7 replies to this topic

[Joker]

Obama’s EPA Shuts Down Damning Fracking Study

 

More here

http://www.counterpu...mination-study/

 

The Associated Press has a breaking investigative story out today revealing that the Obama Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) censored a smoking gun scientific report in March 2012 that it had contracted out to a scientist who conducted field data on 32 water samples in Weatherford, TX.

 

That report, according to the AP, would have explicitly linked methane migration to hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in Weatherford, a city with 25,000+ citizens located in the heart of the Barnett Shale geologic formation 30 minutes from Dallas.

 

It was authored by Geoffrey Thyne, a geologist formerly on the faculty of the Colorado School of Mines and University of Wyoming before departing from the latter for a job in the private sector working for Interralogic Inc. in Ft Collins, CO.

 

This isn’t the first time Thyne’s scientific research has been shoved aside, either. Thyne wrote two landmark studies on groundwater contamination in Garfield County, CO, the first showing that it existed, the second confirming that the contamination was directly linked to fracking in the area.

 

It’s the second study that got him in trouble.

 

“Thyne says he was told to cease his research by higher-ups. He didn’t,”The Checks and Balances Project explained. ”And when it came to renew his contract, Thyne was cut loose.”

[Jabadoodle]

* I'm not at all for fracking; I think it should be stopped in it's tracks.

 

* I'm not surprised that government is acting in in the interest of business. It will until the money gets out of politics.

 

* I'm not surprised that government is acting in the interest of progress-traps. It will until the people change their values.

 

* I won't debate you on it here, but I'm still glad we got Obama over McCain or Romney. 

A thought for anti-frackers: It's great to be against fracking; I am. Still, energy is needed. Shouldn't at least as much personal effort be put toward supporting whatever energy future you think is viable as you put toward anti-fracking? That is to say, so long as all that energy is below our feet and until there is a replacement there is going to be a continuing and powerful pressure to frack. 

[little frog]

A similar dispute unfolded in west-central Wyoming in late 2011, when the EPA released an initial report that showed hydraulic fracturing could have contaminated groundwater. After industry and GOP leaders went on the attack, the agency said it had decided to do more testing. It has yet to announce a final conclusion.

 

Range Resources, a leading independent player in the natural gas boom, has hundreds of gas wells throughout Texas, Pennsylvania and other mineral-rich areas of the United States. Among them is a production site — now owned by Legend Natural Gas — in a wooded area about a mile from Lipsky's home in Weatherford, about a half-hour drive west of Fort Worth.

State agencies usually regulate water and air pollution, so the EPA's involvement in the Texas matter was unusual from the start. The EPA began investigating complaints about the methane in December 2010, because it said the Texas Railroad Commission, which oversees oil and gas drilling, had not responded quickly enough to the reports of bubbling water.

Government scientists believed two families, including the Lipskys, were in danger from methane and cancer-causing benzene and ordered Range Resources to take steps to clean their water wells and provide affected homeowners with safe water. The company stopped doing that after state regulators declared in March 2011 that Range Resources was not responsible. The dispute between the EPA and the company then moved into federal court.

Believing the case was headed for a lengthy legal battle, the EPA asked an independent scientist named Geoffrey Thyne to analyze water samples taken from 32 water wells. In the report obtained by the AP, Thyne concluded from chemical testing that the gas in the drinking water could have originated from Range Resources' nearby drilling operation.

Meanwhile, the EPA was seeking industry leaders to participate in a national study into hydraulic fracturing. Range Resources told EPA officials in Washington that so long as the agency continued to pursue a "scientifically baseless" action against the company in Weatherford, it would not take part in the study and would not allow government scientists onto its drilling sites, said company attorney David Poole.

 

 

this seems like a battle between GOPs and big industry against the EPA .. maybe you should reread this article, if you've even read it in the first place.

[Joker]

* I'm not at all for fracking; I think it should be stopped in it's tracks.

I agree, it should be stopped until we know more about the dangers it poses

* I'm not surprised that government is acting in in the interest of business. It will until the money gets out of politics.

 

* I'm not surprised that government is acting in the interest of progress-traps. It will until the people change their values.

I too, am not surprised. 

* I won't debate you on it here, but I'm still glad we got Obama over McCain or Romney.

There's no need to debate.  As you probably know I would have preferred a third party candidate but out of the three you mention, Obama is probably the lesser of the evils

A thought for anti-frackers: It's great to be against fracking; I am. Still, energy is needed. Shouldn't at least as much personal effort be put toward supporting whatever energy future you think is viable as you put toward anti-fracking? That is to say, so long as all that energy is below our feet and until there is a replacement there is going to be a continuing and powerful pressure to frack. 

 

I believe whatever energy future we do have it should be what is safest. I'd prefer wind and solar although I'm not sure if they are feasible solutions on their own. 

[TEO]

Conservation should be a revived concept as well.

[Joker]

this seems like a battle between GOPs and big industry against the EPA .. maybe you should reread this article, if you've even read it in the first place.

I have read it. Why should I read it again? What do you think I missed?

 

Are you suggesting the EPA didn't shut down the study?

 

Due to the grave health concerns associated with the presence of methane and benzene in drinking water, the Obama EPA “ordered Range…to take steps to clean their water wells and provide affected homeowners with safe water,” wrote the AP.

 

Range’s response? It “threatened not to cooperate” with the Obama EPA’s study on fracking’s link to water contamination. The non-cooperation lead to the Obama EPA suing Range Resources.

It was during this phase of the struggle where things got interesting. As the AP explained,

 

Believing the case was headed for a lengthy legal battle, the Obama EPA asked an independent scientist named Geoffrey Thyne to analyze water samples taken from 32 water wells. In the report obtained by the AP, Thyne concluded from chemical testing that the gas in the drinking water could have originated from Range Resources’ nearby drilling operation.

 

Despite this smoking gun, everything was soon shut down, with the Obama EPA reversing its emergency order, terminating the court battle and censoring Thyne’s report. The AP explained that the Obama EPA has “refused to answer questions about the decision.”

 

“I just can’t believe that an agency that knows the truth about something like that, or has evidence like this, wouldn’t use it,” Lipsky, who now pays $1,000 a month to have water hauled to his family’s house, told the AP.

 

[Joker]

 

Obama officials delay ‘fracking’ rules

More here

http://thehill.com/b...-plans-revision

 

The Interior Department is delaying planned rules that would impose new requirements on the controversial oil-and-gas production method called hydraulic fracturing.

Interior said Friday that it will float a new version of draft rules first issued last May and take new comments on the proposal that will govern “fracking” on public lands.

“In response to comments from stakeholders and the public, the [Bureau of Land Management] is making improvements to the draft proposal in order to maximize flexibility, facilitate coordination with state practices and ensure that operators on public lands implement best practices,” Interior spokesman Blake Androff said Friday.

The decision to issue another draft, which is expected to surface in the first quarter of this year, marks a significant delay in the plan. Interior initially floated the draft rules last May, and had earlier intended to finalize them by the end of 2012, although that timeline had already slipped.
 

 

“The agency intends to publish a new draft proposal in the first quarter of this year and will seek additional comments," Androff said. "Once comments on the updated draft have been collected and analyzed, the BLM expects to issue a final rule that will ensure that operators apply proven cost-effective safety and environmental protection processes when engaging in hydraulic fracturing on our public lands,” he said.

 

Interior did not provide a new timeline for finalizing the rules.

The American Petroleum Institute (API), a powerful petroleum industry lobbying group that has attacked the rules, praised the decision to pull back the earlier plan.

“API asked the administration to reconsider the rules, and we welcome this move as a positive first step,” said API President Jack Gerard in a statement. “However, the real test will be in the substance of the re-proposal. We hope the administration will recognize the strong oversight provided by existing state and federal regulations and take sufficient time to review the many thoughtful comments provided by the oil and natural gas industry and others.”

[Joker]

I have read it. Why should I read it again? What do you think I missed?

 

Are you suggesting the EPA didn't shut down the study?

LF?