Science Lags as Health Problems Emerge Near Gas Fields
People who live close to natural gas drilling in four states complain of similar health symptoms, ranging from respiratory infections to lesions and neurological problems, but there is little science or study to get at the cause of their ailments.
This article is part of an ongoing investigation:
Fracking: Gas Drilling's Environmental Threat
The promise of abundant natural gas is colliding with fears about water contamination.
Latest Stories in this Project
- Another Layer to Rendell’s Fracking Connections
- More Than a Matter of Opinion: Ed Rendell’s Plea for Fracking Fails to Disclose Industry Ties
- Land Grab Cheats North Dakota Tribes Out of $1 Billion, Suits Allege
- Update: State Oil and Gas Regulators Still Spread Thin
- New Study: Fluids From Marcellus Shale Likely Seeping Into PA Drinking Water
Get Updates
Our Hottest Stories
- Bank of America Lied to Homeowners and Rewarded Foreclosures, Former Employees Say
- Time Out: Federal Complaint Alleges Rampant Abuse in Texas Truancy Program
- In Westchester, Progress on Housing and the Specter of Another Fight
- Worried about the Mass Surveillance? How to Practice Safer Communication
- Walmart Accepted Clothing from Banned Bangladesh Factories
- When Interns Should be Paid: A #ProjectIntern Explainer
- Without a Final Map, New York Rebuilds on Uncertain Ground
- Five Ways Congress is Trying to Curb Rape in the Military
- Objection Overruled: Top Prosecutor Must Testify in Wrongful Conviction Case
- Remember When the Patriot Act Debate Was All About Library Records?
- Bank of America Lied to Homeowners and Rewarded Foreclosures, Former Employees Say
- The NSA Black Hole: 5 Basic Things We Still Don’t Know About the Agency's Snooping
- Walmart Accepted Clothing from Banned Bangladesh Factories
- The Best Stories on the Government’s Growing Surveillance
- Worried about the Mass Surveillance? How to Practice Safer Communication
- Betting Against the Future: How Industry Loses When Interns Go Unpaid
- Five Ways Congress is Trying to Curb Rape in the Military
- A Father’s Day Remembrance
- Remember When the Patriot Act Debate Was All About Library Records?
- Unpaid Interns Win Major Ruling in 'Black Swan' Case — Now What?
51 comments
Andy Mechling
Sept. 30, 2011, 3:15 p.m.
Thank you for the fine and brave reporting.
But please; take a closer look at those air quality studies coming out of Texas before concluding that the nature of the chemistry involved somehow remains a mystery at this point.
I believe it is time for everyone involved to stop pretending that we don’t know what the problem chemicals are. We clearly do now. I hope you will check this out.
From my perspective; all of the data in all of those studies points in exactly the same direction. The problem is with the sulfur compounds; specifically carbon disulfide, carbonyl sulfide, and hydrogen sulfide.
These have been the only chemicals detected above Texas health-protective levels. Please see the Flower Mound study, the TITAN study, and the Fort Worth Nat Gas Air Quality Study.
In the latter, out of 138 chemicals monitored, only carbon disulfide shows elevated levels associated with proximity to those well sites. And How!
Here is my main point: This vital fact is completely ignored in the narrative sections of this “million dollar” air study. PLEASE do some fact-checking on your own. Skip the reading in all those studies, go straight to the data tables. You will see what I mean.
Unfortunately, when it comes to the organic sulfur compounds, (carbon disulfide, carbonyl sulfide) neighborhood exposures surrounding natural gas facilities are only small part of a much bigger and growing problem.
Oil refinery tankage, coal processing, landfills everywhere, oil sands, asphalt especially, pesticide spills, fumigant drift, water treatment, paper mills . . .
Literally everywhere where there have been community odor complaints in the past decade, independent testing has revealed the presence of the organo-sulfur compounds, or there has been no testing for the sulfur compounds.
Paul Blanc’s book is an absolute must-read on the subject of carbon disulfide toxicity.
The secrecy surrounding this compound is legendary; and remains essentially in-tact in 2011 in my view.
I want you to fact-check me. If you contact me back, I will be able to substantiate all of this.
In the meantime, that Keystone Pipeline project looms large. Please look up the definition of “bitumen”. This stuff involves carbon disulfide BY DEFINITION. Or am I wrong?
What is “Diluted Bitumen”? What do you suppose is in that natural gas “condensate” which makes it so valuable as a “diluent” for that pipeline project? Do the Canadians have an air standard (Tolerable Concentration) for CS2 that the US does not?
What are we about to buy into here?
Its time to connect some dots already.