David Sirota

David Sirota

Posted: July 29, 2010 01:17 PM

GOP Opposes Federal Fracking Regs Regardless of Whether EPA Finds Poisoning

What's Your Reaction:

As natural gas exploration expands throughout our energy-starved nation -- from the West and now into the South and Northeast -- many folks living in drilling country are rightfully expressing concern that their groundwater may be susceptible to pollution from the fracking fluids that are central to drilling operations. These are very legitimate fears, as HBO's critically acclaimed documentary Gasland so graphically shows. And yet, to date, the Republican Party has expressed a rather callous "drill first, never ask questions later" attitude -- callous, even for the GOP.

During the Bush years, Republicans managed to legislate an exemption for fracking fluid into the Clean Water Act. Then, Republicans in Congress blocked the proposed FRAC Act, which wouldn't even ban fracking fluid -- it would simply require drilling companies to disclose what's in the fluids they are pumping into the earth near critical groundwater supplies. And now, in perhaps the most extreme step yet, Republicans here in Colorado (a state with one of the biggest natural gas reserves in the world) are demanding the Environmental Protection Agency never regulate fracking, regardless of whether or not the agency discovers that fracking is poisoning people.

As the Colorado Independent reports, you just can't make this up:

Eighteen Republican members of the Colorado State Legislature Monday sent a letter (pdf) to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) demanding the federal agency refrain from regulating the natural gas drilling practice of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," no matter what a two-year EPA study of the process reveals.

In a coincidence that highlights just how extreme the GOP position is, notice that the GOP letter was sent two days after this disturbing dispatch from the Grand Junction Sentinel:

Energy giant agrees to pay record fine

By Dennis Webb
Friday, July 23, 2010

Williams has agreed to pay a record $423,300 fine to resolve a state investigation into a spring-contamination case in which a De Beque man drank benzene-tainted water...

The fine would be the highest ever imposed by the commission for a single incident. The current record is a $390,000 fine handed down by the commission in April against Oxy USA for another case of spring contamination, also northwest of Parachute.

State regulators should be applauded for this catch, but with state budgets so strapped across the country, they clearly should not be the only regulators on the job. Do we really need more Civil Action-like tragedies to teach us that?

According to Republicans who know about the issue (which, incredibly, does not include one proudly ignorant leading Senate candidate), we do. And that cavalier attitude is both immoral and politically dangerous for the GOP. Though the national media has tended to portray debates over drilling as "liberal environmentalists" versus "pro-business conservatives," the fact is that these issues can cut in very unpredictable ways. As I reported back in 2008 for the New York Times magazine, someone living in drilling company may like the energy industry and be a cultural conservative -- but that person probably doesn't like the thought of being able to light their tap water on fire, and might not want to vote for politicians who do.

 

Follow David Sirota on Twitter: www.twitter.com/davidsirota

As natural gas exploration expands throughout our energy-starved nation -- from the West and now into the South and Northeast -- many folks living in drilling country are rightfully expressing concern...
As natural gas exploration expands throughout our energy-starved nation -- from the West and now into the South and Northeast -- many folks living in drilling country are rightfully expressing concern...
 
Comments
453
Pending Comments
0
View FAQ
Login or connect with: 
More Login Options
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »   (8 total)
hellowamerica   03:09 AM on 8/06/2010
Fracking, is bad, very bad for business. Killing people and everything else in the area for profit is unconscionable. Those people should be arrested and tried and found guilty of at least manslaughter and crimes against the state and also violations of EPA guidelines. WTF? Is there no limit to the destruction these (power) companies are allowed? How much crap do we have to take from these F---king greedheads?
professor   11:01 PM on 8/01/2010
Why does simple conservation never get top billing in this debate? I understand that simply timing all the stoplights in the country would save 6-9% on annual US gasoline consumption alone. http://www.ite.org/signal/index.asp
dougscott   05:45 PM on 8/02/2010
If every car in the US were a Prius, Professor, you'd only put off the day of spare capacity being going by a few years. It is said by Dr Robert Hirsch that once global oil production goes into decline it will be a problem that out runs any solutions. Hirsch is predicting that we will move to massive coal to liquids technology and that the time frame for determining where to build the plant won't be measured in years but in weeks.

Hirsch is supposedly coming out with a book on the subject this September/fall. James Schlesinger is forwarding it but Schlesinger doesn't agree with Hirsch's optimistic ending.

would you like to listen to an interview with him? www.netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2009-1114-3a.mp3

Better yet, think of it this way: The IEA is saying we need 30 mb/d of new capacity is needed by 2015 http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2008/11/iea-world-energy-outlook-2008.html
Just to offset declines we need a new Saudi Arabia coming online every 5 years (same link) or capacity will be halved by 2030. At 86.4 M/bbl per day of consumption (a 1000bb/sec) you could fill 2,044,000 Olympic pools of oil each year. Those pools would stretch 2 1/2 around the earth...and half that volume could be gone within 20 years.

U.S. JOINT OPERATING ENVIRONMENT REPORT 2010
http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2010/04/united-states-joint-forces-command-us.html
research   08:47 PM on 8/02/2010
World energy 15 TW. 60% of that is to create electricity, which solar and wind do directly, thus reducing the effective electricity plus energy need by about 4TW, to 11TW without conversions.

Solar potential 200 to 2000 times world use. .

near offshore wind, 5 times the world energy.

Waste Bio fuels. twice the total world energy needs.

together,

the real solution,

and cheaper in the long run,

cheap enough now/.
research   09:37 PM on 8/05/2010
bio diesel meets or exceeds every quality measure.

get over it.
research   11:57 PM on 8/06/2010
it's the end of the world? I thought that was 2012?

or is 22015 the "actual" 2012?
dougscott   05:58 PM on 8/02/2010
Chris Nelder FSN News Team Energy Expert
http://www.financials­ensenewsho­ur.com/broadcast/fsn2010-0605-2.mp3

http://www.lifeaftert­heoilcrash.net/
Dear Reader
Civilization as we know it is coming to an end soon. This is not the wacky proclamation of a doomsday cult, apocalypse bible prophecy sect, or conspiracy theory society. Rather, it is the scientific conclusion of the best paid, most widely-respected geologists, physicists, bankers, and investors in the world. These are rational, professional, conservative individuals who are absolutely terrified by a phenomenon known as global "Peak Oil." => .........

German Energy Politician, Astrid Schneider, interview with IEA's Chief Economist, Fatih Birol
"The Sirens Shrill"
http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-follows-is-english-translation.html

The Long Emergency – James Howard Kunstler
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4878856748297910182

A Crude Awakening
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-665674869982904386#

Prof Rick Smalley - Our Energy Challenge
Columbia University Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center presents "Our Energy Challenge" by Nobel laureate Professor Richard Smalley of Rice University.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4626573768558163231

Caltech
Dr David Goodstein: Running out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil
http://today.caltech.edu/theater/5602_bb.ram

The Crash Course
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
research   03:38 PM on 8/06/2010
Panic, run for the hills, buy ammo!

maybe, in in case we need to shift to rooftop solar, offshore wind and waste bio fuels.

It's the only choice that can be implemented within 5 years.
research   12:59 PM on 8/01/2010
There is only ONE solution to our energy problems:

Save money, cut the deficit, employ everyone, cut energy dependence:

Immediately order energy retrofits for all gov buildings.

Rooftop PV Solar, Offshore wind, and Waste Bio char, can supply the worlds energy and fuel needs: cleanly, safely, Forever, within 12 years and cheaper in the long run 2-6 cents now, and 26$ per barrel bio oils.

http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/solar_panels.htm
about 1$ per Wp solar panels, new.

install solar plants for about $1.30 per watt, compared with an industry average of about $1.75, according to Hardy." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=a7K1FZoNgJ0w

Wind: “between two and six cents today, depending on location.12 Wind power approaches competitiveness with conventional generation at this price point. “

http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/binaries/wind%20issue%20brief_FINAL.pdf

http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/BiofBioproBioref%203,%20547-562,%202009%20Laird.pdf

26$ per barrel bio oil from waste bio char.

We must STOP all breaks and subsides for fossils and nukes,

but of course they are the largest multinationals in the world, and green energy has 1% of the money needed to buy congress.

Chu hates green energy, and buries and misrepresents it in his newest gov report.

The fix is in.

Fracking is an environmental disaster, as proven by the industries evasion of the clean water act and secret formulas, and known toxins. .
dougscott   10:41 AM on 8/01/2010
Let me see if I can wake you people up again. Within 2-3 years global spare capacity in oil production will be gone. That has never happened in the history of this modern society. You think $147/bbl oil was expensive, just wait. You ain't seen nothing yet. Not only could capacity be gone by 2012 but the Pentagon believes there could be a 10,000,000bbl per day shortfall by 2015. My sources for that?
http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2010/04/united-states-joint-forces-command-us.html
http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/joe2010.pdf
aspo-usa.com/2009proceedings/Skrebowski­_Oct_12_20­09.pdf

The world requires a new Saudi Arabia every 5 years simply to keep oil production constant. To also meet increasing demand it needs a new Saudi Arabia every 3.8 years. My source? The IEA http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2008/11/iea-world-energy-outlook-2008.html

To put that into perspective, a 10 M/bbl shortfall by would be like having every gas station in the US going dry. Think about it, no autos moving on any US roadways in any state, roads going vacant. In 2007 the US used a record amount of gasoline requiring 9.29 M/bbl per day http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/petroleump­roductscon­sumption.html

In the US we consume 10 calories of oil to produce 1 calorie of the food Americans eat. That's why you aren't forced to grow your own food to survive.....yet.
dougscott   11:03 AM on 8/01/2010
The only thing that can replace those volumes of energy and do so timely is natural gas production. It's not a solution. It's only a cushion to the coming decline GDPs and standards of living.

So while you guys are complaining about an imagined crisis from fracing the real crisis started with the stock market collapse two years ago. That was the beginning of the decline to your world.

Oil *is* the life blood of the economy (NG is just the best substitute to buy us time). Why do think the 1990s was such an economic boom? Because Clinton was the president. Not hardly. Clinton was blessed with low oil prices. Price was under $20/bbl and at one point $8/bbl. http://www.farmdoc.illinois.edu/manage/newsletters/fefo07_11/fefo07_11_­clip_image­004.gif.
When oil prices climb recessions are triggered http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7vGDwGLU7s

Price aside, over a longer view GDP growth tracked oil supply.
http://www.incrediblecharts.com/tradingdiary/images/20080814_oil_gdp.png
Global supply, however, is rolling over and turning down.

Using 55-gallon steel drums try to image just how much oil the world uses each day, each year.
http://oildepletiondebate.blogspot.com/2009/07/steel-drum-pipeline-of-oil-encircling.html
The IEA says half that volume could be gone by 2030. Do you believe we can replace that vol with biomass oil and still feed the planet?
http://www2.allenpress.com/pdf/1551-501X-31.6.pdf
dougscott   11:10 AM on 8/01/2010
If the Obama administration promised to be the most truthful and open president then why hasn't he come out and tell you we are facing a LIQUID fuels crisis?

The Guardian: Key oil figures were distorted by US pressure, says whistleblower
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/09/peak-oil-international-energy-agency

So knowing what I know about peaking of world oil production and how that's going to affect global stability and my believing Obama knows this too since becoming president (he's been briefed), I have no doubt that your frac fears will fall on deaf ears in the end. The administration will put up front to placate their base of voters but drilling and fracing shale gas plays will continue.
research   03:41 PM on 8/06/2010
Panic!

That's how to think clearly?

Wake up!

The prices will rise, efficiency will rise, and alternative will rapidly take over.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StephenJK   10:29 AM on 8/01/2010
To all natural gas and general corporate shills on here: I'll issue the same challenge that all those people in Gasland offered to the drilling engineers/managers.... Why don't you start importing these people's drinking water and show us all how uncontaminated it is. You base your arguments on petrochemical shills and antiquated "studies". GTFO
ThinkCreeps   03:00 AM on 8/01/2010
Not to support it would be fraud - the GOP were paid to provide a service to Halliburton, and so they can't just quit halfway.
lcarliner   02:05 AM on 8/01/2010
It seems that the equivalent of free-for-all fracking is the equivalent of mountain-top mining methods that sow the seed for future Buffalo Creek disasters! One good way to raise funds for paying for universal healthcare would be to have health impact fees on companies whose behavior or proximity to locations experiencing clusters of greater than average health impairments or whose workplace practices forces greater than average burdens on the healthcare system, both physical and mental. White phosphorous matches were basically tax out of existence in the 19th century, in an era that predated the Teddy Roosevelt Food and Cosmetic Safety Acts.
OLEGAR   12:30 AM on 8/01/2010
2012 looms closer every day. Here in the Haynesville Shale drilling area we are not only going to be subjected to the results of "fracking", contaminated personal water wells and flamable gas in some others. Another concern, with hundreds of wells being punched all over northern Louisiana, we are seeing huge amounts of surface water being diverted to these drilling operations which in turn brings out millions of gallons of contaminated water to be "recycled (?) into the surface system.

Clean potable water in one thing that is a vital requirement for animal survival CLEAN WATER GONE ALL MAMMALIAN LIFE - - GONE It won"t matter a pinch of poop if you are rich as god you won't survive either.
dougscott   10:26 AM on 8/01/2010
You people have been sucked into believing Gasland. That movie about fracing has about as much reality to oil & gas completion as Chariots of Fire, Ancient Astronauts, and the Da Vinci Code has to archeology.
photo
PassingBy   11:40 PM on 7/31/2010
We been fighting this same crap for 50 years, it is always the same.
People need to suffer first, cancers, unexplained illness, etc., then litagation, small token settlements, then superfund status, then taxpayers pay to clean it up. Someone makes a movie, Perpetrators laugh all the way to the bank. Stockholders get their dividend, Everyone forgets the deaths and destruction, it becomes one more place you don't want to visit or move to.

Been the American Way since my childhood swimming hole past into history 50 years ago.
DukeCityDog   11:13 PM on 7/31/2010
No surprise here. Halliburton, the company that develops "frack" has Dick Cheney written all over it. Frack is poisioning water wells not only in Colorado, but in New Mexico, New York, Pennslyvannia and Cheney's home state of Wyoming. The EPA is powerless at this point to do anything because the laws have been set up to where no regulation or over sight is possible. A rancher with a frack poisoned well has no one to file a complaint with. Republicans since Reagan have always placed money over people. This is just another disgusting example of the de-reg republicans. For those of you that favor nuclear energy, take a look at how poorly natural gas companies and their suppliers treat the ordinary citizen in this country. The U.S. under republican leadership would allow nuke power plants the same immunity against prosecution as it has protected the natural gas, oil, and banking industries from criminal activities.
lcarliner   01:55 AM on 8/01/2010
Have you read your homeowners insurance policy or the contract agreement for your cellphone repair/replace contract agreement? If so, you will note that BOTH EXCLUDE coverage for losses from ANY FORM of radiation perils. Thus, if a Chernobyl-like catrastophie happens that forces you to flee your home permanently, there is NO coverage for your losses, and moreover, there is no equivalent for a national policy like flood insurance available for purchase. This is because of the Dixon-Yates act of the mid to late fifties that limit liability of nuclear plant operators to $250 million! If nuclear power is so safe, then Congress should show the true beef by repealing Dixon-Yates or increasing liability limits substantially and set up the equivalent of a national flood insurance program for losses from radiation perils!
DukeCityDog   04:37 AM on 8/01/2010
Thanks for pointing that out. You are absolutely right, there is no protection uner the Dixon-Yates act. Chernobyl could happen here and if you'fe lucky you'd die quickly and mercifully.
photo
getoffmedz   10:13 PM on 7/31/2010
"GOP Opposes Federal Fracking Regs Regardless of Whether EPA Finds Poisoning"

Why?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steelsil   10:10 PM on 7/31/2010
The Republican Party -Loathsome criminal conspirators or repulsive conspiracy of gangsters? You be the judge. If you like drinking toxins, vote Republican, before they finish poisoning you.
ShelleyVan   08:41 PM on 7/31/2010
This is a very serious environmental issue, and it clearly defines the GOP's intent. They're only concerned with big business, big banks, etc. Basically, anyone who can line the GOP's pockets. However, the article did fail to mention the one govt. regulatory dept. that actually DOES control fracking. That dept. is called FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) which falls into the Dept of Energy. FERC is a regulatory commission that monitors interstate aspects of utilities industries (i.e., natural gas, oil pipeline, hydoelectric, etc.). For instance, if their is a gas company that wants to run a pipeline between two or more states, then they must have approval and permits from FERC. The gas company then needs to hire FERC approved environmental inspectors whose job it is to stay with the project every step of the way, reporting to FERC weekly, assuring that the guidelines FERC has set forth are followed. And if anyone who's been involved with one of these projects knows, those guidelines are very picky. If a frac-out occurs, immediate action is taken to contain and clean up the incident. A project can be shut down, costing the gas company millions of dollars, if the violation isn't remedied immediately. Unfortunately, FERC can only become involved with a project if it covers more than one state. Otherwise, the feds don't control it and the state is on it's own. It's time for the individual states to legislate environmental laws that will protect their own states.
dougscott   08:22 PM on 7/31/2010
Why are city folk environmentalists who know next to nothing about about naturalism so quick to jump on any new topic as being so dangerous to them even though facing wells has been routine....routine....for 60 years and there's been no known frac job that has ever fractured up through the 1000's of feet of imperishable stratigraphic rock formations?

Oh wait I answered my own question....they know next to nothing.....from an objective POV. And if there is any objective science refuting their subjective/emotional belief they dismiss it out of hand based upon it source. And then never dismiss their own bias sources.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
doubleB   10:47 PM on 7/31/2010
What's so unreasonable about not wanting to poison people? Do you really think it's reasonable to say we should be using these chemicals even if they will pollute our groundwater with chemicals that are toxic to humans? Or is the natural gas so valuable that we can just disregard human life? The reason this is getting so much attention now is because we're looking for alternatives to oil. Congress is debating a scaled down energy bill now that'll subsidize natural gas powered cars. Doesn't take naturalist or an elitist citifolk to figure that out.
dougscott   11:30 PM on 7/31/2010
point to a factual situation were fracing polluted drinking water. If you try to refer to Gasland I already posted a link to a 2008 (2 years before Gasland) State of Colorado report where they tested that well's isotopes were tested against the gas wells near the home. The States conclusion was the water wells source of methane was due to sulfur reducing bacteria. Because the isotopes did NOT match the State of Colorado concluded there was NO, zero, zip gas well contamination to the home's water well.

Now, since that report was in the hands of the landowner and available online to the producer of Gasland the question is who is lying about the well's gas source.

But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your cherished political beliefs.
OLEGAR   12:41 AM on 8/01/2010
Well sir you must come to Desoto Parish in Louisiana and see for yourself the results of some "fracking" blow-outs Maybe in the era you put your in your case that fracking has no negative results was miniscule to what is currently going on today. But you side with the rethugs now and just maybe they will set up a mile or so from your house, drill 25000' down then 5000' horizontally and fracture that shale under where you live.
Then there is a remote possibility that you will have flammable gas coming out your faucet when you turn it on to get a drink.

You show that you may know next to nothing if you continue to generalize about people concerned about the citizenry as a whole and the results of oil and gas companies dodging regulations and creating bad results.. . . BP jog your memory? ? ?
dougscott   10:21 AM on 8/01/2010
If what you say is true you should have no problem posting a credible newspaper link exposing how fracing caused a blowout. Do that.
photo
Whats Goin On   08:05 PM on 7/31/2010

Twitter Edition