Jun 17, 2018 4 min read

The publication of the book “Amity and Prosperity” by the New Yorker writer Eliza Griswold has placed concerns about the safety and health effects of hydraulic fracturing back in the spotlight, even though the natural gas industry has long defended its methods and track record, and Griswold herself has stated her work is less about fracking than the price communities pay for the energy that we all use.

The arrival of Griswold’s book has actually been accompanied by some encouraging events. First, Pennsylvania has adopted new rules that should help reduce some of the impact the Marcellus Shale industry has on our environment; and the commonwealth’s Supreme Court has issued a ruling that could lead communities to think more rigorously about where drilling can take place.

First, the administration of Gov. Tom Wolf has issued new requirements for controlling the emission of methane from natural gas wells, processing and compressor stations. These go into effect in August. When permits are issued for new wells, or wells are modified, energy companies will be obligated to look for methane leaks on a more frequent basis under the new regulations, with penalties being levied if they don’t.

The Wolf administration has said it wants to take similar action against existing wells, and it needs to follow through. Earlier this year, the Environmental Defense Fund reported that emissions of methane from oil and gas sites in the commonwealth may be five times higher than what the companies have reported to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. The Environmental Defense Fund estimated that more than 520,000 tons of methane have been emitted annually by oil and gas drillers throughout the commonwealth, and much of it is caused by malfunctioning and outdated equipment.

The result? As much pollution as 11 coal-fired power plants.

Though it tends to shy away from additional regulation, the natural gas industry should support the new rules because they will likely make more money as a result. Natural gas mostly consists of methane, and it stands to reason that the more of it that can be kept, the more of it that can be sold. Along with pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and contributing to climate change, some estimates have it that $68 million is lost as a result of the escaping methane.

Preventing methane leaks is a win for both energy companies and the environment.

Also, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that municipalities cannot allow drilling in areas that are not designated for industrial uses unless they first amend their zoning regulations. The court’s decision overturns a ruling by the Commonwealth Court that found that oil and gas drilling was akin to a public utility like a water treatment plant. While not limiting in any way where drilling can take place – communities can amend their zoning ordinances to allow drilling anywhere within their borders if they want – the Supreme Court ruling makes the clear point that drilling is an industrial activity, and should be managed as such.

George Jugovic Jr., an attorney for the environmental group PennFuture, told StateImpact Pennsylvania that the ruling “makes clear that shale gas development is an industrial land use, and that local government must rigorously consider what other land uses it is compatible with before allowing it to occur in districts designed for incompatible uses, such as a district designed to foster a quiet residential environment.”

We’ve long supported natural gas drilling, as long as it is done with the health and safety of the community as a paramount concern. These two developments get us closer to that goal.