Our thoughts and opinions about gas extraction and related topics

Put on your earth shoes - call to action by Brook Lenker

Put on Your Earth Shoes

The biggest challenge humanity has ever faced.

That’s one way to describe climate change. It proceeds ahead of schedule, threatening to wreak havoc on the world we know. No longer merely flirting with disaster, we’re tangled in a frenetic dance to save ourselves. Our friends at Years of Living Dangerously have vividly captured the scale of what’s at stake.
Meanwhile, a laundry list of deplorable measures by President Trump ignores or outright dismantles America’s capacity to respond. Federal investment in clean energy is forsaken. Retro economics reigns replete with dystopian impacts on people and the planet. It could be 1950 all over again. Then, we were blinded by the future – fooled that oil and ingenuity would win the day. Today we are sobered by it. Only wholesale change can get us to tomorrow.

The technologies and bright ideas are ready for broader deployment. They’re propelled by information, action, and unbridled hope. Hope feeds exponentially on the hope of others. The organism grows more powerful and adept through colonial enrichment.

Saturday’s Climate March, the People’s Climate Movement, is the feast of a lifetime, a chance to nurture our souls and make a statement for the generations. By bike, rail, bus or carpool, head to Washington, DC or a satellite March site on April 29th. Put on your earth shoes, walk in solidarity, and make the deniers shake in their sole-less shoes.

And don’t for a second think this will be the last word. When you’re choking Mother Earth, it’s a fight to the finish. Cooler heads prevail.

By Brook Lenker, Executive Director, FracTracker Alliance

For the Environmental Justice Listening Tour

PA DEP Environmental Justice Listening Tour

A Guide to Current EJ Rules and Potential Changes

by Kirk Jalbert, Manager of Community-Based Research & Engagement, FracTracker Alliance
and Veronica Coptis, Executive Director, Center for Coalfield Justice

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will be hosting a nine-stop “listening tour” to hear residents’ perspectives on environmental justice (EJ). These sessions begin in the western part of the state on April 12th and 13th. The complete list of dates and locations of these meetings can be found here. The DEP will also be accepting written comments, which can be either mailed or emailed to DEP-OEJ@pa.gov.

The EJ listening tour follows on the heels of events in May 2016, when environmental advocacy groups questioned the well pad siting practices of oil and gas drilling company Range Resources, causing the DEP to announce it would revisit its EJ policies. Such changes would include reassessing how EJ zones are designated and what kinds of development triggers additional scrutiny by the DEP’s Office of Environmental Justice. We wrote about this story, and detailed how present EJ rules fail to account for oil and gas development in June 2016.

The following guide is meant to provide helpful information to residents in preparing for the listening tour. We first offer a summary of PA’s present EJ policies, followed by a commentary on what gaps we believe exist in those policies, and conclude with some reflections on EJ policies in other U.S. states and what we might learn from them in reassessing our own state’s EJ laws.

Listening Sessions Format

Each environmental justice listening tour will include opening remarks from Acting Secretary McDonnell, followed by a brief presentation from the Office of Environmental Justice, and then will open to receive testimony from the public. Verbal testimony is limited to 3 minutes for each witness. Organizations are asked to designate one witness to present testimony on their behalf. Verbal comments will be recorded by a court stenographer, and transcripts will be made available to the public at a later date.

The DEP Office of Environmental Justice has offered a set of eight questions to guide comments in the listening tour sessions. They are as follows:

  1. What environmental justice concerns are most pressing in your community?
  2. Do you feel that the current definition of an environmental justice community (20% poverty and/or 30% minority) properly represents the needs of your community and the Commonwealth at large?
  3. Do you feel the DEP is engaged with marginalized communities to ensure that they have a voice in the decision making process? How can the DEP be more engaged with these communities?
  4. What tools have you used to find out information on DEP permitting/enforcement actions?
  5. What ways can the DEP be more effective at sharing information with the public?
  6. How can the DEP be more effective at receiving public input?
  7. What resource(s) is your community lacking that the DEP can provide that would assist in efforts to ensure environmental equity?
  8. What additional steps can be taken by the Department to effectively reach out to these vulnerable communities to ensure that their concerns are taken into consideration?

Summary of Existing EJ Policies

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, environmental justice is “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” This same definition is used by the DEP.

In 2004, the DEP codified this EJ definition in the Environmental Justice Public Participation Policy. EJ designations are defined by the DEP as any census tract where 20% or more of the population lives in poverty and/or 30% or more of the population identifies as a minority. Designations are based on the U.S. Census Bureau and by the federal poverty guidelines.

Below is a map of current EJ designated census tracts in PA that also shows the counties where listening tour sessions will be held. When zoomed in to regional scale, EJ areas can be clicked to see their current poverty and minority percentages. The locations of oil and gas wells and permits are also visible at the regional scale.

Map of current EJ areas (based on 2015 census data) shown in teal, with listening tour counties outlined in red

View map fullscreenHow FracTracker maps work

Of note in the 2004 policy are the kinds of permits that trigger a potential EJ review – specifically: industrial wastewater facilities, air permits for new major source of hazardous air pollution, waste permits for landfills and incinerators, coal mining permits and coal refuse facilities, and/or concentrated animal feeding operations. The policy also allows for review of “opt-in permits” the DEP believes warrant special consideration, but we have found no evidence to suggest that this option has been historically used.

When a project triggers EJ review, the DEP “strongly encourages” the applicant meets with community stakeholders prior to submitting their permit, with the idea that additional public outreach makes project details more apparent. The applicant is also encouraged to produce “plain language” information sheets, online and in print form, regarding the proposed activity.

Issues with Existing PA EJ Policies

A complete list of what may occur when a project triggers EJ review can be found here. The following table is a breakdown of where we see deficiencies in PA EJ policies that need to be addressed:

Existing Policy Issue Possible Solutions
EJ Definition
EJ areas defined by 20% poverty/30% minority indicators.EJ ensures meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income.
Many communities are just outside poverty/minority thresholds, or are spread across multiple census tracts experiencing concentrated industrial activities.

Disproportionate exist due to other factors besides poverty and race.

DEP should go beyond the census tracts, as well as account for other factors such as the “working poor”, homeownership rates, assisted school lunches rate, disability and elderly populations, and language barriers.

Reviews should factor in “cumulative impacts” of more developing relative to existing industrial burdens.

Regardless of “age and gender” should be added to EJ protection language.

Trigger Permits
Limited kinds of “trigger” permit types are listed in the Public Participation Policy as eligible for EJ review.
Permits outside of these categories are also degrading the communities and being targeted to environmental justice communities. Oil and gas extractions, pipelines, and other infrastructure are not currently considered trigger permits but are impacting many environmental justice areas. DEP should oil and gas permits to the trigger list. All permits, even of seemingly lesser severity, should trigger review to see if they contribute to cumulative impacts to already burdened community.
Permit Notifications
DEP program staff must notify the Office of EJ when a permit “trigger” EJ review and report the details of the proposed activity.
Currently not all DEP program staff are alerting the EJ office of trigger permits, and many are not education on EJ policies. More training and funding needs to be allocated to make sure that trigger permits are not overlooked or mishandled.
Public Education
Requiring the distribution of “plain language” information sheets regarding the proposed activity and permit conditions. Public notices are to be placed in widely read publications in print and online.
Does not always happen or the information produced is inadequately written or poorly distributed. Public notices are put in the legal sections of paper, often initial meetings are not even publicly noticed if the company is the only one organizing the meeting. Enforce this requirement and include real infographics as much as possible. Consult with local community groups to determine what communication tools work best.

Publish additional notice outside of newspaper in widely read publications, flyers in local businesses, community centers, and church bulletins. Require applicants to do direct mailing.

Updated the “eFacts notification system to include more information and send email notices to interested parties when updates in non-technical language.

Applicant Public Meetings
DEP “strongly suggests” applicants meet with all stakeholders, before applying for permit, as well as throughout the permitting process.
Not all stakeholders are being brought into conversations and often DEP allows the applicant to decide who these people should be. Applicants are often not transparent about their plans. Meetings do not occur at all stages of the process. It should not be up to the applicant to control the process and do outreach. DEP should ensure that all interested parties are engaged in the permitting process.

Meeting should be held during the entire permitting process. This should be required, not “strongly suggested.” A meeting should occur after a permit is administratively complete and again after technical review is done but before a decision is made. Many changes happened during technical review and this gives communities the opportunity to weigh in on the final project and understand its timeline.

DEP should always participate in these meetings and make themselves available to answer questions from the community.

DEP Public Meetings
DEP holds an informal public conference within 30 days of receiving the application to inform residents of EJ area designation and the nature of project.
These meetings frequently are not able to answer people questions and residents are told to wait for additional information. The format of these meetings do not allow for dialogue, which prevents the community from learning from each other. The DEP needs to hold the informal public conferences in discussion formats so residents can ask questions together and receive answers in person, not just take notes and tell residents they will receive a written response. DEP staff responsible for reviewing the proposal must be present at the meetings to answer questions.
Public Comments
DEP accepts comments from EJ communities.
These comments are often not taken into consideration, or given very little weight during the permitting process. Instead, the comments are merely noted for the record. Create a formal process for integrating comments from community experts who are often best able to provide information about how a project will impact their community.
DEP Availability
DEP will maintain presence and be availability to residents throughout permitting process.
DEP staff are available during public meetings but are otherwise unavailable until there is a permit decision.

Inadequate continuing public oversight of how EJ policies are administered across the state.

Actively provide updates on the permitting process and changes to the application. The burden should not be on an EJ community to stay up date on the permit, but should be the DEP and applicant’s responsibility.

DEP staff responsible for reviewing the proposal must be available to the community to answer questions. DEP should also prioritize filling its regional Environmental Advocate staff positions currently vacant in many of its districts.

Convert the DEP Citizen Environmental Justice Advisory Board (EJAB) to a full committee, with the power to oversee EJ permits under review and influence state EJ policies. Hold quarterly EJAB meetings in different DEP regions on a rotating basis.

Reflections on other states’ EJ policies

States that use poverty and race indicators differently:

  • Connecticut: Uses income below 200% of the federal poverty level (“working poor”).
  • Illinois: indicates low-income and/or minority population as being “greater than twice the statewide average.”
  • Massachusetts: Defines by census “block group” rather than census tract, which can identify pocket EJ areas that might be lost in larger census tracts.
  • Texas: For income indicator, uses census block group and income below 200% of the federal poverty level.

States that go beyond poverty and race indicators:

  • California: Considers existing disproportionate environmental burden. Also, demographics include “low levels of homeownership, high rent burden…or low levels of educational attainment.”
  • Connecticut: includes a “distressed community” indicator, defined as whether it is eligible for HUD grants, or experienced layoffs/tax loss due to a major plant closing.
  • Georgia: includes language for elderly and disabled populations “The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) encourages the involvement of people with disabilities in the development and improvement of transportation and paratransit plans and services.”
  • Massachusetts: Uses linguistic isolation, defined as “25% or more of households having no one over the age of 14 who speaks English only, or very well.”
  • New Jersey: Communities can file a petition to be recognized as a vulnerable.

Example of better public participation affordances:

  • New Jersey: When a community is designated EJ, a task force is formed to develop a unique “Action Plan” after consultation with residents, local, and county government, that will address environmental, social and economic factors affecting their health or environment. This task force monitors Action Plan implementation, and advises development projects to reduce impacts.

Conclusions

Environmental justice rules came into existence in order to deal with the burdens of large polluting facilities like landfills, incinerators, and coal mines. Race and poverty measures are, without question, two very important indicators that have provided for the fair treatment of people of all races, income, and cultures in these instances. However, if we are to properly assess how residents are disproportionately impacted across a range of environmental burdens in the state, other indicators of marginalization should be included. The Center for Coalfield Justice suggests a few in a report titled Community Indicators of Environmental Justice: A Baseline Report Focusing on Greene and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania.

Fair treatment in EJ communities should also mean offering mechanisms for meaningful input that allow residents to shape the ultimate direction of proposed projects, as well. Finally, current EJ policies are very limited in only addressing future projects, whereas issues such as how disadvantaged communities, struggling with legacy problems such water, air, and soil pollution, are left to other agencies to deal with.

We encourage residents of Pennsylvania to attend an environmental justice listening tour session to share their perspectives, and how the DEP can better fulfill its mandates to protect vulnerable communities.


Photo: Clairton Coke Works, by Mark Dixon, Blue Lens, LLC.

Re-imagine Beaver County meeting - Photo by Sophie Riedel

Mapping a new vision in PA: Alternatives to petrochemical development

At a Re-Imagine Beaver County gathering in Pennsylvania earlier this month, static maps became dynamic in the hands of those who live in and around the region depicted. Residents of this area in the greater Pittsburgh region gathered to depict a new vision for Beaver County, PA. This county is currently faced with the proposal of a massive Shell-owned petrochemical facility – also called a “cracker” – and further build-out that could render the area a northern version of Louisiana’s “Chemical Corridor.” Participants at this event, from Beaver County and beyond, were encouraged to collectively envision a future based on sustainable development. The picture they created was one that welcomes change – but requires it to be sustainable and for the benefit of the community that makes it happen.

Re-Imagine Beaver County Group Mapping - by Sophie Riedel

Figure 1: Participants study a map of Beaver County. Photo credit: Sophie Riedel.

Re-Imagine Beaver County Participants

Panelists from municipal government, organic agriculture, and leaders and entrepreneurs of sustainable initiatives started off the event, sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania and endorsed by the Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Committee. After an hour, the room of 60 or so participants dove into the lively de- and re-construction of large format maps of the area. They were invited to markup the maps, created by Carnegie Mellon University graduate student of the School of Architecture, Sophie Riedel. Each table worked from a different base map of the same area – centering on the confluence of the Ohio and Beaver rivers, including the already heavily-industrialized riverside and the site of Shell’s proposed petrochemical facility.

Massive shell processing plant under construction in Beaver County PA and across the Ohio River from the town of Beaver. This massive processing plant, near residential areas, schools and hospitals, will be a serious threat to the health of the those living in the region.

Figure 2: The site of the proposed petrochemical facility in Beaver County (on left) and the Ohio River that participants hope to see reinvented as a recreational waterway buttressed by public parks. Photo credit: Garth Lenz, iLCP.

Much more than a thought exercise, the gathering represented a timely response to a growing grassroots effort around the proposed petrochemical inundation. Changes are already underway at the site, and those who live in this region have the right to give input. This right is especially salient when considering the risks associated with the petrochemical industry – including detrimental health impacts on babies before they are even born, asthma exacerbation, and increased cancer rates.

Charting a new vision

The re-invented Beaver County would be one of increased connectivity and mobility, well-equipped to provide for local needs with local means.

Many ideas included on the maps reflected a longing for transportation options independent of personal vehicles – including better, safer, more connected bike trails and walking paths, use of existing rail lines for local travel, and even the inventive suggestion of a water taxi. These inherently lower-impact means of transport coincide with preferences of millennials, according to several of the panelists, who want more walkable, bikeable communities. Ushering in such sustainable suggestions would welcome more young families to an area with an aging population. More than just about moving people, transportation ideas also included ways to get locally grown foods to those who need it, such as the elderly.

sophie-riedel-visioning-map-close-up

Figure 3: Participants modify maps to reflect a new vision. Photo credit: Sophie Riedel.

The value of beauty was a subtheme in many of the ideas to connect and mobilize the population and goods, ideas which often held a dual aim of protecting open space, creating new parks, and offering recreation possibilities. Participants ambitiously reimagined their river, the Ohio, from its current status as a closed-off corridor for industrial usage and waste, to a recreational resource for kayaking and fishing walleye.

Participants marked up the maps to show the resources that help sustain this community, and voiced a strong desire for development that would enable additional self-reliance. These forward-thinking changes included increased agriculture and use of permaculture techniques, and community gardens for growing food near the people who currently lack access. Ideas for powering the region abounded, like harnessing wind power and putting solar panels on every new building.

Participants were firm on local sourcing for another key resource: the labor required for these efforts, they insisted, must come from the local populace. Educational programs designed to channel learners into workers for sustainability might include training to rebuild homes to “greener” standards, and programs aimed at bringing a new generation of farmers to the fields. Perhaps a nod to the world-wide plastic glut that a petrochemical facility would add to, suggestions even included local ways of dealing with waste, like starting a composting program and establishing more recycling centers.

Whose vision?

Who is a part of this vision, both in creating it and living it out? Inevitably, the selection of panelists and the interests of the audience members themselves influenced the vision this group crafted. The question of inclusion and representation found articulation among many participants, and the hosts of the event welcomed suggestions on reaching a broader audience moving forward. Looking around the room, one man asked, “Where are all the young people, and families with kids?” Indeed, only several members of this demographic were present. Though indicative of the racial makeup of Beaver County, the audience appeared to be primarily white, meaning that the racially diverse communities in the region where not represented. Others pointed out that going forward, the audience should also include those residents struggling with un- and underemployment, who have a major stake in whatever vision of Beaver County comes to fruition. Another said he would like to see more elected officials and leaders present. Notably, Potter Township Board of Supervisors Chairperson, Rebecca Matsco, who is a strong advocate for the proposed petrochemical project in her township, was present for the first half of the event.

Local means for meeting local needs

People who welcome petrochemical development in Beaver County might believe that those who voice concerns about the proposed Shell plant aren’t forward-thinking, or simply oppose change. Quite in contrast, participants at Re-Imagine Beaver County went to work reinventing their community with optimism and enthusiasm. They didn’t seem to be resisting change, but instead, wanting to participate in the process of change and to ultimately see benefits to their community. For example, discussion of solar power generated substantial excitement. According to panel speaker Hal Saville, however, the biggest challenge is making it affordable for everyone, which suggests that the estimated $1.6 billion in tax breaks going to Shell for the petrochemical plant could be better allocated.

A key narrative from supporters of the ethane cracker centers on the pressing need for jobs in this area, though some locals have expressed concern about how many of Shell’s promised jobs would go to residents. Whoever gets hired, these jobs come with serious dangers to workers. Participants at this event proposed alternative initiatives – both ambitious and small – for creating jobs within the community, like providing “sprout funds” to encourage new business start-ups, and launching a coordinated effort to rehab aging housing stock. These ideas suggest that the people of this region feel their energy and ingenuity would be best spent making Beaver County a better place to live and work, in contrast to producing disposable petrochemical products for export around the world. The fact that so many participants emphasized local means for meeting their needs in no way downplays the need for good jobs. Rather, it points to the fact that people want jobs that are good for them and for the future of their community.

Moving the vision forward

Where do we go from here? Can the momentum of this event draw in greater representation from the region to have a voice in this process? Will these visions become animated and guide the creation of a new reality? Broader and deeper planning is in order; participants and panelists alike pointed to tools like comprehensive community plans and cleaner, “greener” industrial policies. More than anything, the group articulated a need for more deliberation and participation. As panelist and farm co-owner Don Kretschmann put it, when it comes to change, we need to “think it through before we go ahead and do it.”

The maps themselves, bearing the inspirations scrawled out during the event, have not reached the end of the road. From here, these maps will accompany an upcoming exhibition of the artworks in Petrochemical America, which locals hope to bring to the greater Pittsburgh area in the coming months. League of Women Voters, for their part, continue to move the vision forward, inviting input from all on next steps, with an emphasis on pulling in a broader cross-section of the community.

To voice your vision, and to stay in the loop on future Re-Imagine Beaver County events, contact reimaginelwvpa@gmail.com.


Many thanks to Sophie Riedel for sharing photographs from the event, and to the International League of Conservation Photographers and the Environmental Integrity Project for sharing the aerial photograph of the Shell site from their joint project, “The Human Cost of Energy Production.”

By Leann Leiter, Environmental Health Fellow

 

Cuyahoga River on fire - Photo by Cleveland State Univ Library

On a Dark Road to Nowhere

Teddy Roosevelt is rolling over in his grave. The progressive conservationist and one-time republican knew that healthy air, clean water, and stewardship of natural resources are tantamount to a high quality of life. Fifty years before Donald Trump drew his first infantile breath, Roosevelt was championing national parks and cities beautiful. America gained stature in the world – not only from economic might – but from noble ideas and values shared. Roosevelt was a visionary.

The ideals he sowed led to further cultivation of good. From Aldo Leopold to Rachel Carson, we learned that ecology includes humans. Everything is interconnected; everything has consequence. Ignoring the science of climate change and elementary cause and effect will have dire consequences.

In just a few days, the new president has wrought unprecedented carnage on laws and institutions created to protect our land and its people. The Center for Disease Control cancelled a long planned conference on climate change and health. An executive order was signed to clear the way for the Dakota and Keystone XL pipelines – potentially locking-in carbon pollution for decades if the projects move forward. The administration imposed a freeze on EPA grants and contracts and may be considering legislation to ban the EPA from generating its own internal science. The EPA is the federal agency charged to “protect human health and the environment.” Leadership with our best interests in mind would encourage scientific inquiry and requisite oversight, not silence it.

Economies thrive and civilizations rise when challenged to adapt and improve. Prosperity is on the rise in states with high expectations and greater public investment. The mantra of cutting regulations is gross deception. We can’t forget silent springs and burning rivers (photo top), Love Canals or the gulf spills. Attempts to roll back environmental laws and agreements – some enacted decades ago with bipartisan support – can’t go unchecked. Which safeguard enacted to protect life and property is too much? Should billionaire-funded anti-regulatory agendas trump civil rules designed to benefit mankind?

Conservation, restoration, green infrastructure, clean energy, and smart public expenditure pay huge social and economic dividends:

Fighting climate change fuels innovation. Research grows jobs. Cutting pollution reduces healthcare costs. Creating open space and public amenities retains and attracts a motivated, productive workforce. Sustainability nurtures hope.


Other countries will build the renewable energy future if we don’t. They already are. We can be in the top tier or risk sliding into a dirty and dangerous, carbon-dependent oblivion. If that sounds alarmist, take a look at the basic impacts we’ve seen from fossil fuel extraction and distribution nationwide. Hundreds of thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells lay strewn across the country, 200,000 in Pennsylvania alone. Thousands of miles of streams have been contaminated by coal mining. Volatile and potentially explosive oil trains and pipelines pass by our homes, across sacred tribal lands, and through highly populated cities. Refineries pollute the very air we breathe. Degradation and injustice is un-American.

These strange and troubling times require a loud and unified chorus. Roosevelt said “It is only through labor and painful effort, by grim energy and resolute courage, that we move on to better things.”

There is no choice but to resist. And we will.

On a Dark Road to Nowhere – By Brook Lenker, Executive Director, FracTracker Alliance


Feature Image Credit: Cleveland State University Library. The Cuyahoga River is a river in the United States, located in Northeast Ohio, that feeds into Lake Erie. The river is famous for having been so polluted that it “caught fire” in 1969. The event helped to spur the environmental movement in the US – via Wikipedia

For Persevere Post

A request from FracTracker Alliance: Help us persevere in fighting for a safer energy future

As 2016 comes to a close, our earth and all of its inhabitants face grave challenges. In the past year, climate change has demonstrated its foreboding consequences with frightening vigor, while the US President-elect seems determined to derail every measure put into place to address the unfolding climate crisis.

We – you and I – must protect the planet. It is time to be audacious, and we need your help.

In the past year, FracTracker Alliance provided critical mapping and analytical support to organizations across the country. We collaborated with:

  • Earthworks and Clean Air Task Force to create the Oil and Gas Threat Map
  • Natural Resources Defense Council to identify at-risk Latino populations near drilling sites
  • The Center for Biological Diversity to map red-cockaded woodpecker habitat in Mississippi imperiled by oil and gas activities
  • National Parks Conservation Association to document extraction concerns around Mesa Verde National Park
  • River Network to study energy and infrastructure impacts to the waters of the Great Lakes
  • Sane Energy to help them improve their interactive “You Are Here” map
  • Western Organization of Resource Councils to examine the disposal of radioactive fracking waste in several western states

In Pennsylvania, we’re working with Mountain Watershed Association to map zoning as a tool to limit or preclude drilling. In New York, we’re aiding Hudson Riverkeeper to address pipeline projects threatening the historic Hudson. In Colorado, we helped Coloradans Against Fracking and Our Longmont warn the public about a proposal to drill next to Bella Romero Elementary School. In California, we provided robust insights about human health concerns around the Richmond refineries. These are only a few of the ways FracTracker supports advocacy and research. Working together, we make a difference!

We appreciate the many brave people and bold organizations fighting for a better energy future. They need your support, and so does FracTracker. Please consider making a year-end donation to our Fund! To sustain our meaningful, empowering work, we need you!

Another way that you can help is to tell your friends, families and colleagues about FracTracker and the work that we do. Over 650,000 people have visited the FracTracker website, and we want millions more to follow. Our robust information informs perspectives and catalyzes action. In the past year, our efforts have been mentioned in 150 media outlets around the globe, from local newspapers such as the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, to popular press outlets like Grist, to international news sources such as Bloomberg, The Guardian and the Spanish-language El Nuevo Herald.

Our recent national pipeline analysis shows that since 2010, 4,215 pipeline incidents have occurred that resulted in 100 reported fatalities, 470 injuries and property damage in excess of $3.4 billion. These recurring, high-risk impacts underscore the folly of fossil fuel reliance. There’s a better way forward, which we showcase in the Pennsylvania Clean Energy Map that we developed for E2’s “Our Energy Renewal” project; this map locates every business in PA that is involved in renewable energy or energy efficiency. There are a thousand more ways for FracTracker to benefit the better energy movement – a movement that benefits all of us – and we need your support to do it.

I close this letter with heartfelt thanks to our partners, followers, donors, funders, staff and board members. You are the energy that moves us forward, and together we have made great strides. I wish you, and everyone pulling for our beautiful blue planet, my warmest regards for a peaceful and restorative holiday. May wisdom and goodwill reign in the New Year!

Sincerely,
Sig2

Brook Lenker
Executive Director

Brook Lenker, Executive Director, FracTracker

Staff Spotlight: Brook Lenker

As the last article in our staff spotlight series, learn more about Executive Director, Brook Lenker, and how his early environmental work in Pennsylvania brought him to FracTracker Alliance.

Time with FracTracker: 5 years

Education: I graduated from Towson University near Baltimore in 1989 with a degree in geography and environmental planning. I loved the course of study so much that I enrolled in the graduate school and worked on my master’s degree in the same field.

Office Location: Camp Hill, PA

Title: Executive Director

What do you actually do in that role?

From my office in Camp Hill, I lead a wonderful, talented team of eight staff working from five locations around the country. My role is to make sure FracTracker has the strategic direction, staff capacity, financial resources, and board leadership to be effective, impactful.

Previous Positions and Organizations

YBWA cleanup 2013 Brook on creek

Brook during a creek cleanup

While I was evening commuting to Maryland, I served as program director for a county recreation department in Central Pennsylvania. Later, I landed a position with the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, eventually becoming the Director of Watershed Stewardship. The activities we coordinated – river sojourns, stream and habitat restoration, stormwater education, and more – took me around the multi-state watershed even though I was based in Harrisburg.

My next stop was the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources where for over seven years I served as the Manager of Education and Outreach. My responsibilities included community relations and promoting ecological awareness and stewardship. A program called iConservePA was a focal point. My colleagues and I used creative communications strategies to encourage Pennsylvanians to “Take Conservation Personally.” This and other agency initiatives suffered when fracking began to boom.

How did you first get involved working on oil and gas issues / fracking?

As I became demoralized by the degradation I witnessed and read about, I was given the chance to direct FracTracker. I took the reins in late 2011 as the website transitioned out of the University of Pittsburgh. By the summer of 2012, we formed the nonprofit FracTracker Alliance, and I became its executive director. Sometimes things happen for a reason.

It’s hard to believe I’ve been at the helm of FracTracker for nearly five years. Knowing that we’re a helpful force in the fight against the harms of extraction is rewarding. The projects and the people with whom I interact are inspiring. While the challenges facing our planet are daunting and, at times, depressing, I’m lucky to be able to exercise my convictions in the workplace.

What is one of the most impactful projects that you have been involved in with FracTracker?

Brook Lenker in Argentina

Brook Lenker in Argentina

It’s been an unforgettable journey so far. I’ve learned so much and met so many great people – from different states and different countries. Perhaps my greatest experience to date was a tour to Argentina in May 2015. Alongside reps from Ecologic Institute and Earthworks, we presented to hundreds of people at different venues including the senate of Argentina. As I spoke of the insights of FracTracker and other researchers, an interpreter put my words into Spanish. I felt overwhelmingly humble and grateful.

Environmental injustice knows no bounds, but good people everywhere make a profound difference.

Karen Edelstein and her partner in Hawaii

Staff Spotlight: Karen Edelstein

As part of our staff spotlight series, learn more about Karen Edelstein and how her work through FracTracker has changed the course of drilling in New York State.

Time with FracTracker: I started with FracTracker in 2010 as a contract employee and then in 2012 started working 25 hours a week as a regular part-time staffer.

Education: M.P.S. in Environmental Management, and B.S. in Natural Resources, both from Cornell University

Office Location: Ithaca, NY

Title: Eastern Program Coordinator

What do you actually do in that role?

My job has changed a lot since I started working for FracTracker. I came to FracTracker when many New Yorkers were frantically learning as much as they could about unconventional drilling for natural gas, which at the time, appeared likely to start happening in the near future. Over a period of years, using credible public data, I have created dozens of maps on topics about geology, water withdrawals, waste transportation, hydrocarbon storage, and documenting the surging movements of public opposition to high-volume hydraulic fracturing for gas. The maps were informative to a wide range of decision-makers, environmental advocates, educators, and citizens.

Now, I’m working more broadly on projects up and down the East Coast. These projects include documenting controversies surrounding pipelines and other oil and gas infrastructure, and the public opposition to this development. I also support FracTracker’s mission to educate and report on the alternatives to fossil fuel infrastructure, and have been looking at renewable energy issues, as well.

Previous Positions and Organizations

Over the past 16 years, I’ve used geographic information systems in positions at numerous environmental and educational organizations, working for land trusts and other nonprofit agencies, secondary school teacher development programs, and county government agencies. Prior to that, I worked as a naturalist and environmental educator for ten years.

How did you first get involved working on oil and gas issues / fracking?

Karen Edelstein, August 2016

Karen Edelstein, FracTracker’s Eastern Program Coordinator

I live in a rural area of New York State that was in the cross-hairs of the oil and gas industry about 9 years ago. Landsmen were at the door asking me to lease my land, “thumper trucks” were pounding the roads trying to get seismic readings, and helicopters were overhead dropping bundles of equipment to conduct testing. Few people, including me, understood the enormity of what was going on. I joined a few community groups that wanted to know more.

Shortly after a multi-year work contract I had at a local college ended, in 2010, I met the (then small) staff of FracTracker at a public training event in Central New York. The organization had just been formed, and the presentation was all about mapping in Pennsylvania. I went right up to the director and told him how much we needed similar work in New York State, and I could be the person to do it! I started working part-time for FracTracker within the month.

What is one of the most impactful projects that you have been involved in with FracTracker?

Our map of New York State bans and moratoria on high volume hydraulic fracturing received a great deal of attention in the years leading up to the eventual statewide ban on the process. Over time, close to 200 municipalities enacted legislation. It was rewarding to document this visually through a progression of dozens of maps during that period. These maps of how municipality after municipality invoked New York State home rule provided important touchstones for community activists, too. In late 2014, in their announcement about the decision to ban HVHF in NYS, New York’s Health and Environment commissioners cited FracTracker’s map as an indication of patterns of strong ambivalence towards the process among state residents:

Together DEC’s proposed restrictions and local bans and moratoria total approximately 7.5 million acres, or about 63% of the resource. Here’s a summary of the local government restrictions and prohibitions. And the picture even gets cloudier. The practical impact of the Dryden decision I mentioned earlier is that even more acreage may be off-limits to HVHF drilling. Within the 4.5 million acres NOT excluded by the state or local restrictions, approximately 253 towns have zoning and 145 have no zoning. Each town with zoning would have to determine whether its current law restricts or even allows HVHF. So those towns without zoning would still have to decide whether to allow HVHF virtually anywhere or to prescribe where drilling could occur. The uncertainty about whether HVHF is an authorized use would undoubtedly result in additional litigation. It would also result in a patchwork of local land use rules which industry has claimed would utterly frustrate the rational development of the shale resource. Clearly the court’s decision shifted the battleground to town boards, to as evidenced by the conflicting claims of the opposing stakeholder groups. According to the Joint Landowners Coalition, many towns in the Southern Tier have passed resolutions favoring HVHF, while the online map from FracTracker.org indicates that many of the same towns are moving toward a ban. Indeed, our own informal outreach to towns in the Southern Tier confirms that even towns that support HVHF decisions are still up in the air. I’d say that the prospects for HVHF development in NY are uncertain, at best.

Community Sentinel Award for Environmental Stewardship

Three Environmental Stewards to Accept Community Sentinel Award

Bill Hughes giving tour to students in shale fields, WV

A Cross-Country Ride to Support Oil and Gas Tours in West Virginia

Bill Hughes giving tours of gas fields in West Virginia. Photo by Joe Solomon. https://flic.kr/s/aHskkXZj3z

Bill Hughes giving a tour of gas fields in West Virginia. Photo by Joe Solomon.

As many of you know, educating the public is a FracTracker Alliance core value – a passion, in fact. In addition to our maps and resources, we help to provide hands-on education, as well. The extraordinary Bill Hughes is a FracTracker partner who has spent decades “in the trenches” in West Virginia documenting fracking, well pad construction, water withdrawals, pipeline construction, accidents, spills, leaks, and various practices of the oil and gas industry. He regularly leads tours for college students, reporters, and other interested parties, showing them first-hand what these sites look, smell, and sound like.

While most of us have heard of fracking, few of us have seen it in action or how it has changed communities. The tours that Bill provides allow students and the like to experience in person what this kind of extraction means for the environment and for the residents who live near it.

Biking to Support FracTracker and Bill Hughes

Dave Weyant at the start of his cross-country bike trip in support of WV tours

Dave Weyant at the start of his cross-country Pedal for the Planet bike trip

In the classic spirit of non-profit organizations, we work in partnership with others whenever possible. Right now, as you read this posting, another extraordinary Friend of FracTracker, Dave Weyant (a high school teacher in San Mateo, CA), is finishing his cross-country cycling tour – from Virginia to Oregon in 70 days.

Dave believes strongly in the power of teaching to reach the hearts of students and shape their thinking about complicated issues. As such, he has dedicated his journey to raising money for FracTracker. He set up a GoFundMe campaign in conjunction with his epic adventure, and he will donate whatever he raises toward Bill’s educational tours.

Help us celebrate Dave Weyant’s courage, vision, and generosity – and support Bill Hughes’s tireless efforts to open eyes, evoke awareness, and foster communication about fracking – by visiting Dave’s GoFundMe page and making a donation. Every gift of any size is most welcome and deeply appreciated.

100% of the funds raised from this campaign will go to support Bill’s oil and gas tours in West Virginia. FracTracker Alliance is a registered 501(c)3 organization. Your contribution is tax deductible.

And to those of you who have already donated, thank you very much for your support!