Site Announcements

A note from the NYFalls.com founder:
Due to a company restructuring, I will be losing my full time job soon. Although it saddens me to leave the company that I have helped build up for the last 14 years to the success it is today, I am looking forward to new opportunities. I am known for my technical, managerial, and creative abilities, and I hope to utilize all of those talents in my next career. I put together a résumé outlining my skills and projects. Please have a look. Although I am open to any management position, I would like to leverage my experience and success with NYFalls.com and NYHistoric.com into a career in the WNY travel/tourism industry. If you know of a company that would benefit from someone with talents and experience, please spread the word. Thank you for your help and support.
Here is my Resume | Discussion topic

Hydrofracking

Upstate New York communities, politics, news, events, happenings.

Moderators: Brenda, Kelly

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby hobkyl » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:17 pm

Brenda wrote:You should see the commercials that they are airing using "locals" to convince us that it's safe.


You dont think that opponents use the same tactics to convince you that its not safe? :roll:
“There’s an inconsequentiality to our lives that living in the wilderness shows up. Mountain are real, they set their limits, they set ours. They expose us, make us vulnerable and strong at the same time. “
--Alison Wat




Flickr Facebook
User avatar
hobkyl
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Victor, NY
Camera Model: Pentax K30
Challenge wins: :star1: :star1: :star1: :star1:

Advertisement

Thanks for supporting our site by using our advertisers!

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby hobkyl » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:35 pm

Brenda wrote:

Some key points from the film:



And now a few words from the other side:



Matt wrote:why is the music so loud in that third video? And why does it have to be banjo and fiddle? It's like they are trying too hard to appeal to America's heartland.
Why don't they just flat out say "Opposition to Hydro-Fracking in any form is simple un-American and the makers of Gasland are pure illegal immigrant terrorists."


I kind of enjoyed the homey music, and the even displaying of the facts. They werent attacking the opponents. There are dozens of stories and videos that will tell you that most of the claims in Gasland arent factual. Yet again, if thats all you see...and you believe what you saw...then you dont know any better.

http://www.bronx.com/news/usa/995.html

http://newledger.com/2010/06/gaslands-false-fire-water-claims/
“There’s an inconsequentiality to our lives that living in the wilderness shows up. Mountain are real, they set their limits, they set ours. They expose us, make us vulnerable and strong at the same time. “
--Alison Wat




Flickr Facebook
User avatar
hobkyl
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Victor, NY
Camera Model: Pentax K30
Challenge wins: :star1: :star1: :star1: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby Brenda » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:09 pm

hobkyl wrote:
Brenda wrote:Nope, I don't know them personally. It's just the fiction that I read in my left-wing, liberal, hippie newspaper.


So news isn't biased? If you read it...no matter the news source...its the truth? Im not attacking you...just asking the question if you know someone who has been affected by it.

As I said it may or may not be exaggerated.

What I do know is that we need to now put the effort towards other energy sources. With that comes risk. No source of energy is without risk. Risk vs reward. Granted that blow out may have affected dozens of people...but how many thousands will reap the benefits from the gas once the well is up and operating? How many people gained employment drilling and building the well site...as well as how many gained permanent jobs? How has the local economy benefited from the influx of contractors? All the lodging, restaurants, retail stores...these wells are in rural areas...so small businesses are and hard working Americans are the benefactors. The state also gets a hefty cut.

I don't want them drilling here either Brenda (until it can be proven without a shadow of doubt that our FL wont be devastated)...but I believe the negative press releases that are released daily on the NG debate are out of context. I believe there has been some damage to the watersheds have occurred...and that's unfortunate. But damage to what extent? Is what the news article claims 100% accurate? News article after news article claim that energy companies wont reveal their "trade secret" concoction...yet thats not true. I can go to Chesepeakes website and read all the ingredients that they use to frack. Because someone reads that news article and believe what its telling them...it doesnt make it true and thats the sad thing with this debate. Mark Ruffalo says its baaaad....so it MUST be...cause I like that guy. Its easy to sit there and type article after article saying this is BAD because the spills are noticeable and recordable. Its exactally like reading articles about murders, rapes, political scandals, burglaries, fraud...etc. You can read one almost daily in the D&C. What you don't read about nearly as often as people who do the right thing.

We dont have long term studies in place to determine what the affects have been or will be. So I dont think anyone can really at this point say yay or nay. Yet the naysayers are out in full force.

I'd rather that we regulate it and do everything we can to ensure the safety of our drinking water and natural enviornment than for Obama to give Brazil 2 Billion so that they can continue offshore drilling. Our money going to another country so that they can reap the benefits??? What do you think we will get back out of that deal? Couldn't that 2 Billion have been better used here? Whether by exploring our own oil reserves or by a comprehensive study and funding of NG extraction? And then funding for conversion of vehicles and stations across the nation to run on NG.


Of course news is biased, but when you have many expert people and many sources saying the same things over and over again there has to be some truth to the matter.

Risk vs reward? How many families are allowed to get sick to make the reward worth while? Mine? Yours?

I'm going to have to look up the sources to give you exact figures on employment, and I don't have the time right now but I do know that they bring in most of the labor and very few permanent jobs are created because once the well is in place...They've created their own encampments, so the impact on the local economy is highly questionable.

The problem is that it's not being regulated properly. You obviously have little faith in our current administration, so what makes you think that they are going to protect our families when it comes to the risks of hydrofracking?

Brenda wrote:
You should see the commercials that they are airing using "locals" to convince us that it's safe.
hobkyl wrote:
You dont think that opponents use the same tactics to convince you that its not safe?


No, because they don't have the advertising budget for television!
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Lodi
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Challenge wins: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby hobkyl » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:29 pm

Brenda wrote:Of course news is biased, but when you have many expert people and many sources saying the same things over and over again there has to be some truth to the matter.


There may not be as many expert proponents coming forward, but they are out there. So there must be some truth in what they say as well. I think somewhere in the middle lies the truth.

Brenda wrote:Risk vs reward? How many families are allowed to get sick to make the reward worth while? Mine? Yours?


Again, is there clear proof that this has even occured? Or are we just taking what a news article states as the gospel? I dont want anyones family sick. I didnt want the gulf to go to ruins due to an explosion. At the same time, if we dont invest now in a viable fuel source...where will be in the future? How many families could be affected when they cant afford to pay their heating costs and state could no longer afford to subsidise them?

Brenda wrote:I'm going to have to look up the sources to give you exact figures on employment, and I don't have the time right now but I do know that they bring in most of the labor and very few permanent jobs are created because once the well is in place...They've created their own encampments, so the impact on the local economy is highly questionable.




•Roughly 75 percent of the jobs will be blue collar jobs.
•It takes an average of 20-30 different companies participating to drill a well.
•It takes an average 410 people in 150 occupations to drill a single well. They don’t all work full-time! But at some point during the process, over 400 people will have worked at least some amount of time on the well project.
•Each well generates 11.53 (rounded to 12) full-time equivalent workers during the life of the well.
•Each well generates .17 full-time production workers, which are long-term “production” jobs. Put it this way, every six wells will yield one full-time job for many years into the future.


http://marcellusdrilling.com/2010/03/binghamton-natural-gas-summit-how-many-jobs-does-drilling-really-create/

Your claim that the labor is not local comes...from? I personally worked with a company in Avon just two years ago along with around 100 other employees. All full time. For two years we all had as much overtime as we could ever want. Then the moratorium came and we were all laid off due to lack of work. There is a ton more of work to a well site than just the drilling. Pipefitters, electricians, crane operators, carpenters, fence installers to name just a few. All local people, all with jobs that paid well.


Brenda wrote:The problem is that it's not being regulated properly. You obviously have little faith in our current administration, so what makes you think that they are going to protect our families when it comes to the risks of hydrofracking?


Id rather try to have faith in our administration attempting to harness a "new" energy source, creating jobs, and bolstering our economy HERE than to have them invest in other countries endeavors. And it has nothing to do with the "current" administration.

Brenda wrote:You should see the commercials that they are airing using "locals" to convince us that it's safe.
hobkyl wrote:
You dont think that opponents use the same tactics to convince you that its not safe?


Kyle wrote:No, because they don't have the advertising budget for television!


I was referring to Gasland.

Its not being shoved down my throat. I see a commercial FOR natural gas maybe once a week. On the other hand I read or see news AGAINST it several times a week. So while they might not have the money to buy air time, they are still getting their message across in a big way.


Heres another good fact checker...
http://nwpoa.club.officelive.com/Gasland.aspx
“There’s an inconsequentiality to our lives that living in the wilderness shows up. Mountain are real, they set their limits, they set ours. They expose us, make us vulnerable and strong at the same time. “
--Alison Wat




Flickr Facebook
User avatar
hobkyl
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Victor, NY
Camera Model: Pentax K30
Challenge wins: :star1: :star1: :star1: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby Brenda » Tue May 10, 2011 11:06 am

Study finds gas -- but no trace of fracking chemicals -- in drinking water near drilling
8:30 PM, May. 9, 2011
Written by
Dina Cappiello
Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- New research is providing some of the first scientific evidence that a controversial gas drilling technique can contaminate drinking water.

The study published Monday found potentially dangerous concentrations of methane gas in water from wells near drilling sites in northeastern Pennsylvania, although not in central New York, where gas drilling is less extensive.

In an unexpected finding, the team of Duke University scientists did not find any trace of the chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process in 68 wells tested in Pennsylvania and Otsego County in central New York.

In hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, water, sand and chemicals are injected underground to crack the rock and get natural gas to flow into a well. Critics of the technique have worried more about the chemicals since companies have refused to make public the proprietary blends used, and some of the ingredients could be toxic.

On average, water from wells located less than a mile from drilling sites had 17 times more methane than water tested from wells farther away, according to the study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Methane is not known to be toxic, but in high concentrations it can be explosive and cause unconsciousness and even death, since it displaces oxygen needed to breathe.

Of the 60 wells tested for methane gas, 14 had levels of methane within or above a hazard range set by the Department of Interior for gas seeping from coal mines, all but one of them near a gas well. In nine wells, concentrations were so high that the government would recommend immediate action to reduce the methane level.

Methane is released naturally by bacteria as they break down organic matter. The researchers' analysis shows that the type of methane in the wells with the highest concentrations is coming from deep in the earth, the same place tapped by companies in search of natural gas.

In the most severe case, a homeowner in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, who leased her property to a gas company, has so much methane coming out of her tap she can light her water on fire. A natural gas well is 800 feet (245 meters) from her house.

"Not every homeowner within a kilometer (of a drilling site) will have high methane concentrations," said Stephen Osborn, a postdoctoral associate at Duke University's Center on Global Change. "If you are a homeowner within a kilometer, and our study shows this, I would be a little bit concerned."

What the study does not say is how the methane is getting into drinking water sources, and what part of the drilling is potentially involved. While wells closer to drilling sites had more methane, most of the wells in the study -- 85 percent -- had some.

Industry groups faulted the research on Monday on the ground that it did not show that fracking itself was behind the methane contamination, nor did the researchers conduct before-and-after tests to prove the contamination occurred after drilling. The authors themselves suspect that the methane is likely flowing up the sides of the gas well rather than down pathways created by hydraulic fracturing.

"The authors admit they have no baseline data at all, which makes it impossible to characterize the state of those water wells prior to recent development," said Chris Tucker, a spokesman for Energy in Depth, a national coalition of independent gas producers.

The industry also was critical of the paper's editor, William H. Schlesinger, who selected the study's outside reviewers. Schlesinger, a biogeochemist and president of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, N.Y., has supported moratoriums in New York on hydraulic fracturing permits until its effects are completely understood.

Gas drilling has expanded in Pennsylvania and other states where shale formations are thought to hold lots of natural gas, a clean-burning energy source. To get it, companies need to fracture the rock.

As the technique has proliferated, so too have worries among homeowners, and local, state and federal governments about its potential toll on underground drinking water sources which are unregulated and untested. Two federal agencies have launched studies, and the state of Pennsylvania -- where numerous homeowners are suing drilling companies over water contamination -- views methane as among the most serious risks of gas drilling.

In that state, an investigation into an explosion and fire at a house in December, and another at a home in February, is looking at natural gas drilling as the culprit. And a natural gas drilling company last year agreed to pay $4.1 million to 19 homeowners whose water was contaminated by methane gas, even though the company denies causing the pollution.

http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20110509/NEWS01/105090351/Study-finds-gas-no-trace-fracking-chemicals-drinking-water-near-drilling?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Lodi
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Challenge wins: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby George » Tue May 10, 2011 12:31 pm

It's important to remember that gas migrates much more quickly through an aquifer than a contaminant that's dissolved in groundwater. The fact that fracking amendments haven't reached homeowner wells yet may not be conclusive. It may just be a matter of time. Methane can migrate upwards, which is much less likely than for the dissolved contaminants. However, the fact that a relatively high percentage - almost a quarter - of homeowner wells studied have methane in them is very concerning.

I haven't made up my mind on this, largely because I don't know what information to trust.
User avatar
George
Senior Guide II
Senior Guide II
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:21 pm
Location: Castleton-on-Hudson, NY
Camera Model: Nikon D300, Calumet 4x5
Challenge wins: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby Brenda » Thu May 12, 2011 1:25 pm

Gas-drilling advocates present their case in Albany
7:37 PM, May. 11, 2011
Written by
Jon Campbell

ALBANY -- After groups opposing hydraulic fracturing swarmed Albany three times in the past two months, the natural gas industry got its day at the Capitol on Wednesday.

About 50 members of industry and other pro-gas groups met with lawmakers on the Legislature's environmental conservation committees, urging them to stand back and let the state Department of Environmental Conservation complete its review of permitting guidelines for hydrofracking, the technique in which chemical-laced water is injected deep into tight shale formations to release gas.

Dozens of bills that deal with the gas industry have been introduced by the Legislature this year and last, from legislation concerning liability issues to a bill introduced by Sen. Anthony Avella, D-Queens, that would ban hydrofracking altogether.

"The DEC is staffed by the engineers and scientists who have the expertise to navigate this issue and put in place the protections that are needed," said John Conrad, president of Poughkeepsie-based Conrad Geoscience Corporation.

"So we would ask New Yorkers and the Legislature to allow the DEC to put in place procedures that are protective of the environment but also allows New York to realize the economic stimulus of Marcellus Shale development."

The Independent Oil & Gas Association of New York, a trade group representing oil and gas producers, organized Wednesday's lobbying effort. The day was free of any sort of public rally, instead focusing on private meetings with officials.

Drilling in the Marcellus Shale, which sits about a mile beneath the Southern Tier and parts of the Hudson Valley, has been held off since July 2008, when the DEC launched its review.

"This is the only industry that I can think of that is ready to put jobs and money into the economy of New York state, which is badly needed," said Dave Palmerton, owner of The Palmerton Group, a small environmental-consulting firm that contracts with companies involved in natural-gas development. "I could double or triple the size of my company if natural gas were being developed here."

The groups met with a number of lawmakers, including Sen. Mark Grisanti, R-Buffalo, who chairs the Senate's Environmental Conservation Committee. They also met with staff members from the office of Assemblyman Robert Sweeney, D-Suffolk County, who heads the Assembly's environmental panel.

Environmentalists have been critical of hydrofracking, saying that it could be harmful to land, air and groundwater. They point to a number of spills and accidents that have occurred in Pennsylvania, where drilling in the Marcellus is permitted.

Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, D-Ithaca, who has been one of the industry's toughest critics in the Legislature, met with gas-company representatives and landowners Wednesday. She has asked the DEC to immediately pause its review, and re-open a 30-day public comment period on the scope of its Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement, an 800-page document that will guide the hydrofracking permit process.

The DEC has said a second draft of the permitting document will be released at some point this summer, with at least a 30-day comment period to follow.

"I told them that I want the DEC to do its work, but I want the DEC to do a more thorough job than I believe is being done right now," Lifton said. "It's been my position that we're going to keep letting the DEC do its work."

William Cooke, director of government relations for Citizens Campaign for the Environment, dismissed the industry's plea to legislators, saying now is the right time for lawmakers to intervene.

"Anybody who understands DEC's current staffing and funding levels has to admit that DEC is not in the position to adequately regulate or oversee this industry," Cooke said.

When asked Wednesday about the industry's frustration with the state's moratorium, Gov. Andrew Cuomo stressed patience.

"Don't be frustrated," Cuomo said. "Let's get the facts. Let's get the report, and then we'll make a decision."

Conrad said the state is missing out on a badly needed financial windfall.

"The industry has never objected to this kind of in-depth environmental review," Conrad said. "But I will tell you that industry is growing more frustrated and more impatient, because we feel that opportunity is lost each and every day that the DEC is unable to issue drilling permits."

http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20110511/NEWS11/105110358/Gas-drilling-advocates-present-their-case-Albany?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Lodi
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Challenge wins: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby Matt » Fri May 13, 2011 11:06 am

is Cuomo easy on the environment? I'm not familiar with his policies on it or even his father's
User avatar
Matt
President
President
 
Posts: 13957
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Chili, NY
Camera Model: Olympus OMD Em-1; E-5
Challenge wins: :star:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby Brenda » Fri May 13, 2011 11:09 am

I honestly don't know. I guess we'll see!
Finger Lakes Mill Creek Cabins
http://www.fingerlakescabins.com
User avatar
Brenda
VIP II
VIP II
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Lodi
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Challenge wins: :star1:

Re: Hydrofracking

Postby George » Fri May 13, 2011 12:41 pm

Cuomo is tight with one of the Koch brothers - David Koch - who made their fortune in oil and mining and whose conservative, limited government philosophy is showing up in Cuomo's policies towards teacher and state worker unions, education funding and property tax caps. They are big funders of the property tax cap and eliminate tenure advertisements we've been seeing. I have real concerns with their continued influence in the gas drilling debate. If Cuomo allows regulated hydrofracking with no increase in DEC staff, this will amount to unregulated drilling, and the horror stories we've heard from Pennsylvania will come to New York.
User avatar
George
Senior Guide II
Senior Guide II
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:21 pm
Location: Castleton-on-Hudson, NY
Camera Model: Nikon D300, Calumet 4x5
Challenge wins: :star1:

PreviousNext

Return to New York Local Talk

Thanks for supporting our sponsors

Click for Finger Lakes pics
Adorama Pix

Thanks for supporting our sponsors

Finger Lakes pics
Adorama Pix