End waste pits
The news story “DEP investigating drilling wastewater leak in Washington County” showed the risks posed by fracking. As this story clearly showed, the state's residents desperately need the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to halt the use of dangerous fracking waste pits in the commonwealth.
Fracking wastewater is dangerous to our health, communities and environment — containing toxic carcinogens like benzene, poisonous heavy metals like arsenic and lead, and often contaminated with radioactive materials. The last thing we need is to put massive holding ponds the size of football fields with this toxic pollution near people's homes and in our communities.
As this story shows, fracking wastewater pits can and often do fail.
They overflow and send toxic pollution into nearby waterways or drinking-water supplies, release harmful chemicals into the air and in some cases, they've even exploded or caught fire due to the high levels of volatile chemicals found in the wastewater.
Recently, over 15,000 individuals called on the DEP to ban these hazards. This is just one more example of why the DEP should take action — as soon as possible.
The writer is fracking program director for PennEnvironment (pennenvironment.org).
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Russia, not Rice
- Positive & healthy ...
- Ferguson & contradictions
- More answers, please
- ... Or free-riding fad?
- Thanks for the coverage
- Goodell’s ‘pick-six’
- Sticker shock
- Blame judges
- Hiring in Westmoreland II
- Hiring in Westmoreland I