Category Archives: fracking

Fracking Wildlife In Illinois – IDNR thinks it is a good thing

Posted on by
Reply

Run little doggies, run for the hills, but if you are a fish you are pretty much dead.

 

Today (Saturday, 11/30/13) is Day 16 of the IDNR Comment Period on Fracking.  Thanks for hanging in there with us even on this holiday weekend!

Day 16  USED 11/30/13

Topic:  Definition of “Aquatic Life” is too narrow

  • Click the button: Subpart A: General Provisions
  • In the “Section” dropdown box, click:  245.110 Definitions
  • Submit your comment/s (below)
  • Click “Submit”

Section 245.110 Section 245.110 of the Proposed Hydraulic Fracturing Regulatory Act administrative rules, states: “Aquatic life” means all fish, reptiles, amphibians, crayfish, and mussels.

Problems with this section:

  1. This definition is too narrow and does not include many other species that may be important to an aquatic ecosystem.  Aquatic life cannot be understood apart from the larger aquatic ecosystem which sustains it.
  2. Freshwater ecosystems (limnology) not only include fauna, but also flora (plants), micro/macro invertebrates, oxygen levels and algae, for example.

Why these are problems:

  1. Exclusively focusing on a limited definition of “aquatic life” unnecessarily narrows the impact to the larger ecosystem that sustains it.
  2. By the time a fish kill occurs pollution caused by fracking will have reached a critical stage, causing havoc across the larger ecosystem.
  3. It neglects the biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life.

Revisions Needed:

  1. The definition of “aquatic life” must be broadened to include “aquatic ecosystems”.
  2. Specific scientific standards must be developed to include:  a) Biological standards, b) High quality water resources, c) Modified or limited water resources, and d) Stressor identification.

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

:}

Go there and comment. More tomorrow/

 

:}

Water Is Precious – Why would we mix it with toxics and then pump it under ground

Posted on by
Reply

The whole United States is drought prone now. We dirty up to much fresh waster. We drink alot through inefficient drinking water systems. Springfield’s ancient system wastes as much as it delivers and we just came through a serious drought. Now we want to waste water on fracking? Really? No Way!

 

Today (Friday, 11/29/13) is Day 15 of the IDNR Comment Period on Fracking.  Please don’t miss making a comment today on the very important topic of water!

Topic – Inadequate Water Plans and Local Control of Water in Permitting Process

  • Click the button: Subpart B:  Registration and Permitting Procedures
  • In the “Section” dropdown box, click:  245.210 Permit Application Requirements
  • Submit your comment/s (below)
  • Click “Submit”

Subpart B:  Regulations and Permitting

Section 245.210 Permit Application Requirements

Section 245.210 requires permit applicants to submit: a Water Source Management plan: “If fresh water is anticipated to be used in the high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing treatment, a water source management plan that shall include the following information:” (source of ground or surface water, how much water to be used, months of use, methods to minimize fresh water use, methods used to minimize adverse impact to aquatic life).

Problems with this section:

  1. While there is a required water management plan, this plan does not require application to local municipal, water district or other governmental control units requesting use of their ground or surface water resources.  In fact, if fracking is allowed, local government has no authority to deny water to a frack well operator, even in the case of drought.
  2. There is no process for sharing the frack operator’s water plan with other state or regional agencies responsible for water usage (e.g. Illinois EPA, East Central IL Regional Water Supply Planning Committee) for their input on whether the plan is adequate, and how usage relates to possible drought situations.
  3. There are no minimum regulatory thresholds regarding the amount of water to be used, the impact of water use given drought situations, actual impact on aquatic life, impact on existing human, industrial and agricultural water immediate needs, and potential future impacts.

Why these are problems:

  1. The IDNR report The Drought of 2012, March 2013 identified:
  1. In 2012, the 12 counties of southern IL–where the majority of fracking leases have been obtained–experienced “D4 drought – exceptional”, the most severe drought rating.  From July to December 2012 the area was in continuous drought.
  2. Two of three local areas identified as “at risk public water supply” are in potential frack operation counties (Macon, Johnson, IL).  These counties were identified in an IL EPA 2012 drought report as having Community Water Systems most stressed by the drought.
  1. A report by the East Central IL Regional Water Supply Planning Committee identified:
  1. Springfield has a greater than 50% probability their water system will be unable to meet projected water use with a drought of record.
  2. By 2020, Bloomington and Decatur’s water systems will be inadequate to meet demand.
  1. The average water use by a frack operator is significant and will have an impact on water usage.  According to federal EPA, the average frack uses 4.4 million gallons of water.  And wells can be fracked multiple times.

Needed changes:

  1. Any governmental unit that involves itself in local or regional water issues must review the frack operator water source management plan with the power to affirm, reject or modify the plan.
  2. If a county or geographic area is identified as being in a drought, frack operations will cease.
  3. IDNR must develop scientifically based high minimum, specific standards of water usage protecting existing human, agricultural and industrial use.  A frack operator’s water source management plan must adhere to these formal standards.

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

Illinois Will Glow In the Dark – After Frackers scatter radiation all over the land

Posted on by
Reply

All fossil fuels contain radiation somewhere in their masses. In other words in any given coal deposit there will be radioactive hotspots. The same is true of oil and natural gas. So with Fracking you can never tell when you will hit on of those hotspots in the shale. What this means is that all disposal sites for all the debris from the fracked wells must have radiation detectors to guarantee that any radioactive materials are deposited in sites designed for such materials.

 

Today (Wednesday, 11/27/13) is Day 13 of the 45-day Comment Period on Fracking.  We hope you’ll take a minute out of your holiday preparations to submit a comment to IDNR about fracking and radioactivity.

Topic – Radioactivity in fracking operations: More loopholes

  • Click the button: Subpart H: High Volume Horizontal Hydraulic Fracturing Preparations and Operations (245.800-245.870)
  • In the “Section” dropdown box, click:  245.850 Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid and Hydraulic Fracturing Flowback Storage, Disposal or Recycling, Transportation and Reporting Requirements
  • Submit your comment/s (below)
  • Click “Submit”

Comment:  Subsection (d)(1) of Section 245.850 provides for testing radioactivity only one time–during the early flowback stage–and only for “naturally occurring radioactive materials”.  The problems with this are identified below.

Problems:

  1. The proposed rules do not include any standards or protocols to follow if testing of flowback water shows unacceptable levels of radioactivity.
  2. The proposed rules do not require the testing of “produced water”, which is the water produced from a well in conjunction with oil or natural gas production.  This is where radioactivity is most likely to show up.  It should be noted that while these Rules have been purported to be the strongest in the nation, PA law requires the testing of produced water at two separate intervals.
  3. The proposed rules do not require testing for added radioactive materials, like depleted uranium, which can be used in the perforation/fracturing operation.
  4. The proposed rules do not test work areas for levels of radioactivity that would call for OSHA standards of occupational safety.

These deficiencies, cumulatively or singly, would pose a significant risk to the public health and safety, property, aquatic life, and wildlife, in violation of section 1-75(a)(2) of the Hydraulic Fracturing Regulatory Act.

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL61701
United States

:}

Go there and comment. More today.

:}

Frackers Must Post Bonds To Drill – Doesn’t that mean they are going to do damage

Posted on by
Reply

Yes and the damage they will do is a lot more than 50,000 $$$ they initially put up.

 

Today (Thursday, 11/28/13) is Day 14 of the 49-day Comment Period on Fracking.  On this Thanksgiving Day, we are thankful for your comments to IDNR.
Topic – Inadequate Bonding Requirements for Fracking Companies
  • Click the button: Subpart B:  Registration and Permitting Procedures
  • In the “Section” dropdown box, click:  245.220 Permit Bonds or Other Collateral Securities
  • Submit your comment/s (below)
  • Click “Submit”
Section 245.220 states, “The bond shall be in the amount of $50,000 per permit or a blanket bond of $500,000 for all permits.” (Section 1-65(a) of the Act)
Comment:  Plugging a well alone costs more than $50,000. In the study “Who Pays the Cost of Fracking?: Weak Bonding Rules for Oil and Gas Drilling Leave the Public At Risk”, PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center reported documented instances in which fracking wells have cost $700,000 or more to plug.  What is the motivation for the operator to not simply forfeit the bond when they shut down?  Furthermore, drilling companies typically frack a string of wells and not just one.  If they are cutting corners, using improper well-casings for example, or not sealing them correctly, the violation is likely to occur at each site.  One $500,000 bond for perhaps as many as 100 -150 well sites is as unacceptable as a $50,000 for one well site.
If the purpose of the bond is to protect the state from expenses incurred from an accident or violation, then the bond must be sufficient to cover those occurrences.  It makes no sense to offer a blanket bond—like some bargain basement “buy 2 pairs of socks and get a third pair free”.  Each well should be bonded individually and in the amount necessary to cover real and imagined damages as outlined by the PennEnvironment study.
To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.
510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

alt

:}

Go there and comment. More later.

:}

Fracking And Water Quality In Illinois – We don’t want any burning drinking water here

Posted on by
Reply

For now I have run out of thoughts about how bad the original law was and how terrible the rules coming from it are now.

 

Today (Tuesday, 11/26/13) is Day 12 of the 45-day Comment Period on Fracking.  We’re receiving great feedback from so many of you.  Thank you for writing comments and enlisting others to write too.  You rock!

You know the drill.  Here’s what to do to make today’s comment:

  • Go to: http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/OilandGas/Pages/OnlineCommentSubmittalForm.aspx
  • Click the button: Subpart F: Water Quality (245.600-245.630)
  • In the “Section” dropdown box, click 245.600 Water Quality Monitoring
  • Submit your comments (below)
  • Click “Submit”

Section 245.600(b)(1) of the proposed rules provides for the testing and monitoring of water sources within 1,500 feet of the well site.  Among the many problems with the monitoring provisions, the proposed rules do not provide for testing along the horizontal leg of the well bore, which can extend for up to two miles from the well site.  This is a reckless disregard of the known risk of the underground migration of toxic fluids from a horizontal well bore, especially when hydraulic fracturing involves the use of explosive charges and especially in areas known for the risk of higher-magnitude earthquakes.

In a report issued on September 5, 2012, the U.S. Government Accountability Office acknowledged this risk:

“Oil and gas development, whether conventional or shale oil and gas, pose inherent environmental and public health risks, but the extent of these risks associated with shale oil and gas development is unknown, in part, because the studies GAO reviewed do not generally take into account the potential long-term, cumulative effects.”–From: Information on Shale Resources, Development, and Environmental and Public Health Risks, U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-12-732 (2012), “What GAO Found”.

The agency mentioned specifically the risk of underground migration of toxic gases and chemicals:

“[A] number of studies and publications GAO reviewed indicate that shale oil and gas development poses risks to water quality from contamination of surface water and groundwater as a result of erosion from ground disturbances, spills and releases of chemicals and other fluids, or underground migration of gases and chemicals.”  (Emphasis added.)

Water testing and monitoring should be required all along the length of any horizontal well bores.

(The Government Accountability Office is an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress.)

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

 

:}

Go there and comment. More today.

:}

Frackers Could Take Over Your Town – Illinois cedes sovereignty to the extraction industry

Posted on by
Reply

City and county governments?  We don’t care about your stinking City and County governments. Drill baby drill.

 

 

Today (Saturday, 11/23/2013) is Day 9 of the IDNR 45 day comment period on fracking.  You’re all doing a great job sending in your comments.  We’re a fifth of the way through the comment period.  Let’s keep the pressure on. 

Today’s comment is on the Local Control

Here’s what to do to make your comment today:

·         Click the button: Subpart A: General Provisions

·         In the “Section” dropdown box, click 245.210 Permit Application Requirements

·         Submit your comments (below)

·         Click “Submit”

Comment:

This section states that “when an application is made to frack a well site located within the limits of any city, village or incorporated town, the application shall state the name of the city, village, or incorporated town and be accompanied with a certified copy of the official consent for the high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing operations to occur from the municipal authorities where the well site is proposed to be located.  No permit shall be issued unless consent is secured and filed with the permit application.”

This is excellent for municipalities but what about counties???

*  The intent of the legislation was to recognize that local units of government should have decision-making power regarding whether to allow fracking in their jurisdictions.  

*  This section demonstrates blatant disregard for the realities of the geography of fracking in Illinois regarding cities compared to counties.  Little if any fracking is anticipated within the cities of Carbondale, Marion, Decatur or other metro areas affected by the majority of fracking land leases.  If prior notification and an intentional process of permitting is important for metropolitan communities, why are the proposed rules silent regarding neighborhoods in counties and the families living there?

*  There is no substantive difference between a municipal or county government in Illinois in its powers other than the issue of Illinois Constitutional Home Rule.  However, the lack of county Home Rule has never preempted a county power to issue permits on mineral or oil extraction.  Numerous county governments have long histories and traditions in the permitting process regarding mineral and drilling industries. As the current fracking law is largely silent on the issue of county control, IDNR rules should err on the side of history and citizen decision-making. 

*  Counties and municipalities of government tax, employ law enforcement, provide social services and infrastructure.  The rules provide no explanation why citizens residing in counties of Illinois should have less input regarding fracking permits.  The regulatory differentiation between the rights of residents in municipalities vs. counties creates a group of second class citizens. These second class citizens have fewer rights in their ability to participate and ultimately determine the type and quality of energy extraction allowed in their neighborhoods.

*  There is no reasonable expectation that the personnel at IDNR have any better or more clear understanding of the will of citizens in counties regarding fracking permits than the residents themselves.  As the proposed IDNR rules envision municipalities empowered to decide fracking sites, what possible argument does IDNR have that it is better equipped or knowledgeable on the needs of residents living in Illinois counties? 

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL61701
United States

 

:}

Go there and comment. More tomorrow.

:}

Frackers Free To Violate Illinois – According to the State of Illinois

Posted on by
Reply

This was supposed to be the toughest set of regulations in the United States. This is an outrageous lie created by The Chicago Sellouts, better know as the gang of 5, the IEC, the NRDC, ELPC, the Sierra Club, and Faith in Place. They shall pay for this.

 

Today (Sunday, 11/24/2013) is Day 10 of the IDNR 45 day comment period on fracking.  Thank you for all of the comments you’re making!

Today’s comment is on what constitutes a “serious” violation.

Here’s what to do to make your comment today:

This section of the rules states that every applicant applying for a permit must disclose to the Department  “all findings of a serious violation or an equivalent violation under federal, Illinois or other state laws or regulations in the development or operation of an oil or gas exploration or production site via hydraulic fracturing by the registrant or any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of the registrant within the previous 5 years.”

  • What does IDNR define as a “serious” violation?  There is no guideline here making it easy for violators to claim that they didn’t report a violation because “we didn’t think it was serious.”  Instead, applicants should be required to disclose ALL violations alleged by public authorities and any fines or findings therefrom.
  • What is the reason for the 5 year time limitation?  When fracking violations potentially pose a threat to public health and safety, all previous violations and alleged violations should be considered when issuing a permit, regardless of how long ago they occured.

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

 

:}

Go there and comment, More tomorrow.

:}

IDNR Says Your Are Not Sick From Fracking Unless You Can Prove It

Posted on by
Reply

So this regulation says essentially that you are never sick from fracking unless the Frackers and the IDNR agree that you are sick from fracking AND your doctor can prove it. Now of course you can’t prove it because they will not release a list of the chemicals  that they are using so you can test the environment for the chemicals so they can not say that they are naturally occurring. Got that?

 

Today is Day 8 of the 45 day Comment period on fracking in Illinois.  We start week 2.

Today’s comment is on the circular definition of an “affected patient.”

Here’s what to do to make your comment today:

IDNR identifies the definition of an “Affected Patient” as “a person receiving health care services from a health professional for an illness or injury diagnosed by the health professional to be caused by exposure to any chemicals used in high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing operations that are subject to a claim of trade secret by a permittee or contractor.”

PROBLEM:  This definition is circular: in order to learn what chemical was used, a physician must first test for that chemical so s/he can prove s/he has a right to disclosure of the proprietary chemical.  How can a doctor diagnose exposure to a secret chemical used in high volume fracking before s/he knows what the secret cheemicals are to test for?

Thank you!

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

 

:}

Go there and comment. More tomorrow.

:}

IDNR Cancels Hearing In Effingham – Day 7 of comments released here

Posted on by
Reply

The weather outside is frightful. Especially in Southern Illinois. So now you have all the time in the world to post comments to IDNR’s website.

 

Effingham, December 5, Holiday Inn 6:30 PM – CANCELED
• Decatur, IL December 17, Decatur Civic Center 6:30 PM
• Carbondale, December 19, SIUC Student Center 6:00 PM

Today is Day 7 of the 45 day Comment period on fracking in Illinois.  You’ve made it to the end of your first week.  Thank you for your comments!
Today’s comment is on the lack of provisions to address fracking in a tornado-ridden state.
Here’s what to do to make your comment today:
Comment:  Number of draft regulations proposed by Illinois Dept. of Natural Resources describing safety measures regarding tornado strikes on fracking sites: ZERO.  Number of tornados in Illinois in the last 10 years: 674.
Historically, the number and intensity of tornadoes in IL is very high.  “In fact, Illinois has experienced some of the worst tornados in US history.” Dr. Jim Angel, Illinois State Climatologist.
Every county in Illinois has had multiple tornados as demonstrated by the maps in the following links:
A big swath of Washington IL was flattened by a tornado on Sunday, 11/17/13. What would have happened if this tornado had hit an area of the state covered in fracking sites?  Debris from the tornado has been found over 150 miles away.  Imagine if that debris had included “temporarily” stored flowback water or tanks filled with frack fluid or produced water?
To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.
510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States
:}

altGo there and comment. More later.

:}