Jun 7, 2019 2 min read

An environmental group is pushing back on the findings of an air-quality study prepared on behalf of a fracking company last month, describing the report as the work of an “industry ally” rather than an independent expert.

In its analysis, the Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project’s rebuttal is based on it own analysis of a study that Gradient Corp. and Range Resources published a month ago based on air monitoring over a two-year period at three locations near one of Range’s well pads in Mt. Pleasant Township.

The objections EHP has lodged to the findings outlined include the facts that air-quality samples Gradient relied on were taken upwind from the pad, which is known as the Yonker site, and that the firm’s analysis dealt with just a fraction of the emissions from fracking sites located within two miles of the school.

Range touted the study as showing the safety of its operations, and 

But one of the bases EHP cited for its criticism of the study was an apparent coziness between Gradient and corporate clients with an interest in the outcome of its work, saying it “has been frequently contracted by industries looking to escape legal consequences or relax government regulations.”

“Gradient should never be considered an objective third-party researcher, especially when it comes to evaluating public health,” added the rebuttal, which was published May 31.

The three-page document pointed to a 2016 article jointly published by the Center for Public Integrity and Vice magazine that outlined a pattern of research by the firm that was favorable to its clients. 

The firm’s previous work has also included questioning the scientific basis for environmental regulations in Texas in 2015 and one of its scientists’ expert testimony for Phillip Morris during a 2016 trial in Boston in a class-action lawsuit brought against the cigarette maker.

Representatives for Gradient didn’t return a message left at its office in Cambridge, Mass., on Wednesday.