Should Maryland Impose a Moratorium on Drilling?

As companies line up the rights to drill for natural gas in more than 100,000 acres of Western Maryland, a state lawmaker is proposing a moratorium on drilling in the state. The wells would be drilled using a technology called hydraulic fracturing in a formation of black rock called the Marcellus shale that extends from New York through Pennsylvania and Western Maryland to West Virginia and other states.

Maryland State Del. Heather R. Mizeur, who represents Montgomery County in the state General Assembly, argues in an opinion article in the Baltimore Sun that Maryland needs to avoid the mistakes and spills suffered by Pennsylvania to the north. Her colleagues Sen. George Edwards and Del. Wendell Beitzel of Western Maryland made the opposite arguments later in The Sun.

Mizeur writes that caution is warranted: “To release the gas, the rock is injected with a highly pressurized mixture containing at least 2 million gallons of water, 200,000 pounds of sand and 80,000 pounds of chemicals. That would be like putting three Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of water, a sand volleyball court, and enough chemicals to outweigh five African elephants into the ground — for just one well.... While these dangerous chemicals stay underground and threaten our water supply, complications from fracking continue to rise to the surface.”

What do you think about the idea of a moratorium on gas drilling in Maryland? On one hand, some landowners could earn additional income from the Marcellus shale natural gas gold rush.  On the other, the history in Pennsylvania and other states shows that drilling often involves spills of pollutants and wastewater that can contaminate streams and drinking water.

More than 1,700 new gas wells were drilled in Pennsylvania during the first half of 2010, with many in the gas rich Marcellus shale formation that is the center of the drilling boom. Now the industry is moving closer to extracting gas from Maryland, as well.  In far Western Maryland’s Garrett County, local officials estimate that drilling companies have secured rights to drill on 124,000 acres — more than a quarter of the county's land mass — including on or next to publicly owned land in Savage River State Forest, according to The Baltimore Sun.

One company has already applied to the state for drilling permits, and a second firm plans to, soon.

State Sen. George C. Edwards, and del. Wendell Beitzel, both of Western Maryland,  made the argument in a Sun opinion piece that Mizeur was spreading fear unnecessarily.  They wrote: "Putting a moratorium on natural gas drilling for fear that some may eventually find its way into the Chesapeake Bay would be akin to eliminating Maryland's burgeoning bio-tech industry as a way to prevent bio-terrorism."

Do you think a total moratorium on gas drilling in Maryland is needed? Voice your opinions. 

By Tom Pelton

Chesapeake Bay Foundation

(Note: this article was updated on January 5, 2010, adding the Edwards/Beitzel opinion piece)

Comments

[Betsy Singer]

A moratorium on gas drilling in Maryland is needed to avoid the disastrous danger to the water supply and the environment posed by today's techniques of extraction. Until tight safeguards are in place, a moratorium should be in place.
We can do better for the future by pouring our attention and resources into renewable, clean energy from offshore wind, solar power and geothermal.

[Russell Reda]

I heard of to many cases from people in Pennsylvania being able to put a match to their drinking water all due to the process of hydraulic fracturing. What is needed to put an end to this? Do we have to wait until it runs from the faucets of the White House?
Nature will recover, but only after it rids itself of it's violators! When Greed Rules, we all lose!

[Tim R]

Smart move to stop FRACKING EARLY and NOW.
http://gaslandthemovie.com/whats-fracking

[Facebook comments]

As of 10 a.m. on December 21, 34 people had commented on this blog subject on CBF's facebook page. I asked our friends: Do you favor a moratorium on natural gas drilling in Maryland? Here are some of the responses:

* John W. Gontrum: BAN Gas Drilling. As Well as allowing A massive monstrosity of a site to offload natural gas on the Patapsco river and then push it through a 95 mile long pipeline from Sparrows Point to some place in Pa. Not a good idea.

* John W. Gontrum ‎@ Mark C. Metler Sr So, what would that make you? Everything you posted in your second blurb was basically an attack on anyone who doesnt think the way you do.

* Lora Penola: Ban all hydraulic fracturing. It is bad news.

* Mark C. Metler Sr.: Ok so we just keep buying from the middle east good solution. Kinda like the trash/power issues in Delaware. Everyone wants a solution but nobody wants to do anything.

* Mark C. Metler Sr: Natural Gas is cleaner than coal and oil. Offer a solution then? Criticism without solutions is just wasting time or showing there is an alternate agenda a foot.

* Barbara Tipton: what about trying a new source of energy, surely to god with technology you think theres another cleaner safer way then to use energy that destroys our environment and our health

* Mark Tolbert: Fact is, this will not have any affect on our dependence on the Middle East for oil. I am sure that everyone wants to do something, but any solution must be good for the planet. Once the fracturing procedure has occured there is no way to control where the gas and fracturing fluids go. You should research this practice, it is not good for anyone!

* Tim Reyburn: There are alternatives to energy.
There is NO alternative to CLEAN WATER.
The extraction industry has a proven record of disregard to the environment. Been there, done that with BP in the Gulf,
Exxon Valdeze and 3 Mile island.
Until they clean up their acts, I'll take clean water the way nature meant it to be.

* Amy Vinroot Wilson: What exactly makes 3 Mile Island part of "the extraction industry"?

Fraccing won't do anything for our oil issues (let's talk about tar sands...), but it can help us shut down our coal-fired power plants. Those pollute our water and air, to...o. None of these choices is perfect. Folks are opposed to nuclear power plants because of safety fears and waste disposal, and solar/wind/hydroelectric power pose their challenges as well (high costs, environmental impacts of manufacturing solar panels, effects of wind farms on migratory birds, effects of hydroelectric plants and dams on aquatic species). But we use more and more energy. I don't know what the answer is.

* Tim Reyburn: Sloppy energy generation is the point. Frakers won't disclose the volatile chemicals they use.
Fracking can be done with water only, if they wish, but don't.
Even with that, you still get lateral gas movement.
Natural gas comes from other sources. Biofuel is very doable.
Legacy market share for extraction industry dying its slow death is the problem. Large scale production of biofuels can work.
Brazil went to an all ethanol energy economy in 2 years.

* Catherine Pomidor Aingworth: i wish people that say "no" would think about where their energy comes from now. Just stop and think. A large portion of energy comes from outside our country. Other countries and their people are exploited for the energy that we suck from them. Dont you feel the least bit guilty? At least if energy is supplied from within our borders, we can compel companies to abide by rules and regs and fine them if they dont. What about the exploited people in other countries? I say drill here, have rotating inspectors to prevent corruption, and have incentives and fines at the ready.

* Tim Reyburn: Watch Gaslands.
http://gaslandthemovie.com/whats-fracking

* Stan Kotala: Catherin Pomidor;
Natural gas is used mainly to produce electricity. The US is not dependent on any foreign nation for electricity or the means to produce it. In the US, 60% of our electricity is from coal, 20% from nuclear, and the remain...der from miscellaneous sources, such as natural gas, hydro, wind, solar, etc.

* Amy Vinroot Wilson: Ethanol means turning over even more land to mono-cropping of corn, which is a bad idea. We can burn garbage and bio-waste for electric generation, if we are willing to invest in the infrastructure, but this has been pretty limited in the ...U.S. so far. I'd be for it, though.

Realistically, at the moment, natural gas is a growing electric fuel. Coal is what we are trying to replace. I'd prefer nuclear power, myself, but most Americans are too fearful of it.

And why are we investing such a miserable pittance in the world's efforts to develop a viable fusion technology?

If you are against hydraulic fracturing when it's done responsibly (which it can be, and the industry is becoming more and more responsive to the public's disclosure demands), then, at the moment, you are probably opting in favor of coal. Have you looked at the mountaintop removal mining processes? How about the Kingston, TN coal ash spill?

* Stan Kotala: Regarding nuclear energy and hydrofracking for Marcellus shale gas, this is one of the best commentaries I have read:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10003/1025024-109.stm

* Mark Tolbert: Would you have the same opinion if the hydraulic fracturing was being done in your back yard? I am within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant
( Peach Bottom) and would much rather have this near me than a site performing the hydraulic fractur...ing. The fishery below this plant is thriving and you cannot light the water with a match.
I understand that we need alternative energy sources but we cannot let greed overcome common sense. This is large corporations that stand to make alot of money. It is way past time for everyone to be more responsible and take care of this planet.
Coal may not be the answer either but the coal mining will still continue even if the fracturing is done so that is not a legitimate argument in my mind. We have a chance to stop this now in Marland and hope that other States do the same.

* Shelva Angle: As long as fossil fuels are readily available, footdragging will continue as far as the production of solar, wind, and bio fuels which will actually create new jobs. I agree with Mark. Who of the above nay sayers would actually approve of having a gas well within five miles of their houses or schools. This lawmaker should be encouraged to contine her effort.

[stepper]

I'm really glad that you've created your own website and have in fact posted your thoughts. I love your work and feel I can refer to what you've done. Lots of people can't even imagine having such talent. I hope that you know how lucky you are. :) Good luck to you in ALL your endeavors. :)