-
Answers for your Fracking Questions
Why is it so difficult for me to dispose of batteries and electronic items, but the oil and gas industry can pay a tipping fee (part of which the DEP gets) and then dump radioactive fracking waste in landfills not built to properly treat them? What’s the difference between horizontal drilling and fracking, or between surface agreements and subsurface agreements? What are all the substances linked to fracking and the dumping of fracking waste, such as Uranium 238, Thorium 234, Radium 226 and so many others. Why are there so many complaints about black water, red water and orange water, filed with the DEP from people whose land is being fracked? If I am led to believe that the royalties from fracking pads on my property are going to make and my family fabulously rich for decades, is that really going to happen? The new book, Environmental Impacts from the Development of Unconventional Oil and Gas Reserves, not only helps answer these questions and more, but lay out an array of chapters dealing with everything from the basics to the nitty-gritty scientific details of what a lot of people just call Fracking, but which includes a number of related practices in the Oil and Gas Industry, both in America and abroad. Published by Cambridge University Press, it is co-authored/edited by three local scientists: John Stolz (Duquesne University), Daniel Bain (University of Pittsburgh) and Michael Griffin (Carnegie Mellon University). I spoke with Dr. Stolz recently, after meeting him a few years ago, before the pandemic, when our local environmental group, the Citizens’ Environmental Association of the Slippery Rock Area (CEASRA) held an information meeting in Grove City that Dr. Stolz led. He puts a lot of time into helping people, like us, who are threatened by the practices of the Oil and Gas industry, and now his book can help him spread the expertise he and others have, so people (and conscientious lawyers) can start waking up to the dangers that threaten them, and to how to combat those dangers with the facts of scientific testing and the resolve of those who have put so much of their lives into this calling.
Dr. John Stolz, Director of the Center for Environmental Research and Education and Professor of Environmental Microbiology at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh is doing what all scientists should be doing: sharing what his research has taught him with people whose health and well being are affected by what he has been studying. If you live and/or work in Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania (among other places), that means you. While Dr. Stolz has taught and conducted research in many areas, our primary focus in this interview is his work in the study of the environmental effects of oil and gas activities, such as fracking.
Jim: What was the genesis of, the motivating factor for, writing this book for you?
Stolz: I have been working on issues related to the environmental consequences of fracking for over a decade. It started back in 2009 when I attended a PA DEP meeting in Cranberry and met Ron Gulla. The hearing was about updating regulations on the amount of total dissolved solids (TDS) a public wastewater facility could discharge. Ron was there to talk about what had happened on his farm, where the second Marcellus Shale well had been drilled. He invited me to visit his farm and I did so in January of 2010. About the same time, I had begun a collaboration with Dr. Dan Volz, from the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities in the Graduate School of Public Health at the University of Pittsburgh. A combination of things led me to change the major focus of my research to water quality and resources. But the real impetus for the book was the two day conference I organized in November of 2013. Called “Facing the Challenges: Research on Shale Gas Extraction,” the symposium brought together experts in the field working on the environmental impacts such as air quality and water, but also a photojournalist (there was a gallery set up of the photos), a video photographer (with videos), and people living in the shale fields, for a multimedia event. Several of the research papers presented were published in a special issue of Environmental Science and Health in 2015, but it wasn’t as comprehensive as I would have liked. After a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Society in 2017, I was approached by an editor from Cambridge University Press, who suggested that I write a book. So, I contacted people, many of whom had been involved in the 2013 symposium and began to assemble potential chapters. The book went through several iterations. Cambridge University Press would market the book internationally and wanted global coverage, not just what was happening in America. So, we reached out to people in other places and were able to recruit contributions from Canada (seismic activity from fracking waste injection wells), Australia (fracking coal bed methane deposits), and the United Kingdom (microbiology of shale). There were chapters on the global distribution of shale deposits and on governance. It turns out that the political dimensions of unconventional oil and gas extraction differ around the world. For instance, whereas the more progressive politicians in the US tend to support environmental issues and act against industries damaging the environment, conservatives tend to support unconventional oil and gas extraction. Paradoxically, in Australia it is the Conservative party that advocates conservation, while the Labor party supports increased extraction of these reserves. But even though the political and geographic landscapes differ, and oil and gas reserves may be different, the techniques and infrastructure required are similar. Five years later; we have a book!
Jim: From the chapter descriptions, it looks like you have a variety of audiences in mind. Is the book meant to be read in sections by each audience? or do you see it as helping people not trained as scientists understand the more scientific sections, and helping scientists understand the applications of their work outside of academia?
It’s all of that. The book has three sections. In the first, we go over nomenclature so readers begin to have a better grasp of the terms and concepts used in the discussions to follow. What is a proven reserve? What’s the difference between a barrel and a gallon? What is the difference between horizontal drilling and fracking? How has the well stimulation and directional drilling technology changed over the years? What are “smart” drills? How is AI (artificial intelligence) involved? And how much guesswork is still part of the extraction efforts? (a lot, it turns out)
In the second section, we cover the specifics of air quality, methane and climate change, water usage, radioactivity, isotopes (both methane and metals), and the microbiology. This section is more technical, but the reader has been prepared in the previous section of the book.
In the third and final section, we look at case studies of what we’ve found in research related to unconventional oil and gas extraction. This research had to be boiled down; there could have been six extra chapters, but our publisher wanted us to stop at 400 pages total for the whole book. The book includes aerial photographs and color graphics. There is a hardback and an Ebook which can be ordered directly through Cambridge University Press (www.cambridge.org/9781108489195) or from your regular bookstores (Thriftbooks, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Google Books, etc.). Also, Cambridge University Press has a 20% discount if you purchase the book before May: (enter the code EIDUOGR22 at the checkout)
Jim: Do you think the industries involved in fracking will challenge this book? Have you had any pushback yet?
We have had no pushback yet, and we hope people in the industry buy the book. One of the things I’ve found over the years is that people in the industry don’t know the industry in depth, especially as you go up the corporate ladder. They are either being coy or they honestly don’t know what is happening on the ground. The book notes that there are now over 175,000 chemicals listed in the Frack Focus Chemical Disclosure Registry so it’s virtually impossible to figure out what is actually being used (https://fracfocus.org/). Still, there are some that are undefined or considered proprietary. The Physicians for Social Responsibility has recently discovered that the forever chemicals, PFAS and PFOS, have been used as surfactant in drilling.
Jim: Is there any legislation in the upcoming term that would benefit from the information in your book?
There is legislation being proposed for regulating the use of sanitary landfills for gas waste, which addresses the negative impact of leachate and the quality of the landfill itself. But people need to get their lawmakers to understand the science behind that legislation. Landfills are generally built for specific functions, but in most cases, housing radioactive substances is not one of them. The introduction of fracking wastes at some landfills (e.g. Westmoreland) has proven to affect nearby water treatment facilities, making them nonfunctional. We are hoping for a change in Harrisburg. We hope this book can contribute to improving regulations, catching up with the scientific data these studies have documented. People’s health and well being are clearly being impacted. While over 11,000 Marcellus wells have been drilled in Pennsylvania since 2004, there have been over 10,000 complaints filed with the DEP. Over 4000 of those complaints are about water issues: black water, red water, orange water; people who have lost their water wells; problems with pipelines; well integrity on the pad. People are also being led to believe they will get royalties for the next 50 years. The truth is that the fracked wells produce 75% of their lifetime production in the first year. Production rates decline dramatically after that, and agreements often require that production costs be subtracted from royalties due to landowners, so that profits decline dramatically after the first year, and continue to decline and then level off by year five. And yet, the landowners are left with the consequences to their own health and that of their animals. We have the data that can help update the regulations in the industry. We need people, especially those in power, to read this book and act on the data provided.
Jim: What can people who read your book, and want to get more involved in combating industries that are harming our environment, do? Are there organizations you are working with or that you can recommend? What about the Three Rivers Quest Project? As I understand it, the Three River’s Quest Project began studying water in the three river’s basins with the work of the West Virginia Water Institute, with help from the Colcom Foundation. Since 2012, Duquesne University, West Virginia University, West Liberty University and a contractor in Tionesta have taken monthly water samples, monitoring various sites.
Stolz: 3RQ has been monitoring water quality on the upper Allegheny to the mainstem, the Monongahela, and the upper Ohio. Recent work has focused on the Shell Ethane Cracker Plant, in Beaver County, with nurdle (the plastic pellets) patrols and testing for microplastics in the rivers.
It used to be that those in the Three River’s Quest Project took samples twice a month. Now it is down to once a month. So, yes, we need more people and groups getting involved. Leachate can be dumped overnight, but weeks later it is difficult to detect at that source. We need to test for Chloride and Bromide, and other substances. Groups can get involved: (https://3riversquest.wvu.edu/about/volunteer-organizations (https://3riversquest.wvu.edu/)
You can also talk to local representatives. Ask them if they’ve seen the book. Are we looking out for this stuff or is it making its way into local landfills?
We also need changes in the agencies that make and enforce rules with respect to radioactivity. I am on the advisory committee for LAAC (Laboratory Advisory Accreditation Committee) which helps set the guidelines for labs to maintain state accreditation. One of the water standards for radioactivity addresses discharges from nuclear power plants, but doesn’t take into account the radioactivity introduced because of fracking. A drinking water facility only needs to test for radioactivity every nine years. If something is detected, then they have to test every 3 years. But this is usually only for Tritium. Radium 226 and 228 are typically associated with fracking waste water. Regulations haven’t caught up with what’s happening up there. Dan Bain and I just submitted a paper on this topic, dealing with samples from 17 different sites near discharges from wastewater treatment plants taking leachate from these landfills. There was more radioactivity downstream than upstream. That tells you something is being added to the environment that wasn’t naturally occurring.
People and groups can contact Three Rivers Quest, and local groups can organize to create a Source Water Protection Plan. I recently attended a meeting in New Castle with the Beaver/Shenango River Regional Source Water Protection Partnership. The US EPA has a program for Source Water Protection, and through state agencies like the PA DEP provides funding for these efforts. This is focused on source water; the water we drink; not wastewater. Start working with other people, build bonds, coalitions. Three Rivers can help you start. At some point, you may want to hire a hydrologist to find out where your water is coming from, where the recharge areas are. The city of Aliquippa started a Source Water Protection Organization and found out that even though they were getting their water from a radial well, 70% of their water was, nevertheless, still derived from the Ohio. Finding out areas of recharge is important because those locations can introduce dangerous substances into your drinking water. If there is a business at a recharge area, say it’s a truck rental business, if someone knocks over a diesel barrel, that diesel can get into your drinking water unless authorities know to act immediately. While this new book may help people understand things better, people need to use that information to get more involved in the efforts to make sure our water is safe to drink.
Jim: Great! It’s easy to just throw up our hands in exasperation when confronted by these issues, but the work you’ve done helps it seem less confusing, so that doing something about it feels more possible. The Campfire Dispatch is meant to help people and groups who want to do their part to help protect our environment, along with the people and animals who depend on it to live and flourish. I will urge people to follow your advice, as well as read your book! Thanks for your time and all you are doing for our health and well-being, in Pennsylvania and beyond.
Stolz: Thanks!
-
An Interview with Ilyas Khan
“One’s voice can be an action, one’s art can be an action, one’s habits can be an action”:
An Interview with Ilyas Khan
Many of us remember hearing youth climate activist Ilyas Khan speak last June at Convergence One in Harrisburg. It was clear that his voice arises from a passionate connection to our planet and that he has thought deeply about our place in the fight to preserve it. At 18, he is already a compelling, inspiring presence – and a force to be reckoned with! The Editorial Board at Campfire Dispatch wanted to hear more, so we asked Ilyas for an interview.
Ilyas is an 18-year-old Muslim-Latine Climate Activist. Originally from Buffalo, New York, Ilyas was the lead organizer for the Youth Climate Strikes there and helped establish the Western New York Youth Climate Council, (WNYYCC), a youth led organization dedicated to political climate action. The WNYYCC successfully passed a climate resolution in the City of Buffalo, and were later recognized by Erie County for their work. Ilyas moved to Pittsburgh in 2020 and has since been an activist with Sunrise Movement Pittsburgh, a chapter of the national Sunrise Movement. Ilyas took part in the planning of the March 19th 2021, September 24th 2021, Earth Day 2021 and September 21st 2022 Pittsburgh Climate Strikes and other local actions. They have also worked as part of House on Fire Studios, a youth climate art collective, as the acting director. Last year they helped establish the Pittsburgh Youth Climate Council (PYCC) and were recently elected coordinator of Sunrise Pittsburgh. Ilyas is a Winchester Thurston alum, and is currently at Carnegie Mellon.
Karen Elias: Finding one’s voice seems to be a necessary first step in becoming an activist. This is, of course, not just a matter of simply opening one’s mouth to speak. It involves assuming a personal stake in the issues as well as understanding that one has the right, and the power, to take a stand. Could you talk about your own process? What forces did you have to overcome, who gave you encouragement, and how did you discover how to take on, and give voice to, climate issues in a compelling way?
Ilyas Khan: I think the second part needs to be answered first, to give context. I, like everyone else, wasn’t always an activist or activist minded. To me the environment has always been important. My mother taught me just how precious resources like water and soil are from a young age. As a kid I was passionate about fighting invasive species and recycling, but I didn’t understand climate change, and it wasn’t until much later that I came to recognize the deep and oppressive roots of the climate crisis. I could only see the symptoms and not the causes. Around the age of 11-12, my parents broke my provincial “Buffalo Bubble” by traveling the world with me, and what an eye opening experience that was. To see the world removed from one’s own context made me far more attuned to the natural environment, and the politics of its destruction. According to my mom, I was always willing to talk to people, and always curious — but this trip made me be interested in hearing what people with totally different experiences had to say, and listening to them helped me find my voice. It was after Trump’s election, around the March for Science in 2017, that I finally realized what governments were doing, pandering to corporate interests without so much as a care for the people that they are meant to protect. I was angry, disheartened, and unenthusiastic about our future. At thirteen, learning that governments could stop societal collapse into Eco-Fascism but won’t because they’re being led by the nose by a coalition of corporations and wealthy individuals can be a really upsetting concept to live with.
There was a period of time where my outlook was bleak. Even as I joined activist organizations like the Western New York Environmental Alliance (WNYEA) around age 13/14, I found little to encourage me, except for my parents, who were conscientious and supportive. That changed with the Youth Climate Strikes of 2019. For me, the strikes were essentially a really lucky accident. Sohayla Eldeeb (then with Zero Hour) came to Buffalo and gave a speech on the Youth Climate Strike that Greta Thunberg was proposing. Afterwards she asked myself and the other youth in our flagship program under the WNYEA if any of us would step up to the plate and try organizing a strike. I raised my hand without exactly knowing what that entailed. Two weeks before the strike I started scrambling to action, and with the coordinator of that WNYEA program, Emily Dyett, we scraped it together. It was the first time I felt genuine hope in the movement and the first time I truly felt that my voice had weight, because I saw the youth come out and speak about their experiences, their anxieties, and their desire for change, because I had asked them. I think that was a life changing moment, and it continues to inspire me.
Whenever I go anywhere to speak now, I remember that hopelessness first, because that’s where I started. I have to accept that to some degree those feelings, that anxiety, is always with me. But I have grown beyond hopelessness. I’ve seen that a better world is possible, and that we have the opportunity to make change if we are only willing to seize it. I recognize that hope is not a passive thing, but an active one, one which requires a deep connection to the world around you and to yourself. One which requires understanding what is at stake and where we’re going wrong. One which requires that we constantly be ready to take action, on our own and in community. One’s voice can be an action, one’s art can be an action, one’s habits can be an action. The important thing is to remember that we must do these purposefully, in community, and with an understanding of the history and legacy that the climate crisis will leave if we do not.
KE: I’m interested in the fact that you’ve now engaged in activist work in both New York State and Pennsylvania. Here in PA, we look at some of the victories in New York (the banning of fracking, most especially) and often get discouraged by the seemingly ferocious entrenchment and intractability of the fossil fuel industry in our state. Have you found challenges here that seem different from those in NY? And has your style of activism had to redefine itself as a result?
IK: Pennsylvania has absolutely posed a lot of challenges that I wasn’t anticipating. From the willful disinterest of local and state leaders to address environmental health crises, to the comparative lack of enthusiasm and engagement among youth when it comes to climate justice work. That said, I think that despite Pennsylvania being somewhat behind compared to New York, New York isn’t all peaches and roses either, and there is a significant difference in the forces at play here versus there. For example, in Western New York apathy wasn’t as great an issue. Everyone could all rally around causes like clean water, even conservatives. Here apathy is pervasive and all encompassing. Our county executive and legislative bodies almost entirely ignore the voice of youth — and their future wellbeing. Time and again we have proven that certain actions are detrimental to the well being of our people and planet, but they do not have the political will to do what is right, settling for short term profit instead. I think that’s the greatest difference between the two.
I’ve really had to learn patience because that apathy in government trickles down to everyday folk too. It’s hard not to be apathetic when it seems like our governments don’t care. It’s particularly been a struggle to convince people how we can change things, how we can make the government care. That firewall of “oh it doesn’t matter what we do,” or “I’m already doing more than enough,” can be incredibly frustrating to hear, especially if it’s clear that they themselves haven’t even tried to take action. We’ve seen tremendous movement over the past few years, for instance the recent ban on fracking in public parks here in Allegheny county, and I really firmly believe that that movement will be the catalyst for tremendous change. The question is whether or not this movement is enough to inspire people to action. I’ve had mixed results on that front, but I think generally the consensus is that something must change, and we’re getting to the point where youth are more broadly recognizing their power and role in this change. I hope we can build on that in the years to come!
KE: In an interview you talk about realizing that climate change is a “massive, intersectional thing” and being frightened, and frustrated, by the charge that your generation must be the one to fix it. It seems clear that we need to build a movement that’s multi-generational as well as multiracial and multicultural. Fixing it is up to everyone of us. I’m wondering, though, if you’ve experienced instances of intersectionality that could serve as inspiration as we engage in this work.
IK: I definitely agree. To me, a multigenerational, cross-class, multicultural and multiracial movement is the only way forward! Yet young people are still often told that it’s up to our generation to fix the problems of the past, present, and future. Even by the politicians in office! I think that laying the burden on young shoulders is irresponsible at best, and cruel at worst. But I know that this movement is capable of infinitely more than that, and I’ve seen it for myself many times. One of my fondest memories when I lived in Buffalo was the September 20th 2019 youth climate strike. I would be lying if I said organizing it was easy, because negotiating between the over twenty organizations, youth and non-youth alike, wasn’t a piece of cake. But when it all came together it was a breathtaking display of intersectionality.
The day of, it was 81 degrees, and we were all in front of Buffalo City Hall. In the shade of the trees, there were old people with young children, holding signs, playing, chatting, chanting and singing. The able bodied and comfortable stood out in the sun. People of every race, every class, every age, from babies to wheelchair bound seniors, showed up, marched, danced, and played together in the name of climate justice. It was almost like a festival. I can’t recall any similar events that I’ve organized since, but I would say that the way that the elders have so often shown up for the youth and vice versa here in Pittsburgh has given me hope that intersectionality is not only possible but inevitable, even in a city of great apathy.
KE: I notice that, along with involvement in a variety of activist organizations, you’re also part of the House on Fire Studio, a youth-led climate art collective. Could you talk a bit about the mission of this collective and about the role art might play in climate activism? Have you found anyone to collaborate with you on an anime project?
IK: Certainly! House on Fire Studio’s goal is to bring youth activists and artists together to imagine different, more creative approaches to the climate justice movement. Whether it’s theater, dance, or other forms of performance, musical and visual art. The goal is to produce art that anyone can see to understand the emotional root of the youth struggle for climate justice. Unfortunately we’ve been on a (self-inflicted) hiatus, because without multiple lead organizers it’s rather difficult to manage an international artist collective. However I think there’s still plenty of fuel in the tank for this idea, and hope to get it back up and running whenever I can find some more co-conspirators!
As for my dream of making a climate anime, I’ve only moved on it a little, and had a hard time finding interested and willing participants. It’s not very conventional, and as I know from experience the process for creating a story and animating it is not an easy or quick one. I hope to one day become an animator myself doing shows like the ones that inspired me as a kid. (Dora was a breakthrough moment for me!) But I would really love to see a climate focused animation for young people and adults alike. If I ever have the chance to work on one myself, you bet I’ll jump at it! And if one of your readers would like to collaborate they can always reach out! But for now I’ve just got to grit my teeth and keep working on smaller projects!
KE: I know you’re now starting college. How do you plan to balance your academic interests with your activism? And what is your dream for your future?
IK: Balance? What’s that? But all jokes aside, I think academics and activism can absolutely coexist. Oftentimes I run into students who complain that they are too busy to be bothered with activism, and that’s a really common and valid concern. The times I struggled most with my own mental capacity as an activist came when I had essentially convinced myself that academics is the only thing I can afford to focus on. That one-track work culture leads straight to burnout. There are plenty of ways to keep yourself sane, but I personally adhere to the golden rule of SETTING GOOD BOUNDARIES. Don’t live life like only one of those two things matter, and don’t live life like those two things matter more than your health and wellbeing. All of it matters, and it’s possible to live a life where you don’t have to force yourself to do one thing or another. I firmly believe one of our biggest setbacks as individual activists will always be our failure to set strong boundaries, and I think it’s also one of the most important things new activists need to learn.
As for my dreams, I don’t want to be an activist or politician professionally long term. I want to make cartoons for kids, teens, and adults to enjoy that show the diversity of human and non-human life, bringing the climate crisis, as well as issues of language, cultural identity and racism to an everyday audience. Climate justice has shaped how I approach every situation, language identity changes the literal voice in my head, cultural identity and racism have been sources of pain and inspiration for me and all of my work since I was young. I think many people my age and younger can understand that, and it will become increasingly so as our generations grow more diverse and more directly impacted by the climate crisis. Whether or not my dream is the easiest or the most financially suitable is also a part of my activism! After all, as we fight for climate justice we’re also fighting for workers’ justice, now and in the future. I fight for my right to a livable planet and a livable wage because I know someday that I, and every other young person out there today, will need it.
KE: What more would you like to say?
IK: I’ve recently become the hub co-coordinator of Sunrise Pittsburgh and as such I’d like to extend my hand to all of the youth and non youth, individuals and organizations alike, that may be reading this to say: I believe in the power of coalition and relationship building in this movement. If you do too, let’s talk! I think we, as a state, need to learn how best to work together and take on our problems as a team.
Note: Ilyas invites our readers to reach out. His contact information is:
ilsomoshi@gmail.com and @ilyaskhan220 on instagram (for non-sunrise inquiries)
pittsunrisemovement@gmail.com (for sunrise inquiries)
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
CampfireDispatch2023 