New Report Shows Radioactive Threat to New York if Fracking Approved

[White Eagle]

These people are so set on getting gas out of the ground they are ignoring the possibilities of the danger to the public, or do they even care. I've been hearing bad stories in other parts of the country.



http://www.nationofchange.org/new-re...ved-1352475264

New Report Shows Radioactive Threat to New York if Fracking Approved
Eco Watch / News Report
Published: Friday 9 November 2012

“Once radioactive material comes up out of the ground along with the gas, the problem is what to do with it,” says Doug Wood

A new report issued by Grassroots Environmental Education, a New York-based non-profit organization and authored by a former staff scientist for the National Council on Radiation Protection says that horizontal hydrofracking in the Marcellus Shale region of New York State is likely to produce significantly higher amounts of radioactive waste than previously believed, putting New Yorkers in danger, and that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has not demonstrated the ability to properly analyze the potential impact of radiation exposure or take adequate steps to protect the public.

“Once radioactive material comes up out of the ground along with the gas, the problem is what to do with it,” says Doug Wood, associate director of Grassroots Environmental Education, who edited the report. “The radioactivity lasts for thousands of years, and it is virtually impossible to eliminate or mitigate. Sooner or later, it’s going to end up in our environment and eventually our food chain. It’s a problem with no good solution—and the DEC is unequipped to handle it.”

[frankfrank]

This should be a good candidate for one of the top stories of 2012, for the Project Censored think tank.

http://www.projectcensored.org/

It's not one of their stories, though. Go to that website at your own risk. Some of the hidden news will peel the paint off your walls.

[Kulindahr]

I don't see any difficulty at all in deciding what to do with the radioactive material: divide it evenly among the executives and politicians who backed the project, and form it into office furniture for them.

[Sausy]

Fucking environmental extremist....no we can't drill for oil here...no to oil offshore ...no to shale..no to gas.... hell no to coal...other countries are fucking laughing at our can't do idiotic leftist"retrogressives" who think solar and fucking windmills alone are just dandy(windmills ironically are opposed by some on the environmental left for their danger to birds and other unfortunate side effects). China is willing to stare Japan into submission or worse for the humongous oil and gas reserves found offshore recently. Environmentalists get fucking real or get the hell out of the way....unless the endless windbaggery coming from their mouths will do the trick in securing our long term energy needs. There ARE ways to mitigate environmental problems but instead of working with energy producers the raving lunatics on the environmental left just want to stand in the way of every non politically correct form of energy production. Damn them for jobs lost in all the sectors they are fighting. Where are they going to go?

We must transition to renewables but until economically feasable...until we can employ all those affected by the move to clean renewable mass energy supply as well (unless you have the money to compensate them commiserate to salary lost) we need ALL kinds of energy sources to be in the mix. Prosperity alone can handle the cost of that transition to the economy... the funny thing is I read recently one area that the economy was growing,at least in competitive salary, was for the energy field in the gas and oil industries. Fucking environmental do gooders can't see the forest for the trees.

[cityboy-stl]

I have to say I pretty much agree with Saucy. I'm all for alternative energy development because we simply cannot rely on a diminishing supply of fossil fuels. But we are not there yet. You simply cannot provide reliable power with wind, solar or other alternatives. We need to step up the research and be the world leader that we are. On the hand I am also all for regulations that prevent greedy, irresponsible corporations from polluting the air, contaminating the water, poisoning the ground and turning the Gulf of Mexico into a oil field. There is too much extremism on both sides of this issue. There is too much extremism on just about every issue for that matter. Reason and reality seem to be in short supply these days.

[White Eagle]

So releasing radioactive materials on a complete state is ok?
Add the Keystone pipeline, it is ok to contaminate 5 0r 6 states that use the aquifer that Keystone will surely contaminate when their pipeline fails?
I'm glad I am an environmentalist then.
Fix the things that are wrong then go ahead with your fracking or pipelines.

[eastofeden]

The earth doesn't belong to us...we are guests. If people weren't so concerned with immediate gratification and hideous consumption and had a lot more respect for the earth then environmentalists wouldn't have to be as militant as they are.

Someone needs to take care of the balance and that is what environmentalists do...they understand the delicate balance of nature and their fight is not one of personal gain...it is a matter of conscience and respect.

“Once radioactive material comes up out of the ground along with the gas, the problem is what to do with it,” says Doug Wood, associate director of Grassroots Environmental Education, who edited the report. “The radioactivity lasts for thousands of years, and it is virtually impossible to eliminate or mitigate. Sooner or later, it’s going to end up in our environment and eventually our food chain. It’s a problem with no good solution—and the DEC is unequipped to handle it.”

Keywords...OUR ENVIRONMENT. It is completely unacceptable to decide for millions of other people...and millions more whom have not yet been born... that this risk is somehow acceptable.

[Kulindahr]

One thing lacking from the discussion at this point is any mention of what the radioactive material is. Are we talking plutonium? uranium? radon? I'm assuming not the first two, because those wouldn't be that hard to remove -- but the element(s) involved should be stated, so people can make rational conclusions.

[eastofeden]

One thing lacking from the discussion at this point is any mention of what the radioactive material is. Are we talking plutonium? uranium? radon? I'm assuming not the first two, because those wouldn't be that hard to remove -- but the element(s) involved should be stated, so people can make rational conclusions.

I beleive they are referring to radium/radon. Very Bad.

[Stardreamer]

One thing lacking from the discussion at this point is any mention of what the radioactive material is. Are we talking plutonium? uranium? radon? I'm assuming not the first two, because those wouldn't be that hard to remove -- but the element(s) involved should be stated, so people can make rational conclusions.

According to the article it is naturally occurring radium and its decay product radon. It should be noted this material exists naturally everywhere in the world which is why radon gas in basements is a concern. Every living person has a small amount of radium in their bone tissues and always will (it dissolves into ground water and mimics calcium so bones tend to pick it up but the body excretes most of it) as you are exposed to it every day.

The issue is when it becomes concentrated increasing your daily exposure and thus increasing your risk of long term cancers. This is what happened with Madam Currie due to her experiments and the 'Radium Girls' who painted the glow in the dark watch dials ingesting concentrated amounts of it from the licking the brush tips while working. It would certainly be the case here if it is not disposed of adequately.

It looks like the mitigation solution the drillers (with the state's EPA approval) are planning to use is to dispose of the materials by dispersal into the environment intended to reduce the concentrations to acceptable (near background) levels.

[Jack Springer]

Since Obama won -- fracking is over, most new oil drilling is over, coal is over.

Hope your wind turbine keeps you warm in the future.

We're shooting ourselves in the foot -- but for what.

[White Eagle]

The earth doesn't belong to us...we are guests. If people weren't so concerned with immediate gratification and hideous consumption and had a lot more respect for the earth then environmentalists wouldn't have to be as militant as they are.

Someone needs to take care of the balance and that is what environmentalists do...they understand the delicate balance of nature and their fight is not one of personal gain...it is a matter of conscience and respect.

“Once radioactive material comes up out of the ground along with the gas, the problem is what to do with it,” says Doug Wood, associate director of Grassroots Environmental Education, who edited the report. “The radioactivity lasts for thousands of years, and it is virtually impossible to eliminate or mitigate. Sooner or later, it’s going to end up in our environment and eventually our food chain. It’s a problem with no good solution—and the DEC is unequipped to handle it.”

Keywords...OUR ENVIRONMENT. It is completely unacceptable to decide for millions of other people...and millions more whom have not yet been born... that this risk is somehow acceptable.

I HAVE to reply to this post. You are so right on that it's scary. This explains everything that I believe is right.
Your first sentence explains it all. It's an old Native American saying. I tried to find it but my files have no rhyme or reason. But you have it right!
Thank you.

[eastofeden]

I HAVE to reply to this post. You are so right on that it's scary. This explains everything that I believe is right.
Your first sentence explains it all. It's an old Native American saying. I tried to find it but my files have no rhyme or reason. But you have it right!
Thank you.

Wow! Thank YOU! As a staunch defender of the environment I usually get shouted at or cussed out...seriously...never been thanked before. I am glad that it resonated for you. I truly believe everything I said to the core of my being.

[Kulindahr]

I beleive they are referring to radium/radon. Very Bad.

Radon half-lives are counted in days, so that's not it. Radium's is like a millennium and a half, so it fits what the cite said.

[Kulindahr]

Since Obama won -- fracking is over, most new oil drilling is over, coal is over.

Hope your wind turbine keeps you warm in the future.

We're shooting ourselves in the foot -- but for what.

Jack, the election is over; you can stop with all the false claims now.

[Kulindahr]

I HAVE to reply to this post. You are so right on that it's scary. This explains everything that I believe is right.
Your first sentence explains it all. It's an old Native American saying. I tried to find it but my files have no rhyme or reason. But you have it right!
Thank you.

Wow! Thank YOU! As a staunch defender of the environment I usually get shouted at or cussed out...seriously...never been thanked before. I am glad that it resonated for you. I truly believe everything I said to the core of my being.

I second that resonance.

Real libertarians would be staunch defenders of the environment, too, since rationally the earth can't belong to anyone since we didn't make it. The only rational basis for private property is that we all own all of the earth as custodians, so every one of us is obligated in his/her use of his/her portion to care for it while making use of it.

[Kulindahr]

Point of information: radium is a decay product from uranium mostly, but also from thorium. Radium in the solar system is found almost exclusively in deposits of uranium or thorium. So for radium to be a problem in fracking, they have to be busting rocks that are laden with serious amounts of uranium and/or thorium.

One wonders if they should be messing with those rocks in the first place.

[Jack Springer]

Jack, the election is over; you can stop with all the false claims now.

What false claims?

[palemale]

Fucking environmental extremist....no we can't drill for oil here...no to oil offshore ...no to shale..no to gas.... hell no to coal...other countries are fucking laughing at our can't do idiotic leftist"retrogressives" who think solar and fucking windmills alone are just dandy(windmills ironically are opposed by some on the environmental left for their danger to birds and other unfortunate side effects). China is willing to stare Japan into submission or worse for the humongous oil and gas reserves found offshore recently. Environmentalists get fucking real or get the hell out of the way....unless the endless windbaggery coming from their mouths will do the trick in securing our long term energy needs. There ARE ways to mitigate environmental problems but instead of working with energy producers the raving lunatics on the environmental left just want to stand in the way of every non politically correct form of energy production. Damn them for jobs lost in all the sectors they are fighting. Where are they going to go?

We must transition to renewables but until economically feasable...until we can employ all those affected by the move to clean renewable mass energy supply as well (unless you have the money to compensate them commiserate to salary lost) we need ALL kinds of energy sources to be in the mix. Prosperity alone can handle the cost of that transition to the economy... the funny thing is I read recently one area that the economy was growing,at least in competitive salary, was for the energy field in the gas and oil industries. Fucking environmental do gooders can't see the forest for the trees.

The area in New York where fracking is going on extends into the New York City watershed, from where nearly all of our drinking water, and Westchester County's too, comes. Indeed, the gas companies want to frack in the watershed. Do you think it's unreasonable for environmentalists, and the City of New York, to oppose fracking in our watershed?

[Stardreamer]

Point of information: radium is a decay product from uranium mostly, but also from thorium. Radium in the solar system is found almost exclusively in deposits of uranium or thorium. So for radium to be a problem in fracking, they have to be busting rocks that are laden with serious amounts of uranium and/or thorium.

One wonders if they should be messing with those rocks in the first place.

As I understand it the shale formations containing shale gas are high organic formations similar to coal deposits and we know that the burning of coal is a major source or radiation. You can be exposed to 100 times the radiation standing downwind of coal plant than you would of a nuclear power plant. Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste So it would make some sense that shale gas deposits contain similar levels of uranium and its decay products.

The fact is uranium and its decay products exists in ALL soils, there is some in your backyard right now. They contribute to the normal background radiation of the planet. Some soils have heavier concentrations than others which is why you have specific ores that is used for mining it but you are surrounded by it every day. Also ALL gas and oil production produces waste products with these higher radiation levels simply because those organic deposits then to have higher concentrations of uranium and its decay products, this is nothing new that just cropped up with fracking.

I suspect that fracking produces higher amounts of contaminated water due to the nature of the process and the disposal of that water is a concern. Particularly when they are talking about disposal by pumping it into underground wells which might raise the local groundwater levels above approved safe levels. I would think controlled dispersal downstream into the ocean would be better depending on the volume to be disposed of.

[Zu-Mendel]

Protip: Considering that NYC is the only thing keeping New York overwhelmingly blue, Republicans really don't care about NYC unless they can get some knee-jerk photo-op out of the deal. Remember, this is Fake America we're talking about here.

[palemale]

Protip: Considering that NYC is the only thing keeping New York overwhelmingly blue, Republicans really don't care about NYC unless they can get some knee-jerk photo-op out of the deal. Remember, this is Fake America we're talking about here.

Obama won New York State outside NYC by over 300,000 votes.

[Kulindahr]

As I understand it the shale formations containing shale gas are high organic formations similar to coal deposits and we know that the burning of coal is a major source or radiation. You can be exposed to 100 times the radiation standing downwind of coal plant than you would of a nuclear power plant. Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste So it would make some sense that shale gas deposits contain similar levels of uranium and its decay products.

The fact is uranium and its decay products exists in ALL soils, there is some in your backyard right now. They contribute to the normal background radiation of the planet. Some soils have heavier concentrations than others which is why you have specific ores that is used for mining it but you are surrounded by it every day. Also ALL gas and oil production produces waste products with these higher radiation levels simply because those organic deposits then to have higher concentrations of uranium and its decay products, this is nothing new that just cropped up with fracking.

I suspect that fracking produces higher amounts of contaminated water due to the nature of the process and the disposal of that water is a concern. Particularly when they are talking about disposal by pumping it into underground wells which might raise the local groundwater levels above approved safe levels. I would think controlled dispersal downstream into the ocean would be better depending on the volume to be disposed of.

Ah -- I hadn't thought of the water angle. But since most of the water used is going to stay down below, disposing of it somewhere else isn't much of an option. The radon content of the natural gas isn't a problem; just store the gas in tanks for half a year and there will be far less than a trillionth of the original radon content (of course then the tanks will need to be flushed to get rid of the decay products). But that water... yeah; radium is soluble, IIRC, and would drift through the groundwater until it settles somewhere and spends the next few thousand years turning into radon.


p.s. -- I know about the coal ash item; a college friend who was in nuclear engineering got a summer internship at a coal plant because it was the best place to study the spread of radioactive isotopes into the general environment.

[Stardreamer]

But that water... yeah; radium is soluble, IIRC, and would drift through the groundwater until it settles somewhere and spends the next few thousand years turning into radon.

Yes is which is why most ground water has some in it too, the deeper down you go for the water the more radioactive it tends to be. Water near the surface gets diluted by rainwater so tends to be less radioactive and of course once it gets into a major waterway and down to the ocean it is gets diluted out pretty quick. The open ocean is the best radiation sink in the world. I've always thought that properly handled deep ocean burial is the best option for long term nuclear waste disposal if you are not going to take the time and effort of properly recycling spent fuel.