HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » limpyhobbler » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 22 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Home country: USA
Current location: Ohio
Member since: Thu Nov 17, 2011, 06:31 AM
Number of posts: 8,244

Journal Archives

Hydraulic fracturing - news and opinions

US House Science,Space &TechEnergy and Environment Subcommittee -
Hearing to review EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Research - Feb 1, 2012 10:00am

Scheduled Witnesses
Mr. Tom Doll, State Oil & Gas Supervisor, Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Commission
Ms. Kathleen Sgamma, Vice President, Government & Public Affairs, Western Energy Alliance
Dr. Bernard Goldstein, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh
The Honorable Paul Anastas, Assistant Administrator, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency


Related Article:

[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

Industry complains about the use of the word "fracking" just to try and control the terms of the debate.
Even though they invented the term.


[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

All fracking aside, natural gas is not as "clean" as supporters claim.
Mother Jones Magazine - About That "Clean Energy" Future


[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

Texas - News Video
Water broke through a containment wall at a saltwater injection well and into a creek. Land owners want to know why authorities aren't doing more to stop it.

First of all, that is not "salt water". That is toxic waste. Industry calls it "brine" to mislead. Industry clearly lying to local people about this containment breach, as the gravel-patched wall can clearly be seen in the video.


[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

Fracking with more foam, less water, is it any safer?
Akron Beacon-Journal - Gas well in Suffield fractured with carbon dioxide foam, minimal water


[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

U-T San Diego - Shale Fracking’s Boom Outpacing Health Protections

[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

Durango Herald - Fracking gets a new friend in Obama

[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]
Upstate NY Newspaper Editorializes:
No fracking unless all questions can be answered

[div style="width:100%; height:1.31em; border-bottom: solid 5px #999999;"]

Remembering the 1986 Challenger Disaster

My 6th grade study hall teacher wheeled out a big TV on a cart for us to watch the launch.

The shuttle program was still pretty new and every launch had an excitement about it. I lived in New Hampshire at the time and Christa McAuliffe had become a local star through her participation in the shuttle program. People were very proud of her and excited that a local girl had been chosen as the first civilian to go into space.

We were all very shocked when it happened, the explosion. The teacher awkwardly shut the TV off, and went to check in with his boss I guess, to figure out how to talk to the kids about it. A short while later we were called down to the gym for an assembly. We were sent home for the day. School was canceled the following day as well.

Our nation has been through alot since then. The decade of the nineteen-eighties was a time of great challenges and change in America. It was unpleasant in many ways. But with all the changes and events that have happened since, the nostalgic appeal of that era is becoming more apparent.

Despite everything that divided us in America, despite Reagan, despite racism, despite the nuclear arms race, the shuttle program was one thing that united us, one thing that made us all proud.

As troubled as our nation was in 1986, it resembles an age of innocence and simplicity compared to the challenges facing us now. No news event invokes the memory of that era more than the loss of the Challenger and its crew. So they can never be forgotten.

Environmental Group Critical of President Obama’s Natural Gas Push

In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama called on continued development of natural gas in the country, but he said it must be done in a way that protects the environment. This message didn’t sit too well with PennEnvironment, a statewide environmental advocacy group. Clean Water Advocate Erika Staaf said natural gas isn’t a clean energy, noting that the track record in Pennsylvania has been clear.

“We’ve seen the track record of the shale gas extraction industry in other states in other parts of the U.S., and the track record is a track record of pollution. We’ve seen too many leaks, too many spills, too many instances of contaminated surface water, so as it’s done today, natural gas cannot be considered a clean source of energy,” she said.

Energy In Depth (EID), the public relations arm of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, said that accidents do occur, but not enough to mar an otherwise good track record.

“I think that there is an attempt to make it seem as though these events are normal operating procedure and they’re not,” said John Krohn, spokesperson for EID. “Hydraulic fracturing has been in place in this country since the Truman Administration and over 2.1 million wells have been hydraulically fractured.”


Gas Company Cites Obama Speech to Fault EPA’s Dimock Fracking Probe

Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. fired off a complaint to the Environmental Protection Agency, saying a probe of water in Dimock, Pennsylvania, undermines President Barack Obama’s embrace of natural gas in his State of the Union speech.

“EPA’s actions in Dimock appear to undercut the president’s stated commitment to this important resource,” Chief Executive Officer Dan Dinges wrote today in a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. “EPA’s approach has caused confusion that undermines important policy goals of the United States to ensure safe, reliable, secure and clean energy sources from domestic natural gas.”

The EPA said Jan. 19 that it would deliver water to four families in Dimock, where residents say their water has been contaminated during hydraulic fracturing by Cabot. The EPA will also test water at 60 homes to assess whether any residents are being exposed to hazardous substances, the agency said.

Dinges, who also is Cabot’s chairman, said today that the company provided more than 10,000 pages of data to the EPA and there is “no credible evidence” that the water needs further analysis by the federal agency.

continue reading->

try this link (Mother Jones infographs)


They have lots of infographics.


And they have many more on there.

With 283 votes in the House, NDAA was not veto proof.

290 would be veto proof. There were 14 not voting, so depending how those 14 divided, that would have determined the outcome as far as overriding a veto, assuming nobody else switched sides or was absent.

It was certainly no sure thing that it was veto-proof.

just FYI.

Drillers get lift from Obama's talk

...Brad Gill, executive director of the pro-fracking Independent Oil & Gas Association, said in a statement that Obama's message "must be heard and considered in New York as the state moves toward allowing safe natural gas development in the Southern Tier. ... We are confident that his vision will be reflected in the administration's actions, and that New York will recognize the role it will play in fulfilling the nation's energy goals."

"The President is right," said Jerry Kremer, chairman of the New York Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance. "New York must find a way to safely extract Marcellus Shale gas, as the resulting jobs and energy are vital to our state's future."

But Claire Sandberg, executive director of the advocacy group Frack Action, listened to that section of Obama's speech with "great dismay."

"His portrait doesn't stand up to the facts," she said, arguing that the drilling industry underplays environmental concerns and issues overblown projections of its economic impact.

Read more-> http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Drillers-get-lift-from-Obama-s-talk-2692362.php

My opinion:
Fracking should be halted unless or until it is shown to be safe.

Protect drinking water.

Safety should be considered first, not as an afterthought.

This is an issue that affects people in many states. The states are not protecting us.
The federal government should step in to protect us. That's why we elect you.

Applaud those who have engaged in non-violent protest to bring attention to the issue.

If drillers screw up the water, we won't have anything to drink.

When water becomes a scarce resource, we will only have access to water according to our ability to pay.

Ask "how would I feel if my drinking water were being threatened?"

I'm thinking Newt wants to use the moon as a GITMO for pot dealers.

But I would support a peaceful space program in cooperation with the international community.

I think alot of good could potentially come on earth from us cooperating with other nations in space.

It's not a major issue for me, but I'm happy to support it because I know you care about it.

Americans protest fracking as Obama cheers for it

It took years, but opponents of fracking, the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing for the extraction of natural gas, are finally getting their point across. President Barack Obama, however, still isn’t convinced of the cons.

What began as a grass roots campaign to examine the dangers of high-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing has over the last few years spawned a massive movement of critics who are committing countless hours towards find a way to abolish fracking. When American energy companies drill deep into the Earth’s surface to free up natural gas, groups are able to mine a natural resource without dangerous offshore production facilities or by cutting deals with foreign nations. The trade-off to many, however, is simply not worth it.

Yes, fracking can provide massive amounts of methane gas to be used domestically; but it also produces millions of gallons of wastewater that can contain elements that are known carcinogens. Despite fracking freeing up cancerous agents and releasing them into the environment, there are roughly 400,000 of these wells across America. As advocates against the excavation process raise questions regarding its safety and fight to free their cities and towns from these wells, opposition is growing, and fracking, for now, seems to be slowing.

In the Empire State, where fracking occurs in countless sites, Ithaca College biologist Sandra Steingraber tells Mother Jones that the movement is "the biggest since abolition and women's rights in New York." Ten miles west, Ann Furman of Concerned Citizens of Ulysses (CCU) in Ulysses, New York says that they got 1,500 of 3,000 registered voters to sign off against fracking in the town last year.


Politicians side with gas companies, ignore science on shale gas drilling. Drinking water threatened

So the president gave a great State of the Union address last night. 95% of what we said was good. I’m glad I voted for him over John McCain. Not like that was a hard decision or anything. I was excited about Obama in 2008 and made a lot of phone calls and canvassed for him.

Natural gas drilling from the deep underground shale layers is currently poisoning water supplies in America. This is the hydro-fracturing or fracking process.

The government should step in to protect people so we can have clean water to drink.

Politicians including the President say we should continue this toxic drilling and injection without slowing down.

Many people are concerned about this poisoning and are calling for a moratorium on fracking until it can be shown to be safe.

A new poll of Ohio voters shows 72 percent think the practice should be stopped until more study of it can be done.

A new poll of Ohioans shows that more than seven in ten want the controversial practice of hydro-fracking stopped until more study of it can be done, according to a Quinnipiac University survey released this morning.

The first statewide poll on hydrofracking--the practice of pumping millions of gallons of chemical-laced water into shale deposits to crack open oil and natural gas deposits far below the earth's crust--shows Ohioans anxious about its impact on the environment. By a margin of 72-23, Ohioans say the practice should be stopped until further study.


The President says drillers on public lands should disclose their chemicals.
That’s nice but
1) It should apply to all drillers not just public lands
2) Disclosing chemicals does not stop the currently ongoing poisoning

The President says “my Administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy”.

But it is already being developed very unsafely, threatening our drinking water, and the government should be protecting us, instead of siding with the polluters. The administration to date has taken no actions to protect people from this.

The government is siding with the gas and oil companies like Halliburton.
Those companies have great access to politicians because they have a lot of money.
They can meet with Senators any time they want.

Regular people who are concerned with clean water have almost no access to politicians. They sometimes have to go to great lengths to get even a meeting with a state legislator.

I’m really disappointed that politicians including President Obama are choosing to ignore the science presented to them by the Environmental Protection Agency, by shale gas expert advisory groups, by the scientific community, and by the concerned residents of these communities.

In December, the Environmental Protection Agency released a draft study that tentatively confirms hydraulic fracturing contaminates groundwater and drinking water wells. The gas industry has argued the opposite, putting communities and the environment at risk.

In November, the President’s own Shale Gas Advisory Panel advised that “…. if action is not taken to reduce the environmental impact accompanying the very considerable expansion of shale gas production expected across the country – perhaps as many as 100,000 wells over the next several decades – there is a real risk of serious environmental consequences…”

In November, the Scientific American – the oldest continuously published magazine in the United States and 2011 National Magazine Award winner -- editorialized that “drilling for natural gas has gotten ahead of the science needed to prove it safe”.

The President should be putting communities first. But by promoting increased gas drilling when his own advisors and the scientific establishment tell him that we have neither the science nor the oversight to ensure safe drilling, he is not.


Once we are done paying Halliburton and friends to make our water undrinkable, we can then pay them to clean it back up and sell it back to us at a profit.

By siding with the gas companies, our politicians are failing to take into account the cost in health to communities and families.

Besides people, there are also a lot of animals out there trying to get a drink out of a stream. Fish and deer and bald fricken eagles.

I would expect this stance from George W. Bush or John Kasich, but to be honest I wasn’t expecting it from President Obama.

What should the President have said last night instead?
“I call upon all natural gas developers engaged in hydrofracking near water supplies to temporarily halt their activity until the process can be shown to be safe.”

Easy as pie.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 22 Next »