Oh really?
It is Christmas Day and I am writing this article. I know of no better Christmas present than the truth.
This column will address three main topics: The DEP report on Ten Mile Creek, The Marcellus Drilling News release and the comment made by local state official. Let me first say that my family has lived in this area nearly 100 years. The residents here are friends and neighbors. I have fished the area streams for more than 65 years, and it is time you knew the truth.
I am going to use some harsh accusations. I am tired of the unfounded truths and lies being presented by certain individuals and organizations that have no comprehension of what is really happening with our water supplies. Basically, they are lying and making false accusations.
First, let me address the latest DEP report on Ten Mile Creek. I suggest you get the full report and read the thing. In the beginning of the report, the DEP makes reference to their report done on April 10, 2014. They admit that they used the gamma spectroscopy test. This is the test that many scientists consider to be the new and more accurate test for radiation. This test showed high levels of radium 226, radium 228, uranium and thorium. Along with this testing, other methods showed high levels of sodium, bromide, salt and strontium. All these chemicals are known to be associated with the Marcellus Shale layer.
John Poister admits in an article by Natasha Khan that on April 10, 2014 the samples were indeed tested with the gamma spectroscopy tests. This test showed high levels of radiation in Ten Mile Creek and from certain mine discharges. The article is titled “DEP’s testing methods for radiation in Ten Mile Creek questioned,” which was published on July 30, 2015.
The samples taken on June 22 and 23 of 2015 used a different test method. The June samples were examined by using the 903.1 method. Even though this method is accepted by the EPA, there is a flaw in it. This method is primarily used for treated drinking water that is low in Electronic Conductivity (specific conductance) (EC). Mine water is not low in EC; in fact, mine water is very high in EC.
DEP’s own data shows the EC 8420 µs from the Clyde Mine discharge. This makes the 903.1 test questionable at the very least. The recommended maximum level is 1,000 µs. So now you can see a problem. Also, if you check the graphs on EC in Ten Mile Creek on June 22 and 23, one will see a very low EC on June 21, 2015, indicating a massive dilution factor. Radium 226 is water soluble which would be highly diluted at that time.
Also, if one checks the flow rate in Ten Mile Creek on June 21, 2015, it will be noted that the flow rate was over 2,000 cu. ft. per second. These facts are all documented. If you look at the same graph, you will see over the last 68 years the median was less than 50 cu ft/sec for that time period. Where the 155 cu. ft./sec. is coming from that the DEP states in the article is not really clear to me.
On the day of sample collection (June 22, 2015), the flow rate ranged from 414 cu ft/sec to 215 cu. ft./sec. all higher than the so-called 155 cu. ft./sec. the DEP used. Remember, the flow that the DEP is referring is over a 68-year period. Let us look at the flow rate over the last five years and I would believe that longwall mining has drastically lowered that average water flow. Wonder what the results would be if the gamma spectroscopy test were used?
If one looks closer at the results, you will see another flaw. Remember, the safe level for radium 226 and 228 combined is 5 pCi/l combined. Yet, one test showed a reading of 19.539 pCi/L just for radium 228. How is that safe? Further investigation showed that the 903.1 test was used on radium 226 and the Brooks and Blanchard test was used on radium 228. This again leads to suspect on the 903.1 test method. Why not the gamma spec test?
In an article published for the Delaware Riverkeeper Network in December of 2015 titled “Review of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactivity Materials (TENORM) study report” by Marvin Resnikoff, Ph.D., it is brought out the concern about high levels of radiation from the Marcellus drilling. Great article, I suggest you read it.
Also missing from the report is why no mention of thorium and uranium, which were mentioned in the 2014 report and thorium was also mentioned in the West Virginia Water Research article. Where did they go? I feel this report is incomplete and not based on accurate information. The 903.1 test is very suspect.
Second, the news release by the Marcellus Drilling News is filled with mistruths — in other words, lies. Time and time again they refer to the Izaak Walton League of America (IWLA) as an anti-drilling Democratic organization; that is a lie. The IWLA is a 501 C 3 organization that is absolutely nonpolitical. They (Marcellus Group) state the IWLA is anti-drilling; that is a lie. Find anywhere that the IWLA states it is anti-drilling. The IWLA stands for safe mineral extraction and supports good environmental practices in economic development.
A statement was made that the IWLA stated that the mine water was contaminated by drilling waste water. I suggest they read more carefully. The statement from the IWLA is that all tests indicate that the water from mine drainage is more indicative of Marcellus waste water than mine waste. This is collaborated in WRI testing.
The next blatant lie is they state that IWLA testing has showed that there is a problem with radiation. For some reason, the IWLA can not get certain people to understand that the IWLA does not do testing. Certified labs do the testing along with universities. Look, get your facts correct before you publish this garbage. Do your research first, check your facts and re-check them, and then write your articles.
Here are some questions for them to ponder: Where is the bromide coming from? Why is there a cancer rate of 35.1 percent higher in children ages 0 to 4 in drilled counties versus non-drilled counties in Pennsylvania? Come on, forget the negative propaganda and let’s work together to assure the safety of all the people especially our children
I would be remiss if I didn’t take exception to some of the material being presented by some of our political officials who seem to think everything is “a-ok.” Well, it is not and far from it. Comments were made in the past that the Clyde Mine water was cleaned up. How can anyone make such a statement without thorough chemical testing? No scientists would ever commit such a blunder, and those without a science background should educate themselves before speaking on topics of which they have no knowledge.
The water flows during the DEP testing were much higher than normal. Check the DEP’s own graph. The day before testing, the water flow was nearly 90 times higher than normal. Why hasn’t the political structure demanded the gamma spec test that was done in April 2014 be done again? Are they afraid of what they might find? Anyone who is studying radiation knows the gamma spec test is the newer and better test.
There are way too many questions about the DEP’s testing methods to close the investigation on Ten Mile Creek. The investigation is not over by a long shot. I am confident than when the final testing is done, several groups will have a great deal of egg on their collective faces.
Well, the saga goes on. The truth is in this mess somewhere and when it comes to children, we will find out. Always stay safe, and give thanks for everything you have.