Tribune-Review  | Saturday, May 17, 2025 5:00 a.m.

Contrary to industry cheerleading, gas is not a better energy option than other fossil fuels. Fracking destroys agricultural and forest land, pollutes air and water and poses serious risks to public health, e.g., seven times the risk of lymphoma and a 20% increase in hospitalizations for children with asthma.

Increasingly, Pennsylvania residents don’t want these industrial operations near their homes, schools or churches. The letter “We need truth on air quality” (May 6, TribLive) challenged area air monitoring results that indicated poor air quality because, the writer noted, some monitors were placed near frack operations. However, approximately 1.5 million Pennsylvania residents live within a half-mile of oil/gas wells, and millions more near compressor stations and processing facilities. A perhaps unintended message was that Pennsylvania residents get it, fracking is a dirty business.

The letter “Data center concerns, opportunities” (May 2, TribLive) supported the proposed Upper Burrell AI site because it will provide its own energy. However, “its own energy” will come from six on-site fracked well pads. All of this is a real concern as research continues to indicate serious health concerns, as violations mount (roughly 25,000 since 2008), and unplugged frack wells are abandoned (171 to date) with plugging expected to cost up to $8.5 billion.

The Trib has reported on local action on zoning ordinance restrictions for solar and wind sites. Is the same consideration being given to frack sites which pose real risks to the land and residents? If not, why not?

Jan Milburn

Ligonier