PennEnvironment & Commonwealth Foundation Talk Fracking on NBC

If you are interested in the so-called medical gag order, watch from about 9:45 on.

Community and Environmental Rights

A lot of people don't think of "the environment" has being owed rights. "What? Give trees rights?" You might think it's something to scoff at but there's a long tradition of recognizing nature as being owed something other than a numerical dollar value for its extractive potential, its ability to be turned into a chair, a car, or a hand-held device, or its value as property.

In 1948, Aldo Leopold wrote "The Land Ethic" in A Sand County Almanac. He believed that things were owed moral status if they are part of the community. He wrote,

All ethics so far evolved rest upon a single premise: that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts. His instincts prompt him to compete for his place in that community, but his ethics prompt him also to co-operate (perhaps in order that there may be a place to compete for).

The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land.

These simple lines have infused much of the environmental movement's ethics for 60 years. They resonate to some degree in the work of environmentalists' and environmental groups' rhetoric to varying degrees. And some take it more seriously than others.

Today on the show, we will be talking to Ben Price of the Community and Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF). They argue that the escalating ecological crises we are living in has resulted from decisions made powerful people in our major institutions. They argue that "sustainability will never be achieved by leaving those decisions in the hands of a few – both because of their belief in limitless economic production and because their decisions are made at a distance from the communities experiencing the impact of those decisions." What's the answer? In part, it's to change the power dynamics by invoking the rights of communities to determine their futures. The community is that broadest community including the environment, or what Leopold called the land.

Price helped craft State College's Community and Environmental Bill of Rights and Fracking Ban so successfully fought for by GroundswellPA and passed in 72% to 28% landslide. But recently passed legislation that has resulted in Act 13 of the Oil and Gas Law threatens local ordinances to regulate natural gas drilling operations. Will the State College referendum stand? Will the lawsuit against the state by seven Pennsylvania municipalities succeed? Do we need a revolution against what some call a corporate kleptocracy? We'll ask Price these and other questions.

Call in with questions this afternoon from 4-5 pm: (814) 865-9577. You can also join us on Facebook and Twitter as well.

Conservation and Sustainability from the Legislature: Conversation with Sen. Jake Corman

Pennsylvania has a complicated history regarding natural resource use. On the one hand, we have these incredible state park systems, forests, and game lands. But then we have the legacies of timbering, iron and steel, strip mines, and now the looming rush into shale gas. How has and is the legislature dealing with these issues? [See below.]

Over the last few decades, programs like Growing Greener have been helping us preserve our open and green spaces. The program has been very popular among a large segment of Pennsylvanians, but funding has been on the chopping block. And hearkening back to last week's show with Mike Hermann of Purple Lizard Maps and Frank Maguire of the International Mountain Bike Association, there's a lot of concern that Governor Tom Corbett is going to undercut the integrity of state forests and state parks by further opening them to gas drilling.

At the community level, people in the borough of State College overwhelmingly voted for a Community and Environmental Bill of Rights and a Fracking Ban in November. It was a landslide 72% "yays" to 28% "nays." But the recently passed Act 13 of the Oil and Gas Act might undercut home rule and the referendum State College passed. And pretty clearly, there are a lot of rumblings about shale gas development in the Marcellus Shale. Will Pennsylvania end up in another boom and bust like we did with oil and coal?

Our first guest on today's show, Senator Jake Corman (R - 34th district) grew up in Central Pennsylvania. His father was a senator before him and was my first acquaintance with a state politician. Jake Corman was elected in 1998 and is currently serving his fourth term. He chairs the Appropriations Committee and sits on several other committees. Because he sits at the helm of the Appropriations Committee, he has an intimate understanding of how the budget works whether that's money going into Going Greener or being dispersed from Act 13.

Call in with questions this afternoon from 4-5 pm: (814) 865-9577. You can also join us on Facebook and Twitter as well.

UPDATE: Senator Corman's office called this morning to inform us that a schedule change prevents him from coming on the show.

"If there's a new way..."

Yesterday, Megadeth founder Dave Mustaine more or less endorsed Rick Santorum for president (pic at right courtesy of The Atlantic Wire). As of late, he's said he hasn't "endorsed him" but the effect has been kind of endorsement. I've been a Megadeth fan for years. I know Mustaine has converted to Christianity, something I don't find particularly upsetting, but his endorsement of Santorum was very confusing. So I wrote him a letter (also posted to their Facebook page that they have since removed).

So what's the rub? Megadeth's songs include some of the best metal criticisms of political corruption and complicated human-induced environmental problems. Selecting Rock Santorum is more than a little bit confusing. I admit that selecting any major party politician today faces us with with some big problems. But on the environmental front, Santorum has been a major part of what Chris Mooney named "the Republican war on science." It's really too bad.

Their most famous song, "Peace Sells...But Who's Buyin'" says,

If there's a new way
I'll be the first in line
But it better work this time

[...] What do you mean I couldn't be the president of the United States of America? It's still 'We the people' right?

Right or RIGHT? As someone who has worked on sustainability issues now for several years, I can't get how it is going to work this time, especi

Here's my letter...type-o's and all:

Dave,

I can respect your views and find them confusing. It’s too bad you removed my comment. There’s a bigger point here that several people are talking about. We are frankly confused how one of the most seemingly environmentally aware and politically intelligent people we have looked up to can even entertain the idea of voting for Rick Santorum. Well…we might be able to understand it but we don’t really get it.

Before I go on, I want to say that I don’t mean this to be shouting at you. I’m mostly confused and want an explanation. I guess you don’t have to give me one. I’m just one guy who was once a kid who heard “Holy Wars,” “Hangar 18,” and “Five Magics,” and was totally thrilled. I’ve gone on to write the “Heavy Metal” entry for an encyclopedia coming out in the next year, The Encyclopedia of Music and American Culture. Megadeth certainly earned its place in that entry.

On one hand, I get that you are not the person you were when you wrote most of your albums. You’ve led a very public life. Part of that life has been about politics. Seriously, when you did the MTV Rock the Vote stuff in ’92, I thought that was pretty cool. I was 16 and from a politically-minded family.

Unlike some commentors on this thread, I don’t think Megadeth is “just music.” It’s clear that you, like Sepultura, Testament, Xentrix, Nuclear Assault, Kreator, Revocation, Heathen, Forbidden, and some other awesome bands work to raise social consciousness. It’s not dumb kid’s noise. It has a purpose. You’ve always had a purpose…full-fledged aggression mixed with a moral approach to the world that is neither condescending nor authoritarian. I’m sure I’m about the thousandth person who’s written to you to say that lines like from Rust In Peace and Countdown to Extinction played in my mind over and over again. As someone who’s minded politics and the environment, Megadeth serves a special place.

I can’t help but note that Countdown to Extinction came out in 1992. That’s the year of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. The young girl talking in the song “Countdown to Extinction” is forever linked in my mind with the young girl who spoke at the Rio Summit. I get it. Those are my links and they’re not many other people’s. But I bring it up for a reason. Rick Santorum will be an environmental ruin for this country.

I’ll just give three examples: hamstringing the EPA, climate change, and hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling for natural gas in Pennsylvania. First, Santorum, like too many Republicans these days would like to defund, hamstring, or eliminate the federal Environmental Protection Agency. In a world where corporate influence far outweighs the good work of some religious people or the ability of common people to protect their water, their air, or their children, this is baffling. The EPA is sometimes the only bulwark “we the people” have to protect us from industrial pollution.

Second, Santorum denies climate change. He calls the science behind it “junk science.” That is junk thinking. It is basic chemistry and physics. The trend line from an incredible amount of data – some of it going back tens of millions of years – shows that the earth today is at a particularly warm period. More importantly, the earth is warmer than it has ever been during human history. That warming trend, which is continuing and accelerating, is inextricably linked to the release of carbon dioxide and methane from humans burning fossil fuels. The only “junk” out there on this comes from the fossil fuel industry and the politicians – like Rick Santorum – who have enslaved themselves to those industries. [See point #1 about the EPA above.] I find it interesting that you would vote for Santorum given what you wrote in “Dawn Patrol”:

Pretending not to notice

How history had forbode us

With the greenhouse in effect

Our environment was wrecked

That’s a pretty clear warning to me. Are you backing away from that? Santorum isn’t the only Republican with this view by any means but he is the most vocal of the four left standing.

Third, Pennsylvania where I live and where Santorum is from has been undergoing a natural gas rush. Santorum recently told a crowd in Oklahoma that there is “nothing” to worry about. In case you don’t know, two new technologies have been put together to get at massive gas reserves in shale beds. We can drill thousands of feet into the earth and turn the drill bit and go horizontally for thousands of feet. Then, having bored a hole around a mile down and a mile across (give or take depending on conditions) the well is hydraulically fractured. By blasting a mixture of fresh water, some sand, and a cancerous (literally) cocktail of biocides, lubricants, and other chemicals into the earth at upwards of 14,000 pounds per square inch, the shale bed can by stimulated into releasing gas back up the well bore to the well head. People refer to this process as fracking. It is an environmental and community health ruin.

I have met people from across the state now who can’t drink their well water because of these processes. Some of them can set their taps on fire. That’s cool a couple of times. But it’s not cool to have to have a gas ventilation system set up in your house because your water leaks so much methane your house could explode. I know people who have been ripped off. Cattle, dogs, horses, cats, chickens, song birds, and fish have all been killed by fracking. I know people whose property value has plummeted 85% because of damage to their water. Little kids waking up in the middle of the night with their noses bleeding and doctors reporting that kids have elevated levels of toxins in their bodies. People losing hair. Headaches. Just wait for the cancer clusters. Just two weeks ago, Carl Stiles killed himself because he had become so ill from what his family is certain was fracking pollution.

Santorum called this all “the boogey man.” He said, “Ooh, all this bad stuff's going to happen, we don't know all these chemicals and all this stuff, What's going to happen? Let me tell you what's going to happen, nothing's going to happen." Call me uncouth, but as a Pennsylvanian, that’s garbage. The people of Dimock, Pennsylvania lost their water from gas drilling. When the state government and the company stopped providing that water who stepped in? First it was neighboring communities. But then the EPA came and has supplied the water. Once again, we are back at number one.

So I know you said you admired Santorum for his going back to be with his kid. As a father myself, I too am touched by that. Every day that I get to spend with a healthy and happy boy is a day worth more than my life. And I mean no disrespect to you when I say that it affects you differently than it does me given your family history and your father’s negligence as you’ve written about it. Santorum’s devotion to fatherhood is admirable. And certainly, given your vocal embrace of Christianity, his faith is too.

But why does it stop with his son? What about the son getting ill from fracking operations or the arsenic in his water from mountain top removal in West Virginia or Kentucky? What about the boys and girls exposed to the pollution of coal and gas power plants around this nation that create cancer clusters and literally billions of dollars in medical treatment for human-caused industrial disease. It’s no accident that asthma, leukemia, and other awful illnesses proliferate near, downwind, and downstream of polluting industries. Why isn’t Santorum a father for those people and protect them as much as he would protect his own children?

If you’re still reading this I appreciate it. Yeah. My first reaction was pretty strong. I felt like maybe never buying another Megadeth album. Maybe it would be boycott time. But I guess that I, like a lot of other people, can’t square this circle. We just want to understand.

See, it’s not that I ain’t kind. I’m just not his kind. And, like you, I still believe that it’s all for we the people…not we the corporations. If there's a new way, I'll be the first in line. Rick Santorum is not the new way.

He should never be president. Ever.

Peter Buckland

Immersion in Sustainable Science, Politics, and Ethics in Jamaica

Interested in seeing how and why the global political system and economy have affected Jamaica? Are you interested in learning about organic agricultural responses to the global agricultural system? Government? Corporate responses? How do people approach problems on a formerly colonized island?

Enroll in this immersion experience this summer with Dr. Neil Brown, a Jamaican (Ph.D. in Animal Science) of the Office of Global Initiatives. We'd love to see you there.


If you have any questions, you can email me, Peter Buckland: pdb118@psu.edu

Getting real about the climate with Al Gore

For 24 hours Al Gore's newest project, the Climate Reality Project, will be addressing the scope and scale of climate change and some of the solutions at hand to mitigate and adapt. Watch Gore on the Colbert Report plugging it.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

People mix hope, rage, and resolve at Shale Gas Outrage

Yesterday, about 1,000 people attended the Shale Gas Outrage demonstration in Philadelphia. The events was convened as counter-voice to the Marcellus Shale Coalition's Shale Gas Insight conference for industry.

Individuals, community groups, and established organizations joined organizers Protecting Our Waters, Food & Water Watch, Marcellus Protest, and others to call for changes to the way gas drilling is proceeding in Pennsylvania. People joined in chants of "Shut them down!" and "Ban fracking now!"

Meanwhile inside, Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon derided the demonstrators as "extremists" and former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, who also headed the Marcellus Shale Coalition, called environmental concerns "phony hysteria." But former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell shot back in his own speech to the Shale Gas Insight attendees, saying that they needed to step up and pay a severance tax and that people's concerns over clean air, clean water, and health were legitimate.

Outside, speakers shared a mixture of fear, hope, and calls to action. Pittsburgh Councilman Doug Shields riled up the crowd by highlighting Pittsburgh's unanimous vote to ban hydraulic fracturing within the city. Several speakers, including Delaware River Keeper Tracy Carluccio, Al Appleton, and Gasland director Josh Fox all called on the crowd to keep gas drilling out of the Delaware River Basin.

Fox, having just been arrested for civil disobedience in Washington, D.C. over tar sands oil and the proposed Keystone XL pipeline (see here and here) implored people to descend on the Delaware River Basin Commission on October 21st to demand that they ban fracking in the basin. He distributed the DRBC's phone number to the crowd, some of whom called DRBC on the spot. You can call them at (609) 883-9500. If push comes to shove, he believes people are going to have to be civilly disobedient and be arrested. Without civil disobedience, he and other said, blacks would still be riding in the back of the bus and women wouldn't be voting.

Whether this is hysteria or legitimate, people attending were very concerned. Here are four of them.

Tony Ruggiero is from Texas. His 10-acre $300,000 Texas property has almost completely lost its value because of gas operations.



Nathan Sooy of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania is a member of Clean Water Action.



Eric Weldman works for Food & Water Watch. They are asking people to call President Obama on October 13th to change federal policy on hydraulic fracturing.



Gary Thornbloom is the head of the Sierra Club's Moshannon chapter in central Pennsylvania. They are calling for a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing.



Where do you stand?

One woman's commitment to solidarity and sustainability

Toni Brink believes there are so many things that people can do for a better world today and tomorrow. She really hopes that people can "live more harmoniously with the planet." Driven in part by a longtime commitment to social and environmental justice, the 66-year-old grandmother joined thousands of demonstrators in Washington, DC to oppose the proposed Keystone XL pipeline last week.

The 1,600-mile pipeline would carry heavy oil from Alberta's tar sands across Montana and the Midwest to Port Arthur, Texas. A broad range of environmentalists, scientists, farmers, politicians, and citizens worry about air, water, and land pollution, damaged habitats, and the climate impact of tar sand development. Proponents, including TransCanada who has proposed the pipeline, argue that tar sands oil could reduce U.S. dependence on oil from the Middle East and Venezuela. That claim is disputed by Oil Change International. [For background from Sustainability Now, read our previous story here.]

On Thursday, September 1st, Brink was arrested in front of the White House. [Picture below courtesy of Nick Brink] “It really solidified my commitment," said Brink. After a briefing the night before and joining three other women, two of whom were lawyers, she felt as prepared as she could be. Bill McKibben spoke to them as did Josh Fox, director of the film Gasland, who sees an intimate and destructive connection between tar sands development and natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale and elsewhere. Tar sands refinement to get bitumen requires enormous amounts of natural gas, enlarging its energy and climate impacts.

"I've been standing with 8 or 10 people opposing the wars [in Iraq and Afghanistan] for years." She sees joining the likes of Fox, Bill McKibben (who spoke at Penn State last year), James Hansen, Naomi Klein, Darryl Hanna, and 1,200 other people as a natural and necessary step for a better world. [Learn more from 350.org.]

She hopes people will make better choices. These can be as varied as growing your own food or purchasing from local markets to reduce energy waste and restore soil to organizing political actions to helping develop cleaner and more efficient technologies.

Asked what she took away from the experience, she said, “While the destination is a safe, sustainable, equitable future for all, the journey can be a joy. It can open up new creative avenues when we work together. We are not alone.”

Increasing fuel efficiency

This morning on my walk to the bus station in Pine Grove Mills, PA, I saw gas at $3.69 a gallon. It's been higher than that recently and analysts predict that in coming years it will continue to climb over $4 a gallon. No doubt, filling the tank in our Honda is now a $60 endeavor. What's it like to have a Jeep or an Escalade? It's expensive.

Expense doesn't just go to families. There's the cost of obtaining, extracting, shipping, refining, and shipping all the petroleum to do all that. Obtaining all that oil and securing it has no small part in the wars in the Middle East which are in the trillions of dollars in taxpayer expense. We have record breaking oil disasters to deal with and their years of side effects. Later, there's the cost to air quality because of particulates and fumes. And don't forget the growing and ever looming costs greenhouse gases like CO2, and CO. That's a lot of consequence from just filling up your tank to get to work, take your kids to a baseball game or piano classes, or go on vacation.

But they are there: wallet to war and gulf to greenhouse.

Short of cutting individual car use what's to be done? The Pew Environment Group is calling on President Obama to increase fuel efficiency standards. They are asking you to help by signing on and telling the President to increase fuel efficiency to 60 miles per gallon for light trucks by 2025. They say in a press release, "With a 62 MPG standard, vehicle owners could see an average net savings of $6,475 over the lifetime of the car." That's nothing to ignore for most people in today's economy. Sectors of industry and so-called "consumer choice" will and have decried these standards as draconian and unrealistic, but the interconnected realities of peak oil, increasing global oil consumption, and climate change will make oil much more expensive and the cost of using it increasingly pressing as well.

So it looks as though we might aim at fuel use reduction as a goal. Reduce is the first of the "three R's" after all: Reduce. Reuse. Recycle.

But if reduction is a genuine goal, then why not push even harder for even bigger reductions through bigger changes? In the same Pew press release they write, "[R]ecent polls show that Americans want to drive farther on a tank of gas, including one survey on behalf of Go60MPG, a coalition of advocacy groups seeking higher fuel-efficiency standards, which revealed 74 percent of those surveyed supporting 60 MPG by 2025." This is confusing.

Many people want more efficient cars which would reduce environmental and personal economic woes if they drive the same amount. More than doubling fuel economy could more than halve your gas payout if you drive the same distance. But if you double your driving distance you have neither saved fuel, money, nor the effects of burning that gas. Do you smell a Jevons Paradox?

What do you think? Should we go beyond fuel efficiency standards? Should we go beyond transportation to urban or national planning?

Lobbying the state and federal government with citizen voices

Today is lobbying day at the Capitol in Pennsylvania, organized in no small part with groups like Berks Gas Truth, PennEnvironment, and PennFuture because of environmental, public health, infrastructure, and community disruption caused by the natural gas boom in Pennsylvania. No matter your position on this and a number of other critical issues - tax rates, school budgets, environmental regulation, and health care - you might consider calling your Pennsylvania legislators to let them know where you stand and how they can represent your and your community's interests.

On that note: Want the federal government to hear your voice? Here's your chance. It's easily accessible to Pennsylvanians.

[6450-01-P]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Natural Gas Subcommittee

AGENCY: Department of Energy

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting

SUMMARY: This notice announces an open meeting of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) Natural Gas Subcommittee. SEAB was reestablished pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) (the Act). This notice is provided in accordance with the Act.
DATES: Monday, June 13, 2011 7:00pm – 9:00 pm

ADDRESSES: Washington Jefferson College
60 South Lincoln Street
Washington PA


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Renee Stone, Deputy Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585; email to: shalegas@hq.doe.gov or at the following website: www.shalegas.energy.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The SEAB was reestablished to provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary on the Department’s basic and applied research, economic and national security policy, educational issues, operational issues and other activities as directed by the Secretary. The Natural Gas Subcommittee was established to provide advice and recommendations to the Full Board on how to improve the safety and environmental performance of natural gas hydraulic fracturing from shale formations, thereby harnessing a vital domestic energy resource while ensuring the safety of citizen’s drinking water and the health of the environment. President Obama directed Secretary Chu to convene this group as part of the President’s “Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future” – a comprehensive plan to reduce America’s oil dependence, save consumers money, and to make our country the leader in clean energy industries.
Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to allow Subcommittee members to hear directly from natural gas stakeholders.

Tentative Agenda: The meeting will start at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, June 13, 2011. The tentative meeting agenda includes a technical presentation on long-lateral hydraulic fracturing. From approximately 7:15 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., the Subcommittee will hear comments from members of the public. The meeting will conclude at 9:00 p.m.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Space is limited. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions may do so on Monday, June 13, 2011. Approximately 105 minutes will be reserved for public comments. Time allotted per speaker will depend on the number of individuals who wish to speak but will not exceed 2 minutes. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Those wishing to speak should register to do so beginning at 6:30 p.m. on June 13, 2011.

Those not able to attend the meeting or have insufficient time to address the committee are invited to send a written statement to Renee Stone, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington D.C. 20585, or by email to: shalegas@hq.doe.gov.

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting date due to programmatic issues and members’ availability.
Issued at Washington, DC on June, 2011.

LaTanya Butler
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer

Fracked: The Movie

Gasland has already made a huge splash in the United States, by showing some of the problems with unconventional natural gas extraction. Another film has gotten into the mix, Fracked, which recently played to small audiences in Pennsylvania.

You can watch a trailer and excerpt here.

FRACK! The Movie Trailer from Frack The Movie on Vimeo.

Petitions, letter campaigns, and more petitions

Concerned citizens across Pennsylvania keep pushing local and state government to slow drilling. One of the more prominent ways have been letter campaigns and petitions.

At least three are on the radar today.

In Indiana County a well-pad has sprung up near the Yellow Creek State Park. It's caused some alarm to people who appreciate the park to push back against well development and request that the Indiana County Commissioners act responsibly. The petition reads:

Marcellus Shale fracking is spreading across PA faster than our current laws and ordinances can keep up. It promises economic development, but there are daily reminders that the process is rife with problems, such as ruining well water for many, and causing an elevation in the levels of harmful bromides in Pennsylvania's waterways. The immediate effects of well failures and spills that release thousands of gallons of toxic waste fluid are also of great concern.

The lack of common sense regulation is clear in the Yellow Creek Conservation Zone where a company started drilling a fracking well without permission. We, the undersigned organizations and individuals believe that the ordinance which regulates the Special Recreation and Conservation Zones is currently not adequate to protect the conservation zones from the potential hazards of deep gas shale fracking. Therefore, we ask that the County Commissioners immediately revise the zoning ordinance to keep deep gas shale fracking outside of the county's conservation zones.

Just a few weeks ago, I drove to Indiana and in the space of a couple of miles I was treated to the joys of sharing the road with a line of Halliburton trucks. In places like Bradford, Tioga, and Clearfield counties these trucks are an overwhelming fact of life with hundreds a day in places.

On the state and regional level some other groups are encouraging other actions. These include PennFuture's work to push the Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission to adopt a severance tax. PennEnvironment is urging you to help stop drilling on college campuses.

Seven Questions on Shale Gas Development

I had the fortune of typing up all of the questions that the audience wrote for Dr. Tony Ingraffea last night. There were over thirty and some of them really spoke to some of the issues that we've dealt with on Sustainability Now. So I took the opportunity to take a few of them and put a few of them together and then post them here for us to consider.

1. What are the projected impacts of Utica Shale development?

If you don't know, the Marcellus Shale is only one "unconventional" shale play in Pennsylvania. The Utica Shale is much bigger. It stretches into Quebec and well south of us. It's thousands of feet below Marcellus and holds trillions and trillions more cubic feet of natural gas. Right now, it's not economically viable to get at in Pennsylvania. But my home sits atop and so does my beloved Rothrock State Forest. I have a friendly acquaintance who said, "When I saw the map of the Utica Shale, I felt like an endangered species. It's that big. The impacts will be astronomical.

2. Maybe someone in the audience can explain why Penn State professors are not speaking out on this issue. Is there academic freedom on the issue of gas drilling in Pennsylvania?

This is something of a "myth" as Dr. Ingraffea might call it. There are a lot of prominent people, especially in the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences who are quite pro-gas. Dr. Terry Engelder is the most noticed. However, there are several Penn State faculty who have signed a statement that is yet to be released by PennEnvironment that questions the benefit of Marcellus development. I don't know what the status of that signing statement is but I personally know at least two faculty who are signatories.

3. If Central Pennsylvania gas production all comes to fruition, about how many square miles of wells will exist?

You can track existing impacts at sites like FracTracker and the Nature Conservancy's interactive map.

4. Can you comment on the Duke study released on May 9th?

The research in that article finds evidence that there is "methane contamination of drinking water associated with shale-gas extraction" from the Marcellus and Utica shales. "In active gas-extraction areas (one or more gas wells within 1 km), average and maximum methane concentrations in drinking-water wells increased with proximity to the nearest gas well and were 19.2 and 64 mg methane (n = 26), a potential explosion hazard." At distances beyond 1 km they found no such problems. Importantly, the researchers "found no evidence for contamination of drinking-water samples with deep saline brines or fracturing fluids."

You can read the full article here.

5. Why has science in the US become such a target of hysteria? Can serious policy be developed in such a context?

This question is so important. It is far beyond the scope of this blog to say much about it. But Americans, and particularly conservative Americans (though not exclusively) have real trouble with science and some of the authority it comes to have. There are very serious disputes between segments of the public, politicians, and scientists over a host of things. These include climate change, the theory of evolution, and whether or not immunizations cause autism.

The vast majority of scientists working on climate change recognize that humans burning fossil fuels have forced the climate and are accelerating those climate forcings. Rates, extent, scale, etc. are open to debate. But not the cause. Of course there are people who, for ideological reasons, simply won't believe it. Short term economics are more important so they deny climate change because it's easier than accepting it and still saying economics are more important. Or God wouldn't let it happen so it's something else like sun spots.

How do you construct rational policy in this context? I guess that depends on your definition of rational. If you have to include people's values, attitudes, and beliefs in the calculations of political action, then the rationality of politics in a representative democracy might be fundamentally opposed to the forces of nature and long-term human interest. But they might still be rational.

6. What would responsible development of this resource look like? Can we slow it down?

Dr. Ingraffea spoke to this quite eloquently. At the most basic level, he suggested pressing our elected officials regularly and intelligently. Be organized and effective. Press for regulation. Press for effective restitution for violations. This is a representative democracy right?

7. I am meeting with my state representative next Friday. What 3 things do I need to understand about Marcellus and Utica development to ground my meeting with him?

Note what I said above about regulation, restitution, and pressure. Next Friday May 20th, PennFuture is holding an event with Representative Scott Conklin. I suggest attending. More details pending.

Governor Corbett suggests "drilling for natural gas below campus"

Governor Corbett has proposed a new move to expand natural gas's scope in Pennsylvania and to fill the budget hole that higher education faces. Drill for gas below campus. So reports the Erie Times News in this story.

Gov. Tom Corbett told the Pennsylvania Association of Councils of Trustees that the state's universities could ease their financial woes by tapping into Marcellus shale deposits beneath their campuses.

Speaking at Edinboro University during his first visit to northwestern Pennsylvania since taking office, Corbett said six campuses in the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education sit on the Marcellus shale formations now being tapped for natural gas.

The proposed state budget would cut the state's higher education system a whopping $220 million. The state higher education system faces Penn State faces a 52% state budget decrease, amounting to a 2% cut in the PSU budget, and approximately $182 million. What does the Penn State system's map look like relative to the Marcellus Shale map in Pennsylvania?

A Penn State campus system map.A Marcellus Shale play map in Pennsylvania.

Penn State has an awful lot of land on that map. Why not tap the campus gas reserves? They can feed the new power plant that University Park will get. Right? And then we can float education on gas. Right?

First news on today's protest and public comment at the Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission meeting

The press reports are starting to come in from today's meeting of the Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission. Governor Corbett has tasked the Commission to "develop a comprehensive, strategic proposal for the responsible and environmentally sound development of Marcellus Shale." Many people are skeptical that this is little more than a rubber stamp commission.

The governor and the commission itself have been accused of being top-heavy with gas industry representatives. Thirteen of the commissioners come from the gas industry. That number may now be twelve as the governor asked the Chesapeake Energy representative to leave over the disaster in Bradford County. Four environmental groups including the Nature Conservancy and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation are included. The remainder come from state and local government officials and a geologist. That geologist is Penn State professor Terry Engelder who is a vocal gas drilling proponent.

As the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported earlier this year,

Thirteen of the members contributed a total of $557,000 to Mr. Corbett's political campaigns since 2008; 12 have ties with companies whose executives or political action committees contributed another $562,000; one is the son of a $300,000 contributor. All together that amounted to just over $1.4 million.

The lack of parity strikes some as slightly less than fair. But there is, to some, a whiff of insider dealing and political corruption. Some people with those views, and more, came out in force to today's meeting.

Pennsylvania news is already abuzz. Laura Olson of the Post-Gazette writes:

More than 100 protesters attended a noon rally outside the Department of Environmental Protection headquarters, where the commission is holding its day-long meeting. Following the rally, many went inside, planning to participate in the public comment period later this afternoon.

The dozens who filled the inner hallway blocked entrance to the meeting room and heckled several of the commission members as they tried to squeeze through the crowd.

One local activist, Gene Stilp, walked into the morning session and began handing out "delinquent drilling tax bills" to the commission members. He was quickly escorted out of the room, after saying the lieutenant governor was a "prostitute," because of his and Gov. Tom Corbett's campaign contributions from the gas industry.

According to the Capitol Ideas blog,

Don Waltz, a Pitt professor who appeared in the anti-drilling documentary "Gasland," faulted administration officials for not including representatives from the state Department of Health on the shale panel.

"The commission is fatally flawed," he said. "It is here to look at public health, but there is no one there from the Department of Health."

As one Facebook commentor wrote, "Korporate Kangaroo Kommi$$ion DESERVES to be disrupted!!!" The distrust is deep.

You can find information on the disruption on other sites including PennLive. They did, however focus some on what the day's meeting was supposed to do: air the scientific evidence of the environmental impact of drilling. Among the issues are damages to warblers, salamanders, and trout. Perhaps we can add to those serious habitat fragmentation, air pollution, water pollution, climate problems, soil compression, and the potential for proliferating invasive species because of clear cuts.

ABC 27 said a bit about the public comments period and Commission head Lt. Governor Jim Cawley's reaction.

Each person had two minutes to speak and most were anti-drilling protesters.

Afterward, Cawley said the commission is devoted to transparency. He says some speakers' claims aren't backed up by science and fact, but he insists that he and Corbett are devoted to public health and safety.

The protestors would be happy to know that the commission is devoted to transparency. Based on what they are posting to Facebook, they hope to be a part of its process by informing it on at least public perception. As social scientists will tell you, the facts are sometimes irrelevant in the face of people's values and beliefs. If people value the land on which they live and that surrounds them, well blowout frequency might be irrelevant to them. Land or water or air will always trump a well pad.

We at Sustainability Now are most interested in the public comment period. We want to know what you said if you were there or what your perceptions were. As one other Facebook participant Lynne Whelden said, "I know we're only a flea on the hindquarters of gasocracy unlimited. But today we made them itch." Did you make them itch?

If you so desire, you can leave your comments in the comment section below or email them to sustainabilitynowradio@gmail.com and we might put them in a follow-up post.

'The Interview' with Mary McConnell

Last week, DotEarth blogger Andrew Revkin told a Penn State audience that on the balance, he believed that the proliferation of information on the internet will go toward good, true, and accurate information. We certainly hope so. In that vain of hope, we offer this tragic piece of on-the-ground citizen journalism.

The Bedford Free Press has posted Mary McConnell's story as a property owner in Bedford Country. Her property sits on the Marcellus Shale where Columbia Oil & Gas is drilling. She has been facing an incredible maze of gas corporation wrangling, governmental and legal mess, and the despoliation of her land and water. She has to sleep with a gas mask because her house is full of methane.

The email lists that have been circulating these videos are full of shock on one hand and almost eye-rolling and yawns because stories like this are business as usual. Even among activists, these stories cease to shock. Their sheer persistence, pervasiveness, and even the fat that they seem to be more frequent isn't shocking anymore.







Who has been irreparably damaged?

Over the past several months we've talked to people who don't believe that we live in a democracy anymore. Some of them, Patrick Walker and Rosa Eberly to name two, have argued that we live in a Gasocracy - a people under a government by the gas companies and for the gas companies. Whether that view is correct or not, there are petitions out there now to impeach Tom Corbett precisely because of the new administration's collusion with gas companies. What do you think? Who should be at the government's helm?

Addendum:

Today is the meeting of Governor Tom Corbett's Marcellus Shale Commission that she spoke of. There is a contingent of activists going down today. We will be following up on that story with reports from activists who attend.

The Republican Congress's War on Clean Air and Water

Today, we will be talking to Ed Perry of the National Wildlife Federation. A few weeks ago he hosted a protest outside Pennsylvania Congressman Glenn Thompson (R) because of Thompson's support of some legislation that will gut environmental regulations, inhibit the EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases, and will expand polluting industries' governmental entanglement.

Ed has recently written the following:

The House Majority Wants to Gut Environmental Protections

On Feb. 25, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a continuing budget resolution to keep the government operating and cut spending. But most people didn’t notice that it also was intended to gut environmental agencies and regulations that have protected our air, water and land for more than 40 years.

The U.S. Senate wouldn’t go along, but a House majority was willing to trash decades of bipartisan support for our most basic clean water and clean air protections in a full retreat from the fundamental expectation that elected leaders should safeguard our health and natural resources.

Instead of adding earmarks to its first budget resolution, this Congress added “oilmarks.” An oilmark is a prohibition attached to a spending bill that handcuffs regulators, forcing them to look the other way as polluters endanger the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the lands and waters that nurture fish and wildlife.

Oilmarks are like earmarks in that they don’t get debated and scrutinized, so members feel safe in voting for them. Of 51 amendments added to the original House continuing resolution, 14 were oilmarks aimed at letting politics override science and commonsense public-health protections.

Among other things, the oilmarks would have:

• Allowed 5,000 additional tons of hazardous air pollution and mercury emissions.
• Blocked new health standards to reduce soot pollution, which is particularly harmful to the lungs of our children.
• Blocked funding for climate change science and sensible regulations to start reducing carbon dioxide pollution from oil refineries and power plants.
• Blocked science-based restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, Klamath Basin, San Francisco Bay Delta and Florida waters.
• Blocked new rules and guidance to prevent hazardous coal ash from entering water supplies as happened in the 2008 Tennessee disaster.
• Blocked new rules and guidance to protect stream valleys and wetlands from the dumping of waste from mountain top-removal mining and other sources.

The total budget savings for the 14 oilmarks would have been zero dollars. Not one dime would have been shaved from the deficit, which ostensibly was the purpose of this bill.

While adding all kinds of oilmarks to the spending bill, the House rejected the one amendment, offered by Rep. Markey, D-Mass., that would have eliminated billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies to oil companies. Closing a royalty payment loophole for oil companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico could save taxpayers $53 billion in the coming years, but the amendment was defeated.

At least Congressmen Glenn Thompson and Bill Shuster were consistent. They voted for every one of these oilmarks and then voted against the only amendment that would have reduced the deficit; the one that would have cut taxpayer subsidies to the oil companies.

The sheer audacity and scope of the assault on environmental protection makes you wonder if these folks are out of touch with their constituents. Poll after poll shows Americans want Congress to protect air and water regulations and take action on climate change.

A national survey found that two thirds of Americans — including 54 percent of Republicans and 59 percent of Independents — said the EPA should “reduce carbon pollution without delay.” One poll question revealed particularly strong support for clean air updates the EPA is putting forward: 66 percent of Americans — including 54 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents — favor stricter limits on the release of toxic chemicals such as mercury, lead, and arsenic from coal-fired power plants and other industrial facilities.

Our representatives may say they don’t want a bunch of unelected bureaucrats setting carbon limits for the United States; they want Congress to do it. But what they really mean is that they don’t want any limits at all.

Last year, Congress had an opportunity to pass clean energy legislation to reduce carbon emissions and virtually every representative who voted for the oilmarks voted against the bill. They continue to vote against clean energy legislation, yet they have no alternatives.

Is this what Americans want this new Congress to do? Assault the agency that has effectively reduced air and water pollution and set environmental standards that make our country’s quality of life the envy of the world?

Really?

You know, not long ago our government reflected Americans’ strong environmental values. The Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act were passed with bipartisan support in the 1970s, with Republican representatives and senators leading the way. And when Congress updated the Clean Air Act in 1990 to protect thousands of lives and curb acid rain, the House passed the legislation with an overwhelming vote of 401-25. Now it appears all of that has changed.

Fortunately, the U.S. Senate refused to go along with the House oilmarks in last month’s temporary budget resolution. But with another resolution coming soon, let’s hope the Senate — with the help of Pennsylvania Sens. Bob Casey and Pat Toomey — stands firm again and continues to support the EPA and its efforts to protect our air, land and water.

- Ed Perry, PA Outreach Coordinator, National Wildlife Federation

Listen in today from 4-5 pm on The Lion.

Part IV: The Meeting and Next Steps

After the protest, 13 of us including my 3-year-old son, walked to the capitol. One of our members sat and handwrote her letter to Mr. Corbett. Others of us took some time to chat and look around.

Surely we looked out of place. In a building full of suited people, most of whose body language and speech is formalized into the interlocking interests of the corporate government, we were sore thumbs. I was wearning a tee-shirt over my bike jersey, tee-shirt protesting the collusion of big oil and state government. Others were just wearing casual work clothes. One of us, a young woman from West Chester, PA was in her finest protest regalia that showed her “counter-culture” devotion. We were looked at askance by more than one person. And you have to wonder if it hurt our message to look so plain. My father-in-law wondered this quite a bit. I think maybe but not in a way that I think worth compromising in that visit.

We are common people from the commonwealth – Carlisle, Harrisburg, West Chester, State College, Julian, and other places. All but one of us was white. One of us was in a motorized wheel chair. We ranged in age from early 20s to late 60s. None of us were wealthy as far as I know. Our educational attainment may have been the one thing that separated us from the average. But I also know from people who wrote to me thanking me that we were there in spirit for many others. Elderly, disabled, rural, urban, activist, and non-activist people told me that they were so glad that someone was doing this. These are common people. So being the common person means representing yourself honestly and playing a game of airs and pretend. I am a father and a cyclist. I am not a politician or a lobbyist for a corporatized or governmentally “legitimized” group. I am me. We are us.

Interestingly, I saw paintings of our cultural heritage and a kind of classical Promethean humanism where men convene for the good of men.

Natural gas and pollution were conspicuously absent. No acid mine drainage streams. No strip mining. No massive deforestation. Nothing in those images seemed, at least at one glance, to show us the collusion between polluting and despoiling industries at the expense of the people. Just the triumph of reasoned men.

We walked to Governor Corbett’s office, a beautifully ornate room with gorgeous wood furnishings. We requested a meeting with the governor but were told by his assistant tat he was not in. The office assistant was joined by the same Capitol police officer who earlier told me that he had received an email about me. We asked to meet with the Chief of Staff. He was also gone. They were at a Gallagher’s Milk plant. Eventually we were offered the services of a woman who makes the executive branch work smoothly. Interestingly, she is from Bradford County where the impacts of Marcellus drilling are off the hook. Eventually, she connected us with Deputy Secretary for Legislative Affairs, Andrew Ritter who works with DEP and DEP Secretary Krancer.

We spoke with Ritter for an hour. We discussed natural gas drilling’s effects on water, air, and the forests, community health, and corporate influence in state government. We urged Ritter for a moratorium, for state forests and parks to be free of drilling, and an immediate severance tax. One of our submitted letters expressed the way that nuclear power harmed her family and neighbors growing up. Others referred to coal and strip mining. We are a fossil fuel addicted people.

Though we came to no real agreement on anything we were able to make our positions clear. And one of our group, a woman from Harrisburg who works with Clean Water Action, read aloud and submitted a letter that said that under the Pennsylvania Constitution that Governor Corbett is impeachable. It looks as though, however small, some people in the state have the same idea with an online petition to impeach him.

Ultimately I think that my position at this meeting is best articulated in the letter I submitted to meet with Governor Corbett. It is as follows:

Dear Governor Corbett,

Thank you for working to serve Pennsylvania as our governor. I am writing to you to request a meeting with you on the afternoon of Wednesday March 9th, 2011 to bring some measure of better representation to the natural gas rush that’s gripped our state. I will be arriving at approximately 4 pm. Other people who have sent you letters requesting a meeting will be joining me. I, for one, will be riding my bicycle about 120 miles from my home in Pine Grove Mills to meet you.
You may wonder why I insist on meeting you on such short notice. Too many of us are not being heard. That includes people across the state who have already been negatively impacted, people who worry about our shared resources and especially the forests, and people who believe very strongly in a better quality of life.

Allow me to tell you a little bit of my story. When I was a boy, I played in Slab Cabin Run, a stream that flows down the Tussey Ridge south of State College. My friends and I loved that stream, clambering over rocks in our shorts from late spring to the fall. One day we built up the guts to go through the culvert that goes under Route 26 over the mountain to Greenwood Furnace and Whipple Dam State Parks and Shaver’s Creek. Beneath the hemlocks, we followed the stream up toward the headwaters just a few hundred feet from the Rothrock State Forest. We tramped around as adventurous boys do, throwing mossy rocks into Slab Cabin and picking up big sticks that were alternately the walking sticks of wizened old men or knightly swords.

On other occasions we played in a small spillway below someone’s backyard bridge. The other side of that little cascade housed a small brook trout area the homeowners built. Once, my friend Elliott and I found a snapping turtle on the sidewalk between our houses. With a combination of apprehension for our fingers and the self-assuredness of boyhood machismo, we picked it up, dropped it into a bucket and put it into that trout run.

Down West Chestnut Street, just below the headwaters, lies a yellow gate into some forest trails. When I was a kid we used to march up there to get to our favorite sledding runs. Dead Man’s Trail was our favorite with a tree right down the middle. When I was old enough to take long walks by myself and get around at night, I walked my dog in those woods. Today, that gate is 500 feet from my house.

For the last 10 years or more I have spent thousands of hours in the state forests. As a mountain biker, hiker, and camper, the forest is my second home. Rothrock is just outside my door. I know it is not currently on the gas market. But just two ridges to the west lies the Moshannon State Forest where 90,000 acres of state forest has been leased to gas companies. To my north lies the Bald Eagle. I travel by bike in the Forbes, Gallitzin, Sproul, Michaux, Tidaghton, and Tioga State Forests. The forests are my second home and they are the source of much of my health. They bring us all health.

They breathe for us. They filter our water. They bring us beauty. They are the homes of the glorious and diverse creation of Nature. In our state, they embody the flourishing Creation of which we are a very special part.

Our intelligence and our organization have brought the most amazing changes to this planet. But in our intelligence and our power we have not always done what ought to have done. In a quest to do what we can we have too often been shortsighted, impatient, and lacked moral clarity. I won’t bother enumerating a huge list of human-made disasters here because we know too many of them. But from the people of Easter Island who deforested their island to the utter devastation downstream of the Tennessee Valley Authority, powerful people have too often done “business as usual” at the expense of other people’s health, the integrity of their communities, our shared water, our air, the habitat we share with other organisms, and the glorious wilderness we have agreed not to touch.

From the collapse of Easter Island or the ecosystems in Tennessee there is something disturbing at work. How do a boy and his friends appreciate beauty if it doesn’t exist near him? How do those kids learn to live better with the other creatures of the Creation if what exists is the roar of a compressor station and the clear-cutting of the trees for a road that will crush the soil? What is the smell of thousands of uninterrupted acres of woods? What does a ridge top trail look like with its patches of sandstone cracked over the course of millions of freeze-thaw cycles?
Can that boy’s health be worth another gas well? Another one hundred gas wells? Another several thousand as has been estimated will come soon?

Is it worth terrifying a family by introducing evaporating benzene into the air he breathes and poisoning? Is it worth his waking in the night screaming with a pounding headache because people he will never know are allowed to use other people he will never know to extract gas from a formation of rock buried tens of millions of years ago?

That boy lives all around the state right next to thousands of mountain gap streams. This problem is not just in my backyard. It is in our common backyard.

Is this the price of progress? The destruction of our common resources that bring us a common good in our great commonwealth? I find it hard to believe that this is the right thing to do. Is progress in Pennsylvania to make it into a third world nation, where there is no justice and the people are not only ignored but hurt by a collusion of big industry and government?

Like you, I am a father. When I think of my son, Sacha, waking up in the night repeatedly because of a toxic environment, I shudder and grow very angry. I have talked to and had correspondence with people all over the state who have stories about their neighbor’s health. The headaches. The smells. The trips to the doctor. It is only a matter of time until we start seeing the long-term health effects caused by prolonged exposure to heavy metals like cadmium, barium, strontium, radium, and gross alpha. As you know, the recent New York Times articles have provided a wake-up call that cannot be ignored. Following former DEP secretary John Hanger’s recent statements, I would certainly hope that you are going to summon additional DEP power to sample all drinking water across the state for these toxins. Of course, there are other chemicals like benzene that need to be tested for.
We have to stop accepting ugliness and destruction in the name of progress. This is not progress. I am calling on you to focus on our forests’ and our people’s abilities to sustain themselves and each other.

I have to say that there is something else that really bothers me and thousands and thousands of others around the state, certainly those who will join me on Wednesday the 9th. See, we don’t have hundreds of thousands of dollars to donate to your campaign. We don’t have nearly $3,000,000 to contribute to total campaigns over the last 10 years in the state. We can’t buy airtime. We can spend millions to lobby the legislature, to tangle up regulation and regulators, or run create glossy pamphlets that we can dispense at public symposia. We can’t put gag orders into leases. We aren’t poisoning people’s wells and buying them water from elsewhere and shipping it to them. We can’t pay the price for this. On any level.

I am riding my bike to see you because it represents a way of being in the forest that is so much better than the natural gas industry. It is better for me and my health. From bicycling on roads, fire roads, and trails, I can go into communities and forests in a light way with small impacts on Nature and happy impacts on people.

Well…sometimes people honk at us. But the vast majority of businesses appreciate us coming to buy some food and people like talking to us and we to them. It is also a way of finding that peace of mind in myself. It’s a beautiful thing. Hunters get it. Fishermen get it. Hikers and campers get it.

Pennsylvania’s forests bring us great wealth. Not only do people gain the monetary benefits of our forest tourism; they get peace of mind, clean air, fresh water, beautiful trails, wild game from turkey to black bear, and the joy and thrill of being out in wilderness. I am a big fan of happiness…not in the empty bubble gum and pink hearts way but the kind of happiness that comes from meaningful and joyful experiences with friends and family in great places. The state parks and state forests are those places.

We, the concerned, must be heard and represented. We insist that you meet with us now because we aren’t being heard and you are OUR governor. Tomorrow, at about 4 pm, I and my fellows will request that you do the following:
a) Impose a statewide moratorium on new gas drilling;
b) Reinstate DCNR’s ability to perform assessments as per last October’s announcement;
c) Reinstate DEP’s ability to carry out air quality assessments from drilling operations;
d) Provide for the immediate testing of all drinking water facilities around the state to test for all chemicals associated with natural gas drilling process; and
e) Impose a severance tax on existing operations with accrued funds going back into some combination of environmental restoration, infrastructure maintenance, and local municipal and/or educational funding.

This will, I’m sure, be a lively and spirited discussion that might just mark the beginning. See, we believe in conversation and in the power of meeting face to face with those whom we have elected no matter their political persuasion. But to have that conversation, we need to be heard.
We hope you will listen to that little boy.
With great hope,
Peter Dawson Buckland

I wonder what would happen the concerned people across the state joined together on this. If they joined with Clean Water Action, the Forest Coalition, the Responsible Drilling Alliance, Trout Unlimited, their local hiking, mountain biking, or watershed groups and took matters into the hands of the citizens. We are creatures of Nature who need to live more sustainably on this planet. That means flourishing more harmoniously with one another and with the watersheds, rivers, lakes, forests, farmlands, and wilds all around us. We have so much to lose and gain. The gain is our health and life. The loss is the perpetuation of Marcellus Personality Disorder and its associated problems.

I know that a coalition is forming right now that hopes to organize people more effectively and demand better for our health, our neighbors, our water, our air, and our forests. You can bet that there will be more of this kind of action even as we wait to hear from Governor Corbett. We fully expect that meeting to come.

What will you do?

The Rural Impacts of Natural Gas Drilling and Fracking

This video shows some pretty startling footage from Colorado. Citizens there have stories about well blowouts, contaminated water, plummeting property values, drug and crime problems from transient workers, and other negative impacts.



If you follow the blog talk and speak to people on the street in much of Pennsylvania, I think it's fair to say that many of these problems have transferred to this state.

Later in the series, there are some suggestions about what to do. What do you think should be done? How can you work to affect local politics, state politics, regulations and enforcement, and community organizing? Is it possible to slow this down or change its direction?

Part III: The Protest

The protest was organized by union and environmental organizations. 300-400 people rallied against Governor Corbett’s deep budget cuts and his refusal to put a severance tax on natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale. Speeches ran the gamut from union organizers who are tired of working with people who are told to take less while the corporate fatcats get to take more profit home and share in none of the pollution. Their were public health workers whose patience had diminished after all of the talk of shared sacrifice while we give away the gas in the Marcellus Shale instead of taxing it. There was a teacher there who once again was being told he had to sacrifice more of his benefits than the CEOs at the gas companies or the staffers in the governor’s office. And there was a young man there who has home help because he almost drowned at the age of five. His care worker, probably already paid little, will probably take another cut.

The gas companies? Not enough.

A representative from Clean Water Action said something to the effect that the Corbett administration said it wants a “frictionless relationship” with the gas industry. “Well we’re going to bring them some friction.”

We spontaneously started chanting, “Friction! Friction!” And friction we brought.

We marched to the Marcellus Shale Coalition offices chanting away. “Hey hey! Ho ho! Gas drillers’ pockets are lined with gold!” Repeat. Into the offices we went, chanting and stomping and demanding justice. Inside, some of our compatriots found a bunch of wine, a pool table, some Knob Creek (at least they have good taste) and other vittles. What are they doing? Boozing it up with legislators? Don’t get me wrong. I am far from a teetotaler, but this is a bad sign. I’d love to see what legislators are going in and out of that place and see their conditions before and after. Let’s look at that “frictionless” relationship.

In an aside, I hope you have done is gone and looked at the two websites linked above. Clean Water Action. Marcellus Shale Coalition. Go back up. Look at their logos and artwork on their websites and compare them. That, my friends, is Big Brother at work. The blues and the greens. The comfort in that graphic design to lull the viewer into a sense of watery verdant bliss. Marketing is amazing isn't it?

The organizers delivered a bill of $117 million in back severance taxes that we the common people are owed by these gas monsters. Sadly, Tom Ridge and Katherine Klaber, the head honchos working to lubricate the halls of Harrisburg into frictionless caves for gas trucks to drive, were unavailable to take receive the bill. So we handed it off to someone who promised to meet with us again.

I think that sounds great. Actually, what I think should probably happen is that people like you, me, your neighbors, and everyone we know, should just start visiting the corporate headquarters in Pennsylvania of places like Range Resources, Anadarko, Chief, Chesapeake, Rex, and more. This is our commonwealth right? Not theirs. We should start doing tours of these facilities and documenting it all and taking it back to them for accountability. We should take it to our representatives and our senators and DEP and DCNR if it’s in the forest. If we want the bureaucracy to work for us, then We have to make it work.

Margaret Mead wrote, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Well, never doubt that an organized group of committed rich people who have profited from polluting industries will change the world. They are thoughtful too. Very. They just seem to think that the invasion and rape of land and water is good. Negligence is a sign of progress.

And if you flip that Mead quotation over so that it says, “Never doubt that a large group of inattentive, non-committal consumers will let a group greedy gas drillers change the world. Indeed, it already has.” It has.

But I suspect that now that isn’t so true. People are coming alive to this and they have had it. And some of us were even more prepared to share it. We were going to the Capitol Building to demand our right to meet with Governor Corbett. And if not Governor Corbett, then someone in the executive branch. It was time to demand accountability.

To be continued…