EPA supplying drinking water after fracking contamination
Abrahm Lustgarten | Pro Publica |
Jan 21, 2012
First, the earth around the rural town of Dimock, Pa., was cracked open as gas drillers used fracking to tap the vast energy supplies of the Marcellus Shale. Then, in April 2009, residents there lost their access to fresh drinking water. Wells turned fetid. Some blew up. Tap water caught fire. Now, nearly three years later — and after a string of lawsuits and state investigations has ushered Dimock to the forefront of the environmental debate over drilling but failed to resolve the water problem — the Environmental Protection Agency is stepping in to supply drinking water itself. On Friday, the agency announced it would bring tanks of drinking water to four homes, including that of Julie Sautner, whom ProPublica first interviewed about her water problems in 2009. “Data reviewed by EPA indicates that residents’ well water contains levels of contaminants that pose a health concern,” the agency said in a statement. Tests showed dangerous levels of arsenic, a carcinogen, as well as glycols and barium in at least four wells, and the EPA is apparently concerned that the contamination may be more widespread. According to the statement, the EPA plans to test the water supplies in 60 additional homes for hazardous substances. In 2009, Pennsylvania officials charged Cabot Oil & Gas, the company that drilled the wells in Dimock, with several violations it said had contributed to methane gas leaking out of the gas wells and into drinking water. For a time, Cabot supplied drinking water to a number of homes in the area but then stopped. The EPA has waded into the Dimock issues slowly over the past few months, provoking a defensive stance from the state’s lead environmental regulator, who earlier this month called the EPA’s understanding of the Dimock situation “rudimentary.” But the state has not undertaken the scope of water analysis the EPA now plans to do, and until the EPA stepped in Friday, Dimock residents had found little resolution. Environmental groups are applauding the EPA’s move. "This finding confirms what Dimock residents have said for months, that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection should have never allowed Cabot to end deliveries of clean water," said Environmental Working Group senior counsel Dusty Horwitt. But they also say the time has come for the EPA to address water contamination concerns in other communities across the country where residents say drilling has harmed their water. In December, the EPA concluded that fracking was likely to blame for a similar rash of groundwater contamination in Pavillion, Wyo. The agency is conducting a multiyear national study of fracking’s effects on water supplies. ProPublica previously reported about water and drilling concerns in parts of western Wyoming, as well as central and southern Colorado, Texas, Ohio and elsewhere.
by common-sense | January 22, 2012 - 11:15am
It seems a good thing that the EPA is finally taking an interest in doing the job they were tasked for in the Penn, Wyo and Dakota areas. As I understand it, unrestricted production methods in those States is causing potential health problems and there are many more areas and States with similar issues waiting to be addressed by the EPA. The legal argument of the oil and gas producing companies in these areas has always been, "how pristine was the ranchers, farmers or rural water supply before fracking?". The early pioneers to settle in these areas chose their locations on the basis of "good grass and sweet water" for their families and livestock, they had no need to test the water or keep records. Today the lawyers of oil and gas companies have learned to exploit this fact, allowing their clients to get away with the slow murder of the land, water and people. I believe environmental controls are a good thing, they create long term jobs for the good of the people. I believe that firm environmental controls on oil and gas production in the lower 48 will better level the playing field and allow Alaska oil and gas to be more competitive. On another note, this recent activity by the EPA in the lower 48 States should be encouraged by Alaskans. In this manner Alaskans could get even for the lower 48 telling us how to do things in Alaska all these years. Think about where we would be today if their had been no one standing up for the environment we as a people live in today. There are many things to make better and so little time left to do it.
by knipprs | January 22, 2012 - 9:25am
This is certainly a situation that must be watched carefully. Surely the problem may be the drilling, but since this sort of phenomena (high levels of arsenic, tap water that "burns", etc.) has been observed in areas where there is no such drilling, it is important to hear the history of others in the area. Have any of these phenomena been observed before in this area? Was the water tested (surely it must have been) over the years before fracking became an useful technology for extracting oil and gas? There is no mention in the article about how pristine the water from local wells was before the drilling, and a fair article should tell the whole story. |













Comments