[ back ]
Radioactive question posed on gas, oil drilling
(by Sali McSherry - February 24, 2010)
Radioactive question posed on gas, oil drilling
By SALI McSHERRY
Bentleyville Councilman George Skipper, who testified last week to the Ohio House of Representatives Agriculture Natural Resources Committee, asked if there is reason to be concerned that gas- and oil-well drilling sites are not being tested for naturally occurring radioactive material.
Mayor Leonard A. Spremulli had asked Mr. Skipper, who has been researching the issue, to represent him and Village Council in Columbus.
Mr. Skipper told the committee that the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mineral Resources Management, does not test for naturally occurring radioactive material at gas and oil exploration and production sites.
Nearly 15 years ago, the State Review of Oil and Natural Gas Environmental Regulations national organization conducted a review of the Ohio oil- and gas-regulatory program and recommended that the Ohio Department of Health should determine the appropriate action levels for the material, he said. If the naturally occurring radioactive material was found at action levels, the state should establish a regulatory program for it, he said.
Similar reviews were performed in 2000 and 2005, with the same recommendation, that the mineral resources management department should consider whether adopting naturally occurring radioactive material is warranted in Ohio, Mr. Skipper said.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, radioactive wastes from oil and gas drilling take the form of produced water, drilling mud, sludge, slimes or evaporation ponds and pits. It also can concentrate in the mineral scales that form in pipes, storage tanks or other extraction equipment. The people most likely to be exposed to this source of radiation are workers at the site, according to the EPA. They may inhale radon gas, which is released during drilling and produced by the decay of radium, raising their risk of lung cancer.
"How is it possible that 15 years have passed since the first recommendations, yet no program for on-site monitoring has been adopted? How can we know if drillers and the public are exposed to the harmful effects of radiation during drilling and after completion of a well, if there is no monitoring?" Mr. Skipper asked.
"The bottom line is, we don't know if there's a problem or not," he said.
If testing had been done over a period of time throughout the state, it would be established whether there was an issue or not, he said.
It is important to give information about these potential health risks to individuals who are considering leasing their property to drillers, Mr. Skipper said.
According to the EPA, there are two categories of radioactive material that workers and the public need to be concerned about: naturally occurring radioactive material that are released into the atmosphere and deposited on the ground through the drilling process, and technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material, which are radionuclides that have been concentrated by the extraction and production process, such as mineral scales and sludge waste buildup in oil- and gas-extraction equipment."
If one of the objectives of Ohio House Bill 165 is to update Ohio's oil and gas laws to improve protection of public health, safety and the environment, legislation that would require radiation monitoring during drilling should be proposed and adopted, Mr. Skipper said.
In an EPA article, "Oil and Gas Production Wastes," which Mr. Skipper referenced, risks evaluated for members of the public working or residing within 100 meters, or 328, feet of a disposal site are similar to those of disposal workers. They include "direct gamma radiation, inhalation of contaminated dust, inhalation of downwind radon, ingestion of contaminated well water, ingestion of food contaminated by well water and intension of food contaminated by dust deposition."
Mr. Skipper said if homeowners within 100 meters of the drilling site could be at danger to exposure to radioactivity, the minimum between a well and residence should be greater that that amount, not the proposed 46 meters or 150 feet.
Gates Mills resident Sandra Turner has testified several times before Ohio Senate and House committees. "I am against residential drilling and the loss of local zoning control. My fear is the contamination of drinking water by toxic chemicals from gas wells," she said.
She told the Senate committee, "The proliferation of gas wells in residential areas increases the likelihood of accidents, injuries and the environmental poisoning of air and water resources. I realize that you are convinced that such an event is a negligible concern. However, many others do not share your peace of mind, Dr. Turner said.
[ back ]
