BEFORE LAUNCHING INTO ANOTHER VERSION OF MY VIEW of the social and political and environmental realities of our day, of this day and time, I am forced to hold up — to question just what I am about.
Are we faced with the crisis of a climate that becomes increasingly responsive to the manifold insults and transgressions we appear determined to continue, even increase, in the name of profit? Of that, there is, I believe, little doubt. And it becomes tortuous, tedious, to be reminded of this; to be at the mercy of statistics, and lectures, of newspaper columns belaboring what is to some obvious, to others of small moment in lives deeply engaged in the business of living.
It is, as I have been reminded from time to time, just so bloody boring!
So I will wend on by all of that and just have a conversation with you about … well … fracking! Why not — it’s such a compelling word!
Fracking is a fascinating process whereby we drill a hole in the ground at considerable depth, then, so to speak, bend it at right angle and continue to drill horizontally to ground level. We then proceed to blow the hell out of the pipeline neighborhood with a blast of water laced with a cocktail of numerous chemicals, more than 700 different flavors, and many which one would find painfully if not excruciatingly obtrusive (or deadly) if anywhere in the neighborhood of one’s precious body. They possess, one could surely say, a truly impressive toxicity. The process liberates, so to speak, the pockets of oil in the area, which are then pumped to the surface on their way to our automobiles, factories and homes and used in turn to liberate their potential to heat and drive our civilization.
With respect to fracking and water consumption, we learn from Sourcewatch the following:
“Fracking (also often referred to as hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracking) is a process stimulation procedure first used by the oil and gas industry in 1947 at a well in the Hugoton gas field located in Kansas. Hydraulic fracturing was first used commercially in 1949. The premise is simple, fluids are forced under pressure into the formation surrounding the wellbore. Once those fluids reach the fracture gradient of the surrounding rock, the rock parts and fluid continues to flow further from the wellbore. The fluid continues to propagate the fracture, and eventually proppant is added to the fluid stream in order to keep the fractures from naturally healing once the wellbore pressure is released. Once the process is finished, the now-propped fractures provide conduits for fluids to flow to the wellbore. To date hydraulic fracturing has been performed more than 1 million times in every oil and gas producing region in the country. It is estimated that of the existing wells in the United States hydraulic fracturing has been performed in more than 70 percent of them.
“There were more than 493,000 active natural-gas wells across 31 states in the U.S. in 2009, almost double the number in 1990. Around 90 percent have used fracking, according to the drilling industry. In 2013 the (Wall Street Journal) looked at data from over 700 counties in 11 gas-producing states, and found at least 15.3 million Americans have a natural gas well within one mile of their home that has been drilled since 2000. By 2015 the United States will produce more oil from unconventional methods like fracking than conventional means.
“According to a 2012 report from the economic forecasting firm IHS Global Insight Nationwide, residents living near fracked gas wells had filed over 1,000 complaints by 2012 regarding tainted water, severe illnesses, livestock deaths, and fish kills.”
Next, this from Think Progress: “REPORT: Fracking Operations Are Contaminating Well Water in 2 States,” by Katie Valentine, Jan. 6, 2014:
“In Pennsylvania, since 2005, more than 100 well-water contamination complaints have been confirmed, meaning that the well water in question was found by authorities to be polluted. There were nearly 900 complaints claiming that drilling operations had affected private well water in the state in 2012 and 2013 alone.
“It’s unknown what sort of pollution caused the complaints that were confirmed to have been due to fracking — it could have been chemicals from the fracking operation, which oil and gas companies aren’t federally obligated to release, or methane, which according to the AP is the more common form of fracking-related water pollution.
“The AP investigation also found that the states’ policies regarding the release of complaint data differed drastically. Starting in 2011, the AP writes, ‘the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection aggressively fought efforts by the AP and other news organizations to obtain information about complaints related to drilling.’
“The investigation sheds light on the hundreds of complaints made in these four states alleging contamination from drilling operations, and it adds to evidence that fracking can pollute well water. A July Pennsylvania study found the methane concentration of residential water wells at homes one mile from a fracking well was six times higher than it was in homes located farther away from wells, while levels of ethane, another natural gas component, were 23 times higher in homes closer to fracking wells. Fracking has been tied to other instances of water contamination as well — an October report found that in New Mexico, chemicals from fracking waste pits have contaminated water sources at least 421 times.
“The investigation also comes on the heels of another not-yet-published study on oil and gas drilling’s impacts. The study, presented last week at the American Economic Association’s annual meeting, found that living close to a fracking operation increases the risk of low birth weight in a newborn baby by more than half, and doubles the baby’s risk of a low Apgar score, a scale that summarizes of the health of newborns. However, water contamination wasn’t the likely culprit in the study: the mothers in the study who had access to monitored public water had babies that were of similar health as mothers who relied on private wells, which are more likely to be affected by fracking.”
Which leaves the mysterious question, of course: Why the correlation, or what was the cause?! Each month of this fracking surge opens more such questions.
A sort of happy solution to the problem of damages was reported by Jim Efstathiou Jr. and Mark Drajem of Bloomberg News, “Drillers Silence Fracking Claims With Sealed Settlements”:
“Chris and Stephanie Hallowich were sure drilling for natural gas near their Pennsylvania home was to blame for the headaches, burning eyes and sore throats they suffered after the work began.
“The companies insisted hydraulic fracturing — the technique they used to free underground gas — wasn’t the cause. Nevertheless, in 2011, a year after the family sued, Range Resources Corp (RRC) and two other companies agreed to a $750,000 settlement. In order to collect, the Hallowiches promised not to tell anyone, according to court filings.
“The Hallowiches aren’t alone. In cases from Wyoming to Arkansas, Pennsylvania to Texas, drillers have agreed to cash settlements or property buyouts with people who say hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, ruined their water, according to a review by Bloomberg News of hundreds of regulatory and legal filings. In most cases homeowners must agree to keep quiet.
“The strategy keeps data from regulators, policymakers, the news media and health researchers, and, by some happy chance, makes it difficult to challenge the industry’s claim that fracking has never tainted anyone’s water.
“‘At this point they feel they can get out of this litigation relatively cheaply,’ Marc Bern, an attorney with Napoli Bern Ripka Sholnik LLP in New York who has negotiated about 30 settlements on behalf of homeowners, said in an interview. ‘Virtually on all of our settlements where they paid money they have requested and demanded that there be confidentiality.’
“‘We are transforming our energy infrastructure in this country from burning coal for electricity to potentially burning a lot of natural gas,’ Aaron Bernstein, associate director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in an interview. Non-disclosure agreements ‘have interfered with the ability of scientists and public health experts to understand what is at stake here.’”
And so it goes in the land of the free and the home of the brave — and bought.
Jerome Page is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
If all of this is so problematic, then maybe the government needs to start issuing permits for drilling straight down the old fashion way on millions of acres of government owned land and stop stonewalling progress in oil exploration and extraction. We have enough on US soil to fuel the world for the next 50 years. Can you say ANWR? Can you say Keystone pipeline? Your people are the ones forcing the issue.
So your plan — with a lot of grief attached, of course — only gets us 50 years down the road? Then what?
I thought you would find this interesting:
“With only 2% of the world’s oil reserves, we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices,” President Barack Obama said
If one believes that they probably also believe Lois Lerner.
Here are some interesting facts:
After Green River, it’s almost embarrassing to count other sources: 86 billion on the outer continental shelf; 24 billion in the lower 48; 2 billion on Alaska’s north slope; 19 billion in Utah tar sands; 12 billion in ANWR. Then add in oil shale: 800 billion just in Wyoming and neighboring states. As IBD sums it up: “When you include oil shale, the U.S. has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil, according to the Institute for Energy Research, enough to meet all U.S. oil needs for about the next 200 years, without any imports.”
When one considers the advancement of science and technology over the last 200 years, think where we will be 200 years from now.
We likely will have true sources of efficient renewable energy, cars with virtually unlimited range being charged on those sources, we will still have oil, now being used at much lower rates. Either that or we will have beach front property in Tahoe.
My post above is directed at JLB.
Good because it is so full of falsehoods as to not be worth a response.
Awww, Hank. That just made my day. That was the funniest, briefest line since I don’t know when. Which rather sums up the severity of seriousness which goes on in these backwater pages. Hold on, while I get a deep dreg of pondwater and regain my composure. Thanks again.
Peter Bray, Benicia, CA
H H explain the falsehoods. you seem to know so much about. these falsehoods.
Just who is Hank Harrison.? Is it his real name? Maybe or maybe not. I do not mind what language he uses at all. It just proves that he lacks depth and understsanding of others. He could very easily get his point across with cleaned up comments. Come introduce yourself at the Valero info meeting tonight. Would like to meet you one on one for pure indentification purposes only.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Energy_Research
The first sentence will get you started.
Evens the playing field. Maybe our own : “Local Citizen Research Reporter” will “as in in Will” now give us the other side. H H I do know you are looking forward to his comment.
Thanks, Hank, always nice to know how well the oil industry pays for and fabricates its anti-science lies.
Peter Bray
I have never laid claim to having all the answers and freely acknowledge that mistakes are made. I did use an industry source, and such sources are always going to be subject to question as to their reliability and accuracy.
The source I used stated that we have 200 years of recoverable oil in reserve in the USA. That number is wrong and I apologize to all for my error.
I went back though and used Hank’s source: Wikipedia.
At his source I found this article: Oil Reserves in the United States
If one includes ‘technically recoverable shale oil’ we actually have over 300 years of oil reserves.
I will try to be more careful in the future, Thanks Hank for source!
Love it! Some enjoy the anti-science of postulating great wealth if we all drill for oil under our carpets. If we could just get Mitch or Ryan or some other Bush into orifice…Oh? Did i misspell that?
pb
Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) news the community can use…
From the above article:
“So I will wend on by all of that and just have a conversation with you about … well … fracking! Why not — its such a compelling word”!
Indeed Mr. Page.
From the post below a “Special Report” on fracking for Mr. Page and the wider community to consider…
“Now the same companies that brought us the Exxon Valdez spill, the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, Chevron’s destruction of the Amazonian rainforest in Ecuador and countless other pollution examples, want the public to blindly trust them – with zero federal oversight – as they pursue drilling for much riskier unconventional gas throughout the country.”
“The question is, given the oil industry’s track record of environmental and health disasters, can the public trust them to get it right with the more challenging unconventional gas”?
http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future/
Sort of like how you can trust the government to act in your best interests?
“The biggest corporation, like the humblest private citizen must be held to strict compliance with the will of the people.”
Theodore Roosevelt,1902
Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) news the community can use— Small town character vs large oil and gas corporations–who wins?
From the above article:
“So I will wend on by all of that and just have a conversation with you about … well … fracking! Why not — its such a compelling word”!
Indeed Mr. Page.
From the post below a “Special Ruling” on fracking for Mr. Page and the wider community to consider, including our appointed and elected leaders past and present…
“In Blow to Oil Industry, New York’s Top Court Upholds Local Fracking Bans”
“New York’s highest state court ruled today that local governments have the legal authority to use zoning to bar oil and gas drilling, fracking and other heavy industrial sites within their borders.”
“Nationwide, nearly 500 local governments have enacted measures against fracking,”
“The fracking bans represented a “reasonable exercise” of the towns’ zoning authority, the court said in its opinion, written by Judge Victoria Graffeo. “The towns both studied the issue and acted within their home-rule powers in determining that gas drilling would permanently alter and adversely affect the deliberately cultivated [small-town character] of their communities,” Judge Graffeo wrote.
“The decision drew praise from legal experts.”
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/06/30/blow-oil-industry-new-york-s-top-court-upholds-fracking-bans
Well 50 years is a pretty good start and it will lower gas prices tremendously the minute the president opens up land and permits. US oil independence is a good thing. That would also buy us some time to perfect some alternative sources of energy. We all know that wind and solar have not yet reached prime time, although the media would want you to believe so, but the dollars and cents don’t tell lies.
Well reported as always, Jerome, no pun intended. We advance and fall back, advance and fall back, just like everything else we humans touch. Wind and solar, wind and solar, keep Fracking out of my back yard, Governor Jerry Brown. Maybe those with tainted water wells and abnormal baby birth weights will some day divulge what they know and the human race will work together some time and not in a predatory fashion. We took the land from the native americans once and now we take heath, gas, and clean water from each other. Border collies have higher aspirations.The Keystone pipeline is just more of the same, a polluted and sewered environment for short term profits.
Peter Bray, Benicia, CA
Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) news the community can use…California edition.
From the above commenter:
“… keep Fracking out of my back yard, Governor Jerry Brown. ”
From the post below an excerpt for Mr. Page and our appointed and elected leaders past and present to contemplate…
” If Jerry Brown Is So Green, Why Is He Allowing Fracking in California”?
“The California governor wants to be known as a climate leader. But he has said yes to fracking—for now.”
“Fracking may turn out to be Jerry Brown’s Keystone XL pipeline: a high-profile test of his climate commitment in which scientific fact clashes with political reality. Like Obama, Brown clearly grasps the urgency of the climate crisis and has taken important steps to address it. As former California State Senator Tom Hayden has reported, Brown has amassed what amounts to a green budget that could enable the state to spend as much as $120 billion over the next five years to help make California 100 percent carbon-free by midcentury.”
“In May 2013, Brown called fracking “a fabulous economic opportunity” that he had to balance against his commitment to climate protection. He has resisted calls to sign an executive order imposing a moratorium or ban on fracking, which as governor he has the authority to do at any time. ”
“Environmentalists have also voiced suspicions about the $500,000 that Occidental Petroleum, long one of California’s top oil companies, contributed to Brown’s campaign in 2012 to pass Proposition 30, which raised taxes on wealthy Californians to fund increased spending on public education—generally not the kind of initiative that big corporations favor. Occidental’s contributions came a few months after Brown fired the previous director and deputy director of the Conservation Department, following complaints from the oil industry that DOGGR was too slow in granting drilling permits. When a Los Angeles Times article linked the two firings to industry complaints, the governor’s office pointedly did not issue a denial.”
“That was a clear signal to the industry—both the firings and the nondenial,” said a former administration official familiar with the decision.
http://www.thenation.com/article/180303/if-jerry-brown-so-green-why-he-allowing-fracking-california
Mr. Page,
When you get something right, I will be one of those who stand up and offer my heartfelt congratulations. You have proven me wrong with this piece, and I am not too proud to admit my error:
You can make it through an entire piece without once mentioning the Koch Brothers. Well done!
Now if we could get Matt Talbot to make it through a piece without mentioning Richmond and HH correcting someones spelling, we could really be on a roll!
And don’t forget the Border Collies!