News

Researchers from Carnegie Mellon University recently released a report concluding that “there is no support” to back up activists’ claims about cancer risks from Marcellus shale gas.

This is kind of a blast from the past for EID, as it is the latest study to debunk the work of Dr. Marvin Resnikoff, who made a name for himself several years ago by superficially heightening concern over radon in the Marcellus. Calling out Resnikoff’s study in particular, the Carnegie Mellon report states that he “provided insufficient documentation of the methodology used” and “[a]t this time there is no support for the high mortality argument offered by Resnikoff.”

The researchers assert that previous estimates of cancer risk are “speculative” at best, rely on non-peer reviewed conclusions, and overestimate radon exposure of most Marcellus natural gas customers. They find that the difference between radon levels in the average American home compared to a home using Marcellus natural gas is “insignificant.” They add that lung cancer risk to those using Marcellus natural gas “is not high enough to cause a measureable change” in the number of people who are likely to develop the disease in the region.

These conclusions align with assertions made by other respected institutions, including:

• U.S. Geological Survey: Resnikoff “relied on theoretical calculations utilizing limited data from geologic analogs.”
• New York Dept. of Environmental Conservation: Radon levels in Marcellus natural gas are “essentially equal to background values” and “do not indicate an exposure concern for workers or the general public.”
• Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP): “[T]here is little potential for addition...
  View Full Article