Broome county is smack in the middle of an enormous underground reserve of natural gas. (image: nytimes.com)

On November 27, the New York Times published a compelling piece focusing on the issues facing areas of upstate New York that lie atop the natural gas-rich Marcellus Shale formation. Interviewing landowning families in the small towns of Broome and Delaware counties, the Times adds new layers to the debate, which pits landowners in the Rust Belt of Western New York against one another over the future of their communities.

The Marcellus Shale region was long ago identified as a potential source of vast quantities of natural gas, but it was only recently that the development of hydraulic fracturing technology, or “hydrofracking,” developed to the point of being able to extract natural gas from the area’s dense geologic strata. The issues are essentially these: Hydrofracking uses tens of thousands of pounds of pressure to inject fluids into the ground, creating fissures that are then propped open with fillers allowing the gas to escape to the surface. While nothing more than water and sand need be used, toxic substances such as diesel fuel, methanol, formaldehyde and hydrochloric acid are usually employed to speed up the process, in quantities up to hundreds of thousands of gallons. This not only entails substantial risk for the pollution of ground and surface water, but it also can’t be contained locally, because there’s no way to control how the underground fissures develop, and they often extend hundreds of feet into surrounding properties.

In upstate towns, hydrofracking is fissuring communities just as effectively as it does the underground shale. While residents such as the Lacey family of Chenango see selling the leasing rights on their 80 acres –for up to $6,000 per acre and 20 percent annual royalties – as a way to ensure a comfy retirement and reinvigorate the area’s flagging economy, their neighbors in Vestal are concerned for the only source of drinking water on their large, rural properties: wells that draw on the local aquifer. Hancock resident Mark Dunau uses his 50 acres to farm organic produce and has refused to sign for drilling out of concern for his livelihood and the local environment, saying “water is my resource.” But Dunau is the lone holdout among his neighbors, which may render his objections null as “compulsory integration” allows for gas companies to drill under a property if they hold leases on all of the surrounding parcels. Gas drilling and the conflicts surrounding it have already had a profound effect on many upstate communities. Dunau knows of many who plan to leave the area once they get their payout and families have split fighting over the rights. Others feel cheated because they signed early leases for far less money –landowner Grace Kinzer only got $25 per acre for her rights.

With the possibility of enough natural gas to supply the US for a decade lying beneath the shale, the region is experiencing a full-blown “gas rush,” and many worry that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, which has suffered budget and staff cuts due to the economy, is simply not up to monitoring all the new sites. With 4,000 wells alone in Broome County that will net an extra $3.72 billion in taxable revenue, the state simply “cannot afford to chase this industry” away, according to deputy county executive Patrick Brennan. A study by Columbia University, however, points out such massive profits may be fool’s gold, as the bill for cleaning up contamination from the drilling may be almost as large.

A natural gas drilling site near Syracuse, NY. (image: blog.syracuse.com)

As the Legislative Gazette reported on Monday, the New York State Senate is considering the expanding of drilling allowances in upstate New York for natural gas. Instead of a public hearing, the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee is currently conducting a roundtable discussion with both environmentalists and drilling proponents to sort through the issue. As HeatingOil.com’s Steven Zweig reported last week, the proposal is fraught with environmental and safety concerns, so it’s crucial to hear all sides of this particular argument.

The natural gas is located along the Marcellus Shale bed in New York’s Southern Tier, but there is concern over the possible contamination of nearby drinking water and other environmental impacts. Companies interested in exploiting the vast resources were at the roundtable, ready with arguments about the safety of the chemicals used, and the economic benefits of the proposed drilling. Environmentalists, however, are not convinced.

“The benefits have been greatly exaggerated,” said Al Appleton, the former New York City commissioner of environmental protection.

Appleton and other environmentalists are deeply concerned about the chemicals used in hydrofracking, a process used to break up the rock and release the gas, as well as the possible contamination of drinking water, and the anticipated impact on the state’s forests. The natural gas companies are arguing that water can be treated and made potable again, a claim Appleton does not believe.

The next step for the Environmental Committee is to determine which drilling issues would be better addressed by the state Department of Environmental Conservation’s regulatory review process, and which through legislation. Senator Antoine Thompson, Chairman of the Environmental Conservation Committee, would like to see an extension to the public comment period, allowing 90 days instead of 60 for well-researched comments and arguments.

With so many potential health and environmental risks, here’s hoping the Senate will take all appropriate action to research the matter fully before making any decisions. Even though the area could use the economic boost, and natural gas is a bit cleaner than oil, if the anticipated effects are accurate, it might be best to leave the gas in the ground.