New Paltz Village and Town law prohibits 1) natural gas exploration and extraction, 2) disposal of natural gas production waste and 3) application of used frack water and chemicals to de-ice roads. So why would the New Paltz Village Board consider granting Central Hudson an easement to add more natural gas lines in the Village in exchange for a conversion to natural gas at Village Hall?
On August 13th, Central Hudson representatives made a presentation to the Village Board where they claimed natural gas usage will save money and be cleaner. Less expensive natural gas is a bet that the oil and gas industry will continue to pay for influence over policy via campaign contributions to expand fracking in North America. Natural gas is a dirty fuel when all of its consequences including methane leaks from drilling are considered. Methane is a greenhouse gas 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
By utilizing Central Hudson’s natural gas, are we not betraying our commitment against fracking? Why should fracked natural gas and its negative impacts be absorbed by other communities without anti-fracking laws like New Paltz’s? It is hypocritical to capitulate and allow natural gas without more investigation into other options.
Unfortunately, obliging Central Hudson with easements to accommodate fracked natural gas involves risking air, water and food supplies. Plus it increases earthquake threats, and who knows what to do with contaminated frack water and chemicals? We need to be mindful of risks that could compromise land values (our tax base).
Fracking has gone on for decades but more recently the industry began fracking shale horizontally using acids and detergents injected into the ground at high pressures. The 2005 Bush-Cheney Energy Policy Act exempted hydraulic fracturing fluids from the disclosure requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act, meaning that industry does not need to inform the public of what chemicals it is injecting underground. Currently, natural gas production from shale accounts for 37% of total US output, and studies project that will rise to more than 75% by 2035. In his 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama described a 100-year supply of natural gas.
Many believe 100 years of supply is egregiously overstated. That withstanding, do we just kick the can down a 100-year long road polluting groundwater and exacerbating global warming along the way instead of seriously pursuing renewable technologies and policies, or should we be more thoughtful of future generations?
Fortunately, we have a Democratic candidate for Governor, Zephyr Teachout, taking a longer view. She’s proposing to ban fracking in New York State and promote clean energy to invigorate the economy. Arguments suggesting clean energy and a robust economy are mutually exclusive are made to favor incumbent companies that benefit from an economy centered around fossil fuels.
New Paltz municipal boards should not be accommodating projects that conflict with our laws and our community’s values. Giving up should not be an option. How about continuing to work on projects like updating transmission lines for solar-generated electricity produced at a solar farm that’s been discussed for New Paltz’s property on Clearwater Road?
Sincerely,
Tim Rogers
New Paltz