

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

In an analysis sent by letter to the Commission ahead of a meeting this week in Newport Beach, The Center for Biological diversity pulls from data disclosed by oil companies and obtained from government documents that highlights seven risky chemicals used in "hundreds of recently revealed frack jobs in state waters" that directly violate the Coastal Act.
Multiple oil platforms, according to the research, are discharging wastewater directly into the Santa Barbara Channel, according to a government document, and other areas along the California Coast.
The letter states:
In the offshore context, fracking fluid is either discharged into the ocean or transported for onshore underground injection. When disposed of at sea, these chemicals enter the marine ecosystem. The Coastal Commission acknowledges that approximately half of the platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel discharge all or a portion of their wastewater directly to the ocean. This produced wastewater contains all of the chemicals injected originally into the fracked wells, with the addition of toxins gathered from the subsurface environment. These discharges of toxic chemicals directly contravene the requirements of the Coastal Act, which charges the Coastal Commission with the "protection against the spillage of . . . hazardous substances."
"The Coastal Commission has the right and the responsibility to step in when oil companies use dangerous chemicals to frack California's ocean waters," said Emily Jeffers, a Center attorney. "Our beaches, our wildlife and our entire coastal ecosystem are at risk until the state reins in this dangerous practice."
The research shows that at least one-third of chemicals used in offshore fracking operations "are suspected ecological hazards" and are suspected of "affecting the human developmental and nervous systems."
The chemicals include X-Cide, which is "classified as a hazardous substance by the federal agency that manages cleanup at Superfund sites."
"Because the risk of many of the harms from fracking cannot be eliminated, a complete prohibition on fracking is the best way to protect human health and the environment," the letter states.
A recent report by the Associated Press showed that California coastal regulators were unaware until recently that offshore fracking was even occurring.
_____________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. He is the author of Migrant Justice in the Age of Removal. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.

In an analysis sent by letter to the Commission ahead of a meeting this week in Newport Beach, The Center for Biological diversity pulls from data disclosed by oil companies and obtained from government documents that highlights seven risky chemicals used in "hundreds of recently revealed frack jobs in state waters" that directly violate the Coastal Act.
Multiple oil platforms, according to the research, are discharging wastewater directly into the Santa Barbara Channel, according to a government document, and other areas along the California Coast.
The letter states:
In the offshore context, fracking fluid is either discharged into the ocean or transported for onshore underground injection. When disposed of at sea, these chemicals enter the marine ecosystem. The Coastal Commission acknowledges that approximately half of the platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel discharge all or a portion of their wastewater directly to the ocean. This produced wastewater contains all of the chemicals injected originally into the fracked wells, with the addition of toxins gathered from the subsurface environment. These discharges of toxic chemicals directly contravene the requirements of the Coastal Act, which charges the Coastal Commission with the "protection against the spillage of . . . hazardous substances."
"The Coastal Commission has the right and the responsibility to step in when oil companies use dangerous chemicals to frack California's ocean waters," said Emily Jeffers, a Center attorney. "Our beaches, our wildlife and our entire coastal ecosystem are at risk until the state reins in this dangerous practice."
The research shows that at least one-third of chemicals used in offshore fracking operations "are suspected ecological hazards" and are suspected of "affecting the human developmental and nervous systems."
The chemicals include X-Cide, which is "classified as a hazardous substance by the federal agency that manages cleanup at Superfund sites."
"Because the risk of many of the harms from fracking cannot be eliminated, a complete prohibition on fracking is the best way to protect human health and the environment," the letter states.
A recent report by the Associated Press showed that California coastal regulators were unaware until recently that offshore fracking was even occurring.
_____________________
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. He is the author of Migrant Justice in the Age of Removal. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.

In an analysis sent by letter to the Commission ahead of a meeting this week in Newport Beach, The Center for Biological diversity pulls from data disclosed by oil companies and obtained from government documents that highlights seven risky chemicals used in "hundreds of recently revealed frack jobs in state waters" that directly violate the Coastal Act.
Multiple oil platforms, according to the research, are discharging wastewater directly into the Santa Barbara Channel, according to a government document, and other areas along the California Coast.
The letter states:
In the offshore context, fracking fluid is either discharged into the ocean or transported for onshore underground injection. When disposed of at sea, these chemicals enter the marine ecosystem. The Coastal Commission acknowledges that approximately half of the platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel discharge all or a portion of their wastewater directly to the ocean. This produced wastewater contains all of the chemicals injected originally into the fracked wells, with the addition of toxins gathered from the subsurface environment. These discharges of toxic chemicals directly contravene the requirements of the Coastal Act, which charges the Coastal Commission with the "protection against the spillage of . . . hazardous substances."
"The Coastal Commission has the right and the responsibility to step in when oil companies use dangerous chemicals to frack California's ocean waters," said Emily Jeffers, a Center attorney. "Our beaches, our wildlife and our entire coastal ecosystem are at risk until the state reins in this dangerous practice."
The research shows that at least one-third of chemicals used in offshore fracking operations "are suspected ecological hazards" and are suspected of "affecting the human developmental and nervous systems."
The chemicals include X-Cide, which is "classified as a hazardous substance by the federal agency that manages cleanup at Superfund sites."
"Because the risk of many of the harms from fracking cannot be eliminated, a complete prohibition on fracking is the best way to protect human health and the environment," the letter states.
A recent report by the Associated Press showed that California coastal regulators were unaware until recently that offshore fracking was even occurring.
_____________________