State geologists group agnostic on hydrofracking

But one thing they do know: Whatever the solution to the controversy over natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale turns out to be, professional geologists should be involved.

Taury Smith, the actual State Geologist who finds himself in hot water after expressing a much less on-the-one-hand-and-on-the-other-hand opinion on the issue — he thinks hydrofracking anxiety is overblown — is not a member of the group.

Here’s the message from the The New York State Council of Professional Geologists:

Many New Yorkers are concerned about the potentially adverse environmental impacts of proposed methods for extracting natural gas from the Marcellus shale and other shale formations in NYS. The New York State Council of Professional Geologists (NYSCPG) recognizes the importance of maintaining public safety and practicing sound environmental stewardship for future generations, as well as the importance of securing affordable energy for a stable economy. NYSCPG neither supports nor opposes a particular policy regarding energy development in NYS, such as the development of natural gas from shale formations, but insists that this and other important environmental and energy policy decisions be based on reliable science provided by competent professionals, including geologists.

NYSCPG maintains that the professional experience and technical expertise of geologists are critical for addressing the energy development concerns of the people of NYS. For example, geologists in NYS routinely locate, test and evaluate water supply wells; assess the availability, integrity and quality of surface and ground water resources; analyze conditions to minimize soil erosion and pollution; monitor the adequacy of drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations to protect water systems, watersheds, and basin-wide hydrologic balance; coordinate solid and liquid waste handling and disposal; find and certify aggregate resources for roads and construction; evaluate the significance of potential impacts to ecosystems; monitor chemical use, handling and storage; investigate and remediate spills; evaluate soils and slopes for reclamation; and, prepare, review, and approve permits.

NYSCPG emphasizes that sound geologic science is essential to address the challenges presented by expanded shale-gas development in NYS. The development of these resources has the potential to provide positive economic benefits to the citizenry of the state, but the benefits must be assessed relative to the potential environmental costs. The decision to proceed or not to proceed with shale-gas development is a public policy decision that must be informed by the best available science and technology. Policy based on unreliable science puts the public at risk.

NYSCPG promotes the passage of licensure for geologists in NYS to establish high professional standards and accountability for geologists who are addressing the environmental, resource, and energy needs of the people of NYS.

  1. cp retiree says:

    [Taury not a member of the group.]

    Now there’s a big surprise.

    And apparently old Taury failed to become familiar with this hydrofracking recipe card from DEC’s website:

    Hydrochloric / muriatic acid —> swimming pool cleaner
    N,n-dimethyl formamide —> used as a pharmaceutical crystallization medium
    Petroleum distillate —> cosmetics: hair, make-up, nail and skin products
    2hydroxy 1,2,3propanetricaboxylic acid —> used to remove lime deposits
    Ammonium bisulfite —> used in cosmetics
    Ethylene glycol —> automotive antifreeze and de-icing agent

    Drinks are on me, Taury.

  2. honestabe says:

    CP: What’s the problem? There’s a 100 percent chance that these products, when used residentially, will end up down the drain or in the storm water system. When they’re used in hydraulic fracturing they’ll be contained and treated. It’s illogical to believe groundwater will be contaminated with frack water if it hasn’t yet occured in 60 years.
    Drinks are on me, CP.

  3. gerald says:

    I don’t know Taury Smith but for him to say; “hydrofracking anxiety is overblown” indicates he’s not with it very much regarding hydrofracking when study’s point out that in other states this process has drained natural resources to the point of fresh drinking being depleted or turned into a non-drinkable liquid from your own faucet. Anxiety? No, people fed up w/anxious beaureaucrats who sound clueless and act so. We’ve been down this road before particularly w/saving the Adirondacks. The state sues western states for their pollution in the air coming our way because of the natural flow of wind from the west to east. So, why not enact stricter water regulations? Come on all you geologists and so called professional ‘experts’. I live in one of the best areas of the state (Sch’dy County 12305) for fresh drinking water and would never give it up for hydrof**king. Ever. I read over a decade ago that the next environmental ‘war’ will be fought over fresh drinkng water not gas/oil. It’s a very rare commodity today throughout the nation. Because of hydrof**king its abuse has proven no good not only for the environment in its natural state but for insects, animals, humans – in that order – I agree we need more homegrown oil/gas for the future to avoid the middle east altogether but @ what cost?

  4. G says:

    Why do I keep seeing language like “The” or “The Actual” State Geologist regarding this guy? Try using “a” instead. We use the for singular titles, like The Governor of New York State, The President. Your use of “The” makes it sound as if this guy is the head honcho geologist in the state, of which there is no such thing.

  5. PG says:

    Gerald or others – If you have read actual scientific studies showing well water contamination, would you please provide links? I am only able to find opinion papers and advocacy efforts online. I’m writing an article on this issue and would like to provide a balanced look at it all. Thank you, in advance, if you are able to help!

  6. cp retiree says:

    honestabe #2 -

    What’s illogical is that the fluid is contained, while it’s being injected at high pressure into the rock (?). And when would this fluid be captured — before or after it invades my water supply?

    “…it hasn’t yet occured in 60 years.” Good one; and nicely supported.

    And here’s a revised list of the fracking fluids, being used in PA — just a tad more extensive than the few that DEC offers. And note that some are “proprietary” — so who knows WHAT the heck THEY are.

  7. oneoldtimer says:

    So Gerald, how did you save the Adirondacks?

  8. P says:

    The title of State Geologist is an official title recognized in Nw York State since the New York State Geological Survey was formed in 1836 and until it was reorganized in 1999 under the New York State Museum was the oldest continuously operating geological survey in North America. Dr. Smith is a petroleum geologist with a PhD and over 25 years experience in the field. Hydrofracturing is a tool that has been around for decades and, properly applied, can be done safely. Extensive studies have been done and are continuing to be done and it is my understanding that the experts are finalizing their reports and will make a series of recommendations to ensure that the potential environmental impacts are mitigated to the maximum extent practical. Oversight by regulatory agencies is absolutely necessary and NYSDEC takes their job very seriously. I am a geologist, although my experience in petroleum geology dates back to my college days, and there are many more experts who have studied this issue in greater detail than I have and have more expertise. Let the experts do their job, take some time to read and understand their work and stop overreacting to emotional and wild claims that the sky is falling.

  9. Julius C. says:

    What does Ed “CRASH” Landing have to say?

  10. flowerpower says:

    We will be running out of oil in just a few short years. Look around your life and seriously think about that. Natural gas CAN and MUST be hydraulically fractured and a large chunk of that revenue needs to go to building windmill farms (which people won’t want, but we need), retrofitting homes, insisting new homes be much more energy efficient, hyper-geothermal systems (yes they may cause mini-quakes), rewriting code laws to encourage cluster developments (people like me like to live in the country, not housing developments- but guess what? we are part of the problem!), CNG cars or some other alternative than gasoline from oil. There is no more time, we need to do it well, we need to do it with best practices, we need to rely on new technology, we need to monitor things, but we NEED to do it.

  11. Carl K. says:

    Gerald – where has hydrofracking directly impacted drinking water? What studies? Marcellus shale is thousands of feet below drinking water. Impacts to ground or surface water would come from the mishandling of fracking fluid. We haven’t given up our internal combustion engines because of the potential for contamination caused by the mishandling of petroleum products, nor will we or should we. We just strengthen the petroleum handling practices so as to better prevent contamination. The same applies to hydrofracking.

  12. BOB says:

    Lets start drilling already!

  13. decelsior says:

    Let’s hope they do not use dihydrogen monoxide in the hydrofracking process.

  14. Zoon says:

    G — he is the acting State Geologist. State Geologist is an official title, in law, as are other titles such as State Historian. Most of these positions are situated in the State Museum, held by leading scholars in their field.

    Of course, “actual” State Geologist is not a title, but a typo.

  15. Reality says:

    @ honestabe:

    First, the 100% number you use is not correct. You’re guessing.

    Second, you need to educate yourself regarding recent disclosures of incidents regarding this activity. In some cases, fractures have developed and/or casing was insufficiently installed resulting in contamination of groundwater.

    Additionally, there are surface spills of the frack fluid which enter aquifers from the surface or drain into streams.

    So, no, frack fluids are not always “contained and treated”.

    Also, states like Pennsylvania have had severe problems with treated frack fluid released to rivers as part of a permit. Water has been found to have higher than allowed levels of contaminants in it despite the effort.

    Finally, you say that it’s been 60 years with no contamination. That is incorrect. Furthermore, horizontal fracking is a fairly new technology that has not been around for 60 years. More like 10 or so.

    Try learning about something before you go spouting.

    >March 31, 2011, 4:49 PM
    Drinks are on me, CP.

  16. E says:

    Actually, there is such a thing – it is written in the NYS Constitution. He is “The” State Geologist.

  17. twopondsnorth says:

    Nuclear energy is clean, too. It’s just the darn old spent fuel rods that we have no long-term solution for. But if you just come up with a good, 100,000-year holding pattern solution, like storage tanks, well, then everything is just fine. Except natural disasters, but who’s counting those.
    Same with hydrofracking…we recycle the water used so that’s green, right? Except current water treatment facilities lack the capacity to remove all the chemicals and, when they did, no where to store them. Sure we can build storage ponds and they’re secure…unless some natural disaster happens or we get too much rain or show or the dam bursts….
    Until we can come up with ways to deal with the residue of our growing need for energy, neither nuclear nor hydrofracking present good solutions.

  18. Joe says:

    As long as there is a State Geologist, why can’t there be a State Dude?

    I’d like to know what the State Dude thinks about hydrofracking.

    I’ll bet that the State Dude opposes it.

  19. R says:

    Casey I challenge you to write more balanced articles on this topic. Call geologists from acedimia, hydrologists and oil and gas operators. They can be trusted.
    As much as it is nice to see geologists giving a balanced look at the issue, and the members of this group are real and compotent geologist. It is not fair to point out that Taury is not a member. It has nothing to do with his competancy as a geologist. Seeing that members of the organization look to him for guidence in the field. The title profesional geologist is only a matter of being able to cover a geologists working in industries for liability reasons. Taury does not need to be a member in New York it is not required by law in New York.

  20. G says:

    Maybe we should just let the non-experts make a decision about hydrofracking–after all its only a once in a lifetime economic boom that could involves potential environmental impacts that very few people are qualified to study or even understand. Why listen to geologists who spend years in college and years of their career studying the subject when we can get advice from a music manager (Stephanie Low) or cp retiree? I wonder if she’s available to do an emergency appendectomy. Let the experts do the studies and make the analysis! This speculation isn’t worth the keyboards it’s typed on.

  21. gerald says:

    ‘PG’ and ‘oneoldtimer’: PG: I’ve read online articles from here, Metroland just had an expose not long ago and other related articles over the recent months from interviews done in other states. I believe if you seek any info. on this subject from Pennsylvania you’ll have more info. No links, etc. though. The thing that alarms me – regardless – of how many millions of feet “under water” this procedure is drilled you’re gonna have some residue of pollution, etc. in drinking water.
    Good luck on your find for your studies.
    oneoldtimer: I never said I saved the Adirondacks all by myself. Actually, the real beginnings of saving the Adirondacks began during Teddy Roosevelt’s era when governor then president he saw the rapid deforestation via logging within the Adiriondack Park. He set the tone and like minded people have taken up the cause ever since. The state just bought another million acres to continue its vigilance of “forever wild”. Again, I’m not a so called expert. But I do take part one way or the other by either staying informed and involving myself for saving this great planet of ours. My interest began in 1970 when I was 10 years old and the first Earth Day was commenced along the banks of the Hudson River. I still have a button I got on that fateful day and it’s called earthkeeping. Also, my parents were big on recycling, etc. long before it became derigueur.

  22. honestabe says:

    Dear Reality: My comment was specific to groundwater, so the surface spills and discharge into rivers don’t apply. It does not excuse what happened in Pa. Trucks tipping over are called accidents. Regulations exist to minimize the environmental impact from those and other accidents. And spills don’t enter the aquifer immediately. If any contaminate hits the ground (from any industry, bu the way), it takes a long time to infiltrate through the ground and into the aquifer. Again, the regs are in place from preventing or minimizing that, just as they are for industries across the country.

    The discharge into river is a bad thing, too, but the Times articles that exposed that were overstated by assuming the frack water had to be treated to the quality of drinking water, and they did not take into account dilution. Most scientists have dumped on the Times for that article, inlcuding Pa. DEP.

    The incident in Dimock involved methane migration from poor well casing. No frack fluid contaminated the well water. It’s been resolved and the families got a nice check for their problems.

    And hydraulic fracturing has been commercially viable for 60 years. That should be easy to verify for someone as smart as you.

  23. Steven Palmatier says:

    Taury is a brilliant geologist and having heard him speak several times I am convinced he is concerned about our environment. I give his opinion far more weight than that of a clown in a gas mask running around strumming a banjo.

  24. Ziggy says:

    I’d be more concerned with the 100′s of thousands, or millions, of old wells doting the appalachian basin that were drilled prior to the 1950′s.

    In the “old” days, casing consisted of wood. Cement the casing in the ground? Never heard of that. Plugging a well? Just use dirt, rocks, gravel, and tree tops. Now that was a plug job!

    How much fresh groundwater is now contaminated due to salt water / oil invasion from improperly cased and/or plugged wells?????

    That should be “THE” concern with regards to the “Water Issue”.

    Anyone who wants to put a stop to any sort of drilling and “fracking” – sorry, non oilfield folk, it’s frac’ing; just shows how anti-American you are.

  25. G says:


    I’m unable to find a reference in the current NYS constitution (Art. XIV)that shows an official state geologist title. I was able to find that title in older versions of the constitution however.

  26. cp retiree says:

    Hey G, #21.

    I’m just a regular Joe — probably like yourself — and am simply concerned about the integrity of my water supply. I don’t pretend to be an expert in … ANYthing.

    As I’ve stated previously, I’ll gladly support extracting natural gas from the “gold mine” that lies beneath us, but not before I’m convinced that the process is safe.

    You should know that “years in college” doesn’t make one an expert.

    And your crap has done nothing to put my mind at ease.

  27. G says:

    cp retireee

    Years in college are one way of gaining expertise in a subject. A PhD in petroleum geology is no light achievement, especially combined with 27 years of professional experience in the field. Most of Schenectady gets their water from unconfined (“sand and gravel”) aquifers that are distinct from the Marcellus shale. The Marcellus isn’t even present in the Schenectady area. That being said, the scientists studying this are as concerned about protecting ground water quality as everyone. The only difference is they have professional training relative to the subject, have studied the issues in a scientific manner and are not relying on reading a newspaper article or some environmental blog which is unverified and scientifically unsound. The environmental movement is crowded with people who make decisions based on emotion and not facts. We should listen to them to make sure the scientists have carefully considered all factors but if the scientists say its safe, I’ll trust them over an environmental activist any day. At least we agree that this shouldn’t be done unless its safe.

  28. tke65 says:

    The anti gassers are financed by coal and Soreson Their science is paid for in lecture fees and their movie Gasland was a lie debunked by truth. The filmaker pollutes the very river he wants to protect by burning trash and even a trailor near the delaware river. Josh Fox is the Judas of truth. Is our states brightest politicians to be taken in by the lies and theatric plays on their emotions, or will they do the right thing and let the industry refurbish the coffers with taxes and income for thousands of NYkers.

  29. keepwaterclean says:

    Protecting the waters is a statement so foolish to say when it comes to drilling. Foolish you say ? let me tell you why… the laws of physics would have to be rewritten for frack water to break through several miles of rock and reach an aquifer. It is this reason that aquifers have never been polluted by fracking the shale. The fear and lies need to stop The Drilling needs to start

RSS feed for comments on this post.