Showing posts with label CHENEY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CHENEY. Show all posts

Monday, January 30, 2012

Why did Cheney make gas drilling exempt from the Clean Air and Water Acts. This is why! (VIDEO)

Source: unknown

To White House January 28, 2012

Why did Cheney make gas drilling exempt from the Clean Air and Water Acts. This is why!

Carl Stiles of Bradford County, PA passed away yesterday. He had been fighting health issues ever since finding high levels of barium and arsenic in their well water, and fought hard and suffered much in the last 2 years, has lost the fight tonight. Stiles had intestinal cancer which he blames on Chesapeake’s gas drilling. He and his wife abandoned their home last November at the urging of a toxicologist who found barium, arsenic, and VOCs (volatile organic chemicals) in Carl’s blood. Strontium, uranium and radium were found in their water. They were told to expect to get leukemia within two years. Carl did not have that long.
Your inclusion of shale gas as a panacea for all our woes in the State of the Union speech was reckless and ignorant. You will cause the death of thousands soon and millions down the road if you do not immediately stop this insane process.
There is no reason for it except greed. With a bit of patience, common sense and true concern for the well being of our people, we can follow Germany's example and get off poisonous fuels- nuclear and fossil fossil - forever.

.....................
Some call it murder - What do you think?
.....................



Dear All,

Carl Stiles, who stayed with his fiance, Jude, at my house last year
after his home was contaminated, passed away yesterday. He had been
fighting health issues ever since finding high levels of barium and
arsenic in their well water, and fought hard and suffered much in the
last 2 years, has lost the fight tonight.

His widow, Jude, asked that memorial donations be made to GDAC.
I thought you would be touched.

- paula

Carl Stiles had intestinal cancer which he blames on Chesapeake's gas drilling. He and his wife abandoned their home last November at the urging of a toxicologist who found barium, arsenic, and VOCs (volatile organic chemicals) in Carl's blood. Strontium, uranium and radium were found in their water. They've been told to expect to get leukemia within two years."
http://waterandmoreblog.com/2011/06/21/gas-drilling-disrupts-lives-endangers-...
.......................................................


How many innocent people have to suffer for the greed of the industry? How many people's families have to be completely destroyed before anyone truly does anything about this 'horror' and 'catastrophe' called hydraulic fracturing?

We say BAN IT NOW!

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Rupert Murdoch and Dick Cheney Back an Oil Shale Company With Faulty Wells. We’re Shocked!

By Climate Guest Blogger on Sep 6, 2011 at 9:37 am
by Sarah Pavlus in a Media Matters cross-post


The state of Colorado says it will require American Shale Oil, LLC — a company backed by Rupert Murdoch and Dick Cheney — to fix several poorly cemented wells that, according to the state, appear to be endangering ground water in western Colorado.

Halliburton — the oil and gas giant once headed by Cheney — conducted the cementing and cement evaluation of the wells and rated several as having “poor” cement bonds in certain segments, according to a memo that American Shale Oil (AMSO) submitted to state and federal regulators in late July.

In the July 26 memo, AMSO claimed the poor cementing in its wells “poses little threat” to groundwater resources in the Piceance Basin on Colorado’s Western Slope, where the company is leasing federal land to pursue oil shale research and development.

But the state disagrees. When contacted about the AMSO memo, Steve Shuey, a Senior Environmental Protection Specialist for the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS), told Media Matters in a statement that the cementing fell short of the plans filed by the company and it “appears to be inadequate to protect” the region’s aquifers. Shuey said the state would require AMSO to fix the cementing:

DRMS has reviewed the document to which you refer. We recognize that the well completion cementing was not conducted as specified in the Well Construction Designs of the approved NOI [Notice of Intent]. The current well completion status appears to be inadequate to protect the Uinta and A-Groove aquifers. DRMS will be sending AMSO a letter requiring remedial cement and completion work be performed on tomography wells TM-1 through TM-4 to ensure adequate protection of the groundwater resource.

When asked about Shuey’s statement, AMSO maintained that the cementing issues identified in its July memo do not significantly impact the “protection of water quality” and told Media Matters the company would “work with the responsible agencies to resolve any outstanding concerns.” According to an AMSO spokesperson:

Continue reading...



Thursday, August 18, 2011

Gasland Aftermath--We have No Laws

www.open.salon.com.blogspot.com
By Steve Klingaman
AUGUST 18, 2011 8:33AM

The documentary "Gasland" clearly identified the imminent environmental disaster we face, but there are no laws to address the issue thanks to...Dick Cheney!

The second most amazing thing about Josh Fox's 2010 documentary " Gasland " is that it got made at all. The approach can only be described as amateur-verit/i> . The financing, the everything, really--DIY. He deserves a world of kudos for this triumph of beginner's mind; of one individual's dawning awareness of a seemingly amorphous problem transformed into a kitchen sink triumph.  




Fox understands story. Taking the tactic of "who do you believe: them or your lying eyes?" to its logical extreme, he presented his views with the simple truth of burning tap water and touched a nation.

Fox, a grassroots theater director with no formal documentary film experience prior to to "Gasland," has screened the film extensively for the nation's environmental community. In an interview this week with the Baltimore City Paper's Angela Appleton, Fox laid out the central issue he unveiled in the film:

The EPA's been screening the film, regional EPA, federal EPA. They've been screening the film in Congress, at the Department of Justice. All of the regulators are shocked, but they also feel very disheartened in that their hands are tied, because they don't have laws to enforce. The Safe Drinking Water Act should pertain to the gas industry. They're exempt. The Clean Water Act, they're exempt. The Clean Air Act, they're exempt. The Superfund law, they're exempt. All of these basic fundamental American public-health protection laws, they have found a way to get exempt from them through orders of Congress.

I showed the film to the entire Department of Justice environmental wing at their annual retreat and they gave it a standing ovation . . . but the lawyers who enforce our environmental laws on behalf of DOJ have said time and time again, we have no laws to enforce. And that is the problem. This is going to take an act of Congress or a presidential executive order or governors' orders.


Continue reading...


please comment

Sunday, July 31, 2011

"They'll Pay, But They Won't Admit Responsibility"

An Inside Look at What Happens When Gas Drillers Are Exempt from Environmental Law

Rancher Chris Velasquez knows first hand what gas drilling has done to communities, and the land, water and wildlife of New Mexico.
ALTERNET.ORG

Rancher Chris Velasquez demonstrates the viscosity of fluid leaking from the end of a TEPPCO pipeline labeled "methane" and "produced water" at the Pump Canyon Compressor station near his home. Lack of fencing or other barriers makes such toxic materials available for wildlife and livestock to drink.
Photo Credit: Doug Peacock

BLANCO, New Mexico -- Chris Velasquez sees the impacts of gas development in the San Juan Basin of northern New Mexico through the eyes of a rancher, and those of a man whose roots in this country pre-date both the gas rigs and the arrival of Anglos.

He and his dad ran cattle, until recently, on a grazing allotment called the Rosa, rolling high desert lands punctuated by bluffs and arroyos, ringed by mesas, adjacent to the Carson National Forest on the east, the Southern Ute reservation to the north, and bordered on the west by Navajo Lake. In a way, it's what's left of Velasquez' ancestral homeland. "We used to live where the Pine River and the San Juan meet up here, then when they built the lake, it either was drown or move," he says. In 1962, the Bureau of Reclamation completed a dam stretching three-quarters of a mile across the San Juan River.

The idea was to control flooding and provide irrigation water for the Navajo tribe. It also displaced Velasquez' community. "All my ancestor's on my mom's side, well on my dad's side too, came from right up here," he says. "My grandpa and my grandma on my mom's side, they were the second farm below the dam. They got chased out too. From right here on, all the people who lived here -- they were all Spanish people -- relocated. Threw them to the four winds. Scattered them all over the place."

 
Continue reading...   "My youngest daughter would call them the murderers," he says.



Saturday, July 30, 2011

EPA Proposes Air Rules for the Oil and Gas Industry - Symphony of Destruction

EPA proposes air rules for the oil and gas industry July 28, 211 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed a suite of highly cost-effective standards to reduce emissions of smog-forming volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and air toxics from the oil and natural gas industry. The rules also would significantly reduce methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

Continue reading...


















































-------------------------------------------------------------------
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AIR REGULATIONS FOR THE OIL AND NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY




FACT SHEET
OVERVIEW OF ACTION

On July 28, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a suite of highly cost-effective regulations that would reduce harmful air pollution from the oil and natural gas industry while allowing continued, responsible growth in U.S. oil and natural gas production.

The proposal is based on proven technology and best practices that the oil and gas industry is using in some states today. It includes the first federal air standards for wells that are hydraulically fractured, along with requirements for several other sources of pollution in the oil and gas industry that currently are not regulated at the federal level.

Today’s proposal includes four air regulations for the oil and natural gas industry: a new source performance standard for VOCs; a new source performance standard for sulfur dioxide; an air toxics standard for oil and natural gas production; and an air toxics standard for natural gas transmission and storage.

The proposal would cut smog-forming volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions by nearly one-fourth across the oil and gas industry, including a nearly 95 percent reduction in VOCs emitted from new and modified hydraulically fractured gas wells. This significant reduction would be accomplished primarily through use of a proven technology to capture natural gas that currently escapes to the air. That gas would then be made available for sale.

The estimated revenues from selling the gas that currently goes to waste are significant – so much so that today’s proposed rule is anticipated to quickly result in a net savings of nearly $30 million annually, while significantly reducing pollution from this expanding industry.

The VOC emission reductions from wells, combined with reductions from storage tanks and other equipment, are expected to help reduce ozone levels in areas where oil and gas production occurs. In addition, the reductions would yield a significant environmental co-benefit by reducing methane emissions from new and modified wells. Methane, the primary constituent of natural gas, is a potent greenhouse gas – more than 20 times as potent as carbon dioxide. Oil and natural gas production and processing accounts for nearly 40 percent of all U.S. methane emissions, making the industry the nation’s single largest methane source.

The proposed changes also would reduce cancer risks from emissions of several air toxics such as benzene.

EPA estimates the following combined annual emission reductions when the proposed amendments are fully implemented:

o VOCs: 540,000 tons, an industry-wide reduction of 25 percent

o Methane – 3.4 million tons, which is equal to 65 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), a reduction of about 26 percent.

o Air Toxics –38,000 tons, a reduction of nearly 30 percent.

The proposed rules would apply to the more than 25,000 wells that are fractured and refractured each year, as well as to storage tanks and other pieces of equipment. As part of today’s proposal, EPA is seeking comment on several steps to reduce the compliance burdens of the rule to industry and to state, local and tribal air agencies.

Today’s proposal continues EPA’s efforts to support responsible oil and natural gas exploration and production that protects public health and the environment.

In June, the Agency signed a memorandum of understanding with the departments of Interior and Agriculture establishing a common process for the agencies to follow in analyzing the potential air quality impacts of proposed oil and gas activities on federally managed public lands. The collaborative approach in the agreement will provide increased certainty, clarity and transparency about requirements on public lands.

EPA will accept public comment on the proposed amendments for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. Information on submitting written comments is included at the end of this fact sheet. The Agency also will hold three public hearings on the proposals in the Dallas, Denver, and Pittsburgh areas. Additional information on the hearings will be announced in a separate notice.

Continue reading...


 -------------------------


On July 20th  2011, we wrote an article titled: 'Children Forced to Breathe Toxic Chemical Emissions From Gas Wells?' It's not enough to say that serious oversight and complacency had taken place by drilling active Oil & Gas wells within close proximity of Elementary Schools.  Was it complacency, or was it simply that the industry was too drunk on Oil & Gas and drilled wherever, whenever and on top of whomever they desired with no scientifically effective oversight or Federal regulations in place to protect groundwater and humanity? 

It is our opinion that the industry will seek forgiveness at a later date and be subject to numerous class-action lawsuits that will be shadowed in cost comparison as to what was reaped in monetary gains from the unregulated practices in the Oil & Gas Industry. We don't think that's fair and just. 

The children of the future will look back on us and say: "Who the hell allowed this to happen?"

Was this cost/benefit, (aka -death/benefit) part of their business plan? Sure it was, and Cheney was the conductor in this 'Symphony of Destruction.'



---------------------------------

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Fracking: The Great Shale Gas Rush

Natural gas derived from the process is lifting the economy, but it's environmentally risky












By Jim Efstathiou Jr. and Kim Chipman

The Pennsylvania homes of Karl Wasner and Arline LaTourette both sit atop the Marcellus Shale, a geologic formation that stretches from Tennessee to New York and holds vast deposits of natural gas. They also sit on opposite sides of a national debate over hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. That's the process that makes it economical for energy companies to tunnel 5,000 feet below ground and remove the gas—but also poses environmental risks.

Wasner settled 14 years ago in Milanville, in the state's northeast corner, and will leave if drilling companies set up derricks nearby. He already moved away for six weeks last year while an exploratory well was drilled nearby. The noise, muddy water pouring from his taps, and chemicals that turned up in a neighbor's well drove him off, he says. "I moved to a beautiful rural residential area," says Wasner, "not an industrial park."

LaTourette, whose roots in the area go back five generations, is banking on the drilling. Her family has leased almost 700 acres of farmland to Hess (HES) and other companies to tap into the Marcellus Shale. She won't say what she's getting, but signing bonuses can range from $2,000 to $5,000 an acre, and royalty payments are about 20 percent of the value of the gas produced.

President Barack Obama enthusiastically backs gas drilling, and these days 90 percent of it is done by fracking, which involves forcing below ground chemically treated water under high pressure to smash through layers of rock, thus freeing the gas to flow upward. Along with wind, solar, and nuclear power, natural gas is crucial to Obama's goal of producing 80 percent of electricity from clean energy sources by 2035. But the drilling is taking place with minimal oversight from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. State and regional authorities are trying to write their own rules—and having trouble keeping up.

Now, reports of contaminated water and alleged disposal of carcinogens in rivers have caught state and federal regulators, and even environmental watchdogs, off guard. Sometimes the fracking mix includes diesel fuel. Between 2005 and 2009, drillers injected 32 million gallons of fluids containing diesel into wells in 19 states, an investigation by Representative Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) concludes. Just as it recovers its footing from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the Administration faces a new threat, again involving a risky drilling technology and charges of lax regulation. Obama is "evaluating the need for new safeguards for drilling," says White House spokesman Clark W. Stevens. "It's likely that the science is going to say we need to regulate fracking," says Tyson Slocum, director of the energy program for Public Citizen, a liberal advocacy group. "But Obama's political team is going to say don't regulate, and I think the political team will win."

The Marcellus Shale may contain 490 trillion cubic feet of gas—enough to heat U.S. homes and power electric plants for two decades, says Terry Engelder, professor of geosciences at Pennsylvania State University. That makes it the world's second-largest gas field behind South Pars, shared by Iran and Qatar. The shale gas rush is creating thousands of jobs and reviving the economy in states such as Wyoming, Texas, and Louisiana. In Pennsylvania, where 2,516 wells have been drilled in the last three years, $389 million in tax revenue and 44,000 jobs came from gas drilling in 2009, according to a Penn State report. Perhaps best of all, natural gas emits half the carbon emissions of oil.

While there have been no documented cases of fracking fluids flowing underground into drinking water, there have been spills above ground. Fracking produces millions of gallons of wastewater; some of it containing benzene has spilled from holding tanks. The wastewater can overwhelm treatment plants not equipped to handle high levels of contaminants. A Feb. 26 New York Times article, using documents from the EPA and state regulators, described how radioactive wastewater is being discharged into river basins. Sierra Club Deputy Executive Director Bruce Hamilton says Obama "has been sold a bill of goods." But even the Sierra Club has struggled with fracking. Last year it overruled New York and Pennsylvania chapters calling for a national fracking ban; now it's reconsidering that decision, Hamilton says.

The Delaware River Basin Commission, which manages the watershed that supplies drinking water to 15 million people in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, has put gas development on hold while it drafts rules. Wasner and LaTourette were among scores of people to comment at a Feb. 22 hearing in Honesdale, Pa., on a commission proposal to regulate the drilling. New York also has fracking on hold while it develops a drilling playbook. The Marcellus Shale runs beneath the watershed that supplies just over 1 billion gallons of water a day to New York City, the U.S.'s largest unfiltered water system.

The White House has sent mixed signals. "It's not necessarily federal regulation that will be needed," EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson told a Feb. 3 Senate hearing, noting that many communities and states already monitor parts of the process. Energy Secretary Steven Chu seems to differ. In a 2010 speech, he said fracking can be "polluting" and that rules were inevitable. "We continue to believe that state regulatory agencies have the appropriate expertise" to oversee gas production, says Dan Whitten, a spokesman for America's Natural Gas Alliance.

Even if the EPA stepped in, its authority would be limited. A clause in a 2005 energy law—dubbed the "Halliburton (HAL) loophole" for the company that helped pioneer fracking and is a supplier of fracking fluids—exempts fracking from parts of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) says Dick Cheney, once head of Halliburton, pushed for the exemption when he was Vice-President. Hinchey's evidence is circumstantial: Fracking was endorsed in Cheney's 2001 energy task force report, which led to the 2005 law and, according to Waxman, did not reflect the EPA's initial concerns about water pollution. Cheney declined to comment. Halliburton referred a request for comment to its website, which doesn't discuss fracking's risks.

So far, the EPA has begun a study of fracking's effect on drinking water. In February the agency said final results will come in 2014, two years after its initial target—and the 2012 elections. Its emphasis is "politics first and regulation second," says Kevin Book, managing director at ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington policy group. "It's impossible to miss the jobs power of fracking in the Marcellus."

The bottom line: The Obama Administration may need to rethink its hands-off policy on fracking, despite the national job and energy benefits.

Efstathiou is a reporter for Bloomberg News.Chipman is a reporter for Bloomberg News.
Bloomberg Businessweek - Politics & Policy March 3, 2011, 5:00PM EST

Tuesday, September 5, 2000

Weston Wilson, EPA Whistleblower, at CPNY Summit




Weston Wilson, the EPA whistle-blower featured in Josh Fox’s film “Gasland”, made a surprise visit to the Coalition to Protect New York (CPNY) summit in Binghamton, NY on June 19, 2010 and delivered the first keynote. When an EPA study concluding that hydraulic fracturing “poses little or no threat” to drinking water supplies was published in 2004, he was one of several EPA scientists who challenged the study’s methodology and questioned the impartiality of the expert panel that reviewed its findings. EPA Findings on Hydraulic Fracturing Deemed “Unsupportable”.

Dick Cheney’s fingerprints were all over it. Wilson delves into the history with humor appropriate for such a deadly serious topic.


CAST YOUR VOTE