Water Problems From Drilling Are More Frequent Than PA Officials Said

Comment: Most states are not going to tell the truth about any type of water problems because they want the money over people's health, the state will protect the corporations and not us!

by Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica - July 31, 2009 11:29 am EDT

When methane began bubbling out of kitchen taps near a gas drilling site in Pennsylvania last winter, a state regulator described the problem as "an anomaly." But at the time he made that statement to ProPublica, that same official was investigating a similar case affecting more than a dozen homes near gas wells halfway across the state.

In fact, methane related to the natural gas industry has contaminated water wells in at least seven Pennsylvania counties since 2004 and is common enough that the state hired a full-time inspector dedicated to the issue in 2006. In one case, methane was detected in water sampled over 15 square miles. In another, a methane leak led to an explosion that killed a couple and their 17-month-old grandson [1].

Methane is the largest component of natural gas. Since it evaporates out of drinking water, it is not considered toxic, but in the air it can lead to explosions. When methane is found in water supplies, it can also signal that deeply drilled gas wells are linked with drinking water systems.

In many cases the methane seepage comes from thousands of old abandoned gas wells that riddle Pennsylvania's geology, state inspectors say. But other cases, including several this year and the 2004 disaster that left three people dead, were linked to problems with newly drilled, active natural gas wells.



Dimock resident Norma Fiorentino's drinking water well exploded on New Year's morning. The blast was so strong it tossed aside a several-thousand=pound concrete slab. Click to see more of Dimock's residents' stories. (Abrahm Lustgarten/ProPublica)The issue came to the forefront in January when methane was found in the water at 16 homes in the small town of Dimock [2], in northeastern Pennsylvania. State officials cited Cabot Oil & Gas for several violations they say allowed the gas to seep out of the well structures and into water supplies there. The Department of Environmental Protection asked the company to encase its lower well pipes completely in concrete — a process known in the industry as "cementing" — and assured the public that the contamination in Dimock was rare.

But according to a department spokeswoman, there have been at least 52 separate cases of what the state calls "methane migration" in the last five years. In two of the 2009 cases, regulators responded to complaints from more than 32 households and asked gas companies to supply clean water to at least a dozen homes with contaminated wells.

An undated report from the Pittsburgh Geological Society posted to the DEP's Web site makes it clear that old wells and new drilling can lead to stray gas problems. "Although it rarely makes headlines," the report reads, "damage or threats caused by gas migration is a common problem in Western Pennsylvania."

Craig Lobins, the DEP regional oil and gas manager who initially described the Dimock case as an anomaly in interviews with ProPublica, said he still believes the frequency of contamination incidents is statistically insignificant.

Records show there are roughly 58,000 active gas wells in Pennsylvania. "We are just dealing with a very small percentage," he said in a follow-up interview.

The case Lobins was investigating at the same time as the Dimock case concerned a string of problems in Bradford, a rural town 200 miles west of Dimock along the state's northern border. Shortly after a contractor for Schreiner Oil and Gas drilled several dozen wells in the area last spring, residents began complaining of murky and foul-smelling tap water. When the DEP investigated, it found methane in three water wells and metals in six others. It asked Schreiner to supply water to eight homes, and the company has begun installing water treatment systems at each house. While no new gas wells have been drilled in the Bradford area, according to the DEP, the existing ones continue to operate.

Michael Schreiner, Schreiner's president, declined to comment for this article.

Lobins said the problems in Bradford — as in many of the contamination cases across the state — stem from a bad cement job around the core of the well. In most gas drilling, the well pipe is encased in layers of concrete [3] to keep it isolated from surrounding groundwater. The concrete also contains the enormous pressure exerted on the system during the process of hydraulic fracturing [4], which pumps water, sand and chemicals to the well bottom to break up rock.

In Bradford, Lobins said, concrete was poured into the space around the wells but never filled the space — a sign of a possible leak. Because Pennsylvania does not have regulations that require inspections or testing of the concrete casing, the state didn't notice the problem until methane began showing up in water wells. By then, the suspected concrete error had been repeated in as many as 27 different places, Lobins said.

In most gas drilling, the well pipe is encased in layers of concrete to keep it isolated from groundwater. This practice of encasing the well is seen as key to protecting water supplies. (Graphic by Al Granberg/ProPublica)Controlling the quality of cementing and well casing is widely viewed as the most important factor in protecting water supplies and ensuring the integrity of a well. A recent federally funded study of state regulations across the country [5] (PDF), published by the Ground Water Protection Council, a consortium of state oil and gas regulators, industry representatives, and some environmental consultants, said that proper concrete casing is critical to environmental protection. While 96 percent of states, including Pennsylvania, have standards specifying that concrete be used to protect aquifers, the report found that one in five, also including Pennsylvania, do not require testing to confirm that the concrete used is strong enough for the job. That means that until water problems arose as a result of the casing problems in Bradford, the state had little recourse.

"What they are doing is not a violation until the gas is leaving the borehole," Lobins said. "We don't know that until it manifests itself somewhere else."

Lobins said the state is reviewing its regulations and that changes are planned to address both well casing and methane migration issues. But when asked what specific changes were being discussed, Lobins said he did not know. Similar questions went unanswered by Ron Gilius, the DEP's oil and gas director, after they were submitted by ProPublica both in interviews and in writing.

For their part, Bradford residents were surprised to learn that their problems were not unique.

"They didn't say that there were other problems similar to this," said Lori Trumbull, who complained about her water but later found that it was OK. "They said that the odds of having water contamination from drilling operations is very rare."

Fred Baldassare, the state's dedicated methane migration investigator, said he has investigated water contaminated with drilling-related methane in numerous places across the state in recent years. In Bridgeville, two homes exploded when a well casing failed and methane seeped into their basements, he said. In Dayton, he said, residents were evacuated after a well casing failed and methane migrated into an adjacent abandoned well, blowing out its casing and travelling a third of a mile underground.

In Vandergrift, drillers stumbled across an old gas well that no one knew was there. Baldassare said that when the new well was hydraulically fractured, the intense pressure forced gas into the adjacent wells. It then percolated up through water and mud until it surfaced just feet from homes in a heavily populated neighborhood.

The most tragic Pennsylvania methane case began on March 5, 2004 in Jefferson County, about 80 miles northeast of Pittsburgh. According to Baldassare, gas seeped into the home of 64-year-old Charles Harper and his 53-year-old wife, Dorothy, from one of several adjacent wells being drilled by Snyder Brothers. The gas collected until it exploded and, according to court records and news reports at the time, reduced the home to "a pile of rubble." Debris was found across the road, and insulation hung from trees 30 feet in the air. The bodies of the Harpers and their grandson, Baelee, were found buried in the debris.

Executives from Snyder Brothers did not return calls for comment. The company was sued in state court in Jefferson County and reached an undisclosed settlement with the Harper family.

State officials traced the methane's geochemical fingerprint and determined it had come from one of three Snyder wells nearby. The investigation, however, remains open in part because Snyder has yet to comply with state orders to conduct pressure tests on the wells — orders delivered in 2005, according to Baldassare. But that doesn't mean state officials aren't sure about what happened.

According to Baldassare, the Snyder methane caused the explosion.

"In my view," he said, "there was no uncertainty."


http://www.propublica.org/feature/water-problems-from-drilling-are-more-frequent-than-officials-said-731

Why is someone drilling in my backyard?

Comment: People all over Virginia need to wake up and smell the coffee. If Virginia allows uranium mining and milling it well affect your mineral rights; therefore, we will see Drilling Rigs pulling up in your yard. Virginia is known to listen to Corporations and not her people! So demand Virginia to ban uranium mining and milling NOW!!!

June 06, 2009
Peter Gorrie

The province claims it made peace with residents of cottage country when it made private property in Southern Ontario off-limits to prospectors.

Its new policy, announced this spring, "takes bold steps toward a modern, innovative Mining Act that would balance all of our respective interests, benefit Ontario communities and support a vibrant Ontario minerals industry," says mines minister Michael Gravelle.

But "nobody is happy," says Robin Simpson, a leader in the battle to stop uranium mining in Haliburton County, a couple of hours northeast of Toronto. "We were used so the minister could say there were proper consultations. They obviously weren't listening at all."

Many cottagers and full-time residents of Haliburton and, further east, Frontenac, are up in arms over companies trying to take advantage of renewed interest in nuclear power by reviving uranium mines that briefly operated a few decades ago.

Ontario's Mining Act lets prospectors stake claims, without seeking permission, on government Crown land and on private properties where the owners don't control the rights to minerals under the surface.

Claim holders are then free to conduct drilling and other exploration work, which usually entails bulldozing or blasting. It's illegal to attempt to stop them.

The property owners, including many cottagers from the GTA, along with aboriginal groups in Frontenac, have campaigned effectively against potential mining developments.

For First Nations, the issue is treaty rights: Prospecting and exploration are happening on land they claim. Non-natives are concerned about their property rights, and the prospect of radioactive air and water pollution, as well as noise, from mines on Crown land near their homes and cottages.

The province announced recently aboriginal communities are to be consulted before further mining activity, and prospectors can no longer claim private land anywhere in southern Ontario. (There are also new measures for the Far North, equally flawed, which I'll write about in a future column.)

But aboriginal leaders complain the province could still impose mining on their traditional lands. And Simpson points out the new policy does nothing about mining on Crown land, viewed as the biggest threat to an area aiming to create a tourism economy.

On top of that, the province will still hold the mineral rights under private properties, and reserves the power to eventually allow mining on them.

"It's the same old, same old ... a big bloody sham," says Simpson, whose land has been partially staked for uranium exploration.

"It's a crock," says Steve Quebell, sawmill worker who lives with his wife and teenage daughter on 33 hectares of forested land in Haliburton that's been claimed by a company planning to mine nepheline, a relatively rare mineral used in glass and paint.

The ministry is backing the claim, despite evidence, says Quebell, that it wasn't staked properly and that holes were drilled too close to a stream. The exploration crew bulldozed 500 square metres of trees and soil for one of the six holes it drilled.

On the larger front, having seen their original demands ignored, the cottage-country residents will now campaign for a prohibition against any mining on Crown land in southern Ontario.

Their efforts include pressuring members of the Legislature, many of them Liberals, who represent cottagers' home ridings.

Mining in southern Ontario accounts for only one per cent of the industry's spending in the province. The companies involved are minor players, and most of their projects will amount to nothing.

As staking and exploration expand in prime vacation areas (there's also been activity in the Parry Sound area), the government appears to be creating a lot of trouble for itself for little benefit.

Peter Gorrie is the Star's former environment reporter. He can be reached at: pgorrie@sympatico.ca

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/645838

Uranium Exploration in BC set to take off

Comment: History of Santoy!

By Dan Crawford

A shift toward embracing nuclear power as the solution to solving both our world's energy woes and global warming has begun to take foot across the planet. This shift is largely being driven by factors like high oil and natural gas prices, concerns over availability of oil and gas, green house gas (GHG's) emissions, electricity demand growth and misinformation.

The international nuclear energy community has begun in earnest a far-reaching media campaign to float nuclear power as a "clean, green and sustainable" energy source. The focus has largely been on the fact that a nuclear plant does not directly release GHG's into the atmosphere. Missing from that claim is any mention of the green house gases released throughout the rest of the nuclear cycle: from mining and transportation of uranium, to the building of the massive plants. Also missing are the concerns over environmental damage due to radiation exposure, tailings pollution, ground water contamination, nuclear weapons proliferation and nuclear waste management. There is still no safe way of handling spent fuel rods from a nuclear plant. Furthermore, the waste must be managed for hundreds of years.

Nonetheless, these past few years have seen a flurry of announcements for proposed nuclear reactor development projects. Leading the pack are the countries of India and China. To date, a total of 179 nuclear plants world-wide are either under-construction, planned or proposed. If all projects come to fruition, there will be an increase of 40% in the number of nuclear plants in the world.

Breakdown of nuclear plant projects and the most active countries:

25 - Under-construction (India 8, Russia 4, China 2 ...)
41 - On Order or planned (Japan 12, China 9, South Korea 8 ...)
113 - Proposed (India 24, South Africa 24, China 19, USA 13 ...)

The amount of uranium required to meet this growth will be substantial. Also, the amount remaining in worldwide stockpiles is lower than previously thought, and decreasing quickly. All of these factors have helped produce a steady rise in the pice of uranium. In 2000, it was selling for $7 US per pound; now it is $38 US per pound.

In North America, the number of public exploration companies trying to cash in on this uranium rush has increased substantially. In 2003, there were less than 20 exploration companies compared to over 100 currently in search of a big find today.

The province of British Columbia has had a long history with uranium. In fact, the first nuclear bombs developed by the US contained uranium from NWT and transported through BC. During the 70's much of the province was explored for this heavy metal. Out of concern, citizens of BC conducted a Public Inquiry into Uranium Mining. Surprisingly, the project was partially funded by the provincial government to appease demands from the public. This inquiry was then shut down before completion by the very same government. At the same time, the government placed a seven-year moratorium on uranium mining within the province. A general view shared by those involved is that the government did not want the research that was being conducted by the Inquiry to be made available in the public domain.

More recently this issue has re-surfaced in the province. The most notable activity has been with the Blizzard claim just south of Kelowna. This claim is regarded as the most viable one out of a handful of uranium deposits in BC. Two companies are involved - Santoy Resources and Sparton Resources. These entities have come together and formed the Boss Gold Company, which will be responsible for development of the Blizzard claim.

The property was first explored in the seventies, and left riddled with drill holes and debris that are still present today. The president of Santoy Resources, Mr. Ron Netolitzky, openly admits to this in an interview with the Explorers' League Dispatch (Vol 1; No. XII): "The property is like Swiss cheese, it's had so many drill holes put in it".

One of the many issues raised around uranium mining is that any disturbance of the heavy metal can contaminate the surrounding environment, which can also suffer contamination by other byproducts such as radon gas. Uranium is water soluble and can be readily transported through rivers and ground water. Unfortunately, monitoring the surrounding area of a claim to help gather a baseline data set for understanding the impacts of exploration and mining is not currently mandated. This makes it even more difficult for residents in the area to determine the effects caused by any mining activity.

Water contamination from mining operations is a valid concern.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency contends that heavy-metal pollutants flowed for decades down the Columbia River from Teck Cominco's smelter in Trail, into Washington state waters. The EPA told Teck Cominco to pay for a study to determine the extent of the pollution and perform a clean-up. A lawsuit is in progress between the Colville Confederated Tribes of Eastern Washington, along with the state of Washington, alleging that Teck Cominco has failed to comply with the order from the EPA. This lawsuit has yet to be resolved.

In Kleberg County, Texas, a community has made several unsuccessful attempts at stopping a uranium mine operation. During a hearing in August, residents argued that Uranium Resources Inc. had failed to clean groundwater at their prior mine sites and their operations could pose a threat to the county's underground water supply. The residents lost, and mining operations will commence within the next year.

The BC Liberal government is heavily influenced by the mining community. In fact, over $700,000.00 of their 2005 provincial election funding came from the mining sector (excluding oil and gas). The biggest mining donors were:

$132,990.00 Fording
$112,210.00 Teck Cominco
$77,000.00 Highland Valley Copper
$60,000.00 Teck Cominco Metals
$52,500.00 Wheaton River Minerals
$50,000.00 Placer Dome Inc.
$27,990.00 Canadian Natural Resources Limited
$18,000.00 Silver Standard Resources Inc
$15,000.00 Cline Mining
$10,650.00 Canadian Gold Hunter Corp.
$10,000.00 Ivanhoe Mines
$10,000.00 SMM Resources Incorporated
$10,000.00 Southwestern Resources Corp.
$10,000.00 Breakwater Resources Ltd
$10,000.00 Northgate Exploration Limited

As uranium keeps increasing in price, the issue of mining it will eventually be brought to the fore in BC politics and public discussions. The mining industry has made a significant investment in the BC Liberals. Will democracy be upheld on this issue or will it be influenced through monetary interests?

A Uranium-Free BC Coalition was formed recently in Kelowna out of a group of 30 concerned citizens, many of whom were involved over 25 years ago fighting for the same cause. The meeting called upon the BC provincial government to immediately renew a moratorium on uranium exploration and mining. They also want to reactivate a public inquiry into health risks, environmental impacts and end uses associated with uranium exploration and mining.

The coalition will be hosting a screening of "I know I'm Not Alone" a just released movie directed by Michael Franti documenting his journeys through Iraq, Israel and Palestine. The event will be held on March 19th 7:30pm at the Capitol Theatre in Nelson, BC. More information can be found at www.uraniumfreebc.org


http://dan.kootenaygreen.ca/?Articles:Uranium_Exploration_in_BC_set_to_take_off