ing site. The site’s owners have been taken to court for allegedly poisoning residents.
The documents were released this week, as part of a lawsuit that 7 plaintiffs who live near a hydraulic fracturing or fracking site, are serving on the gas industry.
The residents claim that waste water from a nearby site has contaminated their drinking water.
Toxicology tests on the seven claimants, who live within a mile of the drill and waste water site in Amwell Township, Pennsylvania, found toluene, benzene and arsenic in their bodies.
Mr. Loren Kiskadden, one of the plaintiffs, says he has a number of health problems including nausea, bone pain, breathing difficulties and severe headaches, New York Times reports. He says these symptoms are consistent with exposure to “hazardous chemicals and gasses through air and water.”
The chemicals used in fracking, particularly those found in the waste water which is pumped back into the ground under high pressure, are thought by some to lead to serious health problems.
A nurse who has firsthand experience of the health effects of the chemicals used in fracking, pointed to evidence linking the chemicals to cancer as well as liver, kidney and neurological damage in an article in the Baltimore Sun published in July 2012.
However, she also argued that as fracking has only recently taken off in many parts of the US, there is insufficient data on the dangers of the chemicals used. There is also lack of statutory or regulatory processes to ensure health and environmental safety.
Read more @RT.com
Read more links from the Baltimore Sun on their related stories:
Fracking chemicals must be disclosed
Fracking is neither safe nor harmless to the environment
Watch MPT's 'Fracking: Weighing the Risks' here
Over 1.1 Million Active Oil and Gas Wells in the US
Texas fracking site that spilled 42,000 gallons of fluid into residential area hopes to reopen
EPA Radon Zones (with State Information)
Exposing the real price of the US fracking industry (PLAYLIST)
STFN is on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/stfnews…
ring, or fracking, is taking more than its fair share of their groundwater, exacerbating the drought problems in an already parched region. The Guardian recently reported on the predicament facing a small town in Barnhart, Texas—which "appears to have run dry because the water was being extracted for shale gas fracking."
And fracking appears to play a role in many of these water shortages elsewhere in the state. Another 30 towns in the state are expected to run out of water by the end of the year, according to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. And about 15 million people are under some form of water rationing, prevented from watering their lawns and the like.
Beverly McGuire, a resident of Barnhart, told the Guardian that her wells ran dry soon after fracking started near her property two years ago. Another local rancher, Buck Owens, had to sell all of his 500 cattle and 90 percent of his goats, because he didn't have enough water to feed them after fracking contractors drilled 104 wells on his land.
valid and unenforceable" because they conflict with existing state laws.
In 2012, voters in the city of Longmont passed a ban on fracking, while in November 2013, Fort Collins voters passed a five-year moratorium on fracking to give the city time to study health and safety impacts of the process, according to court documents.
The group that challenged Longmont and Fort Collins' rules against fracking, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, called the court's ruling "a win" for the energy industry and the "people of Colorado who rely on affordable and dependable energy and a strong economy."
"Nearly all wells in Colorado are hydraulically fractured, or fracked, meaning a ban on fracking is a ban on oil and gas development," COGA said in a statement today. "With this legal battle over, we look forward to working with Longmont, Fort Collins and other communities to find a balance that allows for responsible oil and gas development while respecting the rule of law and meeting the needs of local communities."
Fort Collins city attorney Carrie Daggett said it will review the court's decision "carefully and fully to evaluate how it affects the City."
"These issues are complex, and we’ll thoroughly examine the decisions relative to Fort Collins and Longmont," Daggett said. "However, it is clear that the Supreme Court has found that the Fort Collins moratorium on hydraulic fracturing is in operational conflict with Colorado law and is therefore preempted."
Representatives for the City of Longmont or the City of Fort Collins did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.
The supreme court's ruling will have an impact on at least three other Colorado cities that have approved restrictions on fracking, Colorado Public Radio reported
High court strikes down Fort Collins' halt to fracking
May 2, 2016
The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday struck down Fort Collins' five-year fracking moratorium, a long-awaited decision that could have statewide implications for the controversial oil and gas recovery method.
The court also ruled against Longmont’s voter-supported ban on hydraulic fracturing, the widespread practice of injecting a high-pressure mix of water, sand and chemicals underground to break open formations and recover oil and gas.
In its first judgment on local fracking bans and moratoriums, the court called both laws “invalid and unenforceable” because they’re preempted by state law.
Fort Collins voters supported the moratorium in 2013, and Longmont's ban was voted into place in 2012. But the Colorado Oil and Gas Association sued both cities in separate cases and won in the lower courts, resulting in the bans being thrown out.
Both cities appealed the lower court's decisions, and the state appeals court in August asked the Supreme Court to take the cases. The high court heard oral arguments for the cases in December.
ANALYSIS: What's in Larimer County's fracking fluid?
The Fort Collins and Longmont cases represent an ongoing debate in Colorado and beyond about whether the ultimate right to regulate the oil and gas industry should belong to states or municipalities. The city of Fort Collins spent about $191,000 on outside counsel defending the citizen-initiated moratorium in court. COGA spent about $1 million fighting the Fort Collins and Longmont laws, along with a fracking ban in Lafayette and moratorium in Broomfield.
There are currently no active wells or permit-pending wells in Fort Collins. One oilfield extends into the northern edge of Fort Collins, but it's been at least three and a half years since a well was fracked there.
Fort Collins and Longmont can't appeal the decisions to the U.S. Supreme Court because they aren't a matter of federal law. The city of Fort Collins hasn't yet announced its next steps, if any.
In a statement, Fort Collins city attorney Carrie Daggett said it's "premature" to comment until the city has carefully reviewed the high court's decision.
"These issues are complex, and we’ll thoroughly examine the decisions relative to Fort Collins and Longmont," she said.
Citizens for a Healthy Fort Collins, which campaigned for the ballot measure that installed the moratorium, wrote in a Facebook post that the group will meet in two weeks to discuss next steps. The group had not replied to the Coloradoan's request for more information by mid-afternoon Monday.
COGA leaders said they were pleased that the court sided with them in their view that local fracking bans and moratoriums are illegal in Colorado.
TPS was created in 2011, in time for our first 9/11 Truth Marathon. Many thanks to Jim and SkyBlueEyes for helping with the background design and layout and Sky, BP, IC Freedom and others for all the hours spent in the Conference room for our Popcorn & Movie Topic Nights.