Opposition to natural gas drilling in Mock County

Environmental Management Read Instructions File #1 Files Attached

Environmental management

The Water Permitting Board

Natural gas represents an important resource within the United States and more efforts are made to create energy sustainability using the resource. Still, the creation of a Schuylkill Energy LLC power plant and gas drilling facility in Mock County is not hereby a recommended course of action.

The arguments in support of this recommendation are drawn from the specialized literature; are all objective and based on scientific facts. The dangers to gas drilling are far too significant for the population and the environment and they are real, even if only visible in the long-term.

Another problem associated with gas processing and drilling is represented by the lack of contingency plans and alternative solutions in case energy situations materialize. In such a setting then, it is recommended to focus on solar and wind energy generation, and to integrate more scientific findings in the processes involving natural gas.

Critical evaluations

The first work presented belongs to Theo Colborn, Carol Kwiatkowski, Kim Schultz and Mary Bachran, all of whom are notable researchers, with vast expertise in their fields. The findings which they forwarded are notable as they are based on strict scientific evidence. The data they promote was collected and processed with the aid of quantitative methods of research and analysis. These methods are characterized by the integration of facts and figures, rather than opinions. The quantitative methods used by the four authors are based on quantifiable values and the findings created are as such supported by real and measurable data. They are objective and reliable.

With most discussions on environmental stability and the role of the energy generating industry in the propagation of environmental damage and stability, the arguments tend to be emotional and subjective. In the case of the assessed works however, emphasis is placed on facts and scientifically proven results, with the elimination of the emotional or subjective factor. The work of Colborn, Kwiatkowski, Schultz and Bachran is well integrated in these parameters. The same is also true for the works of Osborn, Vengosh, Warner and Jackson.

In terms of the work proposed by Finkel and Law (2011), it is noted that their findings are based more so on secondary research, rather than primary research. The study conducted is more confined and not as extensive and detailed as that of Colborn, Kwiatkowski, Schultz and Bachran, who use primary research to create findings. Still, the propositions of Finkel and Law are pertinent in the presented context and guaranteed by the status and expertise of the two researchers, as well as the high quality of the sources used in their study. The same is also applicable to the study of James M. Inhofe and Frank Fannon (2005), but a distinction is made in the different direction taken by the two works. While Finkel and Law focus on drawing alarm signals on the dangers associated with drilling for natural gas, Inhofe and Fannon take a more distanced stand and reveal various features of the changes impacting gas drilling processes, as well as its future.

The situation is more different in the case of the study by Osborn, Vengosh, Warner and Jackson (2011). The four researchers selected a niche subjected and tested their theories. Their findings are supported by precise methods and quantitative tools. At the specific level of the methodology, they used a carefully selected sample and precise tools that preserved correctness and clarity of the analysis and the results. In the very words of the authors:

"A total of 68 drinking-water samples were collected in Pennsylvania and New York from bedrock aquifers (Lockhaven, 8; Catskill, 47; and Genesee, 13) that overlie the Marcellus or Utica shale formations. Wells were purged to remove stagnant water, then monitored for pH, electrical conductance, and temperature until stable values were recorded. Samples were collected "upstream" of any treatment systems, as close to the water well as possible, and preserved in accordance with procedures detailed in SI Methods. Dissolved-gas samples were analyzed at Isotech Laboratories and water chemical and isotope (O, H, B, C, Ra) compositions were measured at Duke University" (Osborn, Vengosh, Warner and Jackson, 2011).

The final study presented was that of Charles W. Schmith, who addressed the problem of drilling in the context of the recent spill and promoted the idea that the companies were not prepared to deal with a potential spill. His findings, much like those of Finkel and Law (2011), were retrieved through secondary research, of primary sources. In other words, the author did not use a strict methodology to derive the findings, but based his conclusions on other researches. The relevance of the findings is however supported by the high quality of the sources used by Schmidt.

At the level of the implications generated by the assessed studies in the context of the new facility to be opened by Schuylkill Energy LLC, these include the following:

- The population could become ill due to various affections caused by the water contaminated with the substances used in the drilling of the natural gas

- Even if Schuylkill Energy LLC were to use the newest technologies, it still cannot ensure the protection of the environment, the water and the population

- Even if, only hypothetically speaking, all other risks are eliminated, the drilling and processing of gas would still pollute waters through the use of the methane, which also causes environmental and health risks of the community

- The drilling companies, including Schuylkill Energy LLC, are not sufficiently prepared to handle devastating and unforeseen situations. They launch operations on hopes that the threats would not materialize, and when these do, they cause devastating impacts upon the environment

A most severe element that has to be remembered is pointed out by Theo Colborn, Carol Kwiatkowski, Kim Schultz and Mary Bachran. According to these researchers, the negative impacts of the pollution caused by drilling are not immediately observable, taking years and years for them to actually manifest. Within the short-term then, this means that the population and the community could be lead to believe that the negative impacts of pollution are make-believe phenomena. Still, in years time, when the implications would become more obvious, there will be too late to act. The people and the environment will fall ill and it will be extremely difficult for them to be cured.

The efforts to curing the people and the environment would imply impressive costs on both the state as well as the individual population, and positive results could not be guaranteed, some of the illnesses being incurable. In this setting then, an alarm is drawn that we need to act now and prevent weakening of the population and the environment. We have to protect them by not allowing the opening of the natural gas power plant.

Conclusions and recommendations

The studies assessed generated the conclusion that, despite their declared commitments and capabilities, drilling companies and their facilities are unable to operate in an environmentally friendly and sustainable manner. They are still using technologies which pollute and which cause harm to the population and the environment. The high cost of natural gas drilling and processing is eventually paid by the population, by the environment, by the globe.

And even if these threats and warnings are not realized in the present, this is because the effects take years to manifest. But make no mistake, they will manifest and they will be disastrous. Science has repeatedly proven this.

An even more dramatic and irresponsible feature is represented by the inability of drilling companies to prevent and contain any potential spill or other such problems. The companies argue that they use the latest technologies, but they helplessly stand by when tragedies occur.

In such a setting, it is obvious that the granting of a license to Schuylkill Energy LLC is not in the best interest of the community, nor does it support environmental responsibility. The recommendation then would be that of not granting the permit to Schuylkill Energy LLC. The commissions and boards should strive and focus more on promoting projects which support the generation of alternative sources of energy, such as wind or solar energy.

Still, recognizing the economic and energetic benefits of natural gas, as well as the current dependability on it, efforts should also be made in this direction. Specifically, it is recommended for practitioners and scientists to better collaborate and develop drilling techniques and tools which are science-based, which create the desired benefits while still preserving health and environmental stability. And even more so, it is important to devise new methods and techniques by which to ensure the management of disastrous outcomes in drilling operations.

References:

Calborn, T., Kwiatkowski, C., Schultz, K., Bachran, M., 2011, Natural gas operations from a public perspective, The International Journal of Human and Risk Assessment

Finkel, M., Law, A., 2011, The rush to drill for natural gas: a public health cautionary tale, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 101, No. 5

Inhofe, J.M., Fannon, F., 2005, Energy and the environment: the future of natural gas in America, Energy Law Journal, Vol. 26, No. 2

Osborn, S.G., Vengosh, A., Warner, N.R., Jackson, R.B., 2011, Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing, PNAS, Vol. 18, No. 20

Schmidt, C.W., 2011, Arctic oil drilling plans raise environmental health concerns, Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 119, No. 3