Think, Baby, Think. Is Drilling Really Green?

Is natural gas environmentally virtuous because burning it creates less air pollution than coal?

Or is it greener to be skeptical about the recent surge in gas drilling in the Chesapeake region, because of its potential to create water pollution and contaminated drinking water wells?

It’s a complex question that is sparking hot debate between environmentalists. And it is an important discussion for our region, because of the hundreds of wells being dug in a formation of black rock called the Marcellus shale that lies under New York state, Pennsylvania, Western Maryland, and West Virginia.

Clashes over gas drilling in the Marcellus region were the focus of a fascinating report on National Public Radio yesterday. Listen to story by clicking here.  The report focused on a dispute within the Sierra Club over drilling. The national organization supports more gas extraction. But the Sierra Club’s New York chapter is trying to stop drilling in the Marcellus shale because of concerns about pollution -- a direct conflict with the national group’s policy.

The national Sierra Club is trying to stop mountaintop removing coal mining, and is gung ho about natural gas as a potential solution to climate change.  But the Sierra Club's New York chapter is worried that the state’s waterways and drinking wells will be poisoned by chemicals and water pumped underground by the drilling companies.

For the record, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) is not opposed to drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus shale region.  But CBF is pushing hard to make sure the drilling is performed responsibly, with careful scrutiny before permits are issued, and adequate precautions to prevent spills of chemicals and contaminants into nearby waterways. CBF also wants significant penalties for drilling companies that pollute, and a tax on natural gas extraction, to generate money that can be used to protect natural resources.

Where do you fall in this debate?

----------------------

(Photo by Tom Pelton of drill rig beside barn in Dimock, Pennsylvania.)

Comments

[Jim Estep]

It appears the Bay Foundation has a solid policy toward Marcellus drilling. I support it. This debate cannot exist in a vacuum. There are justifications for natural gas that go beyond environmental benefits. The potential economic and political benefits are huge. I am a follower of T. Boone Pickens and The Pickens Plan. Mr. Pickens posits that we convert heavy trucks and busses to natural gas (Natural Gas Vehicles, or NGVs). Currently we are sending $700 billion annually overseas, often to nations unfriendly to our interests. Keeping that money here not only significantly cuts our trade deficit, but also will create numerous ancillary jobs in drilling, pipeline construction and mainetenance, and so forth. Royalties will be paid to landowners. Those landowners include individuals, state and federal governments.

An average convenience store goes through a truckload of gasoline daily. We are hauling our fuel up and down the highways in trucks averaging probably 7 mpg, with, say, an average round trip of 100 miles. Imagine the environmental benefit achieved by removing those trucks from the highway once natural gas could be piped to these c-stores, or even to our homes where a special meter and fitting would be installed allowing us to fill our NGV at home. The gas company would submit the highway tax directly to the government.

Drilling must be closely monitored, but it must happen.

[Alan Gregory]

The average Bay watershed human has no idea. He or she flips on the light switch and has no earthly idea of where the actual juice is coming from. Then, once a week, he or she puts several black bags of garbage out at curbside and a truck magically comes by a bit later and picks it up. Like magic, the week's worth of garbage is gone and the citizen has no earthly idea of where it went. It's magic. Duh.