Quantcast

Research Links Proximity to Fracking and Low Birth Weight in Newborns

Energy

By Andy Rowell

It maybe early in a new year, but already new research has been published which raises serious health concerns about fracking.

What is most worrying about this research is that it shows that the controversial drilling technique could be impacting the most-at-risk in our society: new born babies.

Although the new study has yet to be peer reviewed, it will add to the growing scientific evidence against fracking that the authorities will find it increasingly harder to ignore.

Last Friday, research was presented at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association in the U.S., which examined the impact of fracking on birth weight in Pennsylvania, home to many fracking wells.

The researchers from Princeton University, Columbia University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, examined Pennsylvania birth records from 2004 to 2011 within a 2.5-kilometer radius of fracking wells.

What the scientists found is deeply shocking: the closer the babies were to fracking sites, the lower the birth weight.

As Bloomberg reported, the “proximity to fracking increased the likelihood of low birth weight by more than half, from about 5.6 percent to more than nine percent.”

Although the study is yet to be peer reviewed, it will add to the growing scientific evidence against fracking that the authorities will find it increasingly harder to ignore.

Last year a study was published which suggested that exposure to fracking wells increased the overall prevalence of low birth weight by 25 percent and that babies born nearer wells had more health problems.

Both studies urgently suggest more research is needed to find out what is the specific cause of the low birth weight. In the latest study, water contamination seems to be ruled out as both mothers who had access to public water and private wells suffered the same results. This could point the cause to air pollution.

What is does mean is that there is an urgent need for greater regulatory oversight of the technology on both sides of the Atlantic. Given this, it is deeply worrying that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency quietly released a report on Christmas Eve revealing that regulators are unlikely to increase efforts to enforce water pollution cases linked to fracking.

Also worrying is that it will be another year before federal air emission rules governing fracking will come into force in 2015.

Analysts are now arguing that the EPA is unlikely to be more hands on due to Congressional elections in November and the fact that their budgets are being tightly squeezed.

Moreover, fracking is a central part of President Obama’s “All of the Above” energy strategy, meaning that federal oversight is likely to be deliberately light touch.

Critics point out that the EPA has had a much lower rate of enforcement at fracking sites than power plants or industrial facilities.

Amy Mall, a senior policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council argues that it is unlikely that the EPA will reverse the trend of “systematically pulling back from high-profile investigations”.

And that can only be bad for health, for both the old and young.

Visit EcoWatch’s FRACKING page for more related news on this topic.

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

New pine trees grow from the forest floor along the North Fork of the Flathead River on the western boundary of Glacier National Park on Sept. 16, 2019 near West Glacier, Montana. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

By Alex Kirby

New forests are an apparently promising way to tackle global heating: the trees absorb carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from human activities. But there's a snag, because permanently lower river flows can be an unintended consequence.

Read More
Household actions lead to changes in collective behavior and are an essential part of social movements. Pixabay / Pexels

By Greg McDermid, Joule A Bergerson, Sheri Madigan

Hidden among all of the troubling environmental headlines from 2019 — and let's face it, there were plenty — was one encouraging sign: the world is waking up to the reality of climate change.

So now what?

Read More
Sponsored
Logging state in the U.S. is seen representing some of the consequences humans will face in the absence of concrete action to stop deforestation, pollution and the climate crisis. Mark Newman / Lonely Planet Images / Getty Images

Talk is cheap, says the acting executive secretary of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, who begged governments around the world to make sure that 2020 is not another year of conferences and empty promises, but instead is the year to take decisive action to stop the mass extinction of wildlife and the destruction of habitat-sustaining ecosystems, as The Guardian reported.

Read More
The people of Kiribati have been under pressure to relocate due to sea level rise. A young woman wades through the salty sea water that flooded her way home on Sept. 29, 2015. Jonas Gratzer / LightRocket via Getty Images

Refugees fleeing the impending effects of the climate crisis cannot be forced to return home, according to a new decision by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, as CNN reported. The new decision could open up a massive wave of legal claims by displaced people around the world.

Read More
The first day of the Strike WEF march on Davos on Jan. 18, 2020 near Davos, Switzerland. The activists want climate justice and think the WEF is for the world's richest and political elite only. Kristian Buus / In Pictures via Getty Images

By Ashutosh Pandey

Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg is returning to the Swiss ski resort of Davos for the 2020 World Economic Forum with a strong and clear message: put an end to the fossil fuel "madness."

Read More