EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Asks Firms to Reveal Gas Extraction Liquid
WASHINGTON - The US environmental regulator on Thursday asked gas companies to reveal what chemicals are used in deep extraction, addressing concerns by residents that their drinking water is being contaminated.
Photo taken from the trailer for the movie "Gasland." See more at gaslandthemovie.com US companies have increasingly tapped shale gas, which lies deep underground and was once thought inaccessible. Firms force out the gas through hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in which a large volume of liquid is injected below.
The Environmental Protection Agency said it had sent letters to nine companies including energy giant Haliburton asking for data within 30 days on the chemicals involved in fracking.
The agency's chief, Lisa Jackson, said the data would "help us make a thorough and efficient review of hydraulic fracturing and determine the best path forward."
"Natural gas is an important part of our nation's energy future, and it's critical that the extraction of this valuable natural resource does not come at the expense of safe water and healthy communities," Jackson said.
The agency said it was asking the companies to turn over data voluntarily but could try to force them if they did not comply.
Under a law signed by then president George W. Bush in 2005, fluids used in fracking were exempted from environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act.
But a number of communities have since complained that fracking has polluted their drinking water.
In the documentary "Gasland," which won the Special Jury Prize at this year's Sundance Film Festival, filmmaker Josh Fox showed families in a drilling area whose tap water was even flammable.
President Barack Obama's administration last month held a first-of-a-kind international conference to promote shale gas, calling it a plentiful resource that can curb emissions of carbon blamed for climate change.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
18 Comments so far
Show AllYes folks, come to Pennsylvania and get fracked. I've lived in this toxic state for twenty years and at the end of my rope.
I moved to western Pennsylvania 12 years ago after living in Virginia and Kentucky. Pennsylvinia is like no other place I've lived in its combination of forest, coal, oil, industrial, human labor, agricultural, wildlife and ethnic-cultural wealth.
The state has suffered repeated trashings as each of these things, in turn was exploited by the robber barrons - they chopped the forests and replced them with forests of oil-derricks in the northern counties, they dug the coal, killed a lot of miners, left boney and red-dog piles on the hlls and hollows, then draglines and strip mines, and dead, red stained streams from the acid drainage. They built the steel, glass and paper mills abused the immigrant workers coming from all over Europe, and poisoned the air polluted the three rivers and filled the valleys with slag dumps. They build unsafe dams that pracitcally wiped out Johnstown, then a few year later, Austin.
Yet through all of this, thanks to the blessings of its climate, and the enactment of its environmental laws the state has recovered to a good degree, most of the rivers and streams flow clear again fish have returned. The forests grew back (albeit without the Chestnut and Elm and soon the Hemlock and Ash) - even on many of the slag and boney piles.
The wildlife has adapted to an incredible degree to this most-densely populated of the larger states. Bear roam right into the Pittsburgh suburbs, bald eagles nest along the Allegheny, and Elk have been successfully re-introduced in a few northern counties.
So, my overall feeling is "here we go again", only this time, it may take centuries to recover.
from the article:
~ "Natural gas is an important part of our nation's energy future, and it's critical that the extraction of this valuable natural resource does not come at the expense of safe water and healthy communities," Jackson said. ~
interesting that the sentence structure chosen by the head of the EPA prioritizes the gas over the water...
You forget - the gas is for Haliburton, whereas the water is just for the residents of Pennsylvania. If their water is contaminated, they can always buy bottled water. I wonder if Haliburton is now selling bottled water.
How do you stay warm in winter and cook your food?
A ban on exploitation of this resource is unrealistic, but with smart government policy, we dont need a ban -we make normal market forces do it for us. The drilling could be sharply curtailed through stiff regulation and taxes which would raise the cost of drilling, and efficiency and conservation which would deprss demand and therefore the price of gas enough to send the drillers elsewhere.
The conservation (and big greenhouse gas reductions) could be achieved through a program to replace every old gas furnace in the NE US with a high-efficiency furnace. (Right now, most people can't afford to replace their inefficient but working furnace with a HE furnace, but a subsidy or a no-interest loan program would change that). The drop in demand would puch the economic feasability of fracking far into the future.
Of course, this presupposes that government really serves the interests of the people, doens't it?
CNBC hosted a debate about it last night. An industry spokesman was bragging about their safety, and an EPA spokesman said that they must submit a list of the chemicals they are using, which the industry spokesman said they were reluctant to do because it was a 'trade secret' that might get stolen. The host was, of course, an anti-regulation advocate. It's clear to me that just about every industry is run by madmen and psychopaths that are willing to risk poisoning anyone and anything in the name of profit. What could be valuable enough to risk poisoning our drinking water? For human beings it seems to be not survival of the fittest, but survival of the most insane.
But the psychopaths do not have to drink the water. So why should they care, as long as they are bringing in the bacon for the corporation?
I suppose, but how much drinking water will they be able to poison before they (or their children) HAVE to drink it themselves?
They wish to poison the water, greater scracity increases it's commodity value.
Oh Mr. Corporate Giant, pretty please count the ways you poison me.
OilyBomber supporter of:
Shale Oil
Tarsands Oil
Off Shore Drilling
Nuclear Power
.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guardians, watch the watchers, etc?)
My guess about the EPA response is "delay, delay and deny. Their spokesperson will say to the citizens of the US "No FRACKING WAY!". If you don't like it please feel free to drink the water.
"Under a law signed by then president George W. Bush in 2005, fluids used in fracking were exempted from environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act."
Nothing will happen to change this until after elections. Then it will be impossible. Hopefully the EPA has enough latitude and integrity to improve things somewhat.
Our County stopped the Frackers by passing ordinances that required the frackers to pay the additional costs for Police,Fire,Roads and Schools upfront.
Well, I hope they asked nicely to increase their chances of getting a reasonable answer. We can't expect these nice corporations to give up their secrets to just anyone. After all they're people now with a constitutionally guaranteed right to keep their business secrets confidential.
If they didn't ask nicely then try asking once again...very, very nicely.
Question glenn ford: in what county do you live?
I'm with a newspaper above the Marcellus Shale at the Upper Delaware River, and there are many people here who might like to know more about how this worked.
Unofrtuantely, the industry will simply answer the EPA request with: "NO". And the EPA will answer: "OK, never mind".
The solution to this problem is to harvest alternative energy sources to produce cheap electricity that can "back out" the use of NG for electricity production, as well as to provide an alternative to the use of NG for home heating, which would be electricity based "heat pumps".
This can be accomplished by developing and deploying the Atmospheric Vortex Engine, which could make a significant impact within 5 years with a relatively minor expenditure in its development.
This technology uses energy which is abundant, and available at the time and place where it is most needed.
http://vortexengine.ca
I'm sure that Halliburton will explain to the residents, that it's not flaming water coming from their faucets.....It's Halliburtons "INSTANT Cherries jubilee!"
And no one wonders why Cheney is everywhere but Wyoming....there are an awful lot of waterless ranchers, that can't feed their families with instant cheeries jubilee.....it's really hard to take a bath, let alone drink it!
Are we sure the name isn't HELLiBurden?
America is pretty much fracked. What the corporations, Bush/Cheney, Obama/Biden, and every other evil pair of degenerate motherfrackers who've been allowed to pose as our leaders have done is take our country away from us. Next will undoubtedly be the internet, since it looks like there's a corporate profit to be made. Can't have the proles learning how badly they're getting fracked, since some of them are well-armed.