Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Conflicted New York AG Attempts to Tree Constitution Pipeline

Marcellus Pipelines - Jim Willis reportsJim Willis
Editor & Publisher, Marcellus Drilling News (MDN)

…. 

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed an objection to Williams starting tree clearing along the Constitution Pipeline route; just more stall tactics by the anti’s.

This one was easy to predict. Last week we told you that Williams had asked, and received permission from the New York Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC), to begin clearing trees along the path of the Constitution Pipeline in upstate New York. Anti-fossil fuelers went squealing like petulant three year-olds to their favorite “parent,” Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, asking daddy to stop Williams from killing trees. And, so last Thursday Schneiderman filed an objection to the tree-clearing plan with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), to placate the petulant three year-olds that are his favorite constituents.

The question now is, will FERC put a halt to the tree clearing, which must happen before April 1st when it becomes bat season and companies can no longer clear trees for fear of roosting Northern long-eared bats.

constitution pipeline

NY AG Eric Schneiderman

New York’s attorney general filed objections Thursday to the Constitution Pipeline Company’s request to cut trees along the proposed route of its 124-mile natural gas pipeline, citing the lack of a state water quality permit and pending requests for a rehearing of the federal agency order that cleared the way for the project.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the pipeline in 2014 with certain conditions, including a water quality permit from the New York state Department of Environmental Conservation. No timetable has been given for a decision on a water permit.

In objecting to the company’s request, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman asked FERC to deny permission to start any work until a state water quality permit is issued and the commission decides on numerous motions on rehearing its 2014 decision. Several of those requests argue that FERC failed to conduct an adequate environmental review. Schneiderman also said the planned clearing of trees could cause irreparable harm to thousands of acres in New York.

Constitution Pipeline Company, a partnership formed by Cabot Oil & Gas, Williams Partners and Piedmont Natural Gas Company, asked FERC last week for permission to cut trees along the pipeline right-of-way from Pennsylvania’s shale gas fields to upstate New York.

It said that for the company to meet a commitment to complete the pipeline by the end of this year, tree-cutting has to be finished by March 31 to avoid harm to birds and bats during the spring and summer breeding season. Regulators set the condition that the company can only clear forest land between November and the end of March.

constitution pipeline

The company said earth-moving and pipeline construction wouldn’t start until all permits are in place, and asked FERC to make a decision on its tree-cutting request by Friday.

Pipeline spokesman Christopher Stockton said Thursday that if the tree-cutting request is denied, the project won’t be able to meet its goal of going online during the fourth quarter of 2016.

The company says the pipeline will deliver enough low-cost shale gas to serve about 3 million homes in high-demand areas of New York and New England.

MDN Note: The Joint Landowners Coalition of New York (JLCNY) is hosting a “New York Can’t Wait for the Constitution Pipeline” event in Afton, NY on Saturday, Jan. 23. Details here

Editor’s Note: I love how Jim so adroitly lays out the bare-bones truth of what’s happening here, comparing AG Schneiderman to the parent of a spoiled child – an enabler of “affluenza,” if you will. He’s absolutely correct. We’ve previously profiled Schneiderman’s NRDC connections here and the guy might as well be wearing an NRDC gold embroidered shirt to work each day and he has a strange connection to the phony Damascus Citizens for Sustainability outfit from Manhattan, too. He should, if he isn’t already already, be under Preet Bharara’s  gaze. He is the third AG in a row from New York with that same nasty demagogic mindset for which the state’s voters seem to be suckers. It’s been showtime every second of the day as these guys have used and abused the top legal position in the Empire State as a perch from which to ascend to the Emperor position. 

You can find the affluenza enabler’s filing with FERC here and, to make it easier to spot the chicanery, I have highlighted the important parts in yellow. You’ll notice at the outset the laughable contention that Schneiderman “takes no position on the merits of the proposed pipeline,” even though he later acknowledges previously intervening in an attempt to derail the project with more studies and his timing this time was in direct answer to the requests of pipeline opponents. Such is the duplicitous world of New York politics and law, apparently. 

It gets worse when you get into the arguments though. He says “Cutting down trees in the Pipeline corridor constitutes construction.” Really? Well, maybe some of those landowners who happen to favor the pipeline they’re getting paid to accommodate should go out and cut the trees themselves. They’re perfectly entitled to do so and no one would call it construction under those circumstances, which is really the test of Schneiderman’s legal argument and it doesn’t stand.

Then, there is this (emphasis added):

Second, numerous intervenors in the Commission’s on-going licensing proceeding have filed requests for rehearing of the Certificate Order pursuant to the Commission’s rules for licensing proceedings under the federal Natural Gas Act. Under that statute, until the Commissioners complete their review of the Certificate Order on rehearing, that order is neither final nor subject to judicial review, and thus does not constitute the agency’s record of decision.

Putting it in lay terms; “as long as we and our radical enviro friends keep objecting you can’t act.” This is what substitutes for common sense in the legal world of demagogues and affluenza enablers such as Schneiderman.

Next, the guy has the nerve to say this:

Constitution has applied for but not yet obtained a Section 401 certification from the NYSDEC. NYSDEC issued a notice of complete application on April 29, 2015.

There is no mention, of course, of this being the second application for 401 certification, after way more than the permissible one year of deliberation on the part of the State on the identical first application, or the fact the second was filed as a courtesy to give the State more time to act. This is outrageous in every respect – a total abuse of authority statewide, as we have noted here and here, and one that should not be tolerated. Now, the AG wants to pile on and make it worse. No wonder New York is slowly being emptied (which, of course, is exactly what Schneiderman and his NRDC gang friends want).

The AG also reveals, on page 8 of his filing, that we’re talking about “487 acres that will be permanently converted to non-forest,” which, put in perspective, is next to nothing. The DEC chart tells the story: New York State added an average of 275 acres of forestland per day between 1875 and 2000 and the growth continues, especially upstate, but Schneiderman, playing to the pipeline wacko crowd, says converting 487 acres would “potentially cause adverse environmental impacts and irreparable environmental harm” and complains FERC did not assess the environmental impacts of cutting the trees.”

Constitution Pipeline

It makes you want to throw up, doesn’t it? Schneiderman lays it on even thicker later when he argues “the FEIS assumed that felled trees would be promptly removed from the Pipeline corridor and thus does not examine the environmental impacts of leaving them in place for an indeterminate period of time until construction resumes.” He claims this is a potential fire hazard and even attached an Extension Service piece about keeping the forest clean of debris. It’s child’s play at best – legal obstruction and blackmail, really.

It’s all so utterly fake. It’s also more than disgusting to think the Attorney General of a state with massive corruption and crime issues is wasting time participating in this sham attempt at delaying a much needed project with such nonsense. It perfectly explains why both money and people are leaving New York as fast as they can run but, in the meantime, this sorry lot does need gas and so the rest of us labor under the burden of dealing with their theatrics to provide it. 

For more great articles on the subject of natural gas development every single day, subscribe to Marcellus Drilling News using this convenient link.

Print Friendly
Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Digg thisFlattr the authorShare on RedditShare on YummlyShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on TumblrBuffer this pagePin on Pinterest

51 thoughts on “Conflicted New York AG Attempts to Tree Constitution Pipeline

  1. Seems to me, all shenanigans and legal mumbojumbo aside, the real issue is the DEC permit which is outstanding. Why is it outstanding? Its not like the DEC, which first of all has been aware of the application as it participated in the ferc docket, of all agencies might not be aware of construction limitations to protect bats.

    What if anything is the DEC deliberating about the permit? Why hasn’t a reporter asked this question and be able to get an answer from the DEC on it?

  2. The sham is the use of eminent domain to line the coffers of private fossil fuel concerns. It doesn’t pass the straight face test, guys, this is for commerce not public good. Get off my farm, and don’t poison the state’s aquifers for money. Ask those folks in Flint how their water stewardship has been going under republican control. Oh, but nice, nuanced, even-handed journalism you’re practicing here—I haven’t seen the like since I edited my elementary school newspaper and sifted through the hyperbole of 5th graders. Try critical thinking, it helps a lot in this 21st Century of ours.

      • Are you suggesting the buck stops with someone other than Rick Snyder who appointed the incompetent and greedy city managers and whose response time was criminally negligent? If you don’t think it’s his head that will roll on this one, I think you’re reading the tea leaves wrong.

        • The-American-Interest is a neocon journal—not representative of objective assessments of cause and effect in the Flint debacle. It presents a false choice; brain damaged children or relief from governmental pension obligations. Yeah, it’s the Unions’ fault, they shouldn’t have forced the state’s fiscal hand into poisoning the population of Flint. Card-carrying adults oughtn’t to think this crudely.

          • I think you have exposed yourself politically rather well. If you want to talk about gas and pipelines feel free. Otherwise don’t expect us to publish your rants.

      • Is a natural gas pipeline invulnerable to ruptures and leaks? Does natural gas carry with it methane and benzene and radon that comes out of the ground with the gas? Is Delaware County the home of the Ashokan, Pepacton and Cannonsville reservoirs, to name but a few of the sources of NYC’s unfiltered tap water? Does California have a methane emitting gas flare that has just been declared a Federal Disaster? Do we have this technology failsafe now, is that your belief? The record argues vehemently otherwise.

        • Where do you get your information from ?? You appear to be very uneducated on natural gas. Natural gas is a gas. When it leaks it goes up into the atmosphere not down into the aquifer. Radon gas, in natural gas, is an issue that has been studied and found not to be an issue. Benzene is not found in natural gas but can be found in gasoline.

          First you say it will contaminate an aquifer then you babble on about cities getting it’s water from a reservoirs which is above ground. The aquifers are water found in the ground not above it.

          And no California does not have a methane emitting flare. They have a methane emitting leak. A flare is a technique that involves burning the natural gas instead of just releasing it. California is not burning the it.

      • Pipelines transfer NG which is obtained by HVHF a industrial process allowed next to our homes and always having industrial related issues ( that is unless you’re ignore it or are just apathetic .So there is an indirect connection besides other issues .

    • Yes it does, it goes right to the heart of the matter—profits overriding concern for the well-being of citizens. The decision to source Flint’s water from the Flint River was a cost-cutting measure. Penny-wise and ultimately Millions-foolish. This is not to mention the lives of the children who have been ingesting stratospheric levels of lead and other toxic chemicals for over a year. Those brains won’t come back with a little detox and light chelation—that damage is for life. Who’s footing that bill now?

      • The water issue in Flint has to do with the cities old lead pipes. Yes they got their water from a different source because it is cheaper but if they had an updated water infrastucture, meaning pipes, this would not be an issue. Your comparing apples to oranges by saying it has anything to do with the oil and natural gas industries.

        • Up or down it still is vented into the air and is many times more a GHG …….also this is only one part of the production cycle ….

          • that’s right but has plenty to do with NG development and a unSafe ,unhealthy process that will always have issues ( that is except for those that get the big bucks )

  3. The gas from PA is still in search of a lucrative market and needs therefore to get to port. This is farmers and landowners being forced to cede control of their property.
    It’s for profit, not the purported public good.

    To Wit:

    “On November 20, just two days after Massachusetts Attorney General, Maura Healey, sent the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) a report concluding that there is no need for a natural gas pipeline in New England for at least the next 15 years, Kinder-Morgan subsidiary, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, filed its application with FERC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to construct the 400-mile Northeast Energy Direct (NED) pipeline.

    The AG’s report squarely refutes the need for natural gas infrastructure. Titled “Power System Reliability in New England -– Meeting Electric Resource Needs in an Era of Growing Dependence on Natural Gas,” the report was developed by the Analysis Group, Inc. to determine whether the region is facing energy challenges through 2030, and, if so, the most cost-effective and clean ways to meet them.

    In a November 18 press release, AG Healey said, “As we make long-term decisions about our energy future, it’s imperative we have the facts. This study demonstrates that we do not need increased gas capacity to meet electric reliability needs, and that electric ratepayers shouldn’t foot the bill for additional pipelines.”

    “The study demonstrates that a much more cost-effective solution is to embrace energy efficiency and demand response programs that protect ratepayers and significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” the AG said.

      • Except for the plurality that voted her into office and obviously feel she represents their interests, you must mean. New Hampshire has registered its opposition to the cracked gas and the pipeline, too. Rants lack any substance, I’ve made my emotions on the subject clear, yes, but I’ve also cited instances, voiced specific concerns, answered questions put to me as best I can. I’m not seeing a lot of substance in the replies to my assertions, though. Maura Healey comes from a military background, attended public schools, was a star basketball player, worked at one of Boston’s oldest established white shoe law firms before running an organization of 250 lawyers—all in preparation for winning a landslide victory in her run for Massachusetts AG. Not many demagogues come from such backgrounds. Being progressive doesn’t make you a demagogue, no more than being a conservative does. Argue the merits—show where New England is asking for the gas. In terms of interest vs. pipeline capacity, Kinder Morgan is struggling to crest the 40% plateau. Can you demonstrate the legality of using eminent domain for corporate financial gain? Can you demonstrate why pumping gas across watershed is a safe thing to do? My strident tone aside, I’m legitimately interested to hear the counter-arguments. So far, I’ve yet to read one.

        • Your arguments are gibberish. The project the article is about is the constituion pipeline not NED and it has been deemed in the public convenience and necessity by the agency charged with making this determination, FERC.

          • Can you show me a single pipeline project that FERC hasn’t rubber-stamped? That’s what they do, it means nothing in the larger scheme. DEC will have the final say and all will have to live by it. I’ve gone out on a limb and assumed that all natural gas lines and compressors in Delaware/Schoharie Counties and environs were being championed here. If you want to split those hairs, I find that to be disingenuous. Put a little more work into it next time—”Gibberish” is weak.

          • Pipelines mean more Fracing an industrial process that will never be Safe and will always have industrial issues next to our homes …..the whole plan from the beginning was to produce and sell this commodity to the highest markets ( even though it was hailed as “Making America energy independent ” which was BS just to get the leases ( so money could be made on both assignments and NG drilling ) …got plenty of experience on this so don’t tell me No !!

    • AG Healey is a liar. If what he said is true, why did Berkskire Gas issue a moratorium on new connections, citing inadequate capacity to meet demand? That’s a fact. Why is Boston importing natural gas from Trinidad instead of using cheaper domestic gas?
      Who’s pocket is Healey in? If you want to cite greed and corruption, it flows both ways.

      • Healey is a woman and a very smart one from her resume. I know anti-intellectualism is all the rage in this country these days, but look at her bona fides and then compare them to your own before you call her a liar, demagogue, idiot as has been done here. Healey has made the determination to move Massachusetts energy infrastructure forward—towards renewables—not backward. She also may know that Marcellus Gas is a losing proposition in many ways. Investors are very bearish; it’s not commanding a profitable price, there’s a mountain of debt associated with the extraction, the equipment and the infrastructure, and what’s more, these wells don’t keep producing the way an oil well does. They have a smaller window to become profitable and to this point, they are anything but.

        • Ok, so I mistyped ‘he’ instead of ‘she’, but the fact remains that despite whatever her intellectual capabilities, she is patently dishonest with the need for the NED pipeline as the Berkshire Gas moratorium shows. In any normal market-driven situation market forces should determine energy source and use, not some dictatorial fiat. Is her intent to use eminent domain to seize property for wind farms, solar farms, powerlines? How will the average resident feel when told they must convert from oi or natural gas to electric heat, heat pumps (not terribly effective in below freezing climates), or some other form of heat?

  4. At twenty bucks a foot I wonder how many of those local pipeline suporters you will get in Afton? Maybe your Wall street investers auta send a few buses full of supporters up? Considering how much they stand to profit it seems like a good move.Maybe the Ohio and Texas producers will show up? They need a market too! Too much gas,too little market!
    ALL NY OR NONE

  5. i call on Cuomo and Schneiderman (spastic pandering NRDC-owned tools that they are) to ban ALL fossil fuel use in NY- today. that’s essentially what they are preaching…

    i suspect even condescending insulting obfuscating hypocrites like Cato Ward above might have a problem with that.

    hard energy realities, existing law, and the US Constitution have precious little weight in NY, and landowners with destroyed minerals value here are pretty sick of it.

  6. Mr. Ward is jibberjabbering about lots of things unrelated to the actual topic (flint water issues plus attorney general healeys report generated recently relating to a different project whether one agrees with what’s in the report or not) at hand plus is throwing out an amalgamation of gibberish (which is a call ill stand by) and talking points.

    In answer to the fact that the Constitution pipe has been found to be in the PUBLIC need and convenience by FERC, not to line the coffers of fossil fuel companies as he asserted after him initially saying the “sham” was about eminent domain, his response was that I find a single project FERC has not approved with their rubber stamp as that’s what they do AND that the DEC will have the final say which all will have to live with. Plus there was gibberish about how there is some larger undefined scheme which nullifies the certificate order?

    Try me again with a little more “work” or rather give me a sign the gentleman can say something both logical and specific to constitution pipe. Otherwise I’m hearing gibberish and a bunch of known talking points rolled together.

    • In answer to the ‘rubberstamp’ argument against FERC, I’d note that there is not a single fossil fuel project (import/export facility, pipeline, power plant, etc.) that the environmental groups do not rubberstamp as being bad. They conveniently ignore the fact that eminent domain is only invoked if the landowner does not sign a lease, and even under eminent domain they receive more compensation that we landowners in NY received for the state’s confiscation of our mineral rights. They also ignore that eminent domain can and will be invoked against landowners who do not wish to have powerlines on their property that would be required to carry all that renewable-generated electricity. They constantly point out how few permanent jobs are created by a pipeline, but never admit that there will not be a tremendous number of permanent jobs in the renewable sector either. (See EID’s expose’ of Jacobson’s employment figures). And consider – most of the temporary jobs associated with pipeline construction are skilled workers (usually union) certified in welding, etc. Most of the solar jobs I’ve witnessed thusfar are at best semiskilled people putting panels up on houses, with a few licensed electricians to connect to the grid.

  7. I bet if they cut your gas off you would let the pipeline go through without pipeliners you wouldn’t have gas in your house they’re not hurting nothing you’re not hurt your precious little bat that carry rabies by the way and they always put it all back like it was so you want to sit there and put thousands and thousands of people out of work you sit there and talk about they’re cutting the trees down put it in the contract to plant the trees back it can be done it was done in Georgia you don’t hear about these thousands and thousands and thousands of trees being cut down for your paper that’s in your homes are in your office and you don’t hear about the thousands of trees being cut down to build new homes

  8. You Cato Ward the problems with Flints water supply have everything to do with Greed and Big Business I will agree . The Big Business however are the mobster public unions who have ruled places like Flint into the ground. There has been a run tally of about 40 years of democratic rule in Michigan . Private Capital got royally screwed in that an other Blue States and now they pay the price. You ever notice the people of Michigan hardly protest fracking or pipelines like the pocket of malcontents in New York State. Reason for the even tinier protest groups is very simple they saw the golden goose killed with the Auto industry and now have huge public servant pension liabilities to fund. In the case of Flint it becomes very clear when the population has dropped by 50 percent in the last couple of decades. What really half sucks is being poor in a blue city that was basically embezzled but Mobster Unions what really sucks is apologists like yourself trying to hide from the very apparent facts.

  9. There are dozens of errors and misrepresentations in this article. But let’s just take one:

    Jim Willis writes: “Last week we told you that Williams had asked, and received permission from the New York Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC), to begin clearing trees along the path of the Constitution Pipeline in upstate New York”

    FACT CHECK! Can you please give us a link to the FERC docket where the DEC granted the right to clear trees?

    Here’s a link you can use to help you with the search:

    http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/eSave.asp?cnt=200&fd=1/28/2010&td=3/7/2030&cat=submittal,issuance&dkt=CP13-499&ft=fulltext&dsc=description

    The last time the DEC made a comment on the record was in May 2014, *nearly two years ago*, and it did not address trees. In fact, the DEC was asking FERC to address methane emissions in the DEIS (which FERC ignored):

    http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20140514-5087

    To save you a little time, you will not ever find such a thing. The DEC does not approve tree clearing. The only thing the DEC does for pipelines is to approve/deny the Title-V permits for compressor stations, and the sec. 401 permit under the Clean Water Act, WHICH THEY HAVE NOT DONE. Cutting trees and clearing trees can have drastic effects upon water quality by causing erosion and increasing sedimentation in local streams and rivers.

    Thanks

  10. Petulant three year old NIMBY here….
    1. Can’t win an argument on an industry site, so I won’t even try.
    2. If we were able to get gas or share in the profits to be made from this pipeline we might be a bit more receptive. ( How many New York families or towns along the route will be getting gas from this pipeline?)
    3. If we weren’t being left with a worthless, unbuildable, unsellable piece of property that we’ll continue to pay taxes for the rest of our lives, we might be more receptive.

    I also see a lot of “Trump like” name calling in this article. Come on…. at least sound like professionals….

    • Why do you say “If we weren’t being left with a worthless, unbuildable, unsellable piece of property”? There’s no evidence of this whatsoever.

      • come on Tom everyone knows “eminent domain ” can take land that some people wish not to be developed due to quality of life or their operations …also pipelines can limit a sellers market due to the pipeline .Remember smart people don’t wish to live near pipelines or NG facilities ( only the misinformed or the ignorant don’t mind .

  11. What impact did 2008 have that is secondary to pension obligations? I really enjoy the way Wall St.’s impact on the country’s finances is overlooked in favor of blaming public employee pensions. Talk about gibberish, are you aware that their annual compensation was kept low in exchange for pension promises? Unions are the problem not the continuous hemorrhaging of manufacturing jobs overseas? What is it you all love so much about corporate interests that you are willing to give them a free pass? Go look at Dimock, PA’s water supply and then reassert why this is a reasonable risk to take for you, your neighbors, and all the downstaters who get their drinking water from the area. Then check out the Chesapeake Energy document that describes their intentions for overseas marketing of fracked gas and ask yourselves if you stand to gain in any way commensurate with what you risk losing. Karen, the next time you characterize my comments accurately will be the first. Where’s the FERC denial of a pipeline I asked you to find? What do you dispute about the DEC’s sovereignty in this question? If they don’t sign off on the water piece of it, everybody can pack up their bags and go home—that’s the law. Clear enough for you now, or will you distort and mischaracterize in playground fashion as you have thus far? Makes sense, when you don’t have the law, facts or common sense on your side, you trade in tactics like that. The water belongs to everyone. I greatly look forward to Tomasik and DEC’s project ending decision.

    • I am thoroughly familiar with Dimock and its water supplies. You obviously aren’t or you’d know the EPA found that water was safe and realize none of those court cases panned out either.

      • Water’s potable, you say? Well, first of all, did you look at it before you said that? Have you seen the photos? Why is it you only trust environmental regulators when they say something convenient to your point of view? Here ya go:

        “Concerned about the state’s spotty enforcement, on behalf of the Dimock residents, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) asked the EPA to step in and launch its own investigation of the water quality. But when the EPA released the results of its investigation, effectively declaring Dimock’s water safe, it failed to share two important pieces of information.

        First, it did not share that Cabot had contaminated the water with dangerously high levels of methane.

        Second, it limited the scope of its discussion to whether certain federal standards for specific contaminants—not including methane—were exceeded.

        That was ostensibly because the investigation was pursuant to the EPA’s specific and limited powers under the federal “Superfund” law and Safe Drinking Water Act only. These laws do not specify standards for all contaminants that may present a risk to human health and/or the potability of a water supply, including methane, certain other organic compounds and new/uncommon chemicals such as those that may be used in drilling and fracking operations.

        Critically, though, some of the EPA’s initial memos did reference, and express concern about the potential health impacts of, other such contaminants that were found in the families’ water—including glycol compounds, Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthlate (DEHP) and 2-methoxyethanol.

        But evidently a decision was made not to discuss or further pursue them in the final analysis. Indeed, the agency did not report that multiple other contaminants were, in fact, detected, at levels below those specified under those laws. And none of these contaminants, including methane, were mentioned in the EPA’s final determination. Nor did the EPA mention that the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry was—and is still—continuing an investigation into the potential short- and long-term health risks of using Dimock water with these chemicals present.

        Yet, the leaked report made public yesterday suggests that the EPA basically declared that Dimock residents’ water was okay to drink, despite the fact that some of its own staff believed that it showed serious contamination, possibly from fracking, that was likely to persist for a long time. It suggests that the EPA’s own consultants, and perhaps field staff, believed not only that the Dimock aquifer had been contaminated by high levels of methane from the Marcellus Shale, but that this contamination resulted in “significant damage to the water quality.””

        If you want to read more about the cherry-picked data, here’s the link to the full article. I’m sure you’ll dismiss it as NRDC radical whiners as you so eloquently have elsewhere but maybe it’ll give you pause someday, in a moment you’ll fail to mention to anyone else….

        “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary (identity) depends on him not understanding it.”

        • You’re going to lecture me with NRDC crap about methane that’s existed in Dimock water for hundreds of years before there was drilling (e.g. at Sat Springs State Park where Native Americans are known to have lighted the water on fire? What a joke. Your condescending attitude, so typical of those on your side, betrays you. You also challenge me for only believing the EPA when they say something I like, while accepting the word of a bunch of elitists at the NRDC, a creation of the Rockefeller family trying to make a private wilderness out of the Catskills and Delaware region, as if it were gospel? And, you don’t realize that methane isn’t even a primary drinking water standard or that it’s migration has nothing to do with the hydraulic fracturing process? We know what you’re about, Cato, don’t we? By the way, is that your real name or are you hiding behind a fake one?

      • Tommy …..you’re statement is at the least deceiving ..anyone that knows the situation in Dimock knows water was contaminated and the EPA and all covered up on it .There will always be issues when drilling occurs due to the process and how it disturbs the subsurface .The sad part is when ( or if it happens ) it is very ,very difficult and timely to prove a connection All from actual experiences .

          • the resent EPA summary admits there was specific water issues found in their research.I can post the Summary and draw your attention to the CONCLUSION which seems many of you gassers read only what you want to hear…Also standards in Dimock were increased from what I remember ..Since my first experience with NG drilling I have seen plenty of twisting and ignoring of information by state and even the EPA

      • You sound just like a grade school playground bully—shouting from behind the big guys. Be proud of where you’ve brought yourself in this life, bug guy.

        • I think we know who the bully is. It’s the guy attacking from behind a fake name, or is your first name really Cato? Funny thing…your IP address takes me to Grand Avenue in Brooklyn, where International Wow is located. Is that you, Josh? Or, is a just a coincidence?

  12. It’s funny how sanctimonious these antis are when they castigate the EPA for supposedly burying the ‘truth’ in Dimock, but at the same time whine and mewl, wanting them to re-open their four year study of fracking, probably because they didn’t get the answer they wanted. They are quick to accuse big oil and gas of buying government agencies, but they are hide behind the skirts of the well-funded anti organizations, who derive funding from the various foundations and wealthy individuals. Keep it up, Tom!

  13. Pingback: Constitution Pipeline Cleared to Cut Trees!

  14. Pingback: Elitist Energy Politics Disease Threatening the Northeast

  15. Pingback: Across the Pond, It's the Same Fracking Games

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


 Powered by Max Banner Ads