Community-led science reveals high air pollution due to fracking in Ohio County

Some Belmont County residents in eastern Ohio have long suffered from headaches, fatigue, nausea and a burning sensation in the throat and nose. They suspected that these symptoms were the result of air pollution from fracking plants that dominate the area, but regulators dismissed and downplayed their concerns.

With the technical assistance of volunteer scientists from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, MIT and the American Geophysical Union’s Thriving Earth Exchange, local advocacy groups have set up their own network of low-cost sensors. They found that three EPA sensors in the region did not give an accurate picture: the sensors detected levels of air pollution and correlations between local jumps and health impacts.

The results were published today in the journal Letters on environmental research.

Located in the Appalachian Valley, Belmont is booming with new infrastructure for natural gas extraction and processing. Fracking is known to emit pollutants, including particulate matter and volatile organic compounds such as benzene, toluene and ethylbenzene, which are associated with respiratory and cardiovascular health problems. Lung and bronchial cancer has become the leading cause of cancer death in Ohio. Yale’s 2017 public health analysis confirmed the need for additional monitoring and regulation for chemicals associated with unconventional oil and gas development.

Concerned about evaporation in certain parts of the community and a lack of information and transparency, two groups of activists, Concerned Ohio Residents and the Freshwater Responsibility Project, wanted to set up a high-density monitoring network. After submitting their proposal to the Thriving Earth Exchange, which allows for collaboration between community groups and volunteer scientists, they are paired with Garim Rahe, Ph.D. a candidate studying air pollution in Lamont-Doherty.

“We understand that the Thriving Earth Exchange program will provide us with valuable assistance in confirming the complaints we often receive from those living near sources of pollution in a way that provides credible and useful data to improve air quality in the region,” said Lea Harper. Freshwater Responsibility Project Director.

With the advice of Raheja and other scientists, community members bought 60 cheap sensors to monitor particles and volatile organic compounds in the air. They then identified areas of greatest concern and hired residents to install and maintain sensors in courtyards, churches and schools in those areas.

The new study presents the first two years of data from the sensor network. The team found that many sites often had days when air pollution exceeded levels recommended by the World Health Organization. For example, in the city of Martins Ferry, where the sensor measured 336 days, it measured unsafe levels of air pollution for 50 of those days.

“It’s a little wild,” Raheja said, “considering it’s a generally clean area.” I think that any number of days above the WHO guidelines is really worrying for an area like this. “

She sees a clear connection with the development of fossil fuels in this area. “If there was no fracking in this area, there would be no reason for bad air pollution. It’s not an urban area. There aren’t a lot of cars, rush hour or anything like that that usually causes air pollution.”

The study compares daily averages collected from citizen sensors with three nearby EPA sensors. The correlation between them was low - less than 55 percent.

“It just shows that EPA monitors may be getting broad trends exactly, such as annual or seasonal amounts,” Raheja said. “But in terms of daily averages, which affect people’s health, EPA sensors don’t always capture the heterogeneous exposure that people experience in this area.”

That’s because EPA sensors are too small and too deployed to capture a detailed picture of air pollution levels, she said. The EPA relies on high-quality monitors that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece, which helps explain why the network is so rare. In contrast, civilian scientists’ sensors cost only a few hundred dollars each, so they could set up a denser network.

In another aspect of the study, residents picked up spikes of air pollution on their monitors and wanted to know where they came from. Thus, volunteer scientists helped model local wind patterns to determine which fracking objects may be responsible for spikes in certain sensors on certain days.

“There are many different sources in this area, and sometimes community activists have to choose which battles to fight first,” Raheja said. For now, residents say they are particularly concerned about the Williams compressor station and the Dominion compressor station.

The data enabled community leaders to submit targeted requests for public records of these operations and their compliance with air quality standards, the paper notes. Information from air quality sensors also helped residents know when to close windows, wear masks or update indoor air purification systems.

Community members also saw a correlation between jumps in air pollution and their headaches and nausea. For example, some noticed bad odors and more severe symptoms in mid-December 2020. At the same time, data on air pollution show several jumps in emissions.

The paper quotes community member Kevin Young: “Before, [there] there was no one to help us. None of the Ohio regulators would come to attend the events of extreme air pollution that made my wife and I very ill. “

The paper notes that the data offered a common language that community members could use to articulate their complaints to the EPA, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the Ohio Department of Health. Regulators are starting to notice; local activist Jill Hankler was called to testify in April 2021 before a subcommittee of the US House of Representatives.

Scientists and social groups hope to continue working together. They are currently applying for grants to expand their sensory network and network with other community stakeholders, some of whom are even far from the infamous Louisiana Cancer Alley, who want to learn more about how to start similar programs.

“Community-led science and community activism, especially when working with academic scientists, can be really powerful in terms of doing what regulatory agencies can’t do,” Raheja said.

Provided by the Columbia Climate School