This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
ing water contamination,
vustevuter und drííííng íuíd spííís
and local air pollution
have caused environmental
problems and led to growing public resistance to the practice
across the country.
In response, the oil and gas industry has
promoted the supposed economíc beneíts und ¡ob creutíon
potential of shale gas drilling for communities.
studies by industry,
logical think tanks
claim that shale gas development will
generute enormous economíc beneíts. Cne study cíuíms thut
developing the Marcellus Shale alone could create more than
u quurter oí u mííííon ¡obs ín the comíng decude.
1he índustry's ¡ob cíuíms huve íueíed the push to open up
large parts of New York State to shale gas development.
July 2011 study by the Public Policy Institute of New York
Stute (lllNYS) uííeged thut drííííng 500 veíís u yeur ín íve
counties in the Southern Tier of New York alone could gener-
ute 62,620 ¡obs ín Nev York Stute.
(For an analysis of the
methodoíogícuí íuvs ín thís study, see Exposing the Oil and
Gas Industry’s False Jobs Promise for Shale Gas Develop-
ment: How Methodological Flaws Grossly Exaggerate Jobs
However, Food & Water Watch’s analysis of actual 2010
Bureau of Labor Statistics employment data in counties with
shale gas development in Pennsylvania, when compared to
bordering counties in New York without shale gas develop-
ment, suggests that these claims are baseless. In contrast to
índustry-supported cíuíms, un unuíysís oí uctuuí ¡obs dutu
shovs ííttíe evídence oí íurge ¡ob guíns.
The Food & Water Watch analysis shows that opening up the
íve countíes ín the Southern 1íer oí Nev York to shuíe gus
deveíopment couíd creute no more thun tvo totuí ¡obs per
well in the state, far fewer than the PPINYS report’s claim of
Not uíí oí these ¡obs vouíd be drííííng
Issue Brief + November 2011
food & Watcr Watch - 1616 P St. NW, Suitc 300, Washington, DC 20036 - www.foodandwatcrwatch.org
he oil and gas industry is aggressively promoting the expansion of shale gas drilling in the United
Cver the pust decude, oíí und gus compuníes huve deveíoped nev íruckíng technoíogíes
to extruct gus írom shuíe, u prevíousíy unproítubíe source,
leading to a resource extraction rush
referred to as the “natural gas revolution.”
1he Murceííus Shuíe ís pro¡ected to become the íurgest
source of gas produced in the country
and has been a focal point of the industry.
a 62,620 jobs / 500 wells = 125 jobs/well
IMAGE © WWW.MARCELLUS-SHALE.US / USED WITH PERMISSION
HOW ACTUAL EMPLOYMENT DATA SHOW MINIMAL JOB CREATION
¡obs, us some ¡obs vouíd be ín constructíon und others ín
retail and food establishments, for example.
1hís unuíysís suggests thut the reuí economíc beneíts vouíd
be minimal if New York chooses to open up the Southern Tier
to shale gas development. Decision makers must balance the
expected, smuíí empíoyment guíns uguínst sígníícunt enví-
ronmental and public health risks, costs to infrastructure and
public safety and losses to other industries such as agricul-
ture and tourism.
Cver the pust íev yeurs, lennsyívuníu hus opened up íts íund
to intensive shale gas development in the Marcellus Shale,
drilling and fracking more than 3,000 wells.
however, has been more cautious and currently has a mora-
toríum on hígh-voíume horízontuí hydroíruckíng untíí u ínuí
environmental impact study conducted by the Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) is issued sometime after
the public comment period ends on December 12, 2011.
However, the DEC’s draft study recommends opening up
large parts of New York to high volume hydrofracking with
The Marcellus Shale drilling in Pennsylvania has been
focused in part in the northern region of the state, including
Bradford, McKean, Potter, Susquehanna and Tioga counties,
where 792 wells were drilled in the Marcellus in 2010.
Dírectíy ucross the border ín Nev York Stute, íve ud¡ucent
counties within the Marcellus Shale (Allegany, Steuben, Che-
mung, Tioga and Broome) have not had shale drilling due to
1hís unuíysís used u buseííne compuríson to índ the díííer-
ence betveen the uctuuí empíoyment íeveís ín íve countíes
of Pennsylvania that had shale gas drilling in 2010 and the
estimated employment levels in those counties in 2010 if no
shale gas drilling had taken place. The baseline was deter-
míned by usíng the empíoyment trend ín the íve borderíng
counties of New York State where fracking did not take place.
Given that the drilling started intensifying in Pennsylvania in
this analysis measured the change in private sector
empíoyment betveen 2007 und 20l0. ln the íve lennsyívuníu
counties, private sector employment fell 2.7 percent between
2007 and 2010,
vhííe ín íve ud¡ucent countíes ín Nev York
state, it fell 5.2 percent over that period.
(See Table 1.)
1hís 2.5 percentuge poínt díííerence ín ¡ob íoss míght be
explained by the shale gas development that took place in
Pennsylvania. Following this generous assumption, if not for
shuíe gus deveíopment, then the íve lennsyívuníu coun-
ties might have seen a 5.2 percent decline in private sector
employment, not 2.7 percent. This means that there might
have been 1,348 fewer people employed in those Pennsylva-
nia counties in 2010 if there had been no shale gas develop-
ment. (See Table 2.)
Cíven thut 792 veíís vere dríííed ín the íve lennsyívuníu
counties in 2010,
ít íoííovs thut upproxímuteíy l.7 ¡obs
were created per developed well.
It can be assumed that shale gas drilling would have a simi-
íur ímpuct on empíoyment ín íve ud¡ucent countíes ín Nev
York. If the state were to open up the Southern Tier to shale
gus deveíopment, the íve Nev York countíes couíd expect u
guín on the order oí l.7 ¡obs per veíí. Lsíng the lllNYS re-
Table 1. Percent Decrease in
Private Sector Employment, 2007–2010,
Comparing NY and PA Counties
Counties % Decrease
Five PA Counties: Mckean, Potter, Tioga,
Bradford and Susquehanna
Five NY Counties: Allegany, Steuben,
Chemung, Tioga and Broome
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages.
Table 2. Private Sector Employment Attributable
to Shale Gas Development, 2007–2010,
in Five PA Counties
Counties 2007 2010 Change
Five PA Counties with
shale gas development:
54,801 53,299 -1,502 -2.7%
Five PA Counties
without shale gas
54,801 51,951 -2,850 -5.2%
Difference 0 1,348 1,348 2.5%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages.
b 1,348 jobs / 792 wells = 1.7 jobs per well
port’s estimate that 500 new wells would be drilled a year in
these íve countíes,
thís vouíd meun 850 totuí ¡obs creuted
ucross the íve Nev York countíes u yeur, compured to the
baseline of no drilling. Another 500 wells would need to be
dríííed euch yeur ín these countíes to muíntuín the 850 ¡obs.
lor perspectíve, íí 850 ¡obs hud been creuted by shuíe gus
deveíopment, ín the íve countíes ín Nev York ín 20l0, the
vorkíorce empíoyed ín the íve countíes vouíd huve ín-
creased from 192,148 to 192,998, only 0.4 percent higher
than it actually was in 2010.
Job creation extends beyond the counties where hydraulic
fracturing is taking place to other parts of the state as natural
gas companies buy equipment and supplies from compa-
níes, und us thut íncome ís spent ín ud¡ucent communí-
tíes. Hovever, un unuíysís by un economíc íorecustíng írm
looked at the economic impacts of hydraulic fracturing in the
Fort Worth area of Texas and found that employment effects
beyond the ímmedíute drííííng ureu vere smuíí. lor every ¡ob
created within the counties with hydraulic fracturing, 0.19
uddítíonuí ¡obs vere creuted ín the rest oí 1exus.
Applying this estimate to New York State, an additional 162
vouíd be creuted ín the stute outsíde oí the íve coun-
tíes, íor u totuí oí l,0l2 ¡obs,
or ubout tvo ¡obs per veíí
drilled. This would have increased the total employment in
New York State by 0.01 percent in 2010.
This empirical analysis of actual employment data in Penn-
syívuníu, pro¡ected onto ud¡ucent countíes ín Nev York, sug-
gests thut uny shuíe gus drííííng ¡obs creuted ín the íve Nev
York counties would have a minimal effect on the overall
employment picture in these counties.
Fracking Costs the Environment
and Public Safety
These minor employment gains must be weighed against
the costs to public safety and the environment of shale gas
development. In the past year alone, counties with intensive
gas development in Pennsylvania have had incidents that
contaminated waterways and farmland and threatened the
health of residents and livestock.
For example, in January 2011 in Tioga County, Pennsylvania,
ubout 2l,000 guííons oí íruckíng íuíd und íovbuck vuter
spewed from a drilling well when a valve was erroneously
left open, releasing hazardous chloride, sodium, barium and
1hís vus not the írst íncídent ín 1íogu County.
In 2010, the U.S. Department of Agriculture quarantined 28
cows in the county because they may have consumed frack-
ing wastewater that had leaked from a holding pond for a gas
ln lebruury 20ll, u íre ín íruckíng ííquíd storuge tunks ín¡ured
three people in western Pennsylvania. In April 2011, a well
spurted thousunds oí guííons oí íruckíng íuíd onto neurby
farmland in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, due to an equip-
forcing families to evacuate their homes.
The environmental and public safety risks associated with
shale development are real, and there are costs associated
Lnííke the economíc predíctíons ubout ¡ob creutíon mude ín
studies by industry, industry-funded academics and ideologi-
cal think tanks, this empirical analysis shows that very few
¡obs vere creuted ín lennsyívuníu countíes thut hud shuíe
gas drilling. There is no obvious reason why opening up the
Southern Tier of New York to high-volume fracking and hori-
zontuí drííííng vouíd huve u díííerent resuít. 1hese smuíí ¡obs
gains must be balanced against the potential costs of shale
gas development to local infrastructure, public safety, the en-
vironment and public health. Decision makers in New York
and in other states must carefully weigh these costs against
actual employment data, not against the rosy economic pro-
¡ectíons oí índustry.
c 850 new jobs / 192,148 actual jobs = 0.4 percent
d 850 * 0.19 = 162
e 162 + 850 = 1,012
f 1,012 / 500 = 2 jobs per well
g 1,012 / 8,340,732 = 0.012%
125 jobs per new well
2 jobs per new well
Projected Direct Job Creation
in New York State
PER NEW WELL
Food & Water Watch vorks to ensure the íood, vuter und ísh ve consume ís
suíe, uccessíbíe und sustuínubíe. So ve cun uíí en¡oy und trust ín vhut ve eut und
drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean,
uííordubíe, pubííc tup vuter íovíng íreeíy to our homes, protect the envíronmentuí
quuííty oí oceuns, íorce government to do íts ¡ob protectíng cítízens, und educute
about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control.
Copyright © Novcmbcr 2011 by food & Watcr Watch. All rights reserved. This issue brief can be viewed or downloaded at www.foodandwaterwatch.org.
1 Urbina, Ian. “Behind veneer, doubt on future of natural gas.” The New York
Times. June 26, 2011.
Ϯ u͘S͘ uĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ LŶĞƌŐǇ͕ SŚĂůĞ CĂƐ SƵďĐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ SĞĐƌĞƚĂƌǇ ŽĨ LŶ-
ĞƌŐǇ AĚǀŝƐŽƌǇ 8ŽĂƌĚ ;SLA8Ϳ͘ ͞1ŚĞ SLA8 SŚĂůĞ CĂƐ ÞƌŽĚƵĐƟŽŶ SƵďĐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞ͗
90-Day Report.” August 11, 2011 at 8.
ϯ ?ĞƌŐŝŶ͕ uĂŶŝĞů ĂŶĚ 8ŽďĞƌƚ lŶĞƐŽŶ͘ ͞AŵĞƌŝĐĂ͛Ɛ ŶĂƚƵƌĂů ŐĂƐ ƌĞǀŽůƵƟŽŶ͘͟ The Wall
Street Journal. November 2, 2009.
ϰ CŽŶƐŝĚŝŶĞ͕ 1ŝŵŽƚŚǇ !͘ Ğƚ Ăů͘ ͞1ŚĞ ÞĞŶŶƐǇůǀĂŶŝĂ MĂƌĐĞůůƵƐ nĂƚƵƌĂů CĂƐ lŶĚƵƐƚƌǇ͗
SƚĂƚƵƐ͕ LĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ lŵƉĂĐƚ ĂŶĚ lƵƚƵƌĞ ÞŽƚĞŶƟĂů͘͟ ÞĞŶŶƐǇůǀĂŶŝĂ SƚĂƚĞ uŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚǇ͕
Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering. July 20, 2011 at iv to v.
5 McAllister, Edward. “Pennsylvania natgas well has blowout during fracking.”
Reuters. April 20, 2011.
6 Crompton, Janice. “Residents reported gas odors before explosion.” WŝƩƐďƵƌŐŚ
WŽƐƚͲ'ĂǌĞƩĞ. April 1, 2010.
ϳ 8ƵďŝŶŬĂŵ͕ MŝĐŚĂĞů͘ ͞1ĞƐƚƐ͗ ÞĂ͘ ĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ ƚŽǁŶ͛Ɛ ǁĂƚĞƌ ƐƟůů ĨŽƵůĞĚ͘͟ The Associ-
ated Press. October 15, 2011.
ϴ ͞CƌĞǁƐ ƐƚŽƉ ŇŽǁ ŽĨ ĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ ŇƵŝĚ ĨƌŽŵ ÞĞŶŶƐǇůǀĂŶŝĂ ǁĞůů͘͟ The Associated
Press͘ AƉƌŝů ϮϮ͕ ϮϬϭϭ͖ AĂƌŽŶ͕ C͘ !ĞīƌĞǇ͘ ͞CĂƐ ǁĞůů ďůŽǁŽƵƚ ƐƉĞǁƐ ĨƌĂĐŬŝŶŐ ŇƵŝĚ
into the air.” ^ƚĂƌͲ'ĂǌĞƩĞ (Elmira, NY). January 26, 2011; Warco, Kathie O.
͞lƌĂĐŬŝŶŐ ƚƌƵĐŬ ƌƵŶƐ Žī ƌŽĂĚ͖ ĐŽŶƚĞŶƚƐ ƐƉŝůů͘͟ KďƐĞƌǀĞƌͲZĞƉŽƌƚĞƌ (Washington
ĂŶĚ CƌĞĞŶĞ CŽƵŶƟĞƐ͕ ÞAͿ͘ CĐƚŽďĞƌ Ϯϭ͕ ϮϬϭϬ͖ ͞WĂƐƚĞ ĨƌŽŵ MĂƌĐĞůůƵƐ ƐŚĂůĞ
ĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ ŝŶ CƌŽƐƐ CƌĞĞŬ ÞĂƌŬ ŬŝůůƐ ĮƐŚ͘͟ WŝƩƐďƵƌŐŚWŽƐƚͲ'ĂǌĞƩĞ͘ June 5, 2009.
9 Wolf Eagle Environmental. “Town of DISH, Texas Ambient Air Monitoring
AŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͗ lŝŶĂů 8ĞƉŽƌƚ͘͟ SĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌ ϭϱ͕ ϮϬϬϵ Ăƚ ϲ ĂŶĚ ϵ͘
ϭϬ lĂŝƌ͕ MĂƩ͘ ͞nĂƚƵƌĂů ŐĂƐ ͚ĨƌĂĐŬŝŶŐ͛ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĂů ĚƌĂǁƐ ϯϱŬ ƉƵďůŝĐ ĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐ ƚŽ
Delaware River Basin Commission.” The Times of Trenton. April 15, 2011;
Galbraith, Kate. “Resistance to gas drilling rises on unlikely soil.” The New York
Times. April 23, 2011; “Thousands protest outside shale drilling conference in
Philadelphia.” CBS News. September 7, 2011.
ϭϭ AŵĞƌŝĐĂŶ ÞĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ͘ ÞƌĞƐƐ 8ĞůĞĂƐĞ͘ ͞AÞl ŚŽƐƚƐ ŚǇĚƌĂƵůŝĐ ĨƌĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐ
ǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉ͘͟ CĐƚŽďĞƌ ϰ͕ ϮϬϭϭ͖ MŽĐĂƌƐŬǇ͕ SƚĞǀĞ͘ ͞SŚĂůĞ ĐŽĂůŝƟŽŶ ƉƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚ ƉƌŽ-
ŵŽƚĞƐ ĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ͛Ɛ ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ ďĞŶĞĮƚƐ͘͟ The Times Leader (Scranton, PA). October
ϭϮ WŽŽĚ MĂĐŬĞŶǌŝĞ͘ AŵĞƌŝĐĂŶ ÞĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ͘ ͞u͘S͘ SƵƉƉůǇ lŽƌĞĐĂƐƚ ĂŶĚ
ÞŽƚĞŶƟĂů !ŽďƐ ĂŶĚ LĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ lŵƉĂĐƚƐ ;ϮϬϭϮͲϮϬϯϬͿ͘͟ SĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌ ϳ͕ ϮϬϭϭ Ăƚ Ϯϴ
13 Considine, July 2011 at ii and iv.
ϭϰ ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ SƚĂƚĞ ;ÞÞln?SͿ͘ ͞uƌŝůůŝŶŐ ĨŽƌ !ŽďƐ͗ WŚĂƚ ƚŚĞ
Marcellus Shale Could Mean for New York.” July 2011 at 3; Considine, Timothy
!͘ Ğƚ Ăů͘ CĞŶƚĞƌ ĨŽƌ LŶĞƌŐǇ ÞŽůŝĐǇ ĂŶĚ ƚŚĞ LŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚ͕ 1ŚĞ MĂŶŚĂƩĂŶ lŶƐƟ-
ƚƵƚĞ͘ ͞1ŚĞ LĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ CƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƟĞƐ ŽĨ SŚĂůĞ LŶĞƌŐǇ uĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘͟ MĂǇ ϮϬϭϭ
15 Considine, July 2011 at v.
ϭϲ 8ƌŝĐĐĞƫ͕ PĞĂƚŚĞƌ͘ ͞CƵŽŵŽ͛Ɛ ƉůĂŶ ĨŽƌ ŶĂƚƵƌĂů ŐĂƐ ĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ ǁŝůů ĐƌĞĂƚĞ ũŽďƐ͘͟
Crain’s New York Business͘ !ƵůǇ ϭϴ͕ ϮϬϭϭ͖ ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ
SƚĂƚĞ͘ ÞƌĞƐƐ ƌĞůĞĂƐĞ͘ ͞ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ͗ nĂƚƵƌĂů ŐĂƐ ĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ ŝƐ ĞƐƐĞŶƟĂů ƚŽ
New York’s economic recovery.” July 14, 2011.
ϭϳ ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ SƚĂƚĞ ;ÞÞln?SͿ͕ ϮϬϭϭ Ăƚ ϯ͕ ϭϲ ĂŶĚ ϭϳ͘
18 Food & Water Watch. “Exposing the Oil and Gas Industry’s False Jobs Promise
ĨŽƌ SŚĂůĞ CĂƐ uĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͗ PŽǁ MĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐŝĐĂů lůĂǁƐ CƌŽƐƐůǇ LǆĂŐŐĞƌĂƚĞ
!ŽďƐ ÞƌŽũĞĐƟŽŶƐ͘͟ nŽǀĞŵďĞƌ ϮϬϭϭ͘
ϭϵ ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ SƚĂƚĞ ;ÞÞln?SͿ͕ ϮϬϭϭ Ăƚ ϯ͘
20 Madsen, Travis et al. PennEnvironment Research and Policy Center. “In the
SŚĂĚŽǁ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ MĂƌĐĞůůƵƐ 8ŽŽŵ͗ PŽǁ SŚĂůĞ CĂƐ LǆƚƌĂĐƟŽŶ ÞƵƚƐ vƵůŶĞƌĂďůĞ
Pennsylvanians at Risk.” May 2011 at 4.
Ϯϭ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ uĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ LŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů CŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ͘ ÞƌĞƐƐ 8ĞůĞĂƐĞ͘ ͞uLC
ďĞŐŝŶƐ ϵϬͲĚĂǇ ƉƵďůŝĐ ĐŽŵŵĞŶƚ ƉĞƌŝŽĚ ŽŶ ĚƌĂŌ ŚǇĚƌĂƵůŝĐ ĨƌĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐ ƐƚƵĚǇ͘͟
September 7, 2011.
ϮϮ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ uĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ LŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů CŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ͘ ͞8ĞǀŝƐĞĚ uƌĂŌ SƵƉƉůĞ-
ŵĞŶƚĂů CĞŶĞƌŝĐ LŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů lŵƉĂĐƚ SƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ CŶ 1ŚĞ Cŝů͕ CĂƐ ĂŶĚ SŽůƵƟŽŶ
MŝŶŝŶŐ 8ĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌǇ ÞƌŽŐƌĂŵ͗ WĞůů ÞĞƌŵŝƚ lƐƐƵĂŶĐĞ ĨŽƌ PŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂů uƌŝůůŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ
PŝŐŚͲvŽůƵŵĞ PǇĚƌĂƵůŝĐ lƌĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐ ƚŽ uĞǀĞůŽƉ ƚŚĞ MĂƌĐĞůůƵƐ SŚĂůĞ ĂŶĚ CƚŚĞƌ
Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs.” September 7, 2011 at 1 to 3, 20, 21, 27 and
Ϯϯ ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ SƚĂƚĞ ;ÞÞln?SͿ͕ ϮϬϭϭ Ăƚ ϵ͘
Ϯϰ CŽŶƐŝĚŝŶĞ͕ 1ŝŵŽƚŚǇ !͘ Ğƚ Ăů͘ ͞AŶ LŵĞƌŐŝŶŐ CŝĂŶƚ͗ ÞƌŽƐƉĞĐƚƐ ĂŶĚ LĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ
Impacts of Developing the Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Play.” Pennsylvania
State University, Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering. July 24, 2009
Ϯϱ u͘S͘ 8ƵƌĞĂƵ ŽĨ LĂďŽƌ SƚĂƟƐƟĐƐ͕ u͘S͘ uĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ LĂďŽƌ͘ CƵĂƌƚĞƌůǇ CĞŶƐƵƐ ŽĨ
LŵƉůŽǇŵĞŶƚ ĂŶĚ WĂŐĞƐ ;CCLWͿ͘ AǀĂŝůĂďůĞ Ăƚ ŚƩƉ͗ͬͬǁǁǁ͘ďůƐ͘ŐŽǀͬĐĞǁͬŚŽŵĞ͘
htm. Accessed October 26, 2011.
Ϯϳ ÞƵďůŝĐ ÞŽůŝĐǇ lŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ nĞǁ ?ŽƌŬ SƚĂƚĞ ;ÞÞln?SͿ͕ ϮϬϭϭ Ăƚ ϵ͘
28 /ďŝĚ. at 3.
Ϯϵ MĂƌĐĞůůƵƐ SŚĂůĞ LĚƵĐĂƟŽŶ Θ 1ƌĂŝŶŝŶŐ CĞŶƚĞƌ ;MSL1CͿ͘ ͞ÞĞŶŶƐǇůǀĂŶŝĂ MĂƌĐĞů-
lus Shale Workforce Needs Assessment.” June 2011 at 7 and 21.
ϯϬ 1ŚĞ ÞĞƌƌǇŵĂŶ CƌŽƵƉ͘ ͞uƌŝůůŝŶŐ ĨŽƌ uŽůůĂƌƐ͗ AŶ AƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ CŶŐŽŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ
LǆƉĂŶĚŝŶŐ LĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ lŵƉĂĐƚ ŽĨ AĐƟǀŝƚǇ ŝŶ ƚŚĞ 8ĂƌŶĞƩ SŚĂůĞ ŽŶ lŽƌƚ WŽƌƚŚ ĂŶĚ
the Surrounding Area.” March 2008 at 70.
ϯϭ 8ƵƌĞĂƵ ŽĨ LĂďŽƌ SƚĂƟƐƟĐƐ͕ u͘S͘ uĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ LĂďŽƌ͘ CƵĂƌƚĞƌůǇ CĞŶƐƵƐ ŽĨ
LŵƉůŽǇŵĞŶƚ ĂŶĚ WĂŐĞƐ͘ AǀĂŝůĂďůĞ Ăƚ ŚƩƉ͗ͬͬǁǁǁ͘ďůƐ͘ŐŽǀͬĐĞǁͬŚŽŵĞ͘Śƚŵ͘
Accessed October 31, 2011.
ϯϮ AĂƌŽŶ͕ C͘ !ĞīƌĞǇ͘ ͞AŶĂƚŽŵǇ ŽĨ Ă ǁĞůů ďůŽǁŽƵƚ͘͟^ƚĂƌͲ'ĂǌĞƩĞ(Elmira, NY).
March 13, 2011.
ϯϯ CůĂƌŬĞ͕ CŚĞƌǇů͘ ͞1ŝŽŐĂ CŽƵŶƚǇ ĐŽǁƐ ƋƵĂƌĂŶƟŶĞĚ ĂŌĞƌ ĨƌĂĐŬ ǁĂƚĞƌ ůĞĂŬ͘͟ Wil-
ůŝĂŵƐƉŽƌƚ^ƵŶͲ'ĂǌĞƩĞ (PA). July 2, 2010.
34 McAllister, 2011; The Associated Press, April 2011.
35 McAllister, 2011.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.