|
|
May 24, 2013
|
|
The Lowdown on FrackingPosted on Feb 18, 2012
By Lena Groeger, ProPublica This piece originally appeared at ProPublica. In the process of fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, millions of gallons of highly pressurized water, mixed with sand and other chemicals, are injected into the ground to extract natural gas from rock. As we’ve noted before, some of these chemicals are toxic to humans and have contaminated nearby groundwater. Some energy companies have voluntarily made their chemical information public, but others have fought to keep them secret. InsideClimate notes that the proposed national rules would specifically require companies to give both the names and concentrations of individual chemicals used. So far, Colorado is the only state that requires such detailed information for all chemicals; eight other states with fracking disclosure rules either do not require companies to report concentrations or only require them to report concentrations of hazardous materials. The BLM’s rules also would compel companies to report the total volume of fracking fluid used, as well as how they intend to recover and dispose of it. Though the BLM’s proposed rules are more stringent than most state laws, environmental and health advocates say drillers could circumvent some of the requirements. For instance, the rules would only apply to drilling on federal lands. Also, companies could request that certain chemicals be exempted from disclosure if they are deemed a “trade secret.” The trade secret exemptions “could potentially make the rules meaningless if applied broadly,” Dusty Horwitt, senior counsel at a public health advocacy group told InsideClimate. While the BLM’s proposal states that all the non-exempted information would “become a matter of public record,” it makes no mention of how or where the disclosure information would appear—or how it would be made available to the public. Advertisement
Previous item: The Best, Most Revealing Reporting on the Foreclosure Crisis Next item: Ideological Hypocrites New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By Elizabeth Cunneff, February 21, 2012 at 5:33 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
You folks know much more about fracking than I do, so
I’ll just put a link here to the report from a
newspaper that reveals the vote taken by Congress
regarding Keystone XL. Make of it what you will. I’m
still stunned.
http://posttrib.suntimes.com/news/10728728-418/how-
Report thisthey-voted.html
By prosefights, February 20, 2012 at 5:06 pm Link to this comment
Scene 1
La Belle disco explodes.
http://www.prosefights.org/whitmancrocker/whitmancrocker.htm#ceephil
‘Approximately one-half of natrual gas production is obtained from wells drilled within the last five years’
Report thisBy prosefights, February 20, 2012 at 2:15 pm Link to this comment
Film makers Phil and Cee Pfeiffer and bill met for the first time between Cerillos and Galisteo, NM on Saturday February 18, 2012.
Listen to phil explain resistence to fracking the Galisteo basin.
http://www.prosefights.org/nmgco/galisteo/audio/fracjing.mp3
This is phil.
Report thishttp://www.blockbuster.com/browse/catalog/personDetails/160789
By prosefights, February 20, 2012 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment
America’s dependency on foreign oil has already dropped below 50 percent for the first time in 15 years—and yet shale oil production has barely gotten underway…
http://agorafinancial.com/reports/OST/Rebirth/OST_Rebirth_011012_ESI89_vp.php?code=EOSTN261&o=624334&s=628696&u=26440982&l=389173&r=Milo
We will see.
Report thisBy prosefights, February 20, 2012 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment
Some links to Daniel Yergin and Jim Cramer on fracking.
http://www.prosefights.org/nmgco/intervene/eia/yergin.htm#yergin
Report thisBy Blueokie, February 19, 2012 at 5:43 pm Link to this comment
If you were to put the same fracking chemicals in the same proportion as the average fracking well into a public drinking water supply, you would render it non potable and would almost undoubtedly be disappeared for a clear act of terrorism. If you’re an energy company the government will run interference for you. I always have to laugh when I remember how Geo-Thermal was thought a dead end because it could cause earthquakes, while in Arkansas alone earthquake activity went up 1000% once fracking began in earnest there.
I agree with Bill McKibben’s last article. We have a carbon bubble, if the supposed valuable reserves of the extraction cartels were shown to be not as valuable, or economically viable as we are assured, that would be another loss the hoi polloi would have to make up for speculators. How come we aren’t seeing the stories that tell us how the economy has driven gasoline supplies to 20 year lows, supplies haven’t been this high for 10 years, and yet we are told to expect $4.00 gas in the next few months because of? I suppose that’s just “supply and demand” capitalism at work.
Report thisBy caped amigo, February 19, 2012 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment
Bravo Gerard for you insights and courage to speak out. I’ve got your back.
Report thisBy berniem, February 19, 2012 at 12:45 pm Link to this comment
Perhaps if natural resources belonged to the nation rather than in the hands of greedy corporate interests and their ravenous shareholders more deliberate and informed means of extraction and distribution would exist. And please spare me the BS about the private vs public sector expertise spewed by the kleptocrats and their political(governmental) lackeys. If you think that the corpoatocracy cares a lick about our health and welfare or that of the nation as a whole, think again! Our cherished free marketeers only station their interests in the USA because of its willingness to mindlessly provide them with an obscene large and ruthless military establishment devoted to doing their bidding! FREE BRADLEY MANNING!!!
Report thisBy David J. Cyr, February 19, 2012 at 10:37 am Link to this comment
For too many years now, liberals and their fracking friendly “environmental” money dominated “non-profit” organizations have been fighting this disingenuous chemical disclosure delaying action for the extraction industry.
The EPA regulates environmentalists to protect polluters. The Democrat answer to the insanity of fracking is to “transparently” technically list all the poisons before they permit the frackers to continue using them. The sane and sensible people’s position on fracking is to ban it.
There is no “safe” fracking, and the water taken from the Commons and abused by frackers — which water is a far more precious resource than the shale gas extracted — is permanently removed from the natural water cycle, because they cannot remove all the toxic chemicals from the water they’ve turned into toxic waste.
It’s a truly sick society that has family farmers feverishly flocking to have shale fracking toxic waste production facilities sited on their farms, because government considers gas at any health cost to be necessary and fair prices for healthful food production to be unnecessary.
The Un-Clean and Un-Natural Side of Natural Gas
http://www.un-naturalgas.org/Un-Natural_Natural_Gas-090129.pdf
BOOK REVIEW: Sustainable Energy — Without the Hot Air
http://chenangogreens.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=490&Itemid=1
Report thisBy Maani, February 18, 2012 at 8:22 pm Link to this comment
The single most telling fact about fracking is that, without exception, the overwhelming majority of people in every single area where it is being done - including those who took the “fast cash” and leased or sopld their land to frackers - have realized their error, and are sorry they ever got involved. From the damage to the land, to the poisoning of the water, to the trucks belching pollution, to the loud and obnoxious generators, to the cutting down of huge rtacts of forest, etc., etc., there is “buyer’s remorse” EVERYWHERE fracking is taking place in the U.S.
This is the fact that should be at the forefront of the news, but isn’t. I barely even see it on alternative news sites. Why?
Report thisBy ardee, February 18, 2012 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment
This is progress? No mention of banning the process that pollutes groundwater, poisons wells and possibly causes earthquakes as well. Oh no, only that now we will know the names of that which causes our soil to wither, our cattle to die, and why we have to import bottled water to live.
Report thisBy gerard, February 18, 2012 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
In the process of twisting information,(known as “flacking”) millions of prejudicial lies and
Report thishalf truths about “foreign affairs” are told in order to keep the truth secret from the people whose lives are impacted. National Rules proposed in our Constitution would encourage openness, but in recent times government, in order to promote wars, has found ways to circumvent this Constitution on the grounds that all information concerning illegal wars will be “classified” as a “trade secret.” Those journalists who discover information in the form of “leaks” are treated as criminals and held for long periods in solitary confinement even before formal allegations are made.
Even international conferences on “freedom of the press” may be subjected to the “flacking” of powerful governments to completely destroy valuable resources by excluding from the conference any individuals or agencies who support the accused, and the conference(in this case UNESCO now meeting in Paris Feb.15-17) will meet without including a single person who can explain and defend the value of the leaks to those in attendance who might wish to influence their government toward peace and international understanding.
To compare the amount of information citizens get by receiving information through the leaks with the lack of information in the absence of those leaks, see the following charts and tables made by Truthseekers,Inc. of the State of Human perpetuity.