Monday, December 10, 2012

"Devastation" "Toxic" and other buzz words


Toxic has to do with poisons/toxins... Toxic has to do with concentrations, exposure length, exposure route, and related health effects. 
I didn't make this up; Paracelsus said it...

"All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous."

So, your coffee… hopefully at the concentration you are drinking it at... isn’t a poison or isn’t toxic (apparently that is an arguable point).  So, is flowback toxic? Produced water toxic? Are the chemicals used to stimulate shale toxic?  Toxic to who or to what? What are the concentrations used?  Will anyone be exposed? How will they be exposed? At what concentrations will they be exposed at? Will is cause a health effect? Many questions, many different answers…  Is it simply easier to say toxic when information is complex then to spend the time & effort looking/learning? Believe it or not, there are people that have been working on these questions for a long time; they do it with every industry that has waste water.

 "Devastated" PA Countryside (Taken 08/10/2012)

My thirty minutes on “Up with Chris Hayes” went as expected. I am not really one for interviews/panels etc. I prefer talking to people one on one; to that end I met some great people had some great conversations off the air. Chris was cordial.  

Monday, November 19, 2012

Reality Check- Are We Guinea Pigs for Hydrocarbon Development?


Opponents of hydrocarbon development say that we should wait until gas development can be done 100 percent safely. 

Reality check:  If we had waited for transportation to be 100% safe, we would still be waiting. No automobiles, no trains, no planes… nothing. Opponents also claim that companies and regulators that support the development of hydrocarbons treat communities as a giant lab experiment with the residents being guinea pigs.
Experience shows that regulations, safety and best practices evolve with technology,knowledge and experience. Did anyone complain about being a guinea pig when they were little as they rode in the back of a car standing on the hump between the seats… with no seat belt and a solid metal dash board? Were we guinea pigs for future generations or victims of time?

1960 Child Car Seat


Friday, November 2, 2012

Unraveling the Common Denominator to the Health/Environmental Impact Preconception


Green Plan’s Ted Fink, the author of two CommunityImpact Assessments (CIA), paid a visit to Otsego County’s Natural Gas Advisory Committee meeting on Friday October 26th. His visit which was set into motion by a County Board Member, who had hoped Fink could persuade the committee that a similar Assessment would benefit Otsego County. Fink utilizes a “build-out” analysis to depict how much land within the county or town could be impacted by gas development under current zoning regulations. According to my understanding, a build-out analysis is a tool that can be used to evaluate the demands that a future development project could have on the land. It has been used effectively for brick and mortar structures such as housing developments, and new roadways, but only recently has it been used to chart the impact of natural gas development.  A build-out analysis is normally paired with different development scenarios that can then be utilized to determine what land use patterns a community would prefer to see. If utilized properly, without bias, a CIA can be a very useful tool for localities who wish to see the overall big picture and plan accordingly.

How some people see gas development in their backyards.
 Scroll down to see a more realistic picture

However, I am very skeptical of Green Plan’s Community Impact Assessments. Not because of the funding sources but because of the land use assumptions applied. 

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Focusing on Prevention – Mitigating Scenarios that Represent Public Health Risks


Opponents of gas development went to the NYS Officials armed with their list of 20 Reasons Summary Report as to why natural gas development should not go ahead. The list makes many assumptions. The biggest - the report does not take into account that a conclusive health assessment requires more than a portion of an exposure assessment.  

Risk assessments (health or environmental) are done to identify risk. This is the first and most important step in maintaining safe work-spaces and communities.






EPA Image/How much pollutant do people inhale over a specific period of time helps determines the potential or lack thereof of health effects



Missing from the report is a discussion on what has been done to improve the processes to control or eliminate the risk.  Leaving out these strategies creates an illusion that nothing is or has been done to mitigate the concerns raised by the exposure assessment.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Real People, Real Jobs Rally – October 15, 2012


Remarks by Uni Blake; Town of Maryland, Otsego County

Today, I speak as mother, and as a woman of the Shale Country. I speak driven by the scientist in me, who has been in search of answers and solutions.

The one thing I do not speak as--- is an activist. I am here because I feel obligated to speak up. I am here calling on the state to take a stronger leadership role. In your silence people have manipulated facts in an attempt to compensate for the lack of information - Information that YOU hold.

When Science is Unimpressive - Bring on the Anecdotes



While the general public may find anecdotal evidence highly compelling, most scientists are suspicious of data the rests on anecdotes. The idea that research can be based solely on pooling more than one anecdote to create data is problematic - more than one anecdote is simply just – more anecdote(s) not data.  


Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Responding to Questions about My Testimony etc.


Question from Blog Reader:
(did not leave email address)

What is a way to contain the flowback fluids if not in an open pit? In Arlington TX, urban drilling the top flow during flowback (before the Green Completions equipment is used) is held in open hatch flowback tanks, and the steamy white wafting clouds leave the site. How to contain that?

Is there sufficient technology to keep the frac sand from becoming airborne and leaving the padsite?
 Isn't that a health hazard for risk of silicosis?

What is the "setback" distance for drill sites near people?

Can you also send me the link to the DEP N Central Region health study
 that you said on the video link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KzqBDYuZ-c found no health effects cause they had dry gas?

There was also mention in that video of a review of the workers health that did not find illnesses...can you please
 email the link to me?


Thank you for your questions:
Here are some of the references you requested.