pennsylvania
Colorado kids with leukemia are more than twice as likely to live near dense oil and gas development
A recent study suggests that living near a higher density of oil and gas wells increases childhood cancer risk.
A recent study found that Colorado children who’d been diagnosed with Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia were more than twice as likely to live near dense oil and gas development, including both conventional and fracking wells, than healthy children throughout the state.
Oil and gas wells emit chemicals that have been linked to increased risk for this type of leukemia — the most common form of childhood cancer — including benzene and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, among others.
Previous research in Colorado and Pennsylvania, which are among the top 10 energy-producing states in the country, have also linked living near oil and gas wells with higher risk for childhood leukemia, but this is the first to assess whether the density of wells and the volume of oil and gas being produced leads to greater risk.
The new study, published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, looked at medical records for more than 3,000 children born in Colorado between 1992 and 2019. The researchers found that children who were diagnosed with leukemia between the ages of two and nine were more than twice as likely to live within five kilometers — about three miles — of dense oil and gas development compared to healthy children. The study also found that Children who’d been diagnosed with leukemia during this time period were between 1.4 and 2.64 times more likely to live within 13 kilometers (about eight miles) of dense oil and gas development.
“Considering the density of oil and gas development is really important,” Lisa McKenzie, lead author of the study and associate professor of environmental and occupational health at the Colorado School of Public Health, told EHN. “If you were in the unusual situation of having just one oil and gas well within a kilometer of your home, that might not have increased your child’s risk for leukemia. However, we found that if you had lots and lots of wells within 13 kilometers [about eight miles] of your home, that did increase the risk for childhood leukemia.”
The study included 451 children with leukemia and 2,706 healthy children, and considered the density of oil and gas development near their homes starting at the time their mothers conceived them through the time of their diagnosis (or a similar time frame for healthy children). The researchers assessed the density of oil and gas production by looking at the number of wells present, how close they were to a child’s home, the number of new wells being drilled, and how much oil and gas was being produced at various times within three, five, and 13 kilometers of their homes.
“Children living near the densest areas of oil and gas development had the highest risk increase,” McKenzie said, “but we also found that children with leukemia were much more likely to be living within three or five kilometers of any oil and gas wells than children without leukemia.”
The researchers controlled for other childhood cancer risk factors including other sources of pollution around the home, UV exposure, distance to the nearest highway, the mothers’ ages, and the child’s biological sex and birth weight.
“This study has numerous strengths,” Cassandra Clark, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Minnesota's Division of Pediatric Epidemiology and Clinical Research, told EHN. Clark, who was not involved in the study but co-authored a 2022 paper on childhood cancer risk and fracking in Pennsylvania that made similar findings, said this study’s strengths include using a larger sample size than previous research, controlling for other childhood cancer risks, and focusing on the age range where childhood leukemia incidence is highest.
“We have now seen three high-quality case-control studies documenting increased pediatric leukemia risk associated with proximity to oil and gas development, and the effects observed are relatively consistent across studies,” Clark said, adding that there’s now enough research on this for policymakers to “develop health-protective policies for oil and gas development.”
In 2020, Colorado legislators increased the state’s setback distances — the minimum distance between new fracking wells and homes, schools, hospitals, and businesses — from 500 feet from homes and 1,000 feet for high-occupancy buildings like schools, to 2,000 feet (a little more than half a kilometer) from all schools and homes. Those distances are among the most health-protective in the country.
In Pennsylvania, for example, the setback distance is 500 feet (about 0.15 kilometers) for any occupied building, but this can be waived by property owners, and some facilities operate within 300 feet of residential buildings. Public health experts have warned that these distances are not great enough to protect public health, but efforts to expand setback distances in the state have repeatedly been shot down by Pennsylvania lawmakers.
“Our research suggests that just increasing setback distances isn’t enough,” McKenzie said. “Current setback laws only consider where one new well is going. I would really encourage policymakers to consider the cumulative impacts of everything going on around homes or in areas where new oil and gas development is going to protect vulnerable populations like young children.”
Trump administration orders Pennsylvania power plant to stay open amid claims of emergency demand
A half-century-old oil and gas power plant in Pennsylvania will remain online through the summer after a last-minute order from the Department of Energy reversed its planned shutdown.
In short:
- The Eddystone Generating Station near Philadelphia was slated to close for economic reasons, but the Department of Energy ordered it to continue operations, citing a national energy emergency declared by President Trump.
- The order follows a broader push by the Trump administration to extend fossil fuel power generation amid rising electricity demand from artificial intelligence data centers, while simultaneously blocking renewable energy expansion.
- Environmental groups argue the move is unjustified, as grid operator PJM had previously found the plant's closure would not threaten reliability, and they warn of higher costs and increased air pollution.
Key quote:
“Saying that you are going to keep a dirty power plant open during the summer means that you are directly contributing to more failed air-quality days. It’s going to exacerbate our failure to meet clean-air standards, and there are consequences of that for people’s health.”
— Tracy Carluccio, deputy director of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network
Why this matters:
Oil- and gas-fired power plants like Eddystone emit harmful pollutants linked to asthma, heart disease, and other health problems, particularly in urban areas already struggling with poor air quality. Keeping such plants online also perpetuates greenhouse gas emissions at a time when climate scientists stress the need to phase out fossil fuels. The decision to override a scheduled shutdown — based not on grid reliability but on a political directive — raises environmental justice concerns, particularly for nearby communities who bear the brunt of pollution. It also underscores the current shift in federal energy priorities away from renewables and toward fossil fuels, with potentially long-term impacts on public health and climate policy.
Learn more: Public support for renewable energy drops as partisan divides and fossil fuel interests grow
Western Pennsylvania residents protest landfill plan over fracking waste fears
For years, residents of Grove City, Pennsylvania, have fought to stop the reopening of a nearby landfill that could accept radioactive waste from oil and gas drilling.
In short:
- The Tri-County Landfill in Grove City, closed since 1990, may reopen under new ownership, sparking fears it will accept fracking waste that can contain radioactive materials.
- Local group Citizens’ Environmental Association of the Slippery Rock Area (CEASRA) argues the landfill’s reactivation would threaten public health and nearby waterways, citing the presence of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (TENORM) and past environmental violations.
- Pennsylvania regulators approved the landfill’s permit after previously denying it, despite ongoing concerns about pollution and legal loopholes that exempt oil and gas waste from hazardous classification.
Key quote:
“We realized we didn’t only have a trash problem, but we had a radiation problem.”
— Beverly Graham, recording secretary, CEASRA
Why this matters:
Pennsylvania produces massive volumes of waste from oil and gas drilling — especially from fracking — which is often laced with radioactive isotopes like radium-226 and -228. These byproducts, known as TENORM, can accumulate in landfill leachate and wastewater, posing long-term environmental and health risks when released into waterways. Yet thanks to regulatory exemptions dating back decades, fracking waste is not legally classified as hazardous, despite containing substances that fit the scientific definition. That leaves communities vulnerable, especially when such waste is buried in municipal landfills not designed for radioactive material. As waste from the state’s booming gas industry looks for new disposal sites, the battle over the Tri-County Landfill may foreshadow similar conflicts across the region.
Related EHN coverage:
Trump’s reversal on U.S. Steel sale raises fears of long-term coal dependence in Pennsylvania
President Donald Trump celebrated the sale of U.S. Steel to Japan’s Nippon Steel on Friday, a move that could lock in coal-powered steel production for another generation despite environmental and economic shifts away from the fuel.
In short:
- Trump endorsed Nippon Steel’s $15 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel after initially opposing it, promising tariffs and jobs but offering few details on climate or modernization commitments.
- The deal could preserve aging, polluting coal-based blast furnaces in Pennsylvania’s Mon Valley, raising alarm among health and climate advocates who say the decision runs counter to global steel trends.
- U.S. Steel has a history of pollution violations, and local residents fear a continued reliance on coke-based steelmaking will worsen air quality and delay a transition to cleaner technologies.
Key quote:
"This administration has such an animus towards anything that fights climate change. That’s terrible for the future competitiveness of our industries.”
— Mike Williams, senior fellow, Center for American Progress
Why this matters:
Steelmaking is one of the world’s most carbon-intensive industries. While much of the global steel sector is pivoting to electric arc furnaces and hydrogen-based processes, blast furnaces — especially those fueled by the concentrated, very polluting form of coal known as coke — emit large amounts of particulate matter and greenhouse gases. These emissions are linked to respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease, and cancer in communities near production sites. Pennsylvania’s Mon Valley, where U.S. Steel runs multiple coal-powered plants, has long suffered from poor air quality and a legacy of broken promises about cleaner operations. Continued investment in coal-based infrastructure, as signaled by this deal and President Trump’s executive support for “clean coal,” could prolong both health and climate damage. Globally, the industry’s decarbonization is accelerating, but entrenching old methods in the U.S. risks falling behind technologically and economically.
Related EHN coverage:
- Coal-based steelmaking in Pennsylvania causes up to 92 premature deaths and $1.4 billion in health costs every year: Report
- Nippon Steel shareholders demand environmental accountability in light of pending U.S. Steel acquisition
- Clairton residents on the proposed U.S. Steel class action settlement: “It’s not enough.”
- Amidst a controversial international sale, U.S. Steel falls behind in cleaner steelmaking
Fracking company drops Pennsylvania water plan amid stream flow concerns
A Pittsburgh-based natural gas firm has backed off its plan to withdraw millions of gallons of water daily from a sensitive western Pennsylvania creek after determining climate-driven changes in stream flow would make the operation unworkable.
In short:
- PennEnergy Resources voluntarily surrendered permits to take 1.5 million gallons of water a day from Big Sewickley Creek, citing natural changes in stream conditions that would prevent compliance with permit requirements.
- The company had previously attempted a larger withdrawal, but regulators denied the request due to risks to a threatened fish species; local environmental advocates had opposed the plan, urging alternative sources like the Ohio River.
- Environmental groups noted the creek's low and erratic flow, worsened by climate change, could not support industrial-scale water use without degrading water quality and harming wildlife.
Key quote:
“With climate change, and this variability increasing, I would not be surprised to see something like this happening more often.”
— Emma Bast, staff attorney at PennFuture
Why this matters:
As climate change reshapes rainfall patterns and stream flows, long-established assumptions about water availability are breaking down. Fracking operations, which require millions of gallons of water per well, often target small, nearby waterways to cut costs and logistics. But these creeks — especially in biodiverse regions like western Pennsylvania — are increasingly unreliable and vulnerable. Surface water users like PennEnergy are discovering the limits of extracting from fragile streams in a changing climate. Meanwhile, data centers, agriculture, and municipalities are vying for the same resource, increasing the risk of overdrawn watersheds. The decision to abandon a withdrawal site on Big Sewickley Creek may be an early signal of the kind of recalibration that industrial users will need to make as weather whiplash becomes the new norm.
Related: How the “Halliburton Loophole” lets fracking companies pollute water with no oversight
EHN reporters win four Golden Quill Awards
Cami Ferrell and Kristina Marusic received recognition for their investigative reporting on hydrogen energy and chemical recycling.
PITTSBURGH — EHN reporters Cami Ferrell and Kristina Marusic won four 2025 Golden Quill awards for their reporting on hydrogen energy and chemical recycling.
The Golden Quills competition, held by the Press Club of Western Pennsylvania, honors excellence in print, broadcast, photography, videography and digital journalism in Western Pennsylvania and nearby counties in Ohio and West Virginia. This was the 61st year for the annual contest, and winners were announced at an awards dinner in Pittsburgh on May 28th.
Ferrell and Marusic won in the science/environment category for excellence in written journalism for their co-reported series on federally-funded hydrogen hub projects across the country, which uncovered a lack of transparency in the planning process and documented widespread frustration in communities anticipating hydrogen energy development, including those in Texas and western Pennsylvania. Videographer Jimmy Evans also received recognition for his work on the video feature for that reporting.
"It's an honor to be recognized among so many talented journalists," said Ferrell, who visited Pittsburgh for the first time to receive her award. "I hope our reporting continues to have a positive impact."
Marusic also won in both the enterprise/investigative and news feature categories for her series on chemical recycling in Appalachia, which documented community fights against proposed waste processing facilities in Youngstown, Ohio; Point Township, Pennsylvania; and Follansbee, West Virginia. That investigation also won one of four best-of-show Ray Sprigle Memorial Awards.
"I'm really proud to receive an award named for such an important journalist," said Marusic, who also won Golden Quill awards for her reporting on environmental health in western Pennsylvania in 2023, 2022 and 2020.
Kristina Marusic (left) and Cami Ferrell at the 2025 Golden Quill Awards in Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania health advocates say Trump’s first 100 days in office have caused “100 harms” to local communities
“They're terrorizing these scientists because they want to keep them silent.”
PITTSBURGH — On Wednesday, the morning after hurricane-like weather conditions killed at least four people and caused power outages at more than 400,000 homes in southwestern Pennsylvania, community advocates and scientists held an event to discuss how President Donald Trump's first 100 days in office have set back climate action and harmed environmental health and research.
“Climate change has created numerous dangerous realities for families in Pennsylvania,” said Vanessa Lynch, an organizer with Moms Clean Air Force who spoke at the event. “Severe storms are becoming more frequent and more severe, like yesterday's storm with winds ripping out trees, tearing off roofs, and causing hundreds of thousands of people to be without power.”
The event was part of a series of actions across the country by advocates for health, human rights, and the environment dubbed “100 days, 100 harms,” intended to highlight the on-the-ground impacts of the Trump administration’s first 100 days in office.
Lynch noted that the Trump administration has announced plans to revoke a 2009 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policy, based on a Supreme Court ruling, that says greenhouse gasses are a threat to public health and should be regulated under the Clean Air Act. The policy, known as the “endangerment finding,” serves as the legal basis for most federal and many state climate pollution rules for power plants, industries, and cars, and experts have warned that revoking it could have substantial public health impacts.
Vanessa Lynch, organizer with Moms Clean Air ForceCredit: Kristina Marusic for EHN
“I’ve witnessed firsthand the impacts the oil and gas industry has had on my community in western Pennsylvania, where I live with my two children and my husband,” Lynch said, adding that an oil and gas well in her neighborhood negatively impacts air quality near daycares, schools, homes, and an assisted living facility. “Revoking the endangerment finding would threaten the EPA’s ability to protect us from climate pollution at all.”
Carrie McDonough, an assistant professor of chemistry at Carnegie Mellon University who leads a research group focused on the health risks toxic chemicals pose to humans and wildlife, said the Trump administration has taken numerous actions undermining what agencies like the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the EPA can do to protect Americans from harmful chemical exposures in their everyday lives. As an example, she pointed to the firing of most of the scientists working at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the agency that regulates workplace safety, including at least 200 in Pittsburgh.
“They’re trying to use federal funding to control our universities — what scientists are allowed to work on, and who is allowed to do that work,” McDonough said, referencing new restrictions on funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world.
“They want us to erase certain words from our work like ‘indigenous,’ ‘disparity,’ and ‘environmental justice,’ because they want to erase marginalized communities who are disproportionately impacted by environmental pollution,” McDonough said. “If this continues, and if scientists at our universities and our federal labs comply, you won't be able to trust our science anymore or the information they give you because our messages will be censored and distorted.”
Carrie McDonough, assistant professor of chemistry at Carnegie Mellon UniversityCredit: Kristina Marusic for EHN
McDonough added that the Trump administration’s unlawful detention of international students across the country has “terrorized” her own international students, hampering their work.
“These are students who left their families behind — some leaving their countries for the first time for the opportunity to come and learn in the United States,” she said. “Some of my students can’t go home to visit their families because they’re afraid they won’t be able to get back into the country. They're terrorizing these scientists because they want to keep them silent.”
Speakers from the Clean Air Council and the Environmental Health Project also shared stories about how Trump’s roll-backs of environmental policies are worsening air pollution and threatening the health of communities that are home to fracking wells and industrial facilities in western Pennsylvania.
“If this was 100 days, what will the next three years look like?” said Lois Bower-Bjornson, an organizer with the Clean Air Council. “We can’t wait to be rescued. We’re going to have to work together to prevent as much of this harm as possible — we owe that to each other.”