There have been several articles in the paper lately about drilling in the Marcellus Shale for natural gas. Committees are being formed to look into various aspects of the effects that the presence of the drilling operation would have on our community. May I suggest that a committee be given the task of studying the possibility of the operation contaminating our water supply?
I am reminded of a year ago when a company waned to drill the shale in this area. At a meeting, the people were told by the company officials that they would use millions of gallons of water every day. As they didn’t say how many millions, for this article, I am going to estimate it at three million, as I am quite certain that would be a very minimum amount used in a drilling operation of this type.
Also, at the same time the people in Horseheads were up in arms about a chemical company wanting to build a large storage barn for chemicals, as they were going to be supplying five tons of chemicals to the well drilling site every day. They said this at a public meeting.
This means that one well will pump 5 tons of chemicals, dissolved in 3 million gallons of water into the earth every day. In a year’s time, one well will have put 1,056 million gallons of water, poisoned by 1,760 tons of chemicals into the ground.
Pennsylvania has been given permission to drill in the Marcellus Shale. They now have 117 operating wells. Multiply the number of wells, 117, by 1056 million gallons of water and 117 by 1,760 tons of chemicals and you get 123,552 million gallons of water poisoned by 205,920 tons of chemicals being forced into the Pennsylvania ground every year. It is my opinion that in a very few years the wells and waters near the drilling sites will become contaminated, and the contamination will continue to spread every year.
If permission is given to drill in New York, drilling wells will spring up like toad stools on a warm, damp, Spring morning and our ground will become saturated with poisoned water, just as Pennsylvania’s is.
A very small amount of the water used returns to the surface at the drilling site, and is hauled away. To where, no on is saying. The rest travels through the ground. It follows the path of least resistance and may travel in any direction and for many, many miles, until it finally surfaces in wetlands, rivers and lakes.
As you know, our wells are kept full by water flowing through the ground. It is reasonable to believe that the more poisoned water we put into the ground, the greater the possibility is that it will find its way into our wells. The rest of it will surface to pollute all surface water. You can use your imagination as to the effect this will have on our fish, birds and wild and farm animals.
The long-term residents of Camp LeJeune have found out the hard way that contaminated water may not be detected by taste or smell. They have been unknowingly using it for several years, until last October when they became ill from using it during their length of stay. The only sure way to detect polluted water is to have it tested.
The Wallaces found a persons well in Pennsylvania that had blown up due to the excess of chemicals in it that are being used in the near by drilling. If that well was that badly contaminated, it seems reasonable that many other private wells in the area are also contaminated. The owners of those wells should have them tested, as they may contain poison material, thus causing the people to become ill like the long term residents of Camp LeJuene.
I strongly believe that if hydrofracking of the Marcellus Shale is allowed to continue and expand, we will be worse off than the birds in the Gulf of Mexico. To those people who are in favor of the drilling because it supposedly will bring wealth, jobs and other glorious things to the community, I ask: "Would all of the benefits be worth changing our present water supply to one containing a mixture of chemicals?"
Clesson Cook
Bath
