I get sick to my stomach thinking about this:

A small amount of radiation has been detected in a reactor building at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in central Pennsylvania.

About 150 employees were sent home after the radiation was detected Saturday afternoon, but officials say there is no public health risk.

Exelon Nuclear spokeswoman Beth Archer says investigators are searching for the cause, but that the radiation was quickly contained.

Lots of folks have taken note of new polling today showing John McCain potentially in trouble in next year’s Arizona Republican primary for his Senate seat.

Matt Yglesias flags an important aspect of this:

This seems like pretty much terrible news for the world. The most likely path between Point A and Senate passage of a reasonable climate bill is for McCain to rediscover his interest in the issue. But that’s not the sort of thing a Senator worried about a right-wing primary challenge is likely to do.

This is exactly right. And of course, a Politico story (where else?) provides the evidence:

Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman have been working overtime to craft a climate bill that can attract significant GOP support. But they aren’t exactly scoring points with their mutual best friend in the Senate, John McCain. “Their start has been horrendous,” McCain said Thursday. “Obviously, they’re going nowhere.”

This should not be a surprise for anyone who has been paying attention to McCain’s statements on climate legislation since last year’s election.

Steve Benen checked in with a McCain spokesperson on this and got an absurd response:

Asked for an explanation, McCain spokesperson Brooke Buchanan said, “This really hasn’t been done in a bipartisan fashion.”

I see. The climate bill is being pushed by a Dem (Kerry), a Republican (Graham), and an Independent (Lieberman), but the problem is that the effort is too partisan. Follow-up question for Brooke Buchanan: “Huh?”

Predictably, arbiter of conservative-leaning beltway conventional wisdom Chuck Todd blames President Obama for not reaching out enough.

There is a larger point to all of this though. Primary challenges are an extremely effective way to hold ‘moderate’ Members of Congress to the party line. Probably the single most effective way to do so, I’d say.

Arlen Specter is a great example of this (full disclosure: I can’t stand Arlen Specter):

Specter’s overall party loyalty score since becoming a Democrat — counting votes both before and after the primary challenge — is 87 percent. This contrasts with the 44 percent of the time that he broke ranks to side with the Democratic on Contentious Votes while still a member of the Republican Party. He’s basically been behaving like a mainline, liberal Democrat.

On the other hand, it’s hard not to imagine that this process has been strengthened, accentuated, catalyzed, by Joe Sestak’s primary challenge. You can draw a pretty clear line in the sand from when Specter went from sorta, kinda Democrat to OMG totally! Democrat, and it coincides with the date that Sestak announced his challenge.

Continuing this trend, Specter called for an exit strategy in Afghanistan just yesterday.

This chart couldn’t make the Specter example any clearer:

The obvious lesson here is that Democrats should mount aggressive primary challenges against Democrats who are getting in the way of healthcare reform, clean energy legislation, the employee free choice act and job-creating stimulus provisions. Defenders of the status quo will maintain that this tactic is more effective in places like Pennsylvania than it would be in places like Nebraska, Arkansas, Indiana or Louisiana, and they are probably right. But the way we deal with such Senators now doesn’t seem to be working very well, so I’d be more than willing to give this other strategy a shot.

I previously mentioned that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection had ordered Cabot Oil and Gas to stop drilling in Susquehanna County. Cabot Oil and Gas has now responded:

Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation (NYSE: COG) today reported on its remediation of three frac fluid releases at its Heitsman 4H Well location in Dimock Township, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. As reported to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), on September 16, 2009 during fracing operations being performed by Cabot contractors, Baker Corporation and Halliburton, there were two releases of frac fluid for a total of approximately 7980 gallons, some of which entered Steven’s Creek. The frac fluid is 99.5% fresh water and 0.5% gel. This mixture is not hazardous or dangerous.

Cabot has determined these releases were caused by failed piping connections between the frac tanks holding a fresh water supply and the equipment used to pump the fluid into the shale formation located more than a mile underground. Also as reported to the PADEP, on September 22, 2009 a release of frac fluid occurred on the same location of approximately 420 gallons. Cabot has determined this release was caused by a pressure surge which caused a hose to rupture.

After each event, and in conjunction with the PADEP, Cabot immediately mobilized a crew to pump the released fluid into on-site storage tanks and clean up any remaining fluid. Water and sediment samples were taken by Cabot at Steven’s Creek, after flushing operations, on September 17, 2009 and again on September 22, 2009. Results obtained to date confirm that remediation efforts have been successful. Dan O. Dinges, Chairman, President and CEO of Cabot, stated “Cabot has a zero tolerance for releases on Cabot properties, and takes its obligations very seriously in this regard. I am pleased with the remediation at the Heitsman 4H location, have been advised that minimal impact resulted from the initial spill containment measures, and there is no further impact to the environment as a result of the releases.”

Cabot is working with Halliburton and Baker to fully determine the cause of the releases and the appropriate additional measures to prevent reoccurrence in the future. Despite Cabot’s positive working relationship with the PADEP field personnel with whom Cabot interacts on a daily basis, Cabot received an Order from the Environmental Program Manager, Oil and Gas Management of the PADEP, located in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, to temporarily cease all hydraulic-fracturing/well stimulation operations in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania until there is a full review of the incidents.

Dinges stated, “Cabot is disappointed by the PADEP’s issuance of this Order. Based on the facts as we know them, we disagree with several of the allegations made in the Order. However, Cabot is fully committed to understanding the cause of these releases, improving our contractor’s procedures and to the timely resumption of our fracing operations, all of which we will communicate to the market as new information becomes available. This Order has no impact on our drilling which will continue as planned, and there will be no disruption to existing production.”

This piece was originally published by ProPublica. It has been republished here with permission. Learn more about ProPublica.

After three chemical spills in the past nine days, and following a history of environmental problems over the last year, Pennsylvania officials have ordered Cabot Oil and Gas, one of the most active natural gas companies in the state, to stop its hydraulic fracturing operations in Susquehanna County pending an intensive review.

“The department took this action because of our concern about Cabot’s current fracking process and to ensure that the environment in Susquehanna County is properly protected,” DEP north central regional Director Robert Yowell said in a news release distributed this morning.

The stop-work order, which was accompanied by new citations issued for the third spill, will interrupt development of seven new wells that Cabot is currently drilling, and intending to fracture, in Susquehanna County. The citations were similar to those levied earlier in the week, including a failure to contain fracturing fluids.

The state’s order gives Cabot two weeks to re-submit an “accurate” Pollution Prevention and Contingency Plan and Control and Disposal Plan for its well pad sites in the county. It gives the company three weeks to complete an engineering study of the equipment and practices used for hydraulic fracturing.

“There were unique elements of the location that experienced the three incidents and it was not necessary to force a shutdown of all fracturing activities,” said Cabot Spokesman Ken Komoroski, explaining that fluids were piped further than usual at the well site in question. “However Cabot understand the department has an important job to do.”

In interviews earlier this week, Komoroski underscored that the spills had happened under the watch of two of its contractors: Halliburton, one of the world’s largest drilling service companies, and Baker Tanks, a tank transport company.

In recognition of those circumstances, Pennsylvania will require Cabot to post its new pollution prevention plan at each well site and make it available to all its contractors, something that is not normally required in the state.

Here is the press release:

dep_cabot_order_090925 –

This piece was originally published by ProPublica. It has been republished here with permission. Learn more about ProPublica.

Pennsylvania environment officials have charged Cabot Oil and Gas with five violations after nearly 8,000 gallons of hydraulic fracturing solution spilled from a pipe system in two separate incidents near the town of Dimock last week. The department reported that a third, smaller spill occurred at the site Tuesday morning.

According to the state, Cabot failed to prevent a fracturing fluid discharge, failed to keep that discharge from escaping into the environment and from entering a creek, and inappropriately dammed that creek after the spill, among other violations. The company could face fines topping $130,000.

“I was concerned with two releases,” said Bob Yowell, director of the north central regional office of the DEP. “A third release, although it was relatively small, gives us great concern that something unusual is happening at this particular well. This isn’t a normal situation.”

The spills began on Wednesday, Sept. 16, at 2 p.m. when a pipe coupling failed on the system that mixes the fracturing ingredients, sending as much as 2,100 gallons of fluid into the environment. At 8 p.m. that same day another pipe coupling broke in the same system, and 5,880 additional gallons of fracturing fluid were discharged, according to both state and Cabot accounts. On Tuesday morning, Sept. 22, another hose ruptured under pressure, releasing 420 more gallons of the same mixture, though only 10 gallons of that last spill escaped from the company’s spill catch system.

According to Ken Komoroski, a Cabot Oil and Gas spokesman, the fracturing procedure was being conducted by two contractors: Halliburton, one of biggest oil services companies in the world, and Baker Tanks, a petroleum storage tank company.

“Our policy is zero spills, zero unpermitted releases, and those goals were not met so there needs to be evaluations of what can be done to prevent them in the future,” Komoroski told ProPublica. “The spills were less than .5 percent gel, and at 99.5 percent water, this material is not hazardous or dangerous nor does it present any environmental risk.”

Pennsylvania officials allowed Cabot to continue fracturing the well while they conducted their investigation. According to the DEP’s Yowell, halting the fracturing may have presented additional problems, though he could not specify what those risks were. Cabot voluntarily halted the fracturing on Tuesday, after the third spill occurred.

The investigation into the spill is ongoing. According to a DEP press release and the notice letter sent to Cabot, a nearby wetland has been flushed and further remediation may be required, including excavation of soil surrounding the site.

ProPublica reported the spills Monday, stating that the fluids had seeped into Stevens Creek and killed fish there, an assertion repeated in the DEP’s press release on Tuesday. Follow-up interviews with the state’s of Fish and Boat Commission, however, show that a small number of minnows were harmed and that the damage to the creek appeared minimal. However, water samples from the creek are still being evaluated, according to the DEP’s Yowell.

According to a Material Safety Data Sheet provided to the state by Halliburton, the substance spilled was a lubricating gel used in hydraulic fracturing that poses a substantial threat to human health and was described in the Halliburton document as a “potential carcinogen” that has caused skin cancer in animals.

Cabot’s Komoroski points out that the document refers to the gel’s concentrated form, and that the mixture spilled in Dimock was mostly water. He also disputes the information on the Halliburton form that warns the product is a “potential carcinogen.” The disclosure, required by law on the MSDS form, was an effort to be extremely conservative and account for the possibility that a derivative from the refining process could be part of the gel mixture, Komoroski said. He could not say what that derivative was, except that it is a hydrocarbon.

Halliburton did not respond to questions about the details of its MSDS disclosure for the product, called LGC-35 CBM.

This piece was originally published by ProPublica. It has been republished here with permission. Learn more about ProPublica.

Pennsylvania environment officials are racing to clean up as much as 8,000 gallons of dangerous drilling fluids after a series of spills at a natural gas production site near the town of Dimock last week.

The spills, which occurred at a well site run by Cabot Oil and Gas, involve a compound manufactured by Halliburton that is described as a “potential carcinogen” and is used in the drilling process of hydraulic fracturing, according to state officials. The contaminants have seeped into a nearby creek, where a fish kill was reported by the state Department of Environmental Protection. The DEP also reported fish “swimming erratically.”

The incident is the latest in a series of environmental problems connected to Cabot’s drilling in the Dimock area. Last winter, drinking water in several area homes was found to contain metals and methane gas that state officials determined leaked underground from Cabot wells. And in the spring, the company was fined for several other spills, including an 800-gallon diesel spill from a truck that overturned.

Neither Cabot Oil and Gas nor Halliburton immediately returned calls for comment on Monday. A Halliburton spokesperson sent an e-mail referring any questions to information on the company’s Web site.

DEP officials were also unavailable for interviews, but said through e-mail that faulty piping is suspected and that they have not confirmed the exact cause of the spill. A press spokesperson said to expect an announcement and actions toward Cabot by Tuesday.

ProPublica interviewed state officials several months ago about drilling problems in Dimock. “Cabot has definitely had their share of problems out there,” Craig Lobins, a regional oil and gas division director, said then. “Some of them is just being a little bit careless … or sloppy, or maybe a little bit of bad luck too.”

The drilling fluid spill Wednesday may be the most serious yet, because it involves chemicals that are known to pose a risk to human health and has spread into the area’s surface water system.

According to a Material Safety Data Sheet provided to the state this week by Halliburton, the spilled drilling fluid contained a liquid gel concentrate consisting of a paraffinic solvent and polysaccharide, chemicals listed as possible carcinogens for people. The MSDS form – for Halliburton’s proprietary product called LGC-35 CBM – does not list the entire makeup of the gel or the quantity of its constituents, but it warns that the substances have led to skin cancer in animals and “may cause headache, dizziness and other central nervous system effects” to anyone who breathes or swallows the fluids.

It is not yet clear exactly what led to or caused the spill. State officials report that at least 1,000 gallons of fluid were spilled Wednesday afternoon, and another 5,900 gallons about 10 that night. The substance was reportedly a clay-like mixture, with the Halliburton gel mixed at about five gallons per 1,000 gallons of water. A DEP spokesperson said in an e-mail that the spills appear to be the result of supply pipe failures. In one case a pressurized line may have broken, and in another a seal may have given way. State officials said the fluids had spilled into Stevens Creek.

The contamination incident comes as the state faces increasing scrutiny for its handling of a natural gas drilling boom and dozens of instances of spills and water contamination related to it across the state. Earlier investigations by ProPublica found that methane had leaked into drinking water supplies from gas wells in at least seven Pennsylvania counties. And earlier this month the DEP began investigating a suspected chemical spill in the northwestern part of the state, hundreds of miles from Dimock, which decimated aquatic life along a 30-mile stretch of pristine river. No determination has been made in that case either, but waste fluids from drilling are among the possibilities being investigated.

In advance of the Netroots Nation conference last week, organizers of the conference set up a system where community members could submit and vote on questions to be asked of Arlen Specter and Joe Sestak. The top question came from Adam Green:

So, will you commit to — and publicly call on other Senate Democrats to commit to — a caucus-wide rule that if a Democrat is lead sponsor on legislation, all Democrats will support cloture and allow a clean up-or-down vote?

My question, which was voted to third place, was very similar:

If given the opportunity will you promise to vote for cloture on climate legislation?

Ari Melber, who hosted the event, ended up using my question as a follow-up to Adam’s.

Ari Melber: We’ll go to the third question though, in stitching these together then, on the climate legislation, on employee free choice, on a public option health care plan, these are all areas where you would be voting with the majority to have up or down votes?

Arlen Specter: Yes, no doubt about those three issues at all.

The quoted portion begins at the 1:54 mark in the video below: