I take issue with Professor Robert W. Chase’s Jan. 25 commentary that people who are concerned about the safety and environmental impacts of shale drilling are spreading myths (“Five myths about ‘fracking’ ”).
We know with certainty that the oil and gas industry is not capable of extracting and processing shale oil and gas safely. In Pennsylvania alone, companies drilling in the Marcellus shale were cited over 1,600 times for violating state regulations between Jan. 1, 2008, and Aug. 20, 2010.
The Pennsylvania Land Trust Association identified 1,056 as likely to endanger the environment or the safety of communities.
The categories include, among others, improper discharge of industrial waste, faulty pollution-prevention practices, inadequate blowout prevention and improper well-casing construction.
Chesapeake, which has drilled the most wells in the Marcellus shale, has the most violations, and, just last year, was given Pennsylvania’s largest-ever fine (more than $1 million) to an oil and gas company for contaminating the water supplies of 16 families in Bradford County.
There’s no reason to expect the drilling companies’ record to improve in Ohio.
Evidence is consistently being reported of drilling’s threats to water supplies, air and health. Duke scientists report in Scientific American that the closer drinking water wells are to active natural gas wells, the more likely it is that methane contamination will occur.
Award-winning biologist Sandra Steingraber, testifying before the New York Assembly on the adequacy of its new regulations, warns that every phase of the drilling process has the potential to increase the risk of bladder, lung and breast cancer and other serious diseases.
As communities become aware of the growing dangers, more and more are either banning or declaring a moratorium on drilling. Those that ban see the transformation of their environments into heavy industrial zones and the risks to health and safety as unacceptable.
Those that declare moratoriums seek time to strengthen and revise their regulations and wait for the federal Environmental Protection Agency studies assessing the safety of shale drilling, due to come out this year.
Unlike other states, Ohio permits shale drilling before revising its regulations. Gov. Kasich pledges to strengthen regulations, but not to scare business away. I fear we are likely to get the “strongest regulations” industry is willing to approve.
Ralph P. Cebulla
Professor emeritus, Hiram College
Hiram
Costly loss of life in the Middle East
The Jan. 19 article regarding the emotional toll of wartime experiences on service personnel raises serious questions about our nation’s involvement in sending our finest citizens to fight a stealth-like enemy in a foreign land. Thousands have been killed and many more thousands wounded physically and mentally.
The article well describes the results of the longtime wartime engagement and what is now being done to deal with the devastating emotional distress of returning veterans.
In retrospect, one could well agree with U.S. Rep. Ron Paul that we should not be engaged in fighting for some elusive causes, wherever our soldiers are sent. Is it worth the loss of lives, the cost of which are incalculable? A sensible reply is that it is not now, nor ever was, worth the incalculable cost in human life to fight an unidentified enemy whose ideology will not be changed to become more civilized.
Two very notable exceptions to that point are the long-range outcomes of our wars with Japan and Germany. We had to fight the Japanese since they attacked us. The aftermath proved successful, with peace and trading prosperity.
Going to war with Hitler’s Germany was also a “good” war for similar reasons. Such will never happen with the Middle East nations, where our sons and daughters have fought for democracy, an unwanted concept of governance, with, perhaps, the exception of some citizens of Iraq.
Is there any doubt that the loss of human life due to our Middle East meddling was, in retrospect, not worth it? The religious and civil unrest and killing continues, nothing really having been solved.
Joseph C. McLeland
Munroe Falls
Sanctions add to conflict
Sanctions do not work, history and logic tell us.
A sanction is simply one body attempting to impose its will upon another for pursuing policies and actions that are deemed undesirable for the common good.
To think that one can impose its will upon another, despite hardships imposed, is wishful thinking. On the contrary, sanctions create a sense of solidarity, and stiffen resistance, national pride and face-saving the dominant focus.
Hostile responses are considered, and minor skirmishes escalate. Hawks and hard-liners cry for strong action. Soon there is brinkmanship.
Sanctions, instead of diminishing chances of conflict, have increased them. We have reached an impasse. How do we resolve the problem of Iran and its atomic weapons without military action, which should be unthinkable, causing unbelievable destruction and devastation on both sides?
My suggestion to solve this matter would be to reach a peace treaty which would negate Iran’s need for the bomb. What’s yours?
Herman Gilbert
Copley Township
Common ground
I think it’s great that Standing Rock Cemetery in Kent is accepting pets. The pets even have their own section, separating them from their fellow deceased animals, the humans. Somehow, the objection voiced in the Jan. 31 article (“Pets and their owners can rest in peace”) conveyed a belief that human life is more valid, more special, more sacred than the life of an animal, and therefore an animal is not deserving of sharing the same burial ground.
I disagree. Both my father’s parents are buried at Standing Rock. I don’t feel having animals buried nearby desecrates their final resting place in any way. In fact, I personally would be honored to share a final resting ground near animals. The closer the better. When it comes to integrity, friendship, honesty and unconditional love, animals usually outscore humans by a wide margin.
D.L. Klumpp
Massillon
