft regulations before any studies of the cumulative impact of natural gas operations on the watershed have begun.
They also argued the proposed rules rely too much on the industry to police itself and ignore what they say are inherent risks in the drilling process that will inevitably lead to accidents and contamination.
“These rules will not prevent individual catastrophic pollution events, and they also will not prevent the cumulative environmental degradation that you are supposed to prevent,” Tracy Carluccio, deputy director of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, said as a handful of audience members raised small signs that read “Do No Harm.”
“The DRBC is our only defense against gasland, and we will not let you sacrifice our water for gas,” she said.
The audience at the afternoon session largely honored rules that barred protests and heckling, save for a few jibes at “Gasland” filmmaker Josh Fox, who testified against the drilling, and a comment that the commission is like “a manure salesman with a mouthful of samples.” Drilling supporters wore neon stickers that read, “I support NG in the DRB,” and someone snuck one onto the back of outspoken drilling opponent James Barth’s jacket.
Speakers lined up in the cold two hours before the doors opened at 12:30 p.m. to ensure a spot at the podium, which was first come, first served.
One request made by drilling opponents, for more time for public comment and more public hearings, will be addressed during a meeting of the river basin’s commissioners on March 2, Ms. Collier said.
About 1,600 written comments had been submitted to the agency before the start of Tuesday’s hearings. The draft regulations and a link to provide written comments online are at www.drbc.net.
By Laura Legere (Staff Writer)
Published: February 23, 2011
Contact the writer: llegere@timesshamrock.com
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/polarized-hearing-brings-drilling-debate-to-the-delaware-river-basin-1.1109222#axzz1EhEszGKz
Drilling awareness group to meet Thursday
The monthly general membership meeting of the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition will take place at 7 p.m. Thursday in the Graham Academy, 469 Miller St., Luzerne.
GDAC meetings are open to all who are concerned about the hazards of natural gas drilling and related activities in our community. For information, call 570-266-5116, e-mail gdacoalition@gmail.com or visit www.gdacoalition.org.
http://citizensvoice.com/news/drilling-awareness-group-to-meet-thursday-1.1108613#axzz1EbOFXxDI
Published: February 22, 2011
Porter Township opposes natural gas drilling
MUIR – The Porter Township Board of Supervisors made clear at its meeting Monday night that it opposes any Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling inside township borders.
“We will fight this if it comes to Porter Township,” Supervisor Bill Schaeffer said at the meeting after the issue was raised by several residents in attendance.
Rausch Creek Land LP, Valley View, has applied to the Susquehanna River Basin Commission for approval to withdraw up to 100,000 gallons of water each day from an abandoned strip mine pit in the township. In paperwork filed with Schuylkill County, the company states the water would be used for potential Marcellus Shale drilling, but questions remain and the company has refused to discuss its plans.
Nine township households bordering the land from which water may be withdrawn received letters from the company in December, but some of those residents believe those letters did not answer all of the outstanding questions.
Township resident Bonnie Minnich said she has considered starting a petition opposing potential gas drilling.
“I’m trying, but I’m only one” person, she said at the meeting.
Township resident Perry Pillar said the township will eventually have to address the concerns residents have.
“You’re going to have to take some of this in your hands,” he told the supervisors.
Schaeffer cited “horror stories” from northern Pennsylvania counties about water contamination when asked why the board of supervisors opposes potential drilling.
“We’re worried about our water safety,” Supervisor Troy Troup said after the meeting.
Rausch Creek Land owns property in Porter, Frailey, Tremont and Hegins townships.
While the paperwork filed in the county courthouse makes clear the water will be used for drilling on Rausch Creek land, it does not say if that land is in Schuylkill County. It is unclear whether the company owns land elsewhere in the state or if the water would be trucked to other areas in Pennsylvania where drilling is already under way.
The water withdrawal plan likely won’t be decided on by the SRBC until the summer.
http://republicanherald.com/news/porter-township-opposes-natural-gas-drilling-1.1108522
BY BEN WOLFGANG (STAFF WRITER bwolfgang@republicanherald.com)
Published: February 22, 2011
Natural gas drilling symposium scheduled
The Pocono Environmental Coalition and Wildlife Society is sponsoring a natural gas drilling symposium on March 5, 1:30 p.m., at Hughes Library in Stroudsburg.
For information call (610) 381-8989.
http://www.tnonline.com/node/176078
Reported on Monday, February 21, 2011
Pro-drilling group wants states to regulate gas drilling
A coalition of landowners in the Delaware River Basin plans to tell the interstate agency that regulates water quality in the basin to stop trying to regulate natural gas drilling.
Instead, the pro-drilling group suggests the Delaware River Basin Commission renegotiate and strengthen its agreements with its member states, including Pennsylvania and New York, and let those states handle the regulation of gas drilling in the basin’s borders.
“They are going to put in rules that duplicate what the states are already doing, they’ll be forced to create a staff which will be green and inexperienced, and they will not be able to do the job,” Peter Wynne, spokesman for the Northern Wayne Property Owners Alliance, said Friday after the coalition held a press briefing in Honesdale about its criticisms.
The group, which finds the commission’s proposed drilling regulations “totally unworkable,” will be among many concerned citizens, lawmakers and groups that will offer comment on the draft rules in written testimony and at public hearings next week.
The proposed rules are available for review at www.drbc.net.
A set of local hearings will be held at Honesdale High School at 1:30 and 6 p.m. Tuesday.
Published: February 20, 2011
http://standardspeaker.com/news/pro-drilling-group-wants-states-to-regulate-gas-drilling-1.1107714
Landfill accepts gas drilling waste
DUNMORE – Keystone Sanitary Landfill in Dunmore has accepted tons of gas drilling waste that can contain radioactive material and heavy metals, according to documents obtained by Times-Shamrock newspapers.
Environmentalists raised red flags about the practice, but industry and state officials said it posed no public health risk.
At least four natural gas companies have received approval from the landfill to dump “drill cuttings” – deep underground rock and soil removed during the drilling process along with chemical additives. Cabot Oil and Gas, Chesapeake Energy, Chief Oil and Gas, and Stone Energy are identified in the documents, obtained through a Right-To-Know request to the state Department of Environmental Protection.
The documents were submitted by Keystone Sanitary Landfill manager Joe Dexter in a report to DEP last summer. Multiple efforts to contact Dexter, including a visit to the site by a reporter Friday, were unsuccessful.
The landfill accepted at least 17,710 tons of the material over a six-month period last year from July through December 2010, mostly from Cabot Oil and Gas, according to DEP records.
The documents show Chesapeake Energy was approved to dump drill cuttings at Keystone as early as November 2009, including from multiple Marcellus Shale wells in Auburn Township, Susquehanna County.
The drill cuttings, which gas company officials say are benign and environmentalists claim contain a stew of chemical additives, is an economic boon for Keystone, which had an average daily volume of 4,000 tons of waste accepted in 2010.
The landfill is owned by Dunmore businessman Louis DeNaples. Keystone also accepts sludge from municipal wastewater plants, asbestos and other products containing PCBs, and a medley of residential and commercial waste.
The new trash stream has come from Marcellus Shale wells as close as Susquehanna County, where horizontal drilling and gas production has kicked into high gear. One completed Stone Energy natural gas well in Rush Township produced 630 tons of drill cuttings that made its way to Keystone Sanitary Landfill last year.
One Marcellus Shale well can produce as much as 1,000 tons of drill cuttings, Cabot spokesman George Stark said, as drill bits bore more than a mile vertically and horizontally beneath the ground through several geologic layers to reach the gas.
Keystone is among a growing number of landfills throughout the state that are taking the cuttings as gas companies move away from on-site burial, which is allowed under state law as long as drill cutting pits are lined and covered in plastic.
“We’re hoping to develop that side of the business,” said John Hambrose, spokesman for Alliance Sanitary Landfill in Ransom and Taylor. “It happens that we haven’t received any yet. We’re always looking to increase our volume.”
Mark Carmon, a DEP spokesman, said landfills are allowed to take the drill cuttings under their general municipal waste permit, but must abide by special regulations for the material. Regulators also examine its chemical composition on a “well pad by well pad basis” to determine if it is safe for disposal, Carmon said.
Keystone also has radiation monitors in place that would detect if drill cuttings contained unsafe levels.
“We are sensitive to the concern. That’s why there are a lot of controls on these facilities,” Carmon said. “We are not seeing any problems at all. If we did, they wouldn’t be able to accept it.”
He added there has been no indication of any issues at Keystone with the material.
Landfills cannot accept wastewater from gas drilling, the toxic mixture of fracking fluids and underground substances produced after a well is hydraulically fractured. Hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” involves blasting millions of gallons of chemically treated water thousands of feet into the ground to open cracks in the shale and release the gas. Besides the chemical additives, the water comes back with substances from the depths, including naturally-occurring radioactive material and a high concentration of salt.
“Wastewater would have to be either recycled or go to a (wastewater) treatment facility,” Carmon said.
Gas industry officials say the move to deposit drill cuttings in landfills is part of a “closed loop” approach that attempts to mitigate environmental impact and reuse some materials.
“Chesapeake utilizes a closed-loop drilling process that eliminates the need for drilling (disposal) pits throughout the Marcellus,” Brian Grove, a company executive based in Towanda, wrote in an e-mail. “This process separates drill cuttings into steel bins that are taken off-site for disposal in approved regional landfills.”
Grove said the process reduces the footprint of a well site since a disposal location is not needed and works better with sites that have multiple gas wells that produce thousands of tons of drill cuttings.
Stark, of Cabot, and Chief spokeswoman Kristi Gittins said all of their companies’ drill cuttings are now being disposed of in landfills, including Keystone. The companies are drilling extensively in Susquehanna County.
The drill cuttings are considered residual waste, a category removed from household waste, Carmon said. DEP chemists decide whether a toxic substance can be safely deposited in a municipal landfill, testing its reactivity to other substances, among other procedures.
“This is not an issue,” Carmon said. “We’re talking about rocks. If there was going to be a consistent problem setting off these (radiation) monitors, it wouldn’t be worth it for the landfills.”
Not everyone agrees.
Tracy Carluccio, deputy director of Delaware Riverkeeper, an environmental advocacy group, said drill cuttings contain a host of “dangerous chemicals,” other substances found deep underground including arsenic and mercury, and naturally occurring radioactive materials that may present environmental and public health risks, even in a landfill.
“Everything that is in that (underground geologic) formation is going to be in those cuttings,” Carluccio said. “We may be seeing the buildup of radioactive and other hazardous materials in landfills.”
Glenn C. Miller, Ph.D., an environmental chemist at the University of Nevada, said judging the potential environmental harm of drill cuttings is difficult in part because gas companies refuse to disclose the additives used during drilling, claiming the information is proprietary.
Miller said it is also less understood how harmful the naturally occurring radioactive material in the Marcellus Shale rock can be, considering that its intensity can greatly differ depending on the location of a well.
“Exactly what the risks are, I think they are still evolving,” he said. “It’s not well-defined.”
By Steve McConnell
smcconnell@timesshamrock.com
Published: February 20, 2011
http://citizensvoice.com/news/landfill-accepts-gas-drilling-waste-by-steve-mcconnell-1.1107634#axzz1EJyoubc5
Harveys Lake to hold hearing on drilling ban
HARVEYS LAKE – After months of pressure by residents, council gave in Tuesday and voted for an official hearing on a proposed ordinance to ban natural gas drilling in the borough.
Council members Diane Dwyer, Larry Radel and Carole Samson voted to advertise and hold a hearing to adopt the “Harveys Lake Community Water Rights and Local Self-Government Ordinance” drawn up by the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund. Councilman Ryan Doughton and President Fran Kopko voted no, and Councilman Boyd Barber abstained.
“Hallelujah,” said resident Neil Turner, a main proponent of the ordinance.
About 70 people attended, many of whom favored the ordinance, which would prohibit water from any source in the borough being used in natural gas drilling, hold neighboring municipalities liable for harm to water sources and make it “unlawful for any corporation to engage in the extraction of natural gas” in the borough.
Critics of the ordinance say the self-governance aspect and potential conflict with the state Oil & Gas Act could get the borough sued or else lose its state funding.
“It’s plain and simple: this ordinance violates state law,” Doughton said. “There’s not one logical, reasonable explanation that makes sense to pass this.”
Those in favor say there’s no conflict and point to other communities, such as Pittsburgh, that passed similar ones. Although council asked a consultant to look into ways the borough can be protected via the zoning ordinance, Turner said they are “two totally different approaches.”
The state Oil & Gas Act could override a zoning ordinance but not the CELDF ordinance, resident Carol Culver said, adding that if the borough does get sued, CELDF will help defend its ordinance in court.
By Elizabeth Skrapits, Staff Writer
Published: February 17, 2011
eskrapits@citizensvoice.com, 570-821-2072
http://citizensvoice.com/news/drilling/harveys-lake-to-hold-hearing-on-drilling-ban-1.1106145#axzz1EJyoubc5
Local epicenter of shale drilling likely site for EPA fracking study
Susquehanna and Bradford counties have been selected as one among five areas across the country that might be chosen by the Environmental Protection Agency for case studies of oil and gas drilling’s impact on drinking water.
The case study finalists are all places where oil or gas wells have been hydraulically fractured and where drinking water contamination has been reported.
The finalists were included in the draft study plan the EPA released last week for its multiyear investigation of the possible link between groundwater contamination and hydraulic fracturing or fracking, the process of injecting a mixture of water, sand and chemicals into underground rock formations to crack the rock and release the oil or gas trapped there.
The EPA plans to investigate the full life cycle of the hydraulic fracturing process, from the moment water for fracking is withdrawn from waterways through the mixing of chemicals and the fracturing of wells to the disposal of the wastewater that returns to the surface.
The agency selected five areas – two in Pennsylvania and one each in Colorado, Texas and North Dakota – as case study finalists. It may choose three to five of them as retrospective case studies, or studies of areas already reporting impacts from drilling. Other areas, including Greene County, Pa., are proposed as prospective case studies where the agency will seek to measure any impact from fracking as it happens.
Marcellus Shale drilling areas in Bradford and Susquehanna were chosen as case study finalists so the agency can investigate contamination in groundwater and drinking water wells, as well as suspected surface-water contamination from a fracturing fluid spill and methane contamination in water wells, according to the draft study plan. The agency will use both existing data and information gathered through its own testing and modeling to determine if any contamination is linked to fracking activities.
A panel of scientists will review the draft study plan on March 7 and 8. The EPA will begin the study as soon as it incorporates the panel’s recommendations. The agency plans to release initial research results by the end of 2012 and may issue an additional report in 2014 after further research.
By Laura Legere (TIMES-SHAMROCK WRITER)
Published: February 15, 2011
http://thedailyreview.com/news/local-epicenter-of-shale-drilling-likely-site-for-epa-fracking-study-1.1104963
Go slow on shale drilling
baltimoresun.com Opinion: As Pennsylvania has learned, it’s better to ask questions first before allowing energy companies to use hydraulic fracturing to exploit a massive natural gas deposit.
The Marcellus shale natural gas deposit could prove a vital resource for this nation’s energy future. Scientists have estimated that the Appalachians may yield hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, at a value of $1 trillion.
Maryland could have a piece of that action. The Marcellus runs under the western part of the state, perhaps a mile below the surface. It can potentially be extracted by a controversial technique known as hydraulic fracturing, where water is used to break up rock and allow the gas to be released.
It is tempting to want to see domestic natural gas production flourish, not only because of the money and jobs it might bring to the state but because gas can potentially help make this country less dependent on other more problematic fossil fuels. Nevertheless, some caution is in order.
That was the message heard last week from John Quigley, the former secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. He is no opponent of natural gas, but he sees “complex and daunting” environmental consequences to Marcellus extraction.
Appearing before the House of Delegates’ Environmental Matters Committee, Mr. Quigley said his state’s experience with the industry so far should sound a cautionary tale to others. Already, Pennsylvania has seen drinking water wells contaminated, leaks of wastewater pits, well blowouts, explosions and fires. Altogether, there have been thousands of recorded violations of environmental regulations, he told the committee.
Clearly, natural gas is not the only precious resource at stake in this debate. Clean water is, too. The industry claims that the potential for the water and chemicals used in fracturing to be released into the groundwater is small and the technique has been in use for decades, but the risk posed to the environment is too great to be treated lightly.
Nor is groundwater contamination the only problem that has surfaced in Pennsylvania. Questions have also arisen as to whether the state had appropriate regulations in place to protect local communities from other problems associated with gas development, ranging from heavy truck traffic to the influx of out-of-state workers.
That’s why legislation pending in Annapolis that would slow down new natural gas production in Maryland is a sensible step. The measure would require the Maryland Department of the Environment to consider many of the environmental issues raised in Pennsylvania and involve local governments in the decision-making process before any permits could be granted.
Why not learn from the mistakes made in Pennsylvania and elsewhere? The nation will need natural gas years into the future as much as it does today — or next month or next year. Better to do it right than to allow big energy companies to exploit Maryland’s natural resources first and have questions asked later.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bs-ed-shale-gas-20110214,0,7717194.story
baltimoresun.com
February 14, 2011