Energy. Environment. Economy.

Project would bring 400,000 tons of drilling waste to Pa.’s ‘Grand Canyon’

The Pine Creek Gorge in Tioga County.

Marie Cusick/ StateImpact Pennsylvania

Plans call for 400,000 tons of natural gas drilling waste to be placed on a steep embankment near a tributary to the Pine Creek Gorge in Tioga County. The gorge is often called the Grand Canyon of Pennsylvania.

As Marcellus Shale gas drilling has proliferated, so has the amount of waste it generates. Last year in Pennsylvania, over two million tons of drill cuttings were sent to landfills.

Cuttings are the waste dirt and rock that comes up from drilling wells. The material contains naturally occurring radiation, heavy metals, and industrial chemicals.

Over the past three years, a Montgomery County waste disposal company has found a novel way to avoid landfills, by processing and recycling drill cuttings. But critics argue it’s simply a way to avoid regulations.

Now plans to put the gas waste next to one of the state’s most pristine waterways have sparked a backlash.

Pennsylvania’s Grand Canyon

As the manager of the Wellsboro Johnston airport, Craig Musser has a plan to get more air traffic to this rural part of north-central Pennsylvania.

But a lot of people really don’t like the idea.

“If I didn’t feel it was safe, I wouldn’t want to do it either,” he says.

Craig Musser

Marie Cusick/ StateImpact Pennsylvania

Wellsboro Johnston Airport manager Craig Musser holds a sample jar of dried drill cuttings. He thinks the project will bring more economic opportunity to the region.

He hops in his car and drives to the edge of the runway to show me.

So what’s all the fuss about?

A Montgomery County waste disposal company called Clean Earth is proposing to haul in 400,000 tons of gas industry waste– specifically treated drill cuttings. If its plans are approved by state regulators, the company would relocate its Williamsport-based processing facility to the airport grounds. It would pay to lease the land, then use the cuttings to extend the runway by 600 feet, and eventually turn over the processing building to the airport for use as a hanger.

Musser thinks this will help the airport and, in turn, the local economy.

“To bring growth–an airport is a vital step towards that,” he says.

The plan has been met with major push back here in Tioga County—one of the most drilled-on places in the state.

That’s because the airport sits high atop one of the region’s most beautiful natural assets, and a major tourist destination: the Pine Creek Gorge. It’s often called the Grand Canyon of Pennsylvania. The airport’s runway is next to a steep embankment that’s a half-mile from a tributary to the gorge.

And that embankment is exactly where Clean Earth wants to put the drill cuttings.

Tioga County Commissioner Eric Coolige (R) says drillers have been “a godsend” to the area. But he and many other gas industry supporters (including state Senate Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati, who represents the area) are not sold on this idea.

“My concern is this product has not yet been given a 100 percent OK,” says Coolige. “And until it does, I’m not going to be in favor of it.”

Ed Osgood is a member of the Pine Creek Gorge Headwaters Protection Group. He also thinks it would be a big mistake to put so much drilling waste next to the gorge.

“We have no long-term, peer-reviewed studies to indicate this material is safe,” says Osgood.

He’s worried the waste could run into the gorge when it rains.

“I think the name Clean Earth is ironic,” he says. “This is anything but clean earth.”

Research and development?

Thanks to an exemption in federal law, none of the waste generated by the oil and gas industry is considered hazardous. No matter what’s in it. Clean Earth declined multiple interview requests for this story but says in a statement it’s been handling the waste “with the highest integrity.” The company has already disposed of 172,000 tons of it in recent years thanks to a special permit from the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

In 2011, Clean Earth got the permit to do research and development to examine the beneficial re-use of drill cuttings. The idea is to do something with it, rather than send it off to a landfill. Clean Earth takes the muddy cuttings that come out of gas wells, mixes it with cement, and tests it, before placing it old, polluted industrial sites known as brownfields.

Steve Socash has been in charge of reviewing the permit for DEP.

“We’re still evaluating the information at the current time,” he says. “We haven’t completed our review of Clean Earth’s conclusions.”

Since 2011, Clean Earth has put drill cuttings in an abandoned coal mine and two brownfields around the state.

And this has really rubbed some people in the waste business the wrong way.

In 2013 the Pennsylvania Waste Industries Association, a trade group representing landfill owners, sent a letter to DEP urging it to deny a renewal of Clean Earth’s permit. They argued it’s not really a small-time research operation, instead it’s a full-scale commercial enterprise designed to avoid regulations.

Despite their objections, DEP renewed the permit through 2017.

“A good idea”

Although the agency is still studying the practice, Socash doesn’t think people should be alarmed by the idea of recycling drill cuttings.

“DEP believes evaluating drill cuttings to see if they can be beneficially used is a good idea.”

Earlier this year, DEP issued a study which found the natural radiation from drill cuttings poses little threat to public health. It said that disposal techniques in landfills were safe. But the study didn’t look at the kind of work Clean Earth is doing– whether it was safe to re-use the waste.


Marie Cusick/ StateImpact Pennsylvania

Pine Creek Headwaters Protection Group members Bryn Hammarstrom (left) and Bob Ross.

Back in Tioga County, the Pine Creek Headwaters Protection group has been meeting regularly to investigate the airport project.

Group member Bryn Hammarstrom has been upset by the surge in gas drilling in his backyard in recent years, but thinks this project simply goes too far.

“We can’t stop hydraulic fracturing,” he says. “But we can at least try and make the disposal of the byproducts of hydraulic fracturing done as safely to the environmental and to the population of Tioga County as possible.”

DEP says it doesn’t know when it will make a decision on the project.


  • paulroden

    Here is yet another example of why fracking needs to be outlawed and banned. By being exempt from Federal environmental rules, it is yet again another example of the fox guarding the hen house or the “Golden Rule: Them that has the gold, write the rules.” The DEP by renewing the permit, shows us that we can’t expect protection from the “Don’t Expect Protection” department. The PA Dept. of Health can’t offer help or the “Don’t Offer Help” department. It can’t conduct public health studies or record health impacts or complaints. The PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources is dependent on revenue from gas drilling leases from operations in the PA State Parks and Forests, so it is compromised. That is why I call it the “Department of Consumable Natural Resources or Consuming Natural Resources. Fracking is too dangerous, too expensive to be conducted safely while protecting the environment and is totally unnecessary for our energy needs. Outlaw fracking now!

  • Fracked

    Remember the cute little “Christmas tree” that the landmen said you would be left with after they drilled you your piece of American energy? Yep, we’ll drill a well and you’ll never know we were here…not mentioning all the ugly packages that would come along with that little tree….pipeline, compressor stations, pits, tankers, spills, leaks, failed casing, noise and light pollution and if you are really lucky-a water treatment system-painted any color you want! This just keeps getting better and better. DEP cannot protect PA because of the PA Senate and House commitment to the Golden Goose and there are the deals made with oil and gas from VERY high up and the exemptions that the Cheney/Bush team came up with to ensure the future of oil and gas extraction. Creative use of waste material has been going on since day one. Let’s just call it recycling and put a “Keep Pennsylvania Beautiful” sign by it. Why not use the waste to fix the roads? We could have the best roads in the Nation.

    • paulroden

      All the drillers and waste haulers have to do is fill out a form and have the DEP stamp it with their seal of approval, and Voila! the “produced well brine” or “produced fluids”, “well flowback” and “waste water” all are declared as having “beneficial use.” Then they can sell of give this “well brine” for “road dust control” or for use by municipalities or private contractors for snow and ice removal or pre-storm treatment of roadways. Ah, “better things for better living through chemistry.” Trust me this is perfectly safe and good use of fracking waste. Hah! So all of this heavy metal salted brine with radioactive radium and uranium salts emitting radon is spread thin over all of our roadways. They think that by spreading it around and diluting it, there will not be a problem and no one will notice. Heck, companies have just driven down the highway and opened up the valves on their trucks or just dumped it down the storm sewer. Some have been caught and fined. One waste hauler/disposal owner was convicted. I doubt that despite this exposure the illegal dumping or use of the “beneficial use” designation has stopped these practices. Without fracking, this would not be a problem.

      • Fracked

        I don’t really want this stuff on our roads! I do want the gas companies that have destroyed our roads made to fix it! They brag the roads are better than ever? Not in this shalefield.

  • Steve Todd

    Hopefully enough wake up and join those of us who have pushing for the multinational corporations who are profiting wildly from fracking to pay their share, once we give away even more to them. Or, maybe we’ll have to give even more away. Eventually, even the most oblivious and brainwashed have to see the socialized costs needed to allow this privatized profiteering.

    • prothopectore

      Theodore Roosevelt, 26th US President: “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and
      acknowledging no responsibility to the people.”

      Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England stated in 1844:
      “The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined
      by those who are not behind the scenes.”

      President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a letter dated November 21, 1933:
      “The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element
      in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of
      Andrew Jackson.”

      John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York, 1918-1925: “The real menace of our
      Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its
      slimy legs over our cities, states and nation.”

      U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter: “The real rulers in
      Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes.”

    • Wendy Lynne Lee

      Hey Steve–what’s their “share” once the Arctic’s gone? Against climate change refugee migration? Against the loss of species and habitat? Against a future of cancer? neurological damage? What’s their fair share to mitigate climate change? Suggesting that there even IS a share that CAN be paid essentially trades the value of our lives and those of our children’s lives for their profits. We are all being asked to share in this risk–but for the vast majority that risk is undertaken involuntarily. It is indeed profiteering–so why on earth would would permit profiteers the opportunity to “pay their fair share” against an extraction practice whose longterm consequences cannot be calculated in dollars?

      • Steve Todd

        Wendy: Their share will be the same as it is now: a fair cut of whatever is left, good and bad. The Political Class has already traded the value of our lives and those of our children’s lives for their profits. To allow the profiteers the opportunity to continue NOT to “pay their fair share” against extraction is just stupid of us. And wimpy. Our kids future is being stolen from them. I am doing all I can to stop it, and I am doing all I can to stop it, including calling for an end to fracking. As long as we are unsuccessful, though, we might as well take our share of that obscene profit.

        I know we disagree on this. I am not trying to convince you, and don’t waste time convincing me of your view, because we are both familiar with each others’. In my opinion, we should join in our common efforts where we can. If not, fine enough.

        Best luck to you, Alex, John and any others I may have forgotten about who have insulted and alienated me in the past. We could be allies. Or, we could not be. Your call.

        • Wendy Lynne Lee

          Hi Steve–actually, your reasoning is circular; you presuppose the very thing that needs to be shown. A “fair” cut of whatever is left assumes that these companies–the ones whose rapacious behavior has damaged the very prospect of a future generation of people on a desirable planet–are somehow entitled to “fair,” that they’re equal players in this drama.

          They’re not; they’re the CRIMINALS. What is FAIR for them are long and arduous prison terms. I do not know what you mean by the “political class,” but I can assure you that with the passage of TPP, TTIP, and especially TiSA, there will be little other than cosmetic distinction between government and corporate enterprise.

          The only fair deal with these corporations is that they are stopped, that they’re profits are returned in toto to the people from whom they have STOLEN, and that they never be permitted to extract and exploit again–that they be dismantled.

          To get the “fair” you argue for not only leaves the gas companies in tact, it REQUIRES they remain operational. It REQUIRES in other words that they be allowed to continue to destroy our water and air, our property values and communities–so that they can earn enough to pay their fair share–right on the way to climate change.

          That reasoning is so self-defeating as to be nihilistic.

          The facts are that we are well beyond “fair.” Without the prospect of restoration, there’s no such thing–and there is no restoration.

          Fact is, the program you here advocate not only reinforces precisely the system responsible for the harm, it abets the gas industry by permitting them license to keep fracking.

          You cannot have this both ways: either call to STOP the industry, and be prepared to put your body in front of them to do it.

          OR you actively EMPOWER the industry by demanding a “fair” they can only achieve by continuing the harm.

          And the point is not about whether we agree; it’s about getting other people reading this thread to see the absurdity of a line of reasoning that crafts an EXCUSE for the gas industry–one they are exploiting right here, right now.

          • Steve Todd

            My logic is sound, as it has been during the other times we’ve had this same discussion. My conclusion is just different than yours. Neither of us will convince the other. Best luck.

          • Wendy Lynne Lee

            No–Steve, the claim that your logic is sound is not a demonstration that it is sound.

            This isn’t about you and I; it’s not about whether we agree or don’t. It IS about the logic of an argument for which you just happen to be the representative. That argument is manifestly unsound, and I have shown it.

            Put plainly: it is a contradiction to claim that:

            (A) fracking ought to be stopped.

            (B) that the agents responsible for the fracking ought to pay their fair share (whatever that could mean–and THAT too is very obscure)


            Because the only way the gas companies can “pay their fair share” is with revenue produced, presumably, from the fracking–their only source.

            Ergo–they CONTINUE fracking.

            This argument is, in fact, capitulation–and an attempt to cover up that fact with rhetoric like “fair share.”

            And that’s it.

            It’s disingenuous and dishonest–and readers here have a right to see just how disingenuous it is.

          • Steve Todd

            My argument is sound and genuine. You don’t agree. You can repeat your same argument in as many different ways as I and one will tire first. This may lead the other to think they’ve won. Neither of us will. Once again best luck getting the best deal you think we can. I’ll pursue same.

  • Steven Hall

    “He’s worried the waste could run into the gorge when it rains.
    “I think the name Clean Earth is ironic,” he says. “This is anything but clean earth.””

    Worried ????
    Could ? It most definitely WILL ..
    Quit Polluting ..Technologically ,it is no longer necessary …

  • MrPittsburgh

    Then think about all the landfills around the Commonwealth (19?) taking in all this radioactive waste and the waterways already ‘glowing in the dark’ like Ten Mile Creek with ‘off the chart’ levels of Radium, Thorium and Uranium. Time for the citizens of Pennsylvania to wake up and smell the coffee!

  • Richard Schmoyer

    The Pine Creek Watershed is a Pennsylvania treasure!!!. Environmental and visual Desecration should be avoided at all costs. While at Penn State, I wrote my Masters Paper on the Watershed’s fragmented planning infrastucture. I got to know the area intimately ,and I can say that it is one of Pennsylvania’s special places, worthy of protection and preservation at the highest possible levels.

  • Bob Childs

    Coolidge has no idea what’s going on in his own county, he needs to get out of office along with the other idiots running our county and school board. fracking has done nothing good in Tioga, except line certain pockets if ya call that good. theres still a huge jobless market here and prices have tripled since the frackers came in. and less than 10% locals have gotten jobs the rest are imports (out of state) that get a Pa lisence and Coolidge thinks that makes them a resident.

  • prothopectore

    Widespread and systemic contamination found — at the EPA

    By Weston W. Wilson June 15, 2015, 08:30 am

    Despite a press release from EPA proclaiming there is no
    widespread groundwater contamination due to fracking, EPA now says that their
    new study of the nation’s natural gas boom should not be seen as proof that
    hydraulic fracturing is being safely done.

    “That is not the message of this report,” said EPA science
    adviser and deputy administrator Thomas A. Burke. “The message of this report
    is that we have identified vulnerabilities in the water system that are really
    important to know about and address to keep risks as low as possible.”

    The oil and gas industry has claimed repeatedly that
    fracking is safe, alleging there’s never been a single case of groundwater
    contamination from fracking

    People who live near fracking wells report a very different
    picture from devastating health impacts to contaminated drinking water and air

    In 2010, Congress told EPA to study these claims. In 2011,
    EPA responded, announcing it would do a widespread investigation of the entire
    industry including the systemic release of toxic gases during fracking.

    Under pressure from the industry, the EPA began severely
    limiting the scope of its investigation.

    In 2012, EPA withdrew from any investigation of the air
    pathways of toxic gas release during fracking, despite hundreds of citizens
    living near wells reporting air pollution and a robust set of scientists
    confirming ill health consequences.

    In 2013, EPA dropped its study of a marquee ground water
    contamination case in Dimock, Pennsylvania.

    In 2013, EPA dropped its study of ground water contamination
    in Pavilion, Wyoming and Weatherford, Texas.

    After retreating on measuring contamination in already
    fracked areas, EPA announced it would still conduct ‘prospective studies’ of
    new sites where baseline ground water data would be collected before fracking
    occurred. In 2014, EPA dropped all prospective studies.

    Having systematically turned its back on groundwater data
    gathering and analysis, including the groundwater data it had already collected
    in Pennsylvania, Wyoming, and Texas which confirmed water contamination, EPA
    shamelessly released a draft report this month with the deeply deceptive
    headline, “no widespread systemic ground water contamination found.”

    Actually, as EPA knows, hundreds of specific cases of ground
    water contamination have been documented.
    In 2012, Pennsylvania environmental officials found nearly 9 percent of
    fracked wells fail during their first year. EPA, itself, found that two-thirds
    of fracked wells have cement gaps with three percent of these faulty wells
    drilled through drinking water formations, creating a pathway for

    Considering the connectivity of water, even a 3 percent
    failure rate from the 1.1 million fracked wells in the U.S. is numerically
    significant and creates what should be considered systemic risk. Indeed, Schlumberger, a leader in oil-field
    and fracking technology, says that all wells eventually leak.

    Toxic gases released during fracking have been demonstrated
    to cause ill health, cancer, and birth defects. A health study in Colorado
    found a 30 percent increase in birth defects, including spina bifida and
    congenital heart failure, for women living within 10 miles of fracked
    wells. Of course, under pressure from
    the industry, EPA dropped its study of systemic health risks from toxic gases
    altogether in 2012.

    The growing body of science says that fracking causes water
    contamination, air pollution and with high leakage rates of methane, a potent
    greenhouse gas, is a climate disaster. EPA’s clean power plan credits utilities
    for greenhouse gas reductions when they switch from coal to fracked gas. This
    credit is based on EPA’s calculation that the methane leak rate from fracking
    is 2 percent, and that the heat trapping character of methane is only 25 times
    greater than CO2 from coal. Both calculations are incorrect and therefore
    exaggerate the climate benefits of methane. Current information indicates methane
    is 86 times more heat trapping than CO2 over the short term, and the amount of
    methane leaked from fracked wells, according to field measurements by NOAA
    scientists, ranges from 4 percent to 18 percent.Unless the methane leak rate is
    reduced to less than one percent, the political promise that replacing coal
    with natural gas is better for climate protection is hollow, a hoax.

    Still, there is a way out. As Stanford Prof. Mark Jacobson’s
    2010 paper in Scientific American shows, we can run our world on 100 percent
    renewable energy. We don’t need natural gas. 100 percent renewable energy is
    not a pipe dream. It relies on a mix of energy conservation, solar, wind, and
    hydro primarily. And it can be done today with current technologies

    This conversion will not only reduce health and climate
    risks, it will put money in the pockets of Americans. Additionally, a robust
    100 percent renewable energy solution would reduce national security risks from
    climate change — the greatest threat to American national security according
    to the Pentagon.

    Woodrow Wilson observed that if big business is to escape
    government regulation, it would have to strive to capture or own government.
    Industry’s pressure on EPA resulted in this pitifully limited investigation and
    the disingenuous press release. One is led to wonder, has Obama’s EPA been
    kidnapped by America’s fossil fuel hustlers?

    Wilson is an environmental engineer retired from the
    Environmental Protection Agency.

  • LiliVonShtuppIsTired

    Jesus fucking Christ. The world has lost its collective mind.

  • artisanr

    PA needs to work harder kicking fracking and fossil fuels to the curb. Solar and wind, Pennsylvania!!!! Let’s do it!!

  • Julieann Wozniak

    So what if we all die of cancer. We don’t matter!

  • VW

    Keep this away from the water!

  • ChescoDog

    Just remember what coal mining has done to Pennsylvania’s environment.

  • StephenCleghorn

    The duplicity of the oil and gas industry is all right here: “A Montgomery County waste disposal company called Clean Earth is
    proposing to haul in 400,000 tons of gas industry waste– specifically
    treated drill cuttings.” “Clean Earth”? Everywhere you turn in the fossil fuel industry they seem unable name plainly what they do. I would suggest “Dirty Energy Disposal Services” as their true name, and then people would know that those trucks going down the road are actually doing. I sort of doubt the company will take my advice on the matter.

  • Vera Scroggins

    Usual Hair-brained ideas from Gas Development Advocates : Up to a 1,000 tons of drill cuttings per gas well…..check out and look up the tons of waste from each gas well…and other liquid waste….it’s endless trail of contaminated rocks, soil….”Nice, safe” name for this toxic-generating company: “Clean Earth”…! We don’t need processed drill cuttings in our communities and counties which can be spread through rain runoffs…

  • salsarider62

    When this goes through the state had better tax the living hell out of these companies and give the proceeds to public schools. We’ll need an educated citizenry to figure out how to repair the environmental damage. Sigh.

    • prothopectore

      it gets even better. the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) will make it possible for corporations to sue states for infringing on their ability to make a profit. and if the state can’t come up with the cash then the people of Pennsylvania get to cough up the cash personally.

  • BobSchmetzer

    WOW ! This is so unbelievable . Ignorance runs rampant throughout the state. How could anyone believe that polluting the streams, air, and land, is cleaning up the same ? The Pennsylvanian’s who have risen to the position of trust , have and still do violate that trust. It results to a penny wise and dollar foolish mentality. Strip mining has left our state with irreparable harm due to payoffs and bribes. History repeats itself when we fail to learn from past mistakes. Where are the states engineering studies and legal opinions ? It’s you and me that have to pay for all of the damages. Loss of health and life has no acceptable price. Industry has always put profits first and the public last. Government also has followed that example , when they should have looked out for the public first. THIS HAS TO CHANGE ! Drilling a uranium vein and dumping the tailings have long term damage. Using depleted uranium to blow the pipe,( fracturing ), has consequences that the Pa DEP study did not take into consideration after being told of the danger. I agree with the peer review that the study is incomplete. That makes it inaccurate and puts the public at risk. Speak up and take action. Bring this conversation to the table !

  • Fracked

    “Godsend” is the most offensive part of this story….

  • William Huston

    Holy Jesus. Are the Robots in charge now? Or is it Insane Clown Posse?

  • Dwain_Wilder

    If you look carefully at the report on TENORM hazard assessment report for PADEP cited here, there is a curious statement. The solids in the flowback are presumed not to include Uranium, by some undisclosed train of reasoning:

    2.3.1 Limitations on Gamma Spectroscopy Results

    …”Uranium is insoluble in water while Ra is water soluble. Therefore, wastewater,
    produced and flowback fluids, and wastewater treatment solids (sludge and filter cake) contain Ra and its progeny but do not include U.” (See p 36,

  • Karen Feridun

    What utter disregard for our natural resources! I’m more and more inclined to think that global warming is simply Mother Nature preparing to hit the ejector button on mankind because of our arrogant, entitled attitude toward the planet and every species, including our own. Keep it up, DEP! Just stop pretending yours is the Department of Environmental Protection.

    Ban fracking now!!

  • Wendy Lynne Lee

    The gas industry is preparing–AGAIN–to use Pennsylvania’s most beautiful and precious assets–in this case Pine Creek Gorge (the ‘Grand Canyon” of Pennsylvania) as a TOILET for the rotted and foul remains of their cancerous and radioactive extraction.

    They feel no shame.

    And if we lay down–AGAIN–for them to quite literally unload their bowels in our home, it’s as clear as day that we don’t either.

    I was asked today by a respected journalist from Florida what it was going to take to get us to move from activists–our comfortable shoe friends who sell out the people of the Commonwealth virtually daily–to insurgents.

    “Death,” I said.


    Because once you know what the connection is between Pine Creek Gorge, the Trans Pacific Partnership, the gas industry, and greenwash named disposal prostitutes like Clean Earth–a company that’s going to make this piece of paradise into a cesspool for toxic waste, you know that there is NO agency or representative within this corrupted system that either gives a tinker’s damn or, even if they do, has an once of the wherewithal to help you.

    The very same representatives that here express reservations are the same as those who have completely sold us into servitude to the gassers.

    “Death.” Until we are willing to take the pepper spray, the tear gas, the water canons, and the bullets in defense of our right to life and the integrity of the conditions of our lives, this will not change. And it will not end until the last drop of gas is out of the ground–and the climate is altered beyond reclamation.

    Wendy Lynne Lee
    Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

  • David Ira Kagan

    I am ready to become a part of some civil disobedience.

    • Wendy Lynne Lee

      Well, how about your neighbors?

      • David Ira Kagan

        I doubt it. I’m afraid that you are correct that it would take death to get a significant number of others involved in civil disobedience.

  • Timothy Ellis

    I think they should take all the waste to the Big Oil Execs houses and use it for landscaping. I am sure they have plenty of acreage to cover.

  • gus

    In the ninties I had to sell my land back to the state(It was close to Pine creek).
    The state wanted to make a trash transfer station (Which they did)..
    Since the “Rails to Trails” was inetiated there was a great need for trash disposal.
    I was a member of the ‘Pine Creek Preservation Assoc.’
    We all voted NOT to have a land fill in the area.,hence the need for trash transfer.
    I now have land in Bradford co., they are fracking there also..

    all those land owners who signed agreement with gas companys received monies and monthly dividend checks (If the wells are producing).
    This has been a boon to those older farmers who can’t farm, and their kids have since moved to cities; there is revenue to the locals who want to work for the gas companys, and local businesses have reaped rewards also.
    As there is need for independence from forign energy sources ,this is inetival.
    The need will always exceed the want, especially when there’s $$$ involved.

    • Wendy Lynne Lee

      HI Gus–while I appreciate your points about help to older farmers–it simply doesn’t justify the damage to future generations of people, animals, and the ecologies destroyed. It is, in fact, a kind of theft from not only future persons–but the neighbors who are harmed and whose property values have suffered. Why should I or anyone be effectively forced to involuntarily subsidize my neighbor’s royalty checks through my loss of property value?

      Also–what will happen to those same farmers and businesses when the boom goes bust?

      Lastly, the independence from foreign oil and gas is nothing more that industry propaganda–I assure you. The drive to construct the pipelines is primarily to get the gas to export depots–Cove Point, etc. Fact is, we are subsidizing the gas companies with our water, land, and property values while they capitalize on FOREIGN markets–especially Japan, China, India–to whom they WiLL sell the gas.

  • John_at_MarcellusProtest

    We’ve occasionally tried to reach people in the “Northern Tier” who are ready to work — or are already working — to fight fracking. From reading these comments, I suspect we just haven’t been looking in the right places. But we’d love to hear from any of you at ‘info [at] marcellusprotest [dot] org.’ Thanks! /s/ John

  • Jeffrey Morrissey

    Extending the airport runway is a bad idea regardless of what is used as fill. The fact that it is drilling waste makes it just plain foolish. As an airport manager, I would have thought that Mr. Musser would know of the recent Yeager Airport calamity. Epic engineering failure.

  • ComradeRutherford

    They should do like coal mining in West Virginia, just fill in the whole valley with toxic waste. Who dares to stop Capitalism? Certainly not the spineless Democrats.

    Not filling in the valley is Socialism! And Socialism is evil, say the Conservatives. If you are against this plan, then you are a Godless Liberal!

About StateImpact

StateImpact seeks to inform and engage local communities with broadcast and online news focused on how state government decisions affect your lives.
Learn More »