Repository for Oil and Gas Energy Research (ROGER)

Abstract:
The recent publication, “Assessing Agreement in Exposure Classification between Proximity-Based Metrics and Air Monitoring Data in Epidemiology Studies of Unconventional Resource Development” by Hess et al [...]

Abstract:

The scale of harm to health is uncertain, but the danger of exacerbating climate change is not

Abstract:
This Viewpoint reviews the potential health risks associated with fracking in the United States, including effects on air quality and consequences of exposure to fracking fluids, and proposes policy and public health safeguards to prevent harms.

Abstract:
CONTEXT: Many governments globally are investigating the benefits and risks associated with unconventional gas mining for shale, tight and coal seam gas (coalbed methane) to determine whether the industry should proceed in their jurisdiction. Most locations likely to be developed are in rural areas, with potential impact on farmers and small communities. Despite significant health concerns, public health knowledge and growing evidence are often overlooked in decision-making. It is difficult to gain a broad but accurate understanding of the health concerns for rural communities because the evidence has grown very recently and rapidly, is complex and largely based in the USA, where the industry is advanced. In 2016, a concerned South Australian beef and lamb farmer in an area targeted for potential unconventional gas development organised visits to homes in developed unconventional gas areas of Pennsylvania and forums with leading researchers and lawyers in Pennsylvania and New York. Guided by priorities identified during this trip, this communication concisely distils the research evidence on these key concerns, highlighting the Australian situation where evidence exists. It summarises key information of particular concern to rural regions, using Australia as an example, to assist rural health professionals to be better prepared to engage in decision-making and address the challenges associated with this new industry. ISSUES: Discussions with communities and experts, supported by the expanding research from the USA and Australia, revealed increasing health concerns in six key areas. These are absence of a safe solution to the toxic wastewater management problems, air pollution, land and water competition, mental health and psychosocial wellbeing risks, fugitive methane emissions and lack of proven regulatory regimes. Emerging epidemiological studies suggesting interference with foetal development and birth outcomes, and exacerbation of asthma conditions, are particularly concerning to rural families and livestock. LESSONS LEARNED: Rural residents in potentially affected areas should be supported to access and interpret the best current evidence regarding the multiple health concerns associated with unconventional gas mining. This knowledge should be part of wider discourse and decision-making processes driving local economic development and national and global energy choices.

Abstract:
This article describes Dr Theo Colborn's legacy of inspiring complementary and synergistic environmental health research and advocacy. Colborn, a founder of endocrine disruption research, also stimulated study of hydraulic fracturing (fracking). In 2014, the United States led the world in oil and gas production, with fifteen million Americans living within one mile of an oil or gas well. Colborn pioneered efforts to understand and control the impacts of this sea change in energy production. In 2005, her research organization The Endocrine Disruption Exchange (TEDX) developed a database of chemicals used in natural gas extraction and their health effects. This database stimulated novel scientific and social scientific research and informed advocacy by (1) connecting communities' diverse health impacts to chemicals used in natural gas development, (2) inspiring social science research on open-source software and hardware for citizen science, and (3) posing new scientific questions about the endocrine-disrupting properties of fracking chemicals.

Abstract:
Sharon Wilson is a community organizer for the nonprofit organization Earthworks. After leaving her office job managing data for the oil and gas industry, she started organizing in response to negative impacts from unconventional oil and gas extraction methods near her Texas home and throughout the state. She describes the environmental health impacts of oil and gas development aided by new technologies and regulatory exemptions set forth by the 2005 Energy Policy Act. Production has spread to previously unexplored regions over the last decade, including her property on the Barnett Shale in North Texas, where she has interacted with energy corporations and observed the intensification of residents’ health issues. I structured the questions in this interview to highlight her unique perspective on organizing in relation to current regulatory loopholes, health impacts of oil and gas development, and the experiences individuals have had with representatives from the industry.

Abstract:
High volume, hydraulic fracturing (HVHF) processes, used to extract natural gas and oil from underground shale deposits, pose many potential hazards to the environment and human health. HVHF can negatively affect the environment by contaminating soil, water, and air matrices with potential pollutants. Due to the relatively novel nature of the process, hazards to surface waters and human health are not well known. The purpose of this article is to link the impacts of HVHF operations on surface water integrity, with human health consequences. Surface water contamination risks include: increased structural failure rates of unconventional wells, issues with wastewater treatment, and accidental discharge of contaminated fluids. Human health risks associated with exposure to surface water contaminated with HVHF chemicals include increased cancer risk and turbidity of water, leading to increased pathogen survival time. Future research should focus on modeling contamination spread throughout the environment, and minimizing occupational exposure to harmful chemicals.

Abstract:

Abstract:
Health impact assessments (HIAs) across the globe may be used by governments and industries to secure approval for unconventional gas extraction developments. HIA is an umbrella term that covers an array of health review and assessment practices, ranging from the very general to quite specific and technical health studies. Our concern in this paper is principally with the specialist end of the HIA continuum and particularly its application to unconventional gas extraction in the UK. We outline the context within which HIAs in unconventional gas extraction may be conducted. We then explain what HIAs may do. HIAs are often commissioned from consultancy companies to assess unconventional gas extraction project risks and benefits and propose mitigation measures. Communities can rarely afford HIAs in the planning process and may consider them biased when commissioned by vested interests. The oil and gas industry uses these techniques for its own ends. Hiring experts, be they specialist consultants, researchers, lobbyists, ex-government officials, or regulators, to influence planning and regulation is a well-tried tactic and structural advantage exploited by industry in seeking license to operate. Equitable and ethical HIA principles are urgently needed in the UK in relation to unconventional gas to secure the integrity and probity of the emerging regulatory system and address concerns regarding unregulated practitioners.

Abstract:

Abstract:
Summary If unconventional gas development (UGD) continues to expand in Australia, the potential health and environmental impacts should be adequately addressed and preventive public health measures should be implemented. The United States has embraced UGD and has decades of experience that could be beneficial to Australia as stakeholders debate the potential benefits and harms of the technique. Additional research on the health impacts of UGD is necessary. Baseline and trend morbidity and mortality data need to be collected to assess changes in population health over time. To date, few health or epidemiological studies have been conducted, so it remains difficult to assess actual health outcomes. In the absence of scientific consensus, there are two possible risks: failing to develop unconventional natural gas when the harms are manageable; or developing it when the harms are substantial. Many government bodies around the world have chosen to minimise the risk of the latter until the impacts of UGD are better understood. Policies should be informed by empirical evidence based on actual experience rather than assurance of best practices. There is a strong rationale for precautionary measures based on the health and environmental risks identified in the scientific literature.

Abstract:

Abstract:

Abstract:
“Fracking,” the common name for hydraulic fracturing is widely used to extract oil and gas, particularly from deep shale formations. A single well requires the use of millions of gallons of water and tons of sand. Air sampling results show that the majority of silica levels at hydraulic fracturing sites were above the Occupational Safety and Health Administration allowable standard and 84% were above Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s new proposed standard. These exposure levels put workers, particularly sand mover operators and T-belt operators who had the highest levels, at risk of silicosis and the other silica-related conditions of lung cancer, end-stage renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, tuberculosis, and connective tissue disease. Because of the fracking industry’s demand for silica, sand mining has markedly increased, which has also increased the number of workers at risk of developing silicosis and other silica-related conditions in the mining industry. This paper reviews the parts of the country where health care providers should be most concerned about possible patients in their practice who are at risk from this newly recognized source of silica exposure and the appropriate medical testing to perform. However, given the long latency, 20 or more years, of most silica-related health conditions and the fact that fracking did not become widely used until the 2000s, it may be years before health care providers see clinical-related disease in their practices.

Abstract:
The use of natural gas that is obtained from high-volume hydraulic fracturing (fracking) may reduce carbon emissions relative to the use of coal and have substantial economic benefits for South Africa. However, concerns have been raised regarding the health and environmental impacts. The drilling and fracking processes use hundreds of chemicals as well as silica sand. Additional elements are either released from or formed in the shale during drilling. These substances can enter the environment in various ways: through failures in the well casing; via alternative underground pathways; as wastewater, spills and leaks on the wellpad; through transportation accidents; and as air pollution. Although many of these chemicals and elements have known adverse health effects, there is little evidence available on the health impacts of fracking. These health concerns have not yet been fully addressed in policy making, and the authors recommend that the voice of health professionals should be part of the public debate on fracking and that a full health impact assessment be required before companies are given the go-ahead to drill.

Abstract:

Abstract:

Abstract:
Summary There is a push to increase production of unconventional gas in Australia, which would intensify the use of the controversial technique of hydraulic fracturing. The uncertainties surrounding the health implications of unconventional gas, when considered together with doubts surrounding its greenhouse gas profile and cost, weigh heavily against proceeding with proposed future developments. The health and environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing have been the source of widespread public concern. A review of available literature shows a considerable degree of uncertainty, but an emerging consensus about the main risks. Gas is often claimed to be a less climate-damaging alternative to coal; however, this is called into question by the fugitive emissions produced by unconventional gas extraction and the consequences of its export. While the health effects associated with fracturing chemicals have attracted considerable public attention, risks posed by wastewater, community disruption and the interaction between exposures are of also of concern. The health burdens of unconventional gas are likely to fall disproportionately on rural communities, the young and the elderly. While the health and environmental risks and benefits must be compared with other energy choices, coal provides a poor benchmark.

Abstract:
The oil and gas extraction industry is rapidly growing due to horizontal drilling and high volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF). This growth has provided new jobs and economic stimulus. The industry occupational fatality rate is 2.5 times higher than the construction industry and 7 times higher than general industry; however injury rates are lower than the construction industry, suggesting injuries are not being reported. Some workers are exposed to crystalline silica at hazardous levels, above occupational health standards. Other hazards (particulate, benzene, noise, radiation) exist. In this article, we review occupational fatality and injury rate data; discuss research looking at root causes of fatal injuries and hazardous exposures; review interventions aimed at improving occupational health and safety; and discuss information gaps and areas of needed research. We also describe Wyoming efforts to improve occupational safety in this industry, as a case example. Am. J. Ind. Med. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Abstract:

Abstract:
Public health often deals with inconvenient truths. These are best communicated and acted on when public health agencies are independent of the organizations or individuals for whom the truths are inconvenient. The importance of public health independence is exemplified by the lack of involvement of the Pennsylvania Department of Health in responding to health concerns about shale gas drilling. Pennsylvania Department of Health involvement has been forestalled by the state governor, who has intensely supported shale gas development.

Abstract:

Abstract:

Abstract:
High-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing, a controversial new mining technique used to drill for shale gas, is being implemented worldwide. Chemicals used in the process are known neurotoxins, carcinogens, and endocrine disruptors. People who live near shale gas drilling sites report symptoms that they attribute to contaminated air and water. When they seek help from clinicians, a diagnosis is often elusive because the chemicals to which the patients have been exposed are a closely guarded trade secret. Many nurses have voiced grave concern about shale gas drilling safety. Full disclosure of the chemicals used in the process is necessary in order for nurses and other health professionals to effectively care for patients. The economic exuberance surrounding natural gas has resulted in insufficient scrutiny into the health implications. Nursing research aimed at determining what effect unconventional drilling has on human health could help fill that gap. Public health nurses using the precautionary principle should advocate for a more concerted transition from fossil fuels to sustainable energy. Any initiation or further expansion of unconventional gas drilling must be preceded by a comprehensive Health Impact Assessment (HIA).

Abstract:

Abstract:
The development of natural gas wells is rapidly increasing, yet little is known about associated exposures and potential public health consequences. We used health impact assessment (HIA) to provide decision-makers with information to promote public health at a time of rapid decision making for natural gas development. We have reported that natural gas development may expose local residents to air and water contamination, industrial noise and traffic, and community changes. We have provided more than 90 recommendations for preventing or decreasing health impacts associated with these exposures. We also have reflected on the lessons learned from conducting an HIA in a politically charged environment. Finally, we have demonstrated that despite the challenges, HIA can successfully enhance public health policymaking.

Abstract:
High-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing (HVHF) in unconventional gas reserves has vastly increased the potential for domestic natural gas production. HVHF has been promoted as a way to decrease dependence on foreign energy sources, replace dirtier energy sources like coal, and generate economic development. At the same time, activities related to expanded HVHF pose potential risks including ground- and surface water contamination, climate change, air pollution, and effects on worker health. HVHF has been largely approached as an issue of energy economics and environmental regulation, but it also has significant implications for public health. We argue that public health provides an important perspective on policymaking in this arena. The American Public Health Association (APHA) recently adopted a policy position for involvement of public health professionals in this issue. Building on that foundation, this commentary lays out a set of five perspectives that guide how public health can contribute to this conversation.

Abstract:
High-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing of shale formations has the potential to make natural gas a significant, economical energy source, but the potential for harm to human health is often dismissed by proponents of this method. While adverse health outcomes of medical conditions with long latency periods will not be evident for years and will depend on the exposure, duration of exposure, dose, and other factors, we argue that it would be prudent to begin to track and monitor trends in the incidence and prevalence of diseases that already have been shown to be influenced by environmental agents. The dirty downside of modern, unconventional natural gas development, as well as the potential for harm, is discussed.

Abstract:
Community health nurses (CHNs) have an opportunity and responsibility to address potential environmental health issues related to shale drilling, even in the face of scientific uncertainty. Potential health impacts to air and water quality related to shale drilling are addressed within the context of the CHNs role of educator, case finder, advocate and researcher. Since 2005, an estimated 5,500 unconventional natural gas wells have been drilled in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection [PA DEP], n.d.), resulting in tremendous controversy throughout the state regarding impacts to human health and the environment. Although there are numerous anecdotal reports of illnesses in humans and animals living in drilling areas, there is a notable lack of peer-reviewed research on the impacts. Research efforts are underway to study these issues, including a proposed retrospective study of hospital and clinic data by Geisinger Health System's Weis Center for Research (Begos, 2012). However, CHNs have the opportunity and the responsibility to help address potential environmental health issues related to shale drilling, even in the face of scientific uncertainty. This responsibility is highlighted by the American Nurses Association's (ANA) (2003, p. 2) adoption of the Precautionary Principle, which states that "when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically." CHN practice includes the promotion and preservation of health, and the prevention of disease, as well as assisting people in their response to illness (Maurer & Smith, 2009). In Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale regions, CHNs must assume the critical nursing roles of educator, case finder, advocate and researcher when addressing the health needs in shale drilling communities. Unfortunately, CHNs practicing within these regions may feel unprepared to take on these roles related to unconventional gas extraction. The following discusses these CHN roles in the context of environmental health impacts of shale drilling on air and water quality.

Abstract:
Concerns have arisen recently as to whether the upstream oil and gas (UOG) sector — responsible for exploration, production, and some processing of raw fossil fuels — is negatively impacting human (and environmental) health in northeast British Columbia (NEBC). The region has experienced increased rates of cancers and other illnesses that have been linked to the contaminants and stressors associated with UOG. Contaminants reach human receptors through environmental pathways, namely air, soil, water, and food. Each contaminant or stressor has specific sources, transport, exposure mechanisms, and biochemistry; and each can impact health both directly and indirectly. Of particular concern are airborne sulphur and nitrogen oxides, hazardous volatile organic compounds, hydrogen sulphide, ozone, noise, and radiation; as well as soil- or water-borne hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and radiation — some of which can also impact human health through food pathways. It has been determined that UOG is negatively impacting human health in NEBC; however, further information, such as environmental monitoring, is required before the actual health risks and impacts posed by UOG can be quantified.

Abstract:
Background: The Marcellus Shale is a vast natural gas field underlying parts of Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia, Virginia, and Maryland. Rapid development of this field has been enabled by advances in hydrofracking techniques that include injection of chemical and physical agents deep underground. Response to public concern about potential adverse environmental and health impacts has led to the formation of state and national advisory committees., Objectives: We review the extent to which advisory committees formed in 2011 by President Obama and governors of the states of Maryland and Pennsylvania contain individuals with expertise pertinent to human environmental public health. We also analyze the extent to which human health issues are of concern to the public by reviewing presentations at the public meeting of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) Natural Gas Subcommittee formed by the U.S. President’s directive., Results: At a public hearing held by the SEAB Natural Gas Subcommittee 62.7% of those not in favor of drilling mentioned health issues. Although public health is specified to be a concern in the executive orders forming these three advisory committees, we could identify no individuals with health expertise among the 52 members of the Pennsylvania Governor’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission, the Maryland Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative Advisory Commission, or the SEAB Natural Gas Subcommittee., Conclusions: Despite recognition of the environmental public health concerns related to drilling in the Marcellus Shale, neither state nor national advisory committees selected to respond to these concerns contained recognizable environmental public health expertise.

Abstract:

Abstract:
Efforts to identify alternative sources of energy have focused on extracting natural gas from vast shale deposits. The Marcellus Shale, located in western New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, is estimated to contain enough natural gas to supply the United States for the next 45 years. New drilling technology-horizontal drilling and high-volume hydraulic fracturing of shale (fracking)-has made gas extraction much more economically feasible. However, this technique poses a threat to the environment and to the public's health. There is evidence that many of the chemicals used in fracking can damage the lungs, liver, kidneys, blood, and brain. We discuss the controversial technique of fracking and raise the issue of how to balance the need for energy with the protection of the public's health.

Abstract: