http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34469428/ns/technology_and_science-science/
By Jason Dearen
updated 32 minutes ago
SAN FRANCISCO - Scientists have witnessed the eruption of the deepest submarine volcano ever discovered, capturing for the first time video of fiery bubbles of molten lava as they exploded 4,000 feet (1,200 meters) beneath the surface of the Pacific Ocean in what researchers are calling a major geological discovery.
A submersible robot witnessed the eruption during an underwater expedition in May near Samoa, and the high-definition videos were presented Thursday at a geophysics conference in San Francisco.
Scientists hope the images, data and samples obtained during the mission will shed new light on how the ocean's crust was formed, how some sea creatures survive and thrive in an extreme environment and how the earth behaves when tectonic plates ram into each other.
Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement | your ad here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It was an underwater Fourth of July," said Bob Embley, a marine geologist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Since the water pressure at that depth suppresses the violence of the volcano's explosions, we could get the underwater robot within feet of the active eruption."
The eruption was a spectacular sight: Bright-red magma bubbles shot up releasing a smoke-like cloud of sulfur, then froze almost instantly as they hit the cold sea water, causing black rock to sink to the to the sea floor. The submersible hovered near the blasts, its robotic arm reaching into the lava to collect samples.
Earth and ocean scientists also said the eruption allowed them to see for the first time the real-time creation of a material called boninite, which had previously been found only in samples a million or more years old.
Witnessing this deep-sea volcanic eruption was 25 years in the making. Researchers from NOAA and the National Science Foundation had studied deep-sea volcanoes extensively but never witnessed an eruption this deep and in this detail. Eighty percent of the earth's volcanic activity occurs in the sea, but their underwater locations have complicated scientific efforts to this point.
INTERACTIVE
10 deep-sea secrets revealed
The oceans cover more than 70 percent of the earth's surface, yet their depths remain largely unknown. It's a frontier that scientists are racing to explore.
The mission's chief scientist, Joseph Resing, last year detected volcanic material in the water in the area, and realized it was erupting. In May, the researchers traveled to area and sunk the submersible robot, called Jason, hoping to make scientific history.
"When we got there, we put the sub down and within in an hour and a half we found an eruption there in its full glory," said Resing, who is a chemical oceanographer at the University of Washington. "We haven't seen this before and now for the very first time we see molten lava flowing on the sea floor."
Scientists said the water around the volcano was more acidic than battery acid, but that shrimp and certain microbes were able to thrive in such a harsh environment. Biologists were also excited about a new opportunity to study these creatures to see if they are unique to this volcanic environment.
Tim Shank, a biologist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, said access to this deep-sea eruption bolsters study into how life colonizes and survives in an extreme underwater environment.
"Deep sea biologists are obsessed with determining rate of processes, how fast something happens. The anticipation here is if this ground remains unstable because of lava pushing out and breaking away, it will not provide a surface area for these organisms to colonize," he said.
Researchers will continue monitoring the changing West Mata volcano, located about 140 miles (225 kilometers) southwest of Samoa.
"The unusual primitive compositions of the West Mata eruption lavas have much to tell us," said Barbara Ransom, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Ocean Sciences.
© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Mountain Lions
When Mountain Lions Hunt, They Prey on the Weak
By HENRY FOUNTAIN
Published: November 16, 2009
Predators do not always play fair. Sometimes they choose their victims based on physical condition, preferring young, old, sick or injured prey.
Kevin Moloney for The New York Times
Get Science News From The New York Times »
That is the idea, although surprisingly it has not been tested much. But now researchers have found that one predator does, in fact, show a preference for less-than-fully-capable victims. The findings may have implications for the spread of chronic wasting disease among deer populations.
Working in the northern Front Range of Colorado, Caroline E. Krumm and Michael W. Miller of the state’s Division of Wildlife, and colleagues, sampled adult mule deer carcasses known to have been killed by mountain lions, testing them for chronic wasting disease, a degenerative neurological illness that is similar to mad cow disease.
They also sampled tissue from deer killed by hunters in the same area, to get an idea of the infection rate in the general population. Since the deer generally do not have obvious symptoms, hunter-killed deer would have close to a random chance of being infected.
As reported in Biology Letters, they found that the prevalence of infected deer among the mountain-lion-killed group was higher than among the hunter-killed group, suggesting that the big cats actively seek out infected prey.
Dr. Miller said the mountain lions might notice signs of illness that were too subtle for humans to see — slightly slower reaction times, for example.
He said there was no evidence so far that mountain lions were susceptible to the disease. But by consuming infected carcasses, the animals may be keeping infectious agents out of the environment, reducing transmission to healthy deer.
I think this disease is a way of nature controling the deer population and it allows for the growth of mountain lions. It lets the mountian lion population rise along with the deer population. This is natures population control.
By HENRY FOUNTAIN
Published: November 16, 2009
Predators do not always play fair. Sometimes they choose their victims based on physical condition, preferring young, old, sick or injured prey.
Kevin Moloney for The New York Times
Get Science News From The New York Times »
That is the idea, although surprisingly it has not been tested much. But now researchers have found that one predator does, in fact, show a preference for less-than-fully-capable victims. The findings may have implications for the spread of chronic wasting disease among deer populations.
Working in the northern Front Range of Colorado, Caroline E. Krumm and Michael W. Miller of the state’s Division of Wildlife, and colleagues, sampled adult mule deer carcasses known to have been killed by mountain lions, testing them for chronic wasting disease, a degenerative neurological illness that is similar to mad cow disease.
They also sampled tissue from deer killed by hunters in the same area, to get an idea of the infection rate in the general population. Since the deer generally do not have obvious symptoms, hunter-killed deer would have close to a random chance of being infected.
As reported in Biology Letters, they found that the prevalence of infected deer among the mountain-lion-killed group was higher than among the hunter-killed group, suggesting that the big cats actively seek out infected prey.
Dr. Miller said the mountain lions might notice signs of illness that were too subtle for humans to see — slightly slower reaction times, for example.
He said there was no evidence so far that mountain lions were susceptible to the disease. But by consuming infected carcasses, the animals may be keeping infectious agents out of the environment, reducing transmission to healthy deer.
I think this disease is a way of nature controling the deer population and it allows for the growth of mountain lions. It lets the mountian lion population rise along with the deer population. This is natures population control.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Golf Balls: 'humanity's signature litter'
Golf balls: 'Humanity's signature litter'
By Christina Macfarlane, for CNN
cnnAuthor = "By Christina Macfarlane, for CNN";
iConcern is growing in some corners that golf-ball litter is a growing problem.
It takes 100 to 1,000 years for a golf ball to degrade
Golf balls are composed of a zinc rubber filling
UK lawmaker says golf balls are "humanities signature litter"
London, England (CNN) -- Research teams at the Danish Golf Union have discovered it takes between 100 to 1,000 years for a golf ball to decompose naturally. A startling fact when it is also estimated 300 million balls are lost or discarded in the United States alone, every year. It seems the simple plastic golf ball is increasingly becoming a major litter problem.
The scale of the dilemma was underlined recently in Scotland, where scientists -- who scoured the watery depths in a submarine hoping to discover evidence of the prehistoric Loch Ness monster -- were surprised to find hundreds of thousands of golf balls lining the bed of the loch.
It is thought tourists and locals have used the loch as an alternative driving range for many years. The footage shot by underwater robotics team SeaTrepid, can be seen below.
With an increasing number of golf balls discarded each year, the Danish Golf Association devised a number of tests to determine the environmental impact of golf balls on their surroundings.
From the moon to the bottom of Loch Ness, golf balls are humanity's signature litter--UK lawmaker Patrick Harvie
It was found that during decomposition, the golf balls dissolved to release a high quantity of heavy metals. Dangerous levels of zinc were found in the synthetic rubber filling used in solid core golf balls. When submerged in water, the zinc attached itself to the ground sediment and poisoned the surrounding flora and fauna.
Course manager for the Danish Golf Union, Torben Kastrup Petersen, said the scale of the problem is unknown: "There has been very little research on the environmental impact of golf balls, but it's safe to say the indicators are not good. We are planning to collaborate with environmentalists in America to conduct more tests to fully explore the extent of the problem."
GOLF Magazine
Local government ministers in Scotland have also complained about the level of golf ball littering. UK lawmaker Patrick Harvie told CNN: "From the moon to the bottom of Loch Ness, golf balls are humanity's signature litter in the most inaccessible locations."
And he's not wrong. On February 6, 1971, astronaut Alan Shepherd was filmed taking a swing with a six iron on the surface of the moon. According to Shepherd, the balls flew off in the distance and landed a few kilometers away. Although the balls were left for future golfers to discover, it is believed the extreme temperatures on the surface would have dissolved the balls many moons ago.
In many cases, removing a partially degraded ball from a lake or woodland area could result in further damage to the wildlife. So what is the solution? Harvie had this advice: "Keep your balls on the fairway or invest in a stock of biodegradable balls."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SPORT/11/04/littering.golf.balls/index.html
Even though Mr. Gessler put this on the hw calander, I felt like I had to do my current event on this, because I personally hate golf, and this is just another reason why. Anyway, I feel that we need to stop polluting the enviornment with these golf balls. They are killing local flora and fauna and its not necessary. We should at least be using them in golf ranges instead of just any old place. If people would like to do even better, then they should get biodegradable golf balls, and do their part to be sustainable.
By Christina Macfarlane, for CNN
cnnAuthor = "By Christina Macfarlane, for CNN";
iConcern is growing in some corners that golf-ball litter is a growing problem.
It takes 100 to 1,000 years for a golf ball to degrade
Golf balls are composed of a zinc rubber filling
UK lawmaker says golf balls are "humanities signature litter"
London, England (CNN) -- Research teams at the Danish Golf Union have discovered it takes between 100 to 1,000 years for a golf ball to decompose naturally. A startling fact when it is also estimated 300 million balls are lost or discarded in the United States alone, every year. It seems the simple plastic golf ball is increasingly becoming a major litter problem.
The scale of the dilemma was underlined recently in Scotland, where scientists -- who scoured the watery depths in a submarine hoping to discover evidence of the prehistoric Loch Ness monster -- were surprised to find hundreds of thousands of golf balls lining the bed of the loch.
It is thought tourists and locals have used the loch as an alternative driving range for many years. The footage shot by underwater robotics team SeaTrepid, can be seen below.
With an increasing number of golf balls discarded each year, the Danish Golf Association devised a number of tests to determine the environmental impact of golf balls on their surroundings.
From the moon to the bottom of Loch Ness, golf balls are humanity's signature litter--UK lawmaker Patrick Harvie
It was found that during decomposition, the golf balls dissolved to release a high quantity of heavy metals. Dangerous levels of zinc were found in the synthetic rubber filling used in solid core golf balls. When submerged in water, the zinc attached itself to the ground sediment and poisoned the surrounding flora and fauna.
Course manager for the Danish Golf Union, Torben Kastrup Petersen, said the scale of the problem is unknown: "There has been very little research on the environmental impact of golf balls, but it's safe to say the indicators are not good. We are planning to collaborate with environmentalists in America to conduct more tests to fully explore the extent of the problem."
GOLF Magazine
Local government ministers in Scotland have also complained about the level of golf ball littering. UK lawmaker Patrick Harvie told CNN: "From the moon to the bottom of Loch Ness, golf balls are humanity's signature litter in the most inaccessible locations."
And he's not wrong. On February 6, 1971, astronaut Alan Shepherd was filmed taking a swing with a six iron on the surface of the moon. According to Shepherd, the balls flew off in the distance and landed a few kilometers away. Although the balls were left for future golfers to discover, it is believed the extreme temperatures on the surface would have dissolved the balls many moons ago.
In many cases, removing a partially degraded ball from a lake or woodland area could result in further damage to the wildlife. So what is the solution? Harvie had this advice: "Keep your balls on the fairway or invest in a stock of biodegradable balls."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SPORT/11/04/littering.golf.balls/index.html
Even though Mr. Gessler put this on the hw calander, I felt like I had to do my current event on this, because I personally hate golf, and this is just another reason why. Anyway, I feel that we need to stop polluting the enviornment with these golf balls. They are killing local flora and fauna and its not necessary. We should at least be using them in golf ranges instead of just any old place. If people would like to do even better, then they should get biodegradable golf balls, and do their part to be sustainable.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
China-U.S. Group Plans to Build Texas Wind Farm
China-U.S. Group Plans to Build Texas Wind Farm
By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
Published: October 29, 2009
A consortium of Chinese and American companies announced a joint venture on Thursday to build a 600-megawatt wind farm in West Texas, using turbines made in China.
Construction of the $1.5 billion wind farm will be financed largely by Chinese banks, with the help of loan guarantees and cash grants from the United States government.
“This wind farm project came about thanks to the openness of the United States for investments in the field of renewable energy,” said John S. Lin, chief operating officer of A-Power Energy Generation Systems, which is part of the consortium building the project.
The wind farm will be the first instance of a Chinese manufacturer exporting wind turbines to the United States, said Yang Yazhou, vice mayor of the city of Shenyang, where the wind turbines will be manufactured.
The farm, to be built on 36,000 acres in West Texas, will use 240 of its 2.5-megawatt turbines. Construction is scheduled to begin in March 2010, and the project is expected to create 300 temporary jobs and about 30 permanent jobs. Six hundred megawatts of wind power is enough to meet the electricity needs of between 135,000 and 180,000 American homes for a year.
Other partners include the U.S. Renewable Energy Group, an investment firm, and a wind-farm developer, Cielo Wind Power of Austin, Tex.
I think that this is a step forward, and that it is a good thing for the U.S. to do, however, I think that there needs to be a lot more of an effort. I think that the U.S. should also look for other methods of sustainable energy. I also like the fact that this wind farm is creating jobs. It is not only helping the enviornment, it is also helping the economy. I think that if we can find other methods to help the economy while being sustainable with energy that i think we can really be able to move forward in a good way.
By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF
Published: October 29, 2009
A consortium of Chinese and American companies announced a joint venture on Thursday to build a 600-megawatt wind farm in West Texas, using turbines made in China.
Construction of the $1.5 billion wind farm will be financed largely by Chinese banks, with the help of loan guarantees and cash grants from the United States government.
“This wind farm project came about thanks to the openness of the United States for investments in the field of renewable energy,” said John S. Lin, chief operating officer of A-Power Energy Generation Systems, which is part of the consortium building the project.
The wind farm will be the first instance of a Chinese manufacturer exporting wind turbines to the United States, said Yang Yazhou, vice mayor of the city of Shenyang, where the wind turbines will be manufactured.
The farm, to be built on 36,000 acres in West Texas, will use 240 of its 2.5-megawatt turbines. Construction is scheduled to begin in March 2010, and the project is expected to create 300 temporary jobs and about 30 permanent jobs. Six hundred megawatts of wind power is enough to meet the electricity needs of between 135,000 and 180,000 American homes for a year.
Other partners include the U.S. Renewable Energy Group, an investment firm, and a wind-farm developer, Cielo Wind Power of Austin, Tex.
I think that this is a step forward, and that it is a good thing for the U.S. to do, however, I think that there needs to be a lot more of an effort. I think that the U.S. should also look for other methods of sustainable energy. I also like the fact that this wind farm is creating jobs. It is not only helping the enviornment, it is also helping the economy. I think that if we can find other methods to help the economy while being sustainable with energy that i think we can really be able to move forward in a good way.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Current Event
Gas Company Won’t Drill in New York Watershed
By JAD MOUAWAD and CLIFFORD KRAUSS
Published: October 27, 2009
Bowing to intense public pressure, the Chesapeake Energy Corporation says it will not drill for natural gas within the upstate New York watershed, an environmentally sensitive region that supplies unfiltered water to nine million people.
Marcellus Shale is believed to hold substantial gas reserves.
-->
A blog about energy, the environment and the bottom line.
The reversal seems to signal a more conciliatory tone from the gas industry, which is facing mounting opposition in New York to its drilling practices. The decision also increases the pressure on state regulators to reverse their decision to allow drilling within the watershed.
“We are not going to develop those leases, and we are not taking any more leases, and I don’t think anybody else in the industry would dare to acquire leases in the New York City watershed,” Aubrey K. McClendon, the chief executive officer at Chesapeake Energy, said in an interview on Monday in Fort Worth. “Why go through the brain damage of that, when we have so many other opportunities?”
He spoke on the eve of the first scheduled hearing on proposed state rules governing the drilling, on Wednesday in Loch Sheldrake in Sullivan County.
Chesapeake, one of the nation’s biggest gas producers, is the largest leaseholder in the Marcellus Shale, a subterranean layer of shale rock that runs from New York to Tennessee. The shale is believed to hold substantial natural gas reserves.
But extracting gas from shale relies on a method called hydraulic fracturing that has stirred broad concerns. Water, laced with chemicals, is blasted down gas wells at high pressure to break the rock and allow gas to flow out more easily. The technology has vigorously expanded in recent years, allowing for enormous growth in the nation’s natural gas reserves.
But the concerns include the use of chemicals, the disposal of wastewater and the danger of leaks and spills into groundwater and deep aquifers. There also has been a string of explosions from Wyoming to Pennsylvania.
Under energy legislation passed in 2005, the industry won an exemption from the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
Chesapeake acquired 5,000 acres in the watershed when it bought Columbia Natural Resources a few years ago, and it is currently the only leaseholder in the area.
Over all, Mr. McClendon said, the company’s holdings in the watershed are “a drop in the bucket” compared with the Marcellus field’s potential. He suggested that Chesapeake had more to lose by drilling there than by forgoing it, even though he contended such drilling would do no harm.
“How could any one well be so profitable that it would be worth damaging the New York City water system?” he said.
But Chesapeake and other companies are still expected to drill for gas in areas of the state outside the watershed.
State officials have been eager to embrace the drilling because of its potential economic benefits, especially in the current downturn. This month, the state’s environmental agency said it would allow companies to drill throughout the state, imposing few specific limits on operations.
The proposed regulations, which were requested last year by Gov. David A. Paterson, do not ban drilling in the watershed, as many New York City officials and environmental advocates had urged, but would require buffer zones around reservoirs and aqueducts.
Gas industry representatives say the rules, if enacted, will be among the most restrictive in the country. Opponents say they would be inadequate to prevent contamination.
The New York watershed is an area of about one million acres, representing 4 percent of the state’s total surface. Thanks to gravity, water from the region’s rivers and streams flows to six reservoirs in the Catskills, and then, through a series of aqueducts and tunnels, to the taps of New Yorkers. This system provides unfiltered drinking water for half the state’s population, including 8.2 million people in New York City and about one million people in Westchester, Putnam and Dutchess Counties.
Some New York City politicians welcomed Chesapeake’s decision and said they hoped it would have a broader impact. “To proceed with drilling doesn’t make any business sense and doesn’t make environmental sense, and I think Chesapeake understands this, and I am happy they have come to that decision,” said James F. Gennaro, chairman of the City Council’s Committee on Environmental Protection. “If only we could get the state government to come to the same realization. It is strangely ironic.”
Chesapeake’s announcement was also praised by environmental advocates. They said the company’s position should encourage the state to reverse its decision and impose an outright drilling ban throughout the watershed.
“When the industry says it will not drill in the watershed, it sends a strong message to state regulators that drilling there is inappropriate,” said James L. Simpson, an attorney at Riverkeeper, an environmental group.
Hydraulic fracturing pumps huge volumes of water laced with chemicals like benzene into the shale to break it and release the natural gas. The process has been linked to contamination of water wells and the death of livestock exposed to potassium chloride, one of the chemicals used.
State environmental regulators have said they saw no “realistic threat” to water quality that would warrant a drilling ban in the two watersheds in the Catskills region. Their review noted that the city controlled a large amount of the land surrounding the reservoirs and could deny permission to drill in those areas.
In addition to the forum on Wednesday, hearings on the state’s proposed regulations are scheduled Nov. 10 in New York City, Nov. 12 in Broome County and Nov. 18 in Steuben County.
Chesapeake said it had started to publicize the chemical components of the fluids it uses during drilling, down to the percentages for each chemical used since last year, acknowledging criticism that companies had not been transparent enough. “The industry is moving quickly to complete disclosure," Mr. McClendon said.
Mireya Navarro contributed reporting.
I feel that the gas company should not drill at all. It is harmful to the enviornment and water supply. It could effect drinking for a lot of people and they shouldn't have to have they're drinking water affected.
By JAD MOUAWAD and CLIFFORD KRAUSS
Published: October 27, 2009
Bowing to intense public pressure, the Chesapeake Energy Corporation says it will not drill for natural gas within the upstate New York watershed, an environmentally sensitive region that supplies unfiltered water to nine million people.
Marcellus Shale is believed to hold substantial gas reserves.
-->
A blog about energy, the environment and the bottom line.
The reversal seems to signal a more conciliatory tone from the gas industry, which is facing mounting opposition in New York to its drilling practices. The decision also increases the pressure on state regulators to reverse their decision to allow drilling within the watershed.
“We are not going to develop those leases, and we are not taking any more leases, and I don’t think anybody else in the industry would dare to acquire leases in the New York City watershed,” Aubrey K. McClendon, the chief executive officer at Chesapeake Energy, said in an interview on Monday in Fort Worth. “Why go through the brain damage of that, when we have so many other opportunities?”
He spoke on the eve of the first scheduled hearing on proposed state rules governing the drilling, on Wednesday in Loch Sheldrake in Sullivan County.
Chesapeake, one of the nation’s biggest gas producers, is the largest leaseholder in the Marcellus Shale, a subterranean layer of shale rock that runs from New York to Tennessee. The shale is believed to hold substantial natural gas reserves.
But extracting gas from shale relies on a method called hydraulic fracturing that has stirred broad concerns. Water, laced with chemicals, is blasted down gas wells at high pressure to break the rock and allow gas to flow out more easily. The technology has vigorously expanded in recent years, allowing for enormous growth in the nation’s natural gas reserves.
But the concerns include the use of chemicals, the disposal of wastewater and the danger of leaks and spills into groundwater and deep aquifers. There also has been a string of explosions from Wyoming to Pennsylvania.
Under energy legislation passed in 2005, the industry won an exemption from the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
Chesapeake acquired 5,000 acres in the watershed when it bought Columbia Natural Resources a few years ago, and it is currently the only leaseholder in the area.
Over all, Mr. McClendon said, the company’s holdings in the watershed are “a drop in the bucket” compared with the Marcellus field’s potential. He suggested that Chesapeake had more to lose by drilling there than by forgoing it, even though he contended such drilling would do no harm.
“How could any one well be so profitable that it would be worth damaging the New York City water system?” he said.
But Chesapeake and other companies are still expected to drill for gas in areas of the state outside the watershed.
State officials have been eager to embrace the drilling because of its potential economic benefits, especially in the current downturn. This month, the state’s environmental agency said it would allow companies to drill throughout the state, imposing few specific limits on operations.
The proposed regulations, which were requested last year by Gov. David A. Paterson, do not ban drilling in the watershed, as many New York City officials and environmental advocates had urged, but would require buffer zones around reservoirs and aqueducts.
Gas industry representatives say the rules, if enacted, will be among the most restrictive in the country. Opponents say they would be inadequate to prevent contamination.
The New York watershed is an area of about one million acres, representing 4 percent of the state’s total surface. Thanks to gravity, water from the region’s rivers and streams flows to six reservoirs in the Catskills, and then, through a series of aqueducts and tunnels, to the taps of New Yorkers. This system provides unfiltered drinking water for half the state’s population, including 8.2 million people in New York City and about one million people in Westchester, Putnam and Dutchess Counties.
Some New York City politicians welcomed Chesapeake’s decision and said they hoped it would have a broader impact. “To proceed with drilling doesn’t make any business sense and doesn’t make environmental sense, and I think Chesapeake understands this, and I am happy they have come to that decision,” said James F. Gennaro, chairman of the City Council’s Committee on Environmental Protection. “If only we could get the state government to come to the same realization. It is strangely ironic.”
Chesapeake’s announcement was also praised by environmental advocates. They said the company’s position should encourage the state to reverse its decision and impose an outright drilling ban throughout the watershed.
“When the industry says it will not drill in the watershed, it sends a strong message to state regulators that drilling there is inappropriate,” said James L. Simpson, an attorney at Riverkeeper, an environmental group.
Hydraulic fracturing pumps huge volumes of water laced with chemicals like benzene into the shale to break it and release the natural gas. The process has been linked to contamination of water wells and the death of livestock exposed to potassium chloride, one of the chemicals used.
State environmental regulators have said they saw no “realistic threat” to water quality that would warrant a drilling ban in the two watersheds in the Catskills region. Their review noted that the city controlled a large amount of the land surrounding the reservoirs and could deny permission to drill in those areas.
In addition to the forum on Wednesday, hearings on the state’s proposed regulations are scheduled Nov. 10 in New York City, Nov. 12 in Broome County and Nov. 18 in Steuben County.
Chesapeake said it had started to publicize the chemical components of the fluids it uses during drilling, down to the percentages for each chemical used since last year, acknowledging criticism that companies had not been transparent enough. “The industry is moving quickly to complete disclosure," Mr. McClendon said.
Mireya Navarro contributed reporting.
I feel that the gas company should not drill at all. It is harmful to the enviornment and water supply. It could effect drinking for a lot of people and they shouldn't have to have they're drinking water affected.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)