The Aug. 24 Commentary page article by Tracy Carluccio of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, "Cuomo's Chance: A Clean Future for N.Y.," is well-written, but it is like a needle stuck in the groove of an old phonograph record playing a familiar song. To overstate a point, she argues that anything Gov. Andrew Cuomo does, short of banning all gas exploration, will bring irrevocable damage to everyone and everything.
Great fears, even if unfounded and based on semi-truths. Let's look at some of the statements.
"Bubble economics are not sustainable, provide at best short-term, dangerous and dirty jobs for a fraction of the workforce, and long-term employment with sustainable economies are eliminated." There is no evidence to support this assertion and, indeed, there is evidence to the contrary. Under the worst of circumstances, gas exploration and its benefits will continue for a minimum of 50 years. Early employment on well construction uses highly qualified workers coming from out of state.
That changes as the local workforce is developed, trained and qualifications are certified. Ms. Carluccio ignores the secondary impact of revenue brought into the community and the state by exploration.
And, finally, there is evidence to show that communities that plan to realize the benefits of gas exploration are more likely to reap these benefits than those that just let things happen.
"The unvarnished truth is that ruined health of residents and workers and the loss of a healthy environment from the inescapable and permanent air, water and foodshed pollution caused by fracking is turning whole states into sacrifice zones that will burden all of us with costs that the gas and oil industry can dodge but the public cannot."
I checked recent maps and cannot find any sacrifice zone states in areas having long-term experience with gas exploration. Similarly, the simple fact is that a huge number of wells have been fracked in New York State, all without fracking-caused problems. While there is no credible evidence that gas exploration leads to public health problems, there are some ongoing studies by very credible scientific groups to examine this area in more detail.
"This has been carefully arranged by energy corporations over time, with the cooperation of elected officials and policymakers marching across the nation to New York."
Somehow this is supposed to be in contrast to having groups like the Riverkeeper Network or the newly formed Artists Against Fracking marching across New York and elsewhere and lobbying to impact government policies.
Pennsylvania and New York are approaching gas exploration in different but equally prudent ways, reflecting the cultures of the respective states. Pennsylvania has some of the nation's strongest gas exploration regulations — with matching oversight — and those regulations are getting better day by day. New York is proposing limited gas exploration in a manner reflecting the needs of the state and local communities and the risks the state's regulatory authorities feel are appropriate.
Nobody, but nobody, has ever proposed exploration in the New York City Watershed. Talking about this is unmitigated fear-mongering.
Nothing exists without some risks, and we all have different levels of fear tolerance. The two states can benefit from a good scientific dialog, and they are only hurt by questionable statements that do nothing more than promote or exacerbate fears.
Mike Uretsky is a retired New York University professor. He lives in Damascus, Pa. His email is muretsky@stern.nyu.edu.