The research paper that supported the New York fracking ban has been deemed biased and has violated a minimum of four different codes of conduct for scientific research.
It has been brought to the public’s attention that the research report that is behind Governor Andrew Cuomo’s decision to ban fracking in the state of New York was peer-reviewed by active opponents of natural gas development.
On December 17, 2014, during a press conference, acting New York Health Commissioner Howard Zucker held up the “report” to the public as if it were authentic scientific research that supported his decision to bar fracking the New York. The paper, which claims that oil and gas wells are producing potentially hazardous pollution levels, was composed by those with close ties to the environmental community, including anti-fracking organizations Global Community Monitor and the Center for Environmental Health.
Both organizations advocated the paper as a peer-reviewed science. However, the journal that published the report stated the peer-reviews were conducted by Sandra Steingraber, Robert Oswald and Jerome Paulson, all of whom support anti-fracking.
Steingraber, Oswald and Paulson never mentioned an opposition to shale gas development in their reviewer reports. Each of them claimed and stated: “I declare that I have no competing interests.”
The issues at hand are clear cut: the writers and peer-reviewers violated several codes of peer-reviewing and whether or not Zucker knew the report was biased.
To read the entire Breaking Energy article regarding the report behind the New York fracking ban, click here.