Dutch cut deal with the devil on natural gas (5/19/13)
/BBC image
The Netherlands has the largest natural gas reserves in Europe. But the multibillion dollar industry that has helped keep the Dutch on solid ground through the Great Recession is shaking property owners to their foundations.
The BBC reports fracking companies face 6,000 damage claims from Dutch property owners for earthquakes linked to the Groningen natural gas fields, which are the biggest in the EU. The Dutch government's cut of the fracking pie last year was about $18 billion.
We've seen this movie before, and it's playing in theaters around the world.
The dozens of Groningen earthquakes recorded since 1996 are similar to earthquakes linked to fracking in U.S. natural gas fields. In Oklahoma, scientists recently tied fracking to the strongest temblor in state history. And fracking has been exempt from several key U.S. environmental laws since 2005.
The fracking drama pits profits and an energy quick fix against a barely understood range of environmental dangers that includes earthquakes and ground water contamination. In most cases, governments are apparently looking the other way with their hands out while the petroleum industry fracks away despite obvious environmental damage.
Deepwater Horizon: Rig owner cuts $1.4B deal (1/3/13)
Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that exploded in the Gulf of Mexico and unleashed the biggest oil spill in U.S. history, has agreed to pay $1.4 billion dollars to settle its case in U.S. court. BP, which bankrolled and controlled the Deepwater Horizon operation, has already agreed to pay $4.5 billion in federal fines and penalties.
Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer implied BP bore the brunt of responsibility for the ecological disaster, which started with the loss of a dozen lives on Transocean's drilling platform:
“Transocean’s rig crew accepted the direction of BP well site leaders to proceed in the face of clear danger signs — at a tragic cost to many of them.”
A multistate civil case against BP and Transocean is set to begin in February.
They think we're fracking stupid (9/27/11)
If Exxon/Mobil and the other large natural gas companies want to convince the public that fracking is safe, then they need to submit themselves to the scrutiny of environmental regulators like any other potentially dangerous industry.
Fracking with Obama's mind (7/16/11)
President Obama and Energy Secretary Steven Chu tour
an engineering lab at Penn State in February 2011. /whitehouse.gov image
an engineering lab at Penn State in February 2011. /whitehouse.gov image
In 2008, Barack Obama was a relatively obscure political figure. He had served in the Illinois Senate and had his first moment in the national spotlight at the 2004 Democratic Party Convention, when he was a candidate for the U.S. Senate.
The vast majority of the 66 million people who voted Obama into the Oval Office had never had an opportunity to follow his decision-making on any issue, nevermind the often epic challenges the U.S. government has faced since the election. A brewing conflict inside the Obama administration over fracking is one of the most revealing episodes of his first term, with potentially pivotal repercussions at the polls next year.
In the eco-corner of the bureaucratic boxing ring, the EPA is conducting the first comprehensive U.S. investigation of fracking by an independent agency. Congress authorized the research in 2010, and the probe is set for completion next year. On May 9, the first independent, peer-reviewed study of fracking's impact on drinking water was published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The Duke researchers found strong evidence of methane contamination of drinking water wells near fracking operations in Pennsylvania and New York. If the Duke research is an indication of the science to come, the EPA will have to press for new fracking regulations, including bans in sensitive areas.
The industry apparently has the White House in its corner. On May 5, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu picked seven experts to find the "best practices for safe and responsible natural gas production." Chu's advisory board began meeting this week and has 90 days to find "immediate steps that can be taken to improve the safety and environmental performance of hydraulic fracturing." The advisory board also has the next six months to develop "advice" for fracking regulators. Environmentalists claim Chu's advisory board is stacked with industry insiders, and they're probably right. Six of the seven board members have professional and financial ties to the petroleum industry. Two of the Chu panelists have had business ties with fracking industry heavy-weight Schlumberger Ltd., including panel chairman John Deutch, who has served on the Schlumberger Board of Directors.
I've heard Obama say on several occasions that he is committed to making decisions based on what's best for the American people as a whole regardless of pressure from interest groups. When it comes to energy policy in general and fracking in particular, Obama could have the green wing of the Democratic Party seeing red in November 2012.
Like most of the presidents since Richard Nixon, Obama sees the wisdom in boosting domestic energy sources and reducing U.S. reliance on foreign sources of oil. He has embraced not only environmentalist-friendly renewable energy industries, but also energy industries that are the bane of environmentalists, including coal, nuclear and fracking.
In the eyes of environmentally minded Democrats and independent voters, clean coal is an oxymoron, nuclear looks scarier than ever after Fukushima, and fracking seems like a classic case of a new industry raping Mother Nature before regulators and the public figure out what's going on.
Unless the Republicans pick a fatally flawed nominee in 2012, Obama is going to need every vote he can get to win a second term. If the Illinois Democrat decides to back fracking, he risks a significant chunk of his base staying home on Election Day.
Fracking like there's no tomorrow (7/7/11)
The world is running out of cost-effective and safe sources of fossil fuels. It's hard to imagine a more important challenge for every man, woman and child on the planet.
Cheap energy, mainly in the form of coal, oil and natural gas, powered the Industrial Revolution in general and U.S. economy in particular. In a live-by-the-sword, die-by-the-sword twist, the United States' reliance on fossil fuels bears unsustainable costs and unthinkable risks in the 21st century.
The unsustainable costs include environmental damage from coal-fired power plants. Coal, which fuels the majority of the U.S. electricity supply, remains a widespread energy source in industrial countries around the world. But coal's environmental costs such as acid rain, greenhouse gas emissions and mining impacts are barely bearable now. A new spike in air pollution is highly likely if China and India follow in the U.S. economy's coal footsteps.
There are sure signs that the petroleum industry is taking greater risks in its quest for new sources of oil and natural gas. The 2010 Deepwater Horizon rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico was a nightmare risk that became a reality. The industry continues to lobby to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, one of the most environmentally fragile federally protected wilderness areas in the United States. And oil companies want to drill off the coasts of California and Florida, two of the most productive fisheries in U.S. waters.
Fracking seems like a desperate measure for desperate times. This trailer from the award-winning documentary "Gasland" highlights most of the fracking danger signs ...
Fracking could not stand up to scrutiny under the federal Clean Water Act, so Congress and President George W. Bush exempted fracking from the nation's most important water protection law in 2005.
Fracking waste lagoon in Pennsylvania /Flickr image
No comments:
Post a Comment