Peter Galbraith. VTD/Josh Larkin
Several lawmakers floated proposals this week to ban a technique for extracting natural gas through hydrofracking in Vermont.
In a curious sequence, Sen. Peter Galbraith, D-Windham, issued a press release on Monday announcing he would introduce legislation that would ban the practice in the state; then Representatives Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, and Peter Peltz, D-Woodbury, submitted proposed legislation that would amend state law to disallow the Agency of Natural Resources from issuing a permit for the practice.
So what is all the fracking about?
“Fracking,” as the process is called, involves injecting a mixture of water, sand and chemicals into rock that creates fractures in the material and releases natural gas, petroleum or other substances for extraction. The practice is controversial because of its potential effects on drinking water. In Pennsylvania and New York, waterways have been polluted by fracking.
No one in Vermont has applied for a permit for hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas, although it’s hypothetically possible for a company or individual to obtain an underground injection control permit from the Agency of Natural Resources.
Galbraith, who says he initially submitted a request to legislative counsel a few months ago, said the best time to address environmental issues like this one is before any harm occurs.
“It is the only time when we can take a reasoned look at it,” Galbraith said.
Klein says there is no imminent possibility of fracking in Vermont, and his proposed legislation is “more of a preemptive measure.”
Larry Becker, Vermont state geologist, said no one really knows what the potential for natural gas extraction through fracking is in Vermont because no test wells have been drilled yet.
The Utica Shale in Quebec extends into Northwestern Vermont, Becker said. Companies have found potential for natural gas extraction on the south shore of the St. Lawrence River, but projects have been put on hold amid public criticism and high cost assessments.
Natural gas deposits, Becker said, were created when mountains were formed. If there are deposits in Vermont, companies would have to test to see if the shale was viable.
Under current Vermont law, anyone who wanted to extract natural gas through fracking would have to get an underground injection permit from the Agency of Natural Resources. Under regulations promulgated in the 1980s, the state banned the discharge of waste substances or materials into an injection well if it causes ean ndangerment to drinking water or violation of drinking water standards or affects the health of any person.
Catherine Gjessing, associate general counsel for the Department of Environmental Conservation, said the department is currently working on updating the rules. Gjessing said the Department, which is part of the Agency of Natural Resources, is looking into the technical issues involved with the potential environmental harms associated with fracking.
The state’s regulation under the underground injection control permit stems from authority delegated from the Environmental Protection Agency under the Safe Drinking Water Act. A 2005 energy act exempted fracking from the Safe Drinking Water Act, however.
The state has not yet determined whether a state law banning fracking would be pre-empted by federal law. Even though the federal act on its face exempts the activity from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, Gjessing said, “that doesn’t necessarily mean that the state doesn’t have the authority to go in and cover that sort of activity.”
States can generally be more stringent with environmental regulations than the feds, and the Vermont Environmental Court has ruled recently that the state must manage groundwater as a public trust resource that is to be protected from both over-extraction and pollution.
ANR Secretary Deb Markowitz said the Agency of Natural Resources has not reviewed the proposed legislation that would ban fracking and has not taken a position on it yet.
Steve Wark, director of communications for Vermont Gas Systems, said his company is not a producer of natural gas and would not be involved in any sort of hydraulic fracturing in the state.
Permalink |
Can you imagine those mega water trucks destroying our town roads, earthquakes, increased traffic, poisoned well, noise lighting up our starlit skies.
Permalink |
I agree. The best policy is preemptive. Kill such a disastrous possibility before some crackpot even suggests it. The ANR and the governor have to be in the right place on this from the get-go.
Lew Friedland
Motpelier
Permalink |
Wonderful! Best news we’ve heard for ages.
Permalink |
Fracking has been used by water well drilling companies, for years,in Vermont. In the early/mid 1950′s, the Cambrian Corporation did a USGS sounding of most of Northern Vermont in search of gas and oil. Because they found sufficient reason to believe there could be lucrative deposits, they proceeded to approach land owners with lease contracts for the mineral rights to their land. In Grand Isle, most of the land owners signed on and received a stipend of $1. every few months (I was young and do not remember the intervals)for their leases, with the contract promising profit sharing in whatever lucrative amounts were actually found and harvested. There were two parcels that produced sufficient deposits to actually use to operate the landowners’ farms for heat, lights, etc. The corporation never did declare that they located sufficient amounts for commercial purposes, but; they used a fracking technique to drill some of those test wells, as well as blasting, etc.
In the 1990′s, the corporation either went defunct or bankrupt and the leases were void. I digress:
After some sleuthing by my older brother, it was determined that, even at this early time, in drilling for minerals, fracking was used, to run their probe pipes laterally for a couple miles, thus drilling on one persons property and investigating another adjacent property. The person owning the property where the drilling occurred would reap the benefits of the gas that was actually lying under his neighbors, property.
If one were to visit any town clerk, they would find archives of the findings of the USGS surveys and the results that convinced Cambrian to proceed to drill.
My major concern about this Bill, is that it does not exclude the water well drillers. Sometimes fracking is needed to obtain potable water and without it, many would go without water wells to homes that they had already built.
***Major Point: Natural gas runs so close to the surface in Northern Vermont and the Islands, that my one-time neighbors, could light their garden hose water on fire when they first turned it on. I know of one business that had to immediately, turn on the water and let it run before any flammables entered or were used in the business. (smoking was allowed back then). Of course the water was not potable and potable water had to be brought in for consumption.
It’s a good Bill that needs to exempt water well drillers or they may not be able to stay in business.
Permalink |
T.hank you Jan Santor for the info. Very interesting
Permalink |
Jan Santor
Thanks for your very interesting history. But to put your mind at ease, my bill applies only to hydro-fracking for the purpose of exploring for, and exploiting, hydrocarbons. It does not prohibit fracking when drilling for water.
Peter Galbraith
Permalink |
Fracking was exempted from the federal Safe Water Drinking Act in 2005??? What the…?
I’d sure love to know how the vote went on that one. That’s just insane.
Permalink |
Simple question. How does Vermont law effect Federal regulation? or Can the feds give hydro-fracking rights on national park lands in Vermont?
Permalink |
As someone who lives in central upstate New York right along the Pennsylvania border, where we’ve been fighting against fracking for the last few years, I can tell you a couple of things.
First, you are EXTREMELY fortunate to have the general sentiment in your state government that fracking should be stopped before it even starts. It has been clear for a while now that our current governor is determined to frack NYS no matter what we do.
Second, the state of Vermont absolutely does have the authority to prevent fracking within the state, no matter what the Federal position is. The long-running conflict in NYS has not been whether the state has the power to ban fracking, but whether or not to use that power. Unfortunately, I’m not sure about Vermont’s power over national park lands, but I THINK the state does have the authority to block fracking there too. You can look to Virginia for an example with the George Washington National Forest, except that Virginia is not trying to stop fracking (though at least one county near the Forest wants to stop it).
Working with dozens of committed “fractivists” for the last couple years, I can tell you that there are countless examples of fracking contaminating water supplies and ruining lives. My friends and I have hundreds of hours video documenting the consequences of fracking in neighboring communities in Pennsylvania and our fight with the gas industry to stop it from coming to NYS. If you want to see what’s been going on, check out ShaleShockMedia.org. You won’t believe some of the stuff you’ll see, and you won’t want it in Vermont.