NOTE:
I try to be a good editor but
this summary of a long article
ended up being longer than usual.
There were too many relevant
quotes I just couldn't delete.
INTRODUCTION:
I've told you
many times here
that truth is not
a leftist value.
This article is
more evidence
of leftist lying --
this time
to support their
anti-fracking
cause.
Leftist lying can be unbelievable,
from completely false attacks
on Judge Kavanaugh, to the
evidence-free multi-year
Trump Russian Collusion Delusion.
A leftist cause is always more
important than the truth,
as has been obvious in my 21 years
of climate science reading.
Eliza Griswold is an author
who gave an inaccurate view
of shale energy development
in Amwell Township, Pa.,
in a 2011 New York Times
article.
Her 2018 book returned to
to Southwestern Pennsylvania,
documenting false claims of water
contamination in 2010 and 2011,
with the assumption the claims
were true!
Her book:
"Amity and Prosperity:
One Family and
the Fracturing
of America",
follows several families
who sued an energy
company over alleged
health impacts, ranging
from polluted water
to sick animals.
Ms. Griswold wrote
a revisionist history ( lies )
book about their
legal cases in 2018.
NOTE:
Five separate courts, including Pennsylvania’s
Supreme Court, have upheld the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection's
findings, yet lying Ms. Griswold continues
to spread unsubstantiated claims in her book.
This year
Ms. Griswold's
2018 book of lies
won a Pulitzer Prize !
That prize is housed
by the Columbia
School of Journalism.
Ms. Griswold’s husband
is the dean.
Ms. Griswold’s new book
was funded by the
Rockefeller Family Fund,
which has been a major funding source
for the anti-fossil fuel “Keep It
In the Ground” movement.
That includes funding of the
#ExxonKnew campaign
that Steve Coll, Griswold’s husband,
and Dean of the Graduate School
at Columbia School of Journalism,
has been actively involved in.
Mr. Coll (author's husband)
openly admitted
in December 2015
that researchers
went into the
book writing effort
with an anti-fracking
conclusion already
decided before
the research began.
THE BIG PICTURE:
The narrative in the book
bears no relationship
to what regulators,
independent laboratories,
and medical professionals
have determined
– all affirmed in
multiple courtrooms.
Five separate courts,
including Pennsylvania’s
Supreme Court, upheld the
Pennsylvania Department
of Environmental Protection
( DEP ) findings.
What a huge waste
of taxpayers' money
and government
personnel time.
What a huge waste
of taxpayers' money
and government
personnel time.
Smarmy leftist Ms. Griswold
continued to spread the
unsubstantiated claims
in her book.
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) was also involved.
Natural gas drilling did not impact
the groundwater of the three
Amwell Township plaintiffs
identified in Ms. Griswold’s book
-- Loren Kiskadden
-- John and Beth Voyles
-- Stacey Haney
Loren Kiskadden’s lawsuit
failed in multiple courts,
and the Pa. Supreme Court
upheld those decisions
by refusing to hear the case.
Mr. Kiskadden’s water well,
claimed to be polluted by
natural gas drilling,
was actually located
within a junkyard
on his property !
The DEP wrote a 2011 letter
to Ms. Beth Voyles that said
there was
“no credible evidence”
of water contamination
as she had alleged.
“In summary, DEP has determined
that Range Resources has not
contaminated your water supply,”
DEP wrote.
Ms. Voyles alleged chemicals
from Range Resources’ operations
killed her dog in July 2010
and a horse in October 2010.
Statements from Ms. Voyles’
veterinarian contradicted this,
along with tests by a state-certified
laboratory.
Comprehensive tests from a
state-certified laboratory
found the water supplies met all
of the U.S. EPA’s minimum
water quality standards.
The veterinarian suggested the dog’s
death may have been the result
of a common cancer, and the horse
may have died from liver toxicity
State regulators
visited Ms. Voyles’ property
at least 24 times
over three months and
never detected malodors.
Court-ordered, independent medical
examinations found oil and gas
had not impacted the plaintiffs’ health
despite claims of arsenic poisoning,
nosebleeds, nausea, headaches,
joint aches, rashes, an inability
to concentrate and a metallic taste
in plaintiffs’ mouths.
DEP air quality sampling of the
Yeager impoundment in July 2010,
as part of a larger study,
“did not identify concentrations
of any compound that would
likely trigger air-related health issues
associated with Marcellus Shale
drilling activities.”
THE DETAILS:
Three neighboring residents
from Amwell Township, Pa.
– John and Beth Voyles,
Stacey Haney and
Loren Kiskadden
– complained in 2010 and 2011
that Range Resources’ natural gas
drilling and its water impoundment
located near their properties
had contaminated their water wells
and the air, causing health impacts
for the families and their animals.
THE VOYLES:
In August 2010, the Voyles complained
about changes in their water quantity.
Range Resources supplied the family
with temporary water beginning
September 9, 2010, and paid for
a new well, that became operational
on October 20, 2010.
The Voyles and Haney filed complaints
with Range and DEP over potential
water contamination in November 2010.
Their well water was tested by DEP
on November 23 and by Range
on November 10, 19 and 23.
Range supplied both families
with temporary water.
Range informed the family with a letter
on January 14, 2011, explaining the tests
“concluded that your water has not
been impacted by our operations”
and that “with concurrence from the DEP,”
the company planned to discontinue
the temporary water service by January 21.
The DEP tested the Voyles’ water again
on February 16, 2011.
Range tested the water supply
again on April 12, 2011.
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) tested the Voyles’
water on July 27, 2011.
Also in September 2011, DEP
sent a letter to the Voyles,
explaining,
“The Department did not detect
malodors on your property,
and could not establish any violation
of the malodor regulation.”
The Voyles’ malodor letter concludes,
“In summary, over a period of
nearly three months, on 24 separate
occasions, the Department visited
your property and detected
no malodors as that term
is defined at 25 Pa. Code § 121.1,
on your property."
"Accordingly, no violations
of the malodor regulation,
25 Pa. Code § 123.31,
could be established.”
In regard to the Voyles repeated
water contamination complaints,
the DEP explained in an
October 2011 letter:
“These analyses have included
testing for various inorganics,
organics, and semi-volatile organics,
as well as for combustible gas. "
"Similar results were obtained
for each of these tests."
"For each of sample analysis,
all of the parameters analyzed
that have established
Primary and Secondary
Maximum Contaminant Levels
(“MCLs” and “SMCLs”)
were found to be within the
MCLs and SMCLs.”
“We have concluded our investigation
and have determined that there is
no evidence to substantiate
the complaint [that “Range’s well drilling
and construction activities
at the Yeager well site, including the
associated fracking water impoundment,
have contaminated your water supply”
LOREN KISKADDEN
In June 2011, Loren Kiskadden
filed complaints over potential
water contamination.
His water supply was tested
by both DEP and Range
on June 6, 9 and 27.
In a September 2011 letter to
Mr. Kiskadden the DEP explained,
“We have concluded our investigation
and cannot make the determination,
for the reasons summarized below,
that the problems in your water well
are caused by gas related activities,
particularly those at the Yeager well
site operated by Range."
“Your water well is located
over 2,500 feet away from
the Yeager gas well and
impoundment."
"We were not able to obtain complete
information about the construction
of the water well, with depth estimates
ranging from 200-400 feet. "
"Regardless, the hydrology does not
support a link between the water well
and the Yeager gas well."
"From a geologic
examination of the area,
the likely recharge area for your
water supply was identified to be
in a northwesterly direction,
whereas the Yeager well site
is located to the northeast
of your water well. "
"Communication between
the Yeager well site
and your water well
would not be expected.”
“In summary,
DEP has determined
that the high levels of sodium
and dissolved solids in your
water supply, as well as the
presence of dissolved methane,
are not the result
of Range’s actions
at the Yeager well site,
or any other gas well
related activities."
"Neither the hydro-geologic
nor analytic results support
a link between gas well
related activity and your water well
and point rather to natural conditions
as the source of these problems.”
“In summary, DEP has determined
that Range has not contaminated
your water supply.”
Lying Ms. Griswold
continued to repeat
disproven claims
in her 2018 book.
She calls the Range Resources
Yeager impoundment
“a vast open waste pond
that leaked and sent noxious gases
into the air”
– contradicting DEP’s determination.
In her recent opinion piece on the book
in the New York Times, Ms. Griswold
describes the “hidden costs”
of shale development, including
“the more troubling health consequences
of living next door to leaking pools
of industrial waste — including
dying animals and sick children."
In 2012, the Voyles, Stacey Haney
and Loren Kiskadden filed a new lawsuit
against Range, 12 contract companies
and two water testing laboratories
alleging that they
“conspired to produce
fraudulent test reports that
misrepresented the families’
well water as good
and contributed to their
exposure to hazardous chemicals
and a multitude of health problems.”
Mr. Kiskadden in particular
has a long-history
with the court system.
In 2015, an independent panel
of environmental judges
at the Pennsylvania Environmental
Hearing Board upheld the DEP’s
exhaustive investigation
which found that Range
did not affect or impact
water supplies:
“ ... sampling of water wells and springs
on the Voyles and Haney properties
located between the Yeager site
and Mr. Kiskadden’s well
had lower concentrations of chlorides,
sodium, total dissolved solids
and pH than did Mr. Kiskadden’s well."
"This data does not support the theory
that contamination is moving toward
Mr. Kiskadden’s well through a
series of fractures.”
“The physical facts showed that
his water well was located adjacent
to a salvage yard with numerous
automobiles and other solid waste
products on the grounds
over the years…The appellant
never performed any maintenance
on his water well
or on his septic system.”
Later in 2015,
the Commonwealth Court
re-affirmed the DEP
and the EHB findings.
In October 2016 the Washington County
Court of Common Pleas entered a
summary judgment dismissing the
2012 lawsuit from all plaintiffs
that alleged that TestAmerica,
a water testing laboratory engaged in
“fraud and civil conspiracy”
with Range by “producing
and permitting to be produced
incomplete and allegedly
misleading test results.”
The dismissal also discussed
that the U.S. EPA has also been
testing the location, presumably
as part of their historic hydraulic
fracturing study concluding
that fracking was not a major threat
to groundwater.
In October 2016 the Commonwealth
Court once again upheld EHB and DEP’s
findings explaining that
“Kiskadden’s evidence did not
outweigh strong, conflicting evidence
that the contaminants in his well water,
particularly in the ratios and concentrations
detected, were naturally occurring
and not unique to oil and gas activities."
In May 2017, the Pa. Supreme Court
decided not to hear the Kiskadden case
thereby upholding the previous
court decisions.
This ended Mr. Kiskadden’s legal pursuit.