http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/guest/denr-study
To the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources
For the
reasons discussed below, I am opposed to the use of hydraulic fracturing
(“fracking”) and to any changes in North Carolina law that would allow
it.
These
comments refer to the “DRAFT North Carolina Oil and Gas Study under Session Law
2011--‐276”
(hereinafter: report).
Safety
The
report concludes that “hydraulic fracturing can be done safely as long as the
right protections are in place.” (report, p. 293) However, even if hydraulic
fracturing can be done safely, there is no guarantee that it will
be done safely.
There
is also the possibility that, even if all safety protections are usually
followed, there will be a few accidents that cause the release of toxic material
into our water supply. Only one single accident can threaten the water in the
Jordan Reservoir, the drinking water supply for a large number of people. Part
of the Jordan Reservoir lies within the Triassic Basin (report, p.
45).
Water
Hydraulic
fracturing uses a large amount of water (report pp. 44 – 77). The report
concludes that “With wise management, adequate water supplies would
likely be available to meet the needs of the shale gas extraction in the
vicinity of the Triassic Basins in North Carolina” (report, p. 73, emphasis
added).
However,
water use by other industries and for personal use by area residents is expected
to increase. (see report, tables 3-2 through 3-16, pp. 47-55). There may be
sufficient water in the Cape Fear basin watershed to meet the needs of shale gas
extraction, but that use may leave insufficient water to meet the expanding
needs of commercial, industrial, and residential users.
Transportation
The
report addresses a number of issues related to transportation. These
include:
·
Needed
road and bridge infrastructure (report, pp.78-85)
·
Spills
during transportation (report, p. 132)
·
Traffic
and policing (report, p. 235)
·
Access
Road Construction (report, p. 241)
·
Quality
of life (report, p. 265)
In
all of these cases, the report cited negatives effect of the increased truck
traffic that would result from hydraulic fracturing. Most of these negative
effects are not related to safety (except for the spills during transportation)
and would be negative effects even if hydraulic fracturing could be done
safely.
Of
great concern is the effect on quality of life. Residents, most of who are used
to small country roads with little traffic, will have to adjust to larger roads
with heavy traffic. Many of these residents walk or ride bicycles and horses
along these country roads, a practice that would be affected or eliminated by an
increase in truck traffic. This can cause a significant loss of quality of life
for many residents. Many residents of rural areas and small, rural towns live
there, in part, because of the low traffic volumes compared to more urban
areas.
Noise
The
noise associated with the operations is described in the report, pp. 240 – 246.
The sources of noise include access road construction, pad construction,
drilling, fracturing, reclamation, pipeline construction, and compressor
stations. No mitigation for the noise was suggested. This amount of noise,
including noise at night (particularly from the drilling and fracturing
operations) would affect not only those living on the property being leased for
drilling but those living on other properties nearby. Many residents of these
properties are not profiting from the drilling operations but will suffer the
loss of “quite enjoyment” of their property.
Visual
Impacts
Potential
visual impacts are discussed in the report (pp. 246 – 253). One of the effects
of hydraulic fracturing is the lighting required. (see report, p. 248). The
lights are often directed across the drilling pad. This practice can direct
bright lights into the homes of area residents who are not leasing their land
and are not profiting from the gas extraction.
Community
Control of Land Use
Traditionally,
land use decisions, including zoning and long term land use planning, are
determined by local (municipal or county) governments elected by the people of
that area. The local voters should, through their elected officials, have
control of the land use of their communities. One purpose of zoning is to
prevent the use of one person’s land from adversely affecting other people
living nearby. It is very important that this local control remains in place,
and that local governments retain the right to prevent drilling or drilling
related activities in their jurisdictions. (see Recommendation 17, report p.
303).
Conclusion
I
believe that the adverse affects of hydraulic fracturing for extraction of shale
gas, even if it can be done safely, are significant. For that reason I oppose
any change in North Carolina law that would allow hydraulic
fracturing.
Respectfully
submitted,
/s/
John A. Shaw
217
Lake Ridge Drive
Cary,
NC 27519
No comments:
Post a Comment