6:01 PM, Nov. 17, 2011
Gov. Jack Markell said late today that Delaware will vote against a regional agency plan to allow a controversial type of deep shale-gas drilling in the Delaware River watershed, citing unsettled and inadequate terms for state and local environmental safeguards and insufficient public review of recently amended regulatory proposals.
The letter, sent to the governors of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York and the Army Corps of Engineers, emerged just ahead of Monday’s Delaware River Basin Commission vote on new regulations to allow the use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to develop natural gas wells across the northern and northwestern tier of the 13,000-acre watershed.
Fracking allows well-drillers to break previously inaccessible natural gas free of deep shale beds by using high-pressure injections of water, chemicals and sand. Vast amounts of gas are believed to be trapped under a 50,000 square mile stone layer below Pennsylvania and New York and similar deposits around the eastern United States.
Drilling advocates see the gas as an untapped source of wealth and reliable, cleaner-burning domestic energy. Critics see the drilling practice as a threat to groundwater and air quality, and as a potential source of spills, runoff and aquifer pollution that could eventually contaminate the Delaware River itself.'
“This risk is a significant concern for Delaware and therefore, until we have confidence that the Commission's Natural Gas Development Regulations, coupled with the state and local regulations upon which they rely, are adequately protective of this water supply, I have a duty to current and future generations of Delawareans to vote no,” Markell said in a letter sent during a stopover in Kuwait, during his return trip from visiting Delaware troops stationed in Afghanistan.
Continue reading...
Showing posts with label API promotes fracking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label API promotes fracking. Show all posts
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Coffee Hour: Managing Marcellus: a Panel Discussion - is it fracked?
Time: November 11, 2011 - 3:30pm - 5:00pm
Place: Refreshments in 319 Walker at 3:30 p.m., Discussion in 112 Walker at 4:00
URL: HERE
URL: HERE
This week's Department of Geography Coffee Hour will be a panel on "Managing Marcellus" with a variety of perspectives from professionals on all sides of the issues. The panelists are:
• Jim Richenderfer, director of technical programs, for the Susquehanna River BasinCommission (SRBC)
• Bruce Snyder, Range Resources (company that employs man who called for Counter Insurgency Operations on the public and called them 'Insurgents.' Post can be found HERE
• Kathy Brasier, associate professor of rural sociology, Penn State
• Discussion Facilitator: James R. Grace, Goddard Chair in the School of Forest Resources, Penn State.
Dr. Grace sets the context for the panel:
"The development of natural gas contained within the geologic formation called Marcellus shale will likely prove to be one of the most significant events in Pennsylvania history. The actions associated with this phenomenon will impact our citizens and communities economically, ecologically, socially, and politically.
"At this point in time, the discussion should not be focused on whether we should have Marcellus gas development within Pennsylvania—that horse is out of the barn. The more pertinent questions revolve around how we can manage the gas development activities in a manner which preserves our environmental quality of life and deals with our social needs while providing economic benefits to our citizens and bolsters our supply of clean energy.
"The panel assembled contains three professionals, working in the Marcellus arena. They will give their views from the industry, social, and environmental/water, perspectives on the challenges and issues involved with Marcellus gas development. Hopefully a vigorous question and discussion period will follow."
Coffee Hour is also webcast live. The URL will be posted on the event web site. For questions, please contact Angela Rogers, geography@psu.edu
...........................................................
QUESTIONS TO ASK THE PANEL
The people need to be present at this meeting. There are a thousand questions one could ask. Some of them are below.
Q: Does the oil and gas industry test for radioactive materials in produced water? If so, how and what is done with radioactive produced water?
Q: One claims that the industry cannot stop its operations, 'Why shouldn't the industry wait until the EPA has finalized its report on whether hydraulic fracturing has the probability of causing adverse environmental and human health impacts?
Q: If the oil and gas industry is free of causing adverse impacts, why do they need full exemptions from the very laws that protect humans and the environment such as; The Clean Water Act, The Safe Drinking Water Act, the Superfund Act, The Clean Air Act et cetera?
Q: Natural Gas is a fossil fuel, how can one assert its clean? Why not invest in healthy energy solutions?
Q: Of the tens of thousands of reported toxic water spills, groundwater contaminations, aquifer contaminations, adverse human health impacts, why do we accept this as Americans at a negative cost benefit to the environment and humans?
Q: Of all of the reported groundwater contaminations, has the industry cleaned them and if so, how?
Q: when drilling and using the process called fracking, how much Naturally Occuring Radioactive Materials (NORM) are accumulated and are their tests to determine the type and amounts of radioactive materials? What are the hazards?
Q: What kind of radioactive tracers are used and what is their half-life?
Q: What can you tell me about Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and would you want a VOC combustor flare by your house so that the invisible emissions waft into your child's bedroom?
QUESTION FOR RANGE RESOURCES: Do you approve of the counter insurgency tactics your colleague, Matt Pitzarella has stated, and was recently recorded and reported on by CNBC that he wants to use on the 'insurgency' (the concerned people)? What does insurgency mean to you?
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Shale Gas Craze Gets Bigger - Companies mixing, matching to get ahead
Ken Silverstein | Oct 24, 2011
EnergyBiz.com
Of all the bets on natural gas so far, nothing tops that of Kinder Morgan. It has bid $21.1 billion on El Paso Corp. in what would become the biggest pipeline operator and the fourth biggest energy company in North America.
The thinking there is that the newfound shale gas supplies will lead to more development and cause the demand for natural gas to escalate. Several factors have inhibited that gas from getting to markets, two of which have been the scarcity of pipelines and the fragmentation of the industry itself. Not only does consolidation give Kinder more resources to expand its network but merging also helps the company provide more seamless coverage.
“We believe that natural gas is going to play an increasingly integral role in North America,” says Richard Kinder, the company’s chief executive in a public statement. “With the recent development of shale resources, there are now abundant domestic supplies of natural gas, which are being used increasingly to generate electricity and are environmentally friendly.”
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 24 trillion cubic feet of natural gas was burned in 2010. And while the associated carbon emissions are more than those tied to alternative energy forms, as well as nuclear, they are still about half those of coal. Coal now supplies about half of the country’s electric generation while natural gas provides about 24 percent. The combination of new shale deposits and stricter environmental controls means that the former is expected to decline while the latter will rise.
Kinder Morgan now operates 37,000 miles but through the acquisition, it would increase that to about 67,000 miles. Kinder and El Paso, generally, operate in disparate areas and Richard Kinder said during a conference call that he did not expect U.S. regulators to object because the two networks were complementary. If they do raise concerns, the company would oblige by selling off properties.
To pay for the proposed cash-and-stock deal that could close by mid 2012, Kinder will borrow about $11.5 billion. To offset that cost, however, Kinder will sell El Paso’s exploration and production business -- a trend that began prior to the announcement of this deal. A combined company would be worth $94 billion.
Power Race...
Continue reading...
EnergyBiz.com
The thinking there is that the newfound shale gas supplies will lead to more development and cause the demand for natural gas to escalate. Several factors have inhibited that gas from getting to markets, two of which have been the scarcity of pipelines and the fragmentation of the industry itself. Not only does consolidation give Kinder more resources to expand its network but merging also helps the company provide more seamless coverage.
“We believe that natural gas is going to play an increasingly integral role in North America,” says Richard Kinder, the company’s chief executive in a public statement. “With the recent development of shale resources, there are now abundant domestic supplies of natural gas, which are being used increasingly to generate electricity and are environmentally friendly.”
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 24 trillion cubic feet of natural gas was burned in 2010. And while the associated carbon emissions are more than those tied to alternative energy forms, as well as nuclear, they are still about half those of coal. Coal now supplies about half of the country’s electric generation while natural gas provides about 24 percent. The combination of new shale deposits and stricter environmental controls means that the former is expected to decline while the latter will rise.
Kinder Morgan now operates 37,000 miles but through the acquisition, it would increase that to about 67,000 miles. Kinder and El Paso, generally, operate in disparate areas and Richard Kinder said during a conference call that he did not expect U.S. regulators to object because the two networks were complementary. If they do raise concerns, the company would oblige by selling off properties.
To pay for the proposed cash-and-stock deal that could close by mid 2012, Kinder will borrow about $11.5 billion. To offset that cost, however, Kinder will sell El Paso’s exploration and production business -- a trend that began prior to the announcement of this deal. A combined company would be worth $94 billion.
Power Race...
Continue reading...
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Sweeping Ruling Suspends All Drilling, Mining, Exploration, Existing and Future Leasing
For Immediate Release, October 19, 2011
Contact:
Hilary White, Sheep Mountain Alliance, (970) 729-2321
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Josh Pollock, Rocky Mountain Wild, (303) 546-0214 x 2
Federal Judge Halts 42-Square-Mile Uranium Leasing Program in Colorado
Sweeping Ruling Suspends All Drilling, Mining, Exploration, Existing and Future Leasing
TELLURIDE, Colo.— In a major victory for clean air, clean water and endangered species on public lands, a federal judge on Tuesday halted the Department of Energy’s 42-square-mile uranium-leasing program that threatened the Dolores and San Miguel rivers in southwestern Colorado. Five conservation groups had sued to halt the leasing program, charging that the Department of Energy was failing to adequately protect the environment or analyze the full impacts of renewed uranium mining on public lands.
“We are pleased that Judge Martinez agreed with the groups, as well as local governments, who have been requesting the federal government take responsible steps to disclose the full range of impacts of mining uranium on public lands in combination with the impacts from Energy Fuels’ proposed uranium mill,” said Hilary White, executive director of Sheep Mountain Alliance. “This is an important ruling that will help ensure that any uranium mining and milling that may take place in the Dolores River watershed is protective of the environment and human health. We look forward to the Environmental Protection Agency’s leadership in disclosing the full impacts of uranium activity in this important watershed.”
The 53-page ruling invalidates the Department’s approval of the program; suspends each of the program’s 31 existing leases; enjoins the Department from issuing any new leases; and enjoins any further exploration, drilling or mining activity at all 43 mines approved under the program pending satisfactory completion of new environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act.
“This is a huge victory for public lands, rivers and wildlife in southwestern Colorado and a major setback for the uranium industry’s efforts to industrialize and pollute the Colorado Plateau,” said Taylor McKinnon, public-lands campaigns director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Department of Energy has thumbed its nose at environmental laws for too long; today’s ruling is a big course correction.”
Conservation groups challenged the Department's current leasing program for not complying with the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act. In July the Department attempted to thwart the lawsuit by initiating a new “environmental impact statement” for the program but continued to administer the program under its prior flawed approval.
Uranium mining and milling resulting from the lease program will deplete Colorado River basin water and threaten to pollute rivers with uranium, selenium, ammonia, arsenic, molybdenum, aluminum, barium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, vanadium and zinc. Selenium and arsenic contamination in the Colorado River basin from abandoned uranium-mining operations have been implicated in the decline of four endangered Colorado River fish species and may be impeding their recovery.
“Even small amounts of some of these pollutants, like selenium, can poison fish, accumulate in the food chain and cause deformities and reproductive problems for endangered fish, ducks, river otters and eagles,” said Josh Pollock of Rocky Mountain Wild. “It is irresponsible for the Department of Energy to put fish and wildlife at risk by allowing uranium leases without adequate analysis of necessary protections to prevent pollution.”
The Colorado Environmental Coalition, Information Network for Responsible Mining, Rocky Mountain Wild, Center for Biological Diversity and Sheep Mountain Alliance sued the Department of Energy and Bureau of Land Management in July 2008 for approving the program without analyzing the full environmental impacts from individual uranium-mining leases spread over 20,000 acres and for failing to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species prior to authorizing the program. The Department refused to conduct a full EIS analysis in 2008, instead issuing a FONSI (“finding of no significant impact”), which was also struck down as part of the court ruling.
Plaintiffs were represented by attorneys Travis Stills of the Energy Minerals Law Center, Jeff Parsons of the Western Mining Action Project and Amy Atwood of the Center for Biological Diversity.
Contact:
Hilary White, Sheep Mountain Alliance, (970) 729-2321
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Josh Pollock, Rocky Mountain Wild, (303) 546-0214 x 2
Federal Judge Halts 42-Square-Mile Uranium Leasing Program in Colorado
Sweeping Ruling Suspends All Drilling, Mining, Exploration, Existing and Future Leasing
TELLURIDE, Colo.— In a major victory for clean air, clean water and endangered species on public lands, a federal judge on Tuesday halted the Department of Energy’s 42-square-mile uranium-leasing program that threatened the Dolores and San Miguel rivers in southwestern Colorado. Five conservation groups had sued to halt the leasing program, charging that the Department of Energy was failing to adequately protect the environment or analyze the full impacts of renewed uranium mining on public lands.
“We are pleased that Judge Martinez agreed with the groups, as well as local governments, who have been requesting the federal government take responsible steps to disclose the full range of impacts of mining uranium on public lands in combination with the impacts from Energy Fuels’ proposed uranium mill,” said Hilary White, executive director of Sheep Mountain Alliance. “This is an important ruling that will help ensure that any uranium mining and milling that may take place in the Dolores River watershed is protective of the environment and human health. We look forward to the Environmental Protection Agency’s leadership in disclosing the full impacts of uranium activity in this important watershed.”
The 53-page ruling invalidates the Department’s approval of the program; suspends each of the program’s 31 existing leases; enjoins the Department from issuing any new leases; and enjoins any further exploration, drilling or mining activity at all 43 mines approved under the program pending satisfactory completion of new environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act.
“This is a huge victory for public lands, rivers and wildlife in southwestern Colorado and a major setback for the uranium industry’s efforts to industrialize and pollute the Colorado Plateau,” said Taylor McKinnon, public-lands campaigns director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Department of Energy has thumbed its nose at environmental laws for too long; today’s ruling is a big course correction.”
Conservation groups challenged the Department's current leasing program for not complying with the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act. In July the Department attempted to thwart the lawsuit by initiating a new “environmental impact statement” for the program but continued to administer the program under its prior flawed approval.
Uranium mining and milling resulting from the lease program will deplete Colorado River basin water and threaten to pollute rivers with uranium, selenium, ammonia, arsenic, molybdenum, aluminum, barium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, vanadium and zinc. Selenium and arsenic contamination in the Colorado River basin from abandoned uranium-mining operations have been implicated in the decline of four endangered Colorado River fish species and may be impeding their recovery.
“Even small amounts of some of these pollutants, like selenium, can poison fish, accumulate in the food chain and cause deformities and reproductive problems for endangered fish, ducks, river otters and eagles,” said Josh Pollock of Rocky Mountain Wild. “It is irresponsible for the Department of Energy to put fish and wildlife at risk by allowing uranium leases without adequate analysis of necessary protections to prevent pollution.”
The Colorado Environmental Coalition, Information Network for Responsible Mining, Rocky Mountain Wild, Center for Biological Diversity and Sheep Mountain Alliance sued the Department of Energy and Bureau of Land Management in July 2008 for approving the program without analyzing the full environmental impacts from individual uranium-mining leases spread over 20,000 acres and for failing to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species prior to authorizing the program. The Department refused to conduct a full EIS analysis in 2008, instead issuing a FONSI (“finding of no significant impact”), which was also struck down as part of the court ruling.
Plaintiffs were represented by attorneys Travis Stills of the Energy Minerals Law Center, Jeff Parsons of the Western Mining Action Project and Amy Atwood of the Center for Biological Diversity.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
American Petroleum Institute Launches $ 20 Million Pro-fracking ad Campaign
API Hires Omnicom Shop for Advocacy Campaign
By: Alexandra Bruell
Published: September 16, 2011
Fleishman-Hillard's New PR Challenge: Backing 'Fracking'API
Fracking has for years incited backlash from those concerned that the practice is environmentally destructive. The coming election, rife with energy debates, is likely contributing to the fact that the movement against the practice is gaining momentum. Energy companies and API members like Exxon are running their own campaigns to respond to the critics and influence the general public and lawmakers as they seek to expand their shale assets and operations.
Continue reading... or not...
By: Alexandra Bruell
Published: September 16, 2011
Fleishman-Hillard's New PR Challenge: Backing 'Fracking'API
The American Petroleum Institute has hired Omnicom's Fleishman-Hillard to support an issues campaign that advocates hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," which is the controversial practice of extracting shale oil and natural gas.
The PR agency is tasked with an ad campaign to extend "Energy from Shale," an informational initiative and website that the trade group launched earlier this summer as an offshoot of its "Energy Tomorrow" campaign.
Fracking has for years incited backlash from those concerned that the practice is environmentally destructive. The coming election, rife with energy debates, is likely contributing to the fact that the movement against the practice is gaining momentum. Energy companies and API members like Exxon are running their own campaigns to respond to the critics and influence the general public and lawmakers as they seek to expand their shale assets and operations.
Continue reading... or not...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)