Home rule goes up against the fracking industry – and the political system

By: danps Saturday April 21, 2012 3:50 am
FireDogLake.com

No Associated Press content was harmed in the writing of this post

The fight against fracking in Ohio comes at a time when the state is approving new wells at a rapid pace. Local activists are organizing in an environment where the ground is constantly shifting under their feet – sometimes literally.

Anti-fracking activism has been influenced by developments both inside the state and beyond. At a recent public anti-fracking meeting a representative from the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) described the experience of activists in western Pennsylvania several years ago.

Residents there began seeing lots of drilling sites, processing plants and other fracking infrastructure pop up. Neighborhood opposition responded through the regulatory process. Drillers needed permits, so locals educated themselves on permit writing. They enjoyed some early victories as improperly written permits were thrown out.

The wins were only temporary though. Drillers came back weeks or months later with rewritten permits that fixed the problems in the earlier ones. The new permits passed regulatory muster and the frackers moved in. At one point counsel for the companies jokingly thanked a CELDF representative for its help in putting together a bulletproof permit-writing process. As you might imagine, this was not the intended outcome.

The regulatory process may not be a suitable one for anti-fracking activists for other reasons as well. For one, regulations are not ultimately about protecting citizens; they are about legalizing harm. Regulation on, say, arsenic in drinking water is not based on the maximum amount that humans may safely consume, but on the maximum amount the industry can get legislators to allow. If they allow an amount that is unhealthy for humans or animals, those who suffer as a result have no legal recourse. The harm was permitted.

If you do not want the fracking to occur at all – if you think it is too unregulated, too opaque, and generally too hazardous – then fighting over regulation is a sucker’s game. You are not fighting over whether or not your community will expose itself to the tender mercies of the oil and gas industry, but over how much damage the industry will be allowed to do to it; and since the oil and gas industry is flooding the statehouse with lobbyists how do you think that fight will go?

Continue reading...

WE ARE CALLED FRACTIVISTS! DON'T FORGET IT.

Ohio Tries to Escape Fate as a Dumping Ground for Fracking Fluid

Bloomberg Businessweek
Feb 01, 2012

By Mark Niquette

Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) -- The millions of gallons of chemical- laced wastewater that fracking produces must flow somewhere, and Ohio is trying not to be that place.

The oil and natural-gas drilling boom spurred more permits for disposal wells there during the past two years than during the previous decade combined. The volume injected into them was on a near-record pace last year, according to the Department of Natural Resources, and more than half was from out of state. That included 92.6 percent of the water sent to a Youngstown well closed last year after 11 nearby earthquakes.

“We have become in Ohio the dumping ground for contaminated brine,”

state Representative Armond Budish, the House Democratic leader, said at a Jan. 26 forum in Columbus. “We didn’t prepare adequately for the potential for earthquakes and other environmental problems.”

Now, Ohio is considering tightening regulations governing wells in response to the temblors and seeking to stem out-of- state fluid shipments. It’s an example of the challenges U.S. states face as they try to enjoy hydraulic fracturing’s economic boost while avoiding its side effects.

Ohio’s situation highlights the tradeoff that may come with the technique of using chemical-laced water to bring forth natural gas and oil, said Glen Andersen, energy program director for the National Conference of State Legislatures in Denver. While states benefit from investment by companies including Chesapeake Energy Corp., Halliburton Co. and Vallourec SA, they also may contend with roads damaged by heavy equipment and concerns about polluted drinking water, he said.

Negotiating the Constitution

“It doesn’t necessarily mean there needs to be this tradeoff with environment versus energy extraction,”

Andersen said in a telephone interview. “It really comes down to the degree to which it’s regulated and whether those regulations are enforced.”

In Ohio, companies pay to operate disposal wells after they have been approved by the state, and brine haulers hired by drillers pay the companies to inject the fluid. The well owners pay a disposal fee to the state of 5 cents per barrel for brine originating in the state and 20 cents for out-of-state wastewater, according to the Ohio Natural Resources Department.

Republican Governor John Kasich said that while he’s not happy about the increasing volume of wastewater from neighboring states, the U.S. Constitution prohibits interference with shipments. He declined to speculate about what might be done.

Soaking It Up

“When people are using our things, and they could disrupt our ability to have progress here, we have to be concerned about it,” Kasich said in an interview in Columbus on Jan. 26. “We’re thinking about what we can do and not violate the interstate commerce clause.”

Continue reading...