Prepared Remarks of Testimony for the Colombian Debates on Fracking. Recorded on August 28, 2023

by Sandra Steingraber, PhD, SEHN Senior Scientist

Hello! My name is Sandra Steingraber, and I am speaking to you from New York. I am a PhD biologist, and I work as a senior scientist at the Science and Environmental Health Network. I am also a co-founder of Concerned Health Professionals of New York. Our group formed ten years ago when fracking was proposed for New York State, and our governor needed to decide whether to permit fracking or prohibit fracking.

We scientists began to compile the medical and scientific findings on the risks and harms of fracking into a Compendium.

At the same time, our state’s Department of Health also began to review the evidence for harm.

Both groups asked two questions. One: Is fracking harmful to public health and the climate? Two: And, if it is harmful, can we devise rules and regulations that would make it safe, or are the dangers unavoidable?

In December 2014, both groups—the government scientists plus the independent scientists in my group—had reached the same conclusion: fracking injures the health of people who live nearby both because of water and air pollution, and current technologies could not make fracking safe enough to allow it.

Fracking was banned in New York State.

At that time, 400 studies in the peer-reviewed scientific literature showed the evidence for harm. Now, nine years later, there are almost 2,500 such studies. In other words, today we have six times as much evidence for harm as when we banned fracking in New York in 2014.

Altogether, the new studies plus the old studies show that our governor made the right decision.

As Colombia studies fracking, we scientists here in New York hope that our research will be useful to you. Since our own fracking ban, we have continued to update our fracking science compendium each year because so many other nations are wondering what to do about fracking.

The first edition of our compendium was 65 pages. Now the 8th edition is more than 500 pages long. Let me highlight for you our main findings, which are strengthened by more data but which are not very different from the Spanish language version released in 2016 that you have available to you already.

First, fracking is a public health crisis. As documented in more than 120 studies, public health harms now linked with drilling, fracking, and associated infrastructure are well- established. They include cancers, asthma, respiratory diseases, skin rashes, heart problems, and mental health problems. Multiple corroborating studies of pregnant women residing near fracking operations across the nation show harm to infant health, including birth defects, preterm birth, and low birth weight. Harm to children includes blood cancers and asthma. Old people living near fracking wells have shorter lifespans and more heart problems. They don’t live as long.

Most recently three new studies in Pennsylvania released just this month show that children living near fracking wells have much worse asthma and seven times the risk of lymphoma, a type of cancer. They are also born smaller.

Fracking is accelerating the climate crisis. North American fracking operations for both oil and gas are driving the current surge in global levels of methane, a greenhouse gas that is 86 times more potent at trapping heat than carbon dioxide over a twenty-year period and which has contributed 40 percent of all global warming to date. Methane escapes into the atmosphere from all parts of the extraction, processing, and distribution system, at significant rates that, as demonstrated through multiple methodologies, sometimes exceed earlier estimates by a factor of two to six.

In sum, the vast body of scientific studies now published on hydraulic fracturing in the peer- reviewed scientific literature confirms that the climate and public health risks from fracking are real and the range of environmental harms wide. Our examination uncovered no evidence that fracking can be practiced in a manner that does not threaten human health directly or without imperiling climate stability upon which human health depends.

Importantly, no set of rules can fix the problems created by fracking. The injection of ever-increasing volumes of fluids into an ever-increasing number of wells creates significant deformations in the shale. These are translated upwards, a mile or more, to the surface. Along the way, these “pressure bulbs” can impact, in unpredictable ways, faults and fissures in the overlying rock layers, including layers that intersect freshwater aquifers. Such pressure bulbs may mobilize contaminants left over from previous drilling and mining activities. No set of regulations can prevent these potential impacts to groundwater.

Regulations cannot stop earthquakes. Fracking activities have triggered earthquakes around the world. In spite of emerging knowledge about the mechanics of how fracking and the underground disposal of fracking waste trigger earthquakes via activation of faults, no model can predict where or when earthquakes will occur or how powerful they will be.

Regulations cannot stop air pollution. Fracking wells are giant cigarettes in the earth, and air pollution follows fracking wherever it goes. The state of California determined that fracking can have “significant and unavoidable” impacts on air quality, including driving pollutants to levels that violate air quality standards.

Regulations cannot stop radioactive emissions. The deep earth is full of radiation. Radioactive elements commonly found in shale formations are released during the process of drilling and fracking. They may accumulate in tubes, pipes, and equipment at fracking sites at levels known to cause health risks. Excess radioactivity has been detected in the soil near well pads, downstream of water facilities where fracking wastewater is treated, and in landfills where fracking waste is dumped. Radioactive airborne particles are also released from fracking wells themselves and are detectable in residential areas downwind from drilling and fracking operations.

Regulations cannot stop wells from leaking. Fracking wells are lined with cement and steel, and these are not immortal substances. As they age and corrode, they leak methane and other toxic gases. In addition to unintentional well leakage, purposeful methane releases are engineered into the routine operation of fracking extraction, processing, and transport infrastructure, as when vapors are vented through release valves in order to regulate pressure and prevent explosions. These releases are not fixable plumbing problems. Also, idle and abandoned wells are a significant source of methane leakage. Long after they have ceased pumping oil or gas, old wells continue to leak in ways that are not always fixable. Idle and abandoned wells are a significant source of methane leakage into the atmosphere, based on findings from New York and Pennsylvania.

The rapidly expanding body of evidence compiled here is massive, troubling, and cries out for decisive action. Across a wide range of parameters, the data continue to reveal a plethora of recurring problems that cannot be sufficiently averted through regulatory frameworks. The risks and harms of fracking are inherent in its operation. The only method of mitigating its grave threats to public health and the climate is a complete and comprehensive ban on fracking.