Industry's destruction goes beyond the San Bruno explosion

The recent explosion of a gas pipeline underneath a San Bruno, Calif., neighborhood, brought back decades old memories of returning to my Boston apartment building after work to find it severely damaged by a ruptured gas line.

If I'd been home, I probably wouldn't be writing this article.

Since then, I've tried to live in homes heated with something other than natural gas. It's not as safe for humans, wild creatures or the environment as people have been lead to believe. The push for natural gas comes with an extremely unnatural price tag: it's contaminating United States water supplies, destroying the landscape and making Americans sick.

Let me tell you how.

Energy companies increasingly extract natural gas from underground shale using a process called hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" for short. They drill down a mile, then across thousands of feet, blasting out the gas with millions of gallons of water and hundreds of chemicals. The resulting chemical wastewater leaches into nearby wells, streams and other water supplies. Unsuspecting folks living in "hot" fracking areas such as Ohio, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and upstate New York lease their land to gas companies for exploration and drilling of the gas rich Marcellus Shale. It brings in new revenue. Unfortunately, it also brings in contaminated water and often destroys the livelihoods it purports to save.

In Gasland, a documentary released in 2010, filmmaker Josh Fox drives around the United States talking to folks who'd leased their land to energy companies for fracking. In the film, landowners easily "ignite" their tap water with lighters. Their water had become unusable. Their livestock inedible. Their children unwell.

Naturally, drilling companies claim fracking has nothing to do with water contamination. They say homeowners had water problems before the energy companies came to the area. Although the water contamination continues to happen at "fracking" sites across the United States, it's hard to prove causation because The 2005 Energy Bill exempts fracking from The Safe Drinking Water Act. Energy companies do not have to disclose the chemicals they use in the fracking process due to "trade secrets." How can rural homeowners prove water contamination by energy companies that do not have to disclose the chemicals they've injected into nearby gas wells?

An Erin Brockovich deja vu?

Probably, but relief may be on the way via The Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness to Chemical Act (S. 1215). This pending Senate bill requires the natural gas industry to disclose all chemicals used in the fracking process, something they vehemently oppose. That fact alone ought to raise health advocates' eyebrows.

Some states aren't waiting. In May 2010, the New York Senate passed a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in upstate New York. New York City's pristine water supply lies in the heart of new fracking country. A poisoned water supply would affect eight million New York City residents. Upstate dairy farmers see leasing their land for fracking as the only way to save failing farms and contend it's safe. Historically, landowners have been able to do anything with their land for which they can get it zoned. Have we reached a land tipping point where that right can no longer be upheld? And what about public lands? Do energy companies have the right to take over collectively owned land for energy use?

Take El Paso Corporation's Ruby Pipeline Project. Their gas pipeline is slated to cross virgin lands populated with wild things. Beginning in Wyoming, it will trench across Utah, Idaho, Nevada and end in Oregon. But the start has been delayed. The five states want cultural and historic sites protected and wildlife/animal advocacy groups oppose the pipeline. For the past few years, the Bureau of Land Management has been purging public lands in Nevada of American Mustangs, most likely to make it easier for El Paso Corporation to build its pipeline. Many horses and their young foals have died during the terrifying helicopter roundups or when crowded into tiny pens, where they are staged for relocation or sent across country lines to be slaughtered for food. These horses are being removed from land set aside for them at a cost of millions to the U.S. taxpayers.

The Wild West has morphed into the Wildless West.

Now, I'm aware that some people don't care about wild horses or clean water or open space or historical artifacts. They consider such things and the people that care about them - like me - impediments to "progress" and in this case "energy progress." Do we really want to destroy the pretty wild horses and our precious water supplies through "fracking" to get more energy? Is the U.S. government and corporations treating wild horses the way they're going to treat us if we get in the way of energy progress?

I understand we need an alternative to Middle Eastern oil. Ravaging and emptying our lands for volatile gas pipelines doesn't feel like the way to go. Surely, with all our "technological might" the American people can come up with something less destructive. It might take a little longer and cost a little more in the short run, but in the long run it will be worth it if we want to save our country and ourselves. Start by supporting Senate Bill 1215 to reveal all chemicals used in the fracking process.

As John Young, the astronaut who twice walked on the moon, said, "If you want to see an endangered species, get up and look in the mirror."

Julie Nardone lives in Ashland.