Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
News Opinion Op-Eds

No studies, no fracking

During this presidential election season, we Americans may not agree on everything. But one thing we do agree on is this: Only through democracy and open debate can we hope to solve our toughest challenges as a nation.

Unfortunately, here in Maryland, that democratic process has been missing in the face of one of the biggest pollution threats our state has ever faced: hydraulic "fracking" for natural gas. Even as tap water catches on fire in neighboring Pennsylvania and earthquakes have been strongly linked to the fracking process in Ohio, the Maryland chapter of the American Petroleum Institute has been winning its efforts to shut down meaningful debate over these threats here at home. Armed with expensive lobbyists, its shocking goal has been to make sure the state does not designate funding to carefully study the potential threats posed to Western Maryland and the rest of the state from fracking.

That's right — with money and backroom access, the oil and gas industry has blocked the General Assembly from even studying the issue. I say: Enough is enough. In January, I will introduce legislation to create a statutory moratorium on all fracking activity in Maryland. This moratorium will stay in place until and unless we have a science-based review of all the safety risks involved. Once those studies are complete, the General Assembly would take a final vote on whether to go forward with this drilling practice.

In short, my legislation would guarantee that debate, facts and democracy determine the fate of fracking in Maryland. That's in contrast to the oil and gas industry approach which, to date, relies on money, lobbying and subverted democracy, all of which lead in the direction of guaranteed pollution.

The gas industry wants you to believe that fracking is perfectly safe. We've been bombarded with slick newspaper and TV ads about "clean natural gas" promising new jobs and greater energy independence. What the ads do not mention — but what the media have revealed — are the broken towns and farms and families left in the wake of this process in every state that has opened the door widely: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arkansas, Wyoming, West Virginia and others. When you drill a mile deep and inject explosives, water, sand and a cocktail of chemicals into the earth to force up methane gas, there are many consequences. Methane gets into drinking water, toxins get into rivers, industrial-scale well pads get into rural towns, and even the earth itself shakes, according to the latest estimates of the U.S. Geological Survey.

Thankfully, there are no fracking wells yet in Maryland, but the industry is pounding at our door. In 2011, as gas companies rushed in to lease mineral rights to a whopping one-quarter of the surface of Garret County alone, Gov. Martin O'Malley established a special commission to look into safety concerns surrounding fracking. The commission was tasked with reporting back to the General Assembly with a comprehensive set of studies. These studies would determine what "best practices" (if any) could prevent the fracking horrors experienced elsewhere.

The only problem is, the governor's fracking commission — of which I am a member — does not have dedicated resources to fund these studies. So last March, the House of Delegates voted overwhelmingly to attach a small fee to fracking leases in Maryland, just enough (about $2 million) to fund the necessary safety studies.

What happened next? The gas industry and its lobbyists, in a series of discreet phone calls and closed-door meetings, pressured key leaders in the Senate to keep the bill from ever coming up for a vote in committee.

So I say: Fine. If the gas industry doesn't want Maryland studying the safety risks associated with fracking, then there should be no fracking. Let's put an official, statutory moratorium in place and wait. Polling shows 71 percent of Marylanders agree that such studies are needed before drilling commences. And my legislation will be clear: Once these studies — as enumerated in the governor's June 2011 executive order on fracking — are finally funded, and they lay out the drilling methods and pollution measures needed to keep our people safe, then the General Assembly can decide to lift the moratorium and adopt these science-based standards.

Although a "de facto" moratorium on drilling has existed for the life of the proposed commission studies, as long as no statutory moratorium on drilling exists, the state remains unprotected from the influence of powerful drilling interests and potential lawsuits to force the state to issue drilling permits.

Is my proposal a radical step? Not at all. A state-level moratorium is a reasonable, methodical and thoughtful approach. What's radical is allowing a fossil fuel special interest to thrust upon us — without full democratic input — a drilling method that is associated with temblors and benzene-contaminated water in virtually every state where it's been tried.

Our state has a long history of using sound reasoning and the democratic process to make good choices. Let's continue that tradition as a new energy challenge knocks on our door.

Heather R. Mizeur, a Democrat, is a member of the Maryland House of Delegates representing the 20th District (Takoma Park and Silver Spring). Her email is

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Western Md. faces fracking threat

    Western Md. faces fracking threat

    The recent article about fracking in Western Maryland seemed to me to raise more arguments for not drilling for natural gas in Garrett County than for it ("Fracking debate intensifies in Western Maryland, those benefits would be relatively short-term since "Western Maryland's gas reserves are limited."

  • Fracking's false promise

    Fracking's false promise

    Letter writer Matthew Dempsey wants us all to jump on the fracking bandwagon, quoting governors of both parties, including former Gov. Martin O'Malley, that "regulations will effectively manage the risks of fracking" ("Fracking causes no harm," April 2).

  • Risks of fracking are unacceptable

    Risks of fracking are unacceptable

    I am a resident and property owner in Garrett County and want my voice heard by state officials: I do not want fracking in Maryland.

  • Fracking an assault on the planet

    Fracking an assault on the planet

    The Baltimore Sun recently carried a letter from a reader advocating fracking in Maryland, apparently placing the priority on overpopulating the planet and "to hell with the environment" ("Md. shouldn't make the same mistake as New York in banning fracking," March 31). Already, fracking has been...

  • Fracking causes no harm

    Fracking causes no harm

    With the House of Delegates recently voting to institute a three-year moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, it's clear that politics could trump science in Maryland ("Md. shouldn't make the same mistake as New York in banning fracking," March 31).

  • Md. shouldn't make the same mistake as New York in banning fracking

    Md. shouldn't make the same mistake as New York in banning fracking

    I live in Deposit in New York's Southern Tier and know first-hand how New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's decision to ban fracking has taken away our chance to transform our economically depressed communities into thriving ones ("New York bans fracking, citing health risks," Dec. 18).

  • Fracking's risks are 'considerable'

    Fracking's risks are 'considerable'

    I applaud your March 23 editorial endorsing a moratorium on fracking in Western Maryland ("Fracking deserves a pause," March 25). My considerable research reveals fracking in Maryland imposes severe and permanent environmental risks with questionable to negative long-term economic impacts to produce...

  • Fracking moratorium is the right step

    Fracking moratorium is the right step

    Your editorial ("Fracking deserves a pause," March 25) got it right on all counts. Fracking simply does not mesh well with our tourist industry in Western Maryland.