As a lifelong environmentalist with an open mind regarding hydrofracking, I have been dismayed by the level of discourse from people opposed to hydrofracking.
The commentary by Sandra Steingraber (a scientist with a doctorate in biology from the University of Michigan) made my hair stand on end ("The right climate for a time out," Feb. 24). Her categorization of fracking as a "brutal methane-breathing dragon" would seem to be more appropriate from a child than a trained scientist.
I'm not really sure what she means by her statement "new studies say (fracking) is a bigger climate-killer than coal," but it sure sounds scary. If by climate-killer, Ms. Steingraber is talking about greenhouse gas emissions, many scientists would disagree with her, and most would say that issue is not resolved. If she is talking about acid rain, she is wrong.
But what really disturbed me was her statement that "all studies say (fracking) is at least as lethal as coal." I cannot believe a scientist would write that. There are numerous peer-reviewed studies going back decades documenting increased morbidity and mortality seen in coal miners and in the general population living in the area coal is mined.
There is also extensive documentation of the adverse health effects in the population living near coal-fired power plants. There is no comparable literature as regarding the health effects of hydrofracking, just an abundance of speculative conjecture and anecdotal stories.
Hydrofracking is something reasonable people can disagree about, and an informed, reasoned debate is needed. Ms. Steingraber does us all a disservice with the hyperbole and fear-mongering contained in her piece.
John Carson
Voorheesville