EC

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

2254 discussions

Fwd: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] FYI: New Study Supports Water Contamination Due to Fracking
by Jim Sconyers 03 Oct '12

03 Oct '12

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Deb Nardone" <deb.nardone(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Oct 3, 2012 10:25 AM Subject: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] FYI: New Study Supports Water Contamination Due to Fracking To: <ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS(a)lists.sierraclub.org> http://action.sierraclub.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=254646.0 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 3, 2012 Contacts: Maggie Kao, Sierra Club, 202-675-2384 Bruce Baizel, Earthworks, 970-259-3353 x2 *New Study Supports Water Contamination Due to Fracking* *U.S. Geological Survey Verifies EPA Findings in Pavillion, WY* Pavillion, WY -- An independent analysis of new U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) water monitoring data verifies a 2011 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) investigation into whether hydraulic fracturing contaminated the Wind River aquifer near Pavillion, Wyoming - an important groundwater source that provides water to thousands of Wyoming residents and farmers. The preliminary results of EPA’s study was one of the first to document hydrocarbons consistent with fracking fluid chemicals in drinking water wells and monitoring wells located near natural gas wells. EPA’s preliminary results have since been attacked by the oil and gas industry, as they seek to continue their dangerous practices and protect their own interests over public health and safety. USGS’s study was conducted specifically to check EPA’s results. The Sierra Club, Earthworks, and the Natural Resources Defense Council worked with a hydrologist and independent expert, Dr. Tom Myers, to analyze the USGS raw data and compare those results with the original EPA report. Dr. Myers found that the USGS data support EPA's initial findings. EPA’s analysis should be widely accepted now that its findings have been replicated. The USGS report found that thermogenic gas, which very likely comes from fracked deep shale formations, continues to increase in a monitoring well. This evidence strongly suggests that as a result of fracking, gas is seeping into Pavillion’s water. A range of chemicals associated with the fracking process also continue to appear in the monitoring well, showing that hazardous pollution is spreading towards the surface. This new information supports EPA’s hypothesis that natural gas drilling activities, including fracking, have contaminated the Wind River aquifer near Pavillion. Read Dr. Myers’ analysis here<http://www.sierraclub.org/pressroom/downloads/myers-tech-memo-093012.pdf> . View the U.S. Geological Survey’s data here<http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3410#.UGoCok25SgY> . “The Sierra Club is concerned by the U.S. Geological Survey’s important conclusions, which further underline EPA’s report that fracking has contaminated Pavillion’s water,” said *Deb Nardone, Sierra Club Beyond Natural Gas campaign director*. “This report raises the alarm on the public health threats posed by dirty and dangerous fracking and the need to rein in a oil and gas industry that remains unchecked and unaccountable for their toxic pollution.” “Dr. Myers’ analysis shows that the USGS upholds EPA’s preliminary conclusion that hydraulic fracturing contaminated Pavillion-area groundwater,” said *Bruce Baizel, Earthworks’ Oil & Gas Accountability Project Senior Staff Attorney*.” He continued, “It’s long past time for states and industry to stop denying oil and gas development’s environmental problems, and start working on fixing them.” “This reinforces EPA’s findings – and the concerns of Americans in communities across the country – that dangerous fracking practices are putting our drinking water and health at risk,” said *NRDC senior policy analyst Amy Mall*. “That’s why it’s critical that EPA thoroughly investigate reports of fracking water contamination concerns. It’s essential that we protect Americans from a repeat of what we are seeing in Wyoming.” ### -- Deborah J. Nardone, Director Beyond Natural Gas Campaign Sierra Club O: 814-308-9767 C: 814-932-6668 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This email list is associated with the Hydrofracking Team on the Sierra Club's Activist Network. Join the Hydrofracking Team at http://sc.org/frac. This list is open to the public and subscribers are not moderated. Please be aware that information you share may be forwarded to or read by others beyond this list. To unsubscribe from the ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS list, send any message to: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Re: [EC] EarthWorks report "Breaking All The Rules"
by Frank Young 02 Oct '12

02 Oct '12

It's worth than that, Beth. The law does require one thing of DEP- that it issue permits if the applicants have simply jumped through the paperwork hoops, but which hoops are very, very low. To not issue a permit immediately puts the burden on DEP to show that it was prudent to deny the permit. And usually DEP is too paralyzed by inertia and too bound by political pressure to make realistic findings of relative prudency. Frank Young ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elizabeth Little" <blittle(a)citynet.net> To: "James Kotcon" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> Cc: <ec(a)osenergy.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 8:07 PM Subject: Re: [EC] EarthWorks report "Breaking All The Rules" It sounds like WV, but they didn't include WV. If it's this bad elsewhere, imagine how bad it is here. Example: Antero and Halls Drilling have had violation, accident, spill, etc. one after another, starting with the spill in Buckeye Run that Louanne discovered, and the DEP just lets them keep going. The really frustrating thing is that there is nothing we can legally do. When we had that call with several lawyers about filing an action to make the DEP do what the law says, it came out that the regulations don't require the DEP to do anything. The language is all that they "may" inspect or "may" require thus and so. Arrrrgh! If ever there was a timely report to justify our Moratorium call, here it is. Caution, 3 MB, about 150 pages. http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/breaking_all_the_rules_the_c… JBK ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Septoff ( mailto:aseptoff@earthworksaction.org ) To: cog Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 1:39 PM Subject: [COG] Earthworks' response to John Hanger re our enforcement report http://www.earthworksaction.org/earthblog/detail/public_health_isnt_a_numbe… Public health isnâ?Tt a numbers game - a response to John Hanger By Nadia Steinzor ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/earthblog/byauthor/8 ) September 28, 2012 This post was co-authored with Alan Septoff ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/earthblog/byauthor/10 ). The most fundamental truth uncovered in Earthworksâ?T just-released report Breaking All the Rules: the Crisis in Oil & Gas Regulation ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/breaking_all_the_rules_the_c… ), is that states are falling tragically short in enforcing their own oil and gas development rules. It is good to see that John Hanger ( http://johnhanger.blogspot.com/2012/09/reviewing-earthworks-report-ripping.… ), ex-Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), does not argue that truth. As a result of this inadequate enforcementâ?"a problem in all of the six states we reviewedâ?"Breaking All the Rules concludes that so many problems with oil and gas development are left undiscovered, undocumented and unresolved, the public cannot have confidence that their health, air, and water are being protected. Again, John Hanger does not argue against that conclusion. As a former regulator, he knows how complicated it is to oversee an industry based on a â?odrill and permit now, figure out how to oversee laterâ? approach. Even with an increase in the number of inspectors and improved reporting and data protocolsâ?"facts that Earthworks acknowledges in the report. John Hanger also argues that we should not have looked at all producing wells, since it is primarily shale gas wells â?othat are the focus of attention and concern.â? However, all active wells require oversight. Production may be minimal, but potential contamination issues still exist from produced water and leaks, especially since the older equipment at these sites may be more prone to corrosion and failure. And when the DEP wrote its recommended inspection policyâ?"still the basis for current activitiesâ?"shale gas wells did not even exist. John Hangerâ?Ts response to the report is also based on the idea that because DEP increased its enforcement efforts from 2010 to 2011, our use of 2010 data skews the results so much that the report isnâ?Tt useful. As we stated on on page 23 of the full report, because 2011 data were not available for all statesâ?"and Earthworks wanted to do a comparable analysis across six statesâ?"we relied primarily on 2010 data. (For example, DEPâ?Ts 2011 data on wells, permits, and other aspects were not completely available to the public until July 2012.) Nonetheless, we did include 2011 data where available -- in the full report within table A6-1 and in the Pennsylvania-specific report prominently on page 2 ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/enforcement_report_pa_dep ): "In 2010 DEP failed to inspect more than 82,000 or 91 percent of active wells. In 2011, more than 66,000 active wells (86 percent) did not receive DEP oversight." But even if the numbers shift a bit in some months, the key question that was the impetus to this research remains: "Can the public have confidence that their health, air and water are being protected?â? Citing different numbers does not even begin to answer this question because the Pennsylvania DEP addressed its enforcement inadequacies in the same manner that allowed the problem to develop in the first place: DEP looked at the amount of drilling as something outside their control, and defined their ability to govern that drilling in terms of the limited resources available to them. We hope that anyone who reads Breaking All the Rulesâ?"including regulators and policymakersâ?"takes away the core lesson learned from an in-depth analysis of regulatory agenciesâ?T own data: Right now, states take the amount of drilling as given, and then figure out how they can best do their jobs with scarce resources available. That equation must be reversed. The amount of drilling that takes place should be contingent upon what resource strapped state agencies can safely regulate -- ensuring that public health and the environment are fully protected as top priority. If a state enforcement agency can't guarantee that the next proposal for a well, compressor station, or other facility will not cause harm (and that it will be properly overseen during construction and operation), they shouldn't permit it. Plain and simple. In the end, protecting communities isn't a numbers game, and solutions to very real and very serious problems in the gas patches of the United States wonâ?Tt be found comparing one yearâ?Ts marginally improved inspection and enforcement performance to another. (Though any meaningful improvement would be welcome.) What it will require from regulatory agencies is that they revisit their rules in a public and transparent manner to determine what constitutes enforcement that credibly protects the public and the environmentâ?"and then allow only the amount of development that meets that strong enforcement standard. And no more. A continued rush to drill without such change will continue to harm communities and result in even more violations and problems on the groundâ?"a scenario that the regulatory agencies themselves should want to avoid. _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

1 1

EarthWorks report "Breaking All The Rules"
by James Kotcon 02 Oct '12

02 Oct '12

If ever there was a timely report to justify our Moratorium call, here it is. Caution, 3 MB, about 150 pages. http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/breaking_all_the_rules_the_c… JBK ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Septoff ( mailto:aseptoff@earthworksaction.org ) To: cog Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 1:39 PM Subject: [COG] Earthworks' response to John Hanger re our enforcement report http://www.earthworksaction.org/earthblog/detail/public_health_isnt_a_numbe… Public health isn’t a numbers game - a response to John Hanger By Nadia Steinzor ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/earthblog/byauthor/8 ) September 28, 2012 This post was co-authored with Alan Septoff ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/earthblog/byauthor/10 ). The most fundamental truth uncovered in Earthworks’ just-released report Breaking All the Rules: the Crisis in Oil & Gas Regulation ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/breaking_all_the_rules_the_c… ), is that states are falling tragically short in enforcing their own oil and gas development rules. It is good to see that John Hanger ( http://johnhanger.blogspot.com/2012/09/reviewing-earthworks-report-ripping.… ), ex-Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), does not argue that truth. As a result of this inadequate enforcement—a problem in all of the six states we reviewed—Breaking All the Rules concludes that so many problems with oil and gas development are left undiscovered, undocumented and unresolved, the public cannot have confidence that their health, air, and water are being protected. Again, John Hanger does not argue against that conclusion. As a former regulator, he knows how complicated it is to oversee an industry based on a “drill and permit now, figure out how to oversee later” approach. Even with an increase in the number of inspectors and improved reporting and data protocols—facts that Earthworks acknowledges in the report. John Hanger also argues that we should not have looked at all producing wells, since it is primarily shale gas wells “that are the focus of attention and concern.” However, all active wells require oversight. Production may be minimal, but potential contamination issues still exist from produced water and leaks, especially since the older equipment at these sites may be more prone to corrosion and failure. And when the DEP wrote its recommended inspection policy—still the basis for current activities—shale gas wells did not even exist. John Hanger’s response to the report is also based on the idea that because DEP increased its enforcement efforts from 2010 to 2011, our use of 2010 data skews the results so much that the report isn’t useful. As we stated on on page 23 of the full report, because 2011 data were not available for all states—and Earthworks wanted to do a comparable analysis across six states—we relied primarily on 2010 data. (For example, DEP’s 2011 data on wells, permits, and other aspects were not completely available to the public until July 2012.) Nonetheless, we did include 2011 data where available -- in the full report within table A6-1 and in the Pennsylvania-specific report prominently on page 2 ( http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/enforcement_report_pa_dep ): "In 2010 DEP failed to inspect more than 82,000 or 91 percent of active wells. In 2011, more than 66,000 active wells (86 percent) did not receive DEP oversight." But even if the numbers shift a bit in some months, the key question that was the impetus to this research remains: "Can the public have confidence that their health, air and water are being protected?” Citing different numbers does not even begin to answer this question because the Pennsylvania DEP addressed its enforcement inadequacies in the same manner that allowed the problem to develop in the first place: DEP looked at the amount of drilling as something outside their control, and defined their ability to govern that drilling in terms of the limited resources available to them. We hope that anyone who reads Breaking All the Rules—including regulators and policymakers—takes away the core lesson learned from an in-depth analysis of regulatory agencies’ own data: Right now, states take the amount of drilling as given, and then figure out how they can best do their jobs with scarce resources available. That equation must be reversed. The amount of drilling that takes place should be contingent upon what resource strapped state agencies can safely regulate -- ensuring that public health and the environment are fully protected as top priority. If a state enforcement agency can't guarantee that the next proposal for a well, compressor station, or other facility will not cause harm (and that it will be properly overseen during construction and operation), they shouldn't permit it. Plain and simple. In the end, protecting communities isn't a numbers game, and solutions to very real and very serious problems in the gas patches of the United States won’t be found comparing one year’s marginally improved inspection and enforcement performance to another. (Though any meaningful improvement would be welcome.) What it will require from regulatory agencies is that they revisit their rules in a public and transparent manner to determine what constitutes enforcement that credibly protects the public and the environment—and then allow only the amount of development that meets that strong enforcement standard. And no more. A continued rush to drill without such change will continue to harm communities and result in even more violations and problems on the ground—a scenario that the regulatory agencies themselves should want to avoid.

1 0

Fwd: WVNS story: Fracking Waste Disposal Wells Harbor Hidden Concerns
by Paul Wilson 02 Oct '12

02 Oct '12

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Public News Service <wvns(a)newsservice.org> Date: Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:51 AM Subject: WVNS story: Fracking Waste Disposal Wells Harbor Hidden Concerns To: PaulWilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> Fracking Waste Disposal Wells Harbor Hidden Concerns Dan Heyman, Public News Service-WV http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/28646-1 Join the discussion: facebook.com/PublicNewsService<http://www.facebook.com/PublicNewsService> Twitter: @pns_news <http://twitter.com/#!/pns_news> @pns_WV<http://twitter.com/#!/pns_WV> Google+: plus.to/publicnewsservice <http://plus.google.com/106260479325451709866> (10/01/12) CHARLESTON, W.Va. - A loophole that lets oil and gas drillers dispose of their waste in loosely regulated injection wells is drawing criticism. When billions of gallons of used fracking fluid and the salty brine that comes up with natural gas are injected into disposal wells, some fear states like West Virginia could be setting themselves up for serious problems. Although the fracking fluid and brine may contain serious pollutants, the industry got a federal exemption from the strict rules that regulate the injection of hazardous waste. Evan Hanson, president of Downstream Strategies, a water science and policy consulting firm, is studying what are known as Class II wells. "There's been a series of exemptions related to the oil and gas industry. One of the important exemptions related to the Class II wells is the assertion that these fluids are not hazardous." West Virginia has nearly 800 Class II wells. They are supposed to be regularly pressure-tested for leaks. According to an investigation by ProPublica, Class II wells in the state failed these tests more than 80 times from 2008 to 2010. Seven of the failures were determined to be serious. Hanson says even the brine can contain natural toxins, such as arsenic and radioactive minerals. The public does not always know what is actually in the fracking fluids, he warns. "There's more and more information out there. In some cases, companies are voluntarily disclosing the ingredients in fracking fluids. But I'm not confident that we have as much information as we need." The industry contends that the brine and fracking fluids are largely safe, and that the wells go deep enough to protect drinking water, but Hanson says the wells can leak if poorly constructed. He adds that a lack of inspectors can leave drillers on the honor system about their construction methods and what they're injecting. Then there's the issue of seismic events, he says. Class I disposal wells that handle hazardous waste are required to carefully consider the area's geology. But the oil and gas disposal wells are much less regulated. A study by the National Academies of Science linked the Class II wells to minor earthquakes, which Hanson says have been an issue here. "Regarding small earthquakes or seismic events around some of these injection wells, there's been a case documented in Ohio, a situation documented in the Flatwoods area." Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/28646-1<http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/28646-1> --- To be removed from this list please send an e-mail to remove(a)publicnewsservice.org <remove(a)publicnewsservice.org?subject=remove>and put the word "remove" in the subject line. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Fwd: Genetics Seminar Oct. 2 on gas well microbes
by James Kotcon 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

Just an FYI. There were some claims made at Marcellus Academy, so I will see if any microbiologists can verify them. JBK >>> Dan Panaccione 10/1/2012 10:30 AM >>> Genetics Seminar October 2, 2012 * 3:30 PM * 1085 Ag. Sci. Bldg. Bacterial communities associated with hydraulic fracturing fluids in thermogenic natural gas wells in North Central Texas, USA presented by Yael Tucker Since we have no plant path./ env. micro. seminar this week, students are required and others are encouraged to attend the Genetics seminar presented by Yael. Daniel Panaccione Professor West Virginia University (304)293-8819 danpan(a)wvu.edu

1 0

Energy Plan Hearing Comments are available
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

The public comments for the energy plan hearings are now available online at http://www.wvcommerce.org/energy/energyplan/default.aspx -Jonathan

1 1

Auditor: OO&G Is Not Enforcing Statutory Requirements
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

Here's an interesting report from West Virginia Legislative Auditor: "The Office of Oil and Gas Is Not Enforcing Statutory Requirements as They Concern Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells Which Is Causing the Number of Abandoned Wells to Increase" http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Joint/PERD/perdrep/Oilgas_9_2012.pdf -Jonathan

1 0

Fwd: [Coal Volunteers List] Stop the Madness! Stop the War on Coal Act Passes the House
by Paul Wilson 28 Sep '12

28 Sep '12

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Angela Garrone <angela(a)cleanenergy.org> Date: Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:16 AM Subject: [Coal Volunteers List] Stop the Madness! Stop the War on Coal Act Passes the House To: coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org Morning, In honor of the week anniversary of the passing of the Stop the War on Coal Act in the House of Representatives, I wanted to share a Southern Alliance for Clean Energy blog on the issue. We should *not* have bills like this seeing the light of day. <http://goog_68105562> http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2012/09/28/stop-the-madness-house-passes-stop-t… Share it loud and proud(ly)! Cheers, Angela -- *Angela Garrone | Southeast Energy Research Attorney* *Southern Alliance for Clean Energy* P.O. Box 1842 Knoxville, TN 37901 angela(a)cleanenergy.org | 865-637-6055 ex. 23 http://www.cleanenergy.org http://blog.cleanenergy.org CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION / WORK PRODUCT: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed, and may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or confidential attorney work product. If you receive this message in error, please send a reply e-mail to the sender and delete the material from any and all computers. Unintended transmissions shall not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege. -- To access the Beyond Coal Campaign Resource Portal, go to: https://sites.google.com/a/sierraclub.org/beyond-coal-resource-portal/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "#Coal-Volunteers" group. To post to this group, send email to coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to coal-volunteers-list+unsubscribe(a)sierraclub.org. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Fwd: Our most ambitious venture yet
by Jim Sconyers 27 Sep '12

27 Sep '12

Dear Friends, We're getting ready for our most ambitious venture yet. >From November 7th to December 3rd, I'll be on the road, visiting 20 cities in 20 nights (with a few days for travel in between) to help bring together the movement we need to make sure this planet has a future that we can all appreciate. *We're calling it the Do the Math tour, but it's not (thank heaven) just going to be me standing in front of a microphone.* The goal is to jump-start the kind of movement that I discussed in the article I wrote for Rolling Stone about the scary new math of climate change. We will bring together musicians, artists and voices from across the movement to work together on directly confronting the financial and political might of the fossil fuel industry. If you are near one of our stops, I want to make sure you’re there with us. *You’re exactly the people we need to be there* -- folks who understand the climate math already, have experience in the movement, and are willing to step up to do more. <http://act.350.org/go/2148?t=1&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> Click to check out the tour and RSVP<http://act.350.org/go/2148?t=2&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> These events will need to be big, and reach beyond our normal circle of friends. *That’s why we need to make sure that everyone knows that something big is underway. Can you take a moment to share the Do the Math tour site with your social networks?* <http://act.350.org/go/2157?t=3&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> <http://act.350.org/go/2144?t=4&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> Click to share on Facebook<http://act.350.org/go/2157?t=5&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> Click to share on Twitter <http://act.350.org/go/2144?t=6&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> *Also, just a heads up -- we’re going to be putting together a live web event* so that everyone who doesn’t happen to be near a tour stop can still get together and get a campaign started in their community. Our team is still hammering out the details for the exact date and time, but please keep an eye out -- we absolutely need you in this fight. I do a lot of talks to big groups, but this is a new kind of undertaking for me, and for 350.org. We’re trying to quickly build up some serious momentum, which is why we’ve gone to great lengths to make this a very different kind of event. Not only will we have music and guests like Naomi Klein, Jim Hansen, Desmond Tutu, in person and via video, this event is also the kickoff to some serious organizing in your community. *This tour will launch our next big mission -- a campaign to directly confront the economic power of the fossil fuel industry.* Our message will be crystal clear: it's not OK to sacrifice our future for the sake of one industry’s bottom line. Divestment is one important tool that we'll discuss, but we're ready for many other tactics as well. *Over the past few months our planet gave stark warning signs that humans have never seen before.* The Arctic melted, breaking every record. The Great Plains sweltered. The West burned. This roadshow is the next big step -- but the price of admission, besides the ticket, is a willingness to really go to work to change the world in the year ahead. That’s why we need you this November. The stakes have never been this high, and I've never been more serious. Please join us: math.350.org<http://act.350.org/go/2148?t=7&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> --Bill McKibben for 350.org ------------------------------ 350.org is building a global movement to solve the climate crisis. Connect with us on Facebook <http://facebook.com/350.org> and Twitter<http://twitter.com/350>, and sign up for email alerts <http://350.org/signup?akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh>. You can help power our work by getting involved locally, sharing your story<http://local.350.org/stories/?akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh>, and donating here. <http://350.org/donate?akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> ** *To stop receiving emails from 350.org, click here.<http://act.350.org/cms/unsubscribe/unsubscribe/?t=8&akid=2200.570617.6tuyMh> * * * -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fwd: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Should the U.S. Export Natural Gas?
by Jim Sconyers 23 Sep '12

23 Sep '12

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: david Meiser <dhmeiser(a)comcast.net> Date: Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 7:22 PM Subject: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Should the U.S. Export Natural Gas? To: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS(a)lists.sierraclub.org Should the U.S. Export Natural Gas?<http://ecowatch.org/2012/u-s-export-natural-gas/> **** *http://ecowatch.org/2012/u-s-export-natural-gas/* * * 09-23-2012**** Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy <http://catskillcitizens.org/>**** By Bruce Ferguson**** [image: http://ecowatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/LNGpoints.png]<http://ecowatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/LNGpoints.png>Should the U.S. export natural gas?**** The answer depends on what you think about hydrofracking.**** Historically, the U.S. has had to supplement domestic natural gas production with imports, but now the extensive use of hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale could allow America to become a gas exporter. A recent article in Barron’<http://online.barrons.com/article/SB500014240527487047597045772673709390831…>s suggested that the U.S. could become the world’s largest exporter of gas by 2017.**** But let’s be clear. When we’re talking about natural gas exports, we’re talking about shale gas.**** That is, we’re talking about fracking. So let’s reframe the question: Should the U.S. be fracked to supply foreign nations with gas?**** The objections to fracking are legion, and each one needs to be weighed in the balance if the U.S. is to develop a prudent gas export policy.**** We know, for example, that fracking even a single shale gas well requires millions of gallons of fracking fluid, and produces huge quantities of toxic wastewater<http://ecowatch.org/2012/the-water-footprint-of-shale-gas-development/> .**** All of this fluid has to be transported, usually by truck, and that means hundreds of diesel trucks going to and from each well pad. The exhaust from these trucks combines with the methane and volatile organic compounds released into the atmosphere during the extraction process to produce ozone. **** It’s no exaggeration to say that, because of fracking, some rural communities have higher ozone levels than Los Angeles on a bad day.**** Developing a giant shale formation like the Marcellus will entail injecting hundreds of billions of gallons of toxic fluid underground<http://ecowatch.org/2012/meet-the-frack-family/>, and no one can say with any certainty how this might impact our drinking water supplies in the years and decades to come.**** We do know that a recent geochemical study conducted in northeastern Pennsylvania found naturally occurring pathways between underground shale formations and shallow drinking water aquifers. The fact that the industry insists that fracking be exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act is not reassuring.**** And of course there are other issues to consider, including the recent peer-reviewed studies<http://ecowatch.org/2012/natural-gas-from-shale-not-suitable-as-bridge-fuel…>that indicate that shale gas is, from a greenhouse gas perspective, worse than oil or coal. Health care professionals say we don’t know what effect fracking will have on human health, while economists worry that disruptive extraction activity might damage local economies by crowding out long-term sustainable businesses like agriculture and tourism.**** Right now the U.S. doesn’t have the infrastructure it needs to become a major gas exporter. Canada and Mexico don’t need our gas, and the liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals that will be necessary to tap lucrative markets in Europe and Asia have not yet been built.**** Constructing the eleven huge LNG export terminals now on the drawing boards will cost more than $100 billion.**** Tens of billions more will be needed to build pipelines to bring the gas to the coastal terminals. Should the U.S. pour this kind of money into fossil fuel infrastructure at a time when scientists warn that we are already suffering the adverse impacts of climate change?**** The Obama administration has held up licensing export terminals until after the election. This winter, when licensing is again on the table, scientists, health care professionals and concerned citizens who oppose fracking may find themselves allied with manufacturers who realize that competition with foreign markets will drive up costs for both American industry and consumers.**** Finally consider this: If the U.S. does export shale gas, it will be supplying countries like France that have already banned fracking because it’s too dangerous.**** Is the U.S. on its way to becoming an energy extraction colony for other nations?**** Are we the new Third World?**** ** ** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This email list is associated with the Hydrofracking Team on the Sierra Club's Activist Network. Join the Hydrofracking Team at http://sc.org/frac. This list is open to the public and subscribers are not moderated. Please be aware that information you share may be forwarded to or read by others beyond this list. To unsubscribe from the ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS list, send any message to: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/ -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC