Blog Posts: Fracking

By Rich Bindell

Pennsylvania’s license plates used to read, “You’ve Got a Friend in Pennsylvania.” Thanks to Governor Tom Corbett and new legislation that’s friendly to shale drilling, they ought to make new plates that read, “Fracking’s Got a Friend in Pennsylvania.” While the state continues to push for more drilling, the residents and environment continue to suffer.

The oil and gas industry has now given us something new to add to the list of negative impacts caused by shale gas drilling: home displacement. The immediate threat of relocation for Piatt Township, Pennsylvania residents in the Riverdale Mobile Home Village continues to add to the frustration and anger that many citizens have toward the gas industry for constantly turning communities into victims, all for a handsome profit–in this case for a private water company called Aqua America.

Aqua America bought the land on which the residents of Riverdale Mobile Home Village lived and they plan to build a water withdrawal facility there after receiving approval from the Susquehanna River Basin Commission to withdraw 3 million gallons of water from the river basin. The facility would supply Range Resources and another gas company with the water needed to drill and frack for natural gas.

As soon as Aqua America purchased the land, they quickly terminated all Riverdale leases, giving them merely two months to vacate their homes. In one fell swoop, 37 taxpaying homeowners were suddenly homeless. Is this what the industry means when they promise that shale gas drilling will offer communities a better local economy? Read the full article…

By Hugh MacMillan

If you won’t be getting a refund this year, like I won’t, you’ve probably just finalized your tax return and signed a sizable check. I don’t necessarily agree with many of the things that U.S. taxpayer funds support, but that’s democracy, and the benefits of our democracy are manifold.

But it is especially hard for me to stomach the enormous U.S. tax expenditures that pad the record-setting profits of the oil and gas industry. The tax breaks enjoyed by the industry do nothing to lower the price of gas, but we taxpayers are left to fill the gaping hole these tax breaks create in federal revenues.

The tax breaks are many. Here are several that make it cheaper for the oil and gas industry to frack:

• Expensing of intangible drilling costs: The oil and gas industry can deduct up to 100 percent of what they spend to make and haul fracking fluids, and can do so in the year they use the fluid (in other words, they don’t have to spread the deduction over the life of a new well.) By giving the oil and gas industry this deduction up front in the first year, and not making them spread it out over several years like all other businesses have to do, we taxpayers are essentially giving the industry an interest free loan to frack.
• Percentage depletion allowance: Alternatively, many oil and gas companies are allowed to recover the total cost of drilling and fracking a new well based on their revenues, not based on what they actually spent to prepare the well for production. This is called percentage depletion (as opposed to cost depletion), and it means that a company that drills and fracks a well that gushes with oil and/or gas could recover, as a percentage of revenues from the well, more than it actually cost to drill and frack the well.

These and other taxpayer giveaways to the oil and gas industry will likely add up to an estimated $11 billion in Fiscal Year 2013. Of course, this is in addition to the costs that drilling and fracking pose to public health and the environment.

by Hugh MacMillan

Food & Water Watch has submitted brief comments on the draft North Carolina Oil and Gas Study under Session Law 2011-276. 

The draft study finds that North Carolina is totally unprepared for drilling and fracking for natural gas, that opening up the state to fracking would effectively mean joining an uncontrolled public health experiment, and that fracking would negatively affect the state’s economy and residents. 

But given misrepresentations of the study’s findings, you wouldn’t know all that unless you’ve read the study.

The lead conclusion – that “hydraulic fracturing can be done safely so long as the right protections are in place” – has been embraced by the oil and gas industry as a green light to open up the state to fracking. This is a problem. The conclusion doesn’t make sense tacked on to the end of a study that raises so many unanswered questions, which include:

• How the cumulative pollution impacts of drilling and fracking operations would affect public health in North Carolina;
• Whether the cumulative economic consequences of drilling and fracking in the state would be negative;
• Whether low- or fixed-income residents of North Carolina would bear a disproportionate burden of the negative economic consequences;
• How funding for resources to enforce the “right protections” would be secured in the current political climate;
• How local governments would pay for increased demands on social services in communities in the wake of drilling and fracking; and
• How contamination of potential North Carolina drinking water resources would be avoided.

It is nonsense to conclude that “the right” regulatory protections can be designed, enacted and enforced to ensure that fracking “can be done safely” when so many fundamental questions are left unanswered. Unfounded by the study’s findings, the lead conclusion is thus an inexplicable giveaway to the oil and gas industry.

Hundreds of North Carolinians attended the recent public hearings on the draft study to state their opposition to fracking in their communities. Public officials in North Carolina need to be reminded that, unlike the citizens that flooded the recent public hearings, the oil and gas industry has no stake in the long-term economic prosperity of these North Carolina communities.

If you are in North Carolina, or just like to go there in your mind, here are some actions you can take to help keep the brakes on fracking in North Carolina: 

• Join the petition urging North Carolina’s Representatives to oppose any efforts to allow fracking in NC. You can email the petition to your friends, post it on Facebook, share it on Twitter, and collect signatures in person.

• Call your State Representative and tell them to oppose any bills that would allow fracking. You can call (919) 733-7928 and give the operator your house district number, the name of your state house member, or your zip code, and they will transfer you to the office of your representative.

• Call Governor Perdue and tell her you don’t want fracking in North Carolina. Call (202) 609-9041 and you will be connected to her office.

• Write a letter to your local newspaper, community newsletter or favorite blog.

• For more information contact Renée Maas at rmaas(at)fwwatch(dot)org or go to: www.foodandwaterwatch.org/fracking

By Scott Edwards

It was one of those infrequent eye-openers that went largely unnoticed. On March 13, 2012 Chevron submitted an emergency motion to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, raising “serious environmental concerns” with a planned natural gas pipeline that is charted to run across land belonging to Chevron’s subsidiary, Texaco. The 16 mile long pipeline, proposed by Spectra Energy, is slated to bring fracked gas from New Jersey, across Texaco’s property in Bayonne, under the Hudson River and into the West Village in Manhattan. Now it seems that one of the dirtiest industries on Earth is siding with environmentalists who have been raising concerns for months about the adverse impacts of the Spectra pipeline.

Chevron is a company that has engaged in some of the most horrific environmental and human rights crimes across the planet. In Ecuador they poisoned Amazonian rainforest communities with hundreds of unlined oil pits and billions of gallons of poisonous sludge poured into local water sources. In Nigeria, Chevron has been linked to the deaths of indigenous activists who were against irresponsible oil production in the countryside. And just last week in Brazil, Chevron executives had their passports confiscated by a judge so they couldn’t flee the country after Brazilian prosecutors laid criminal charges arising from an oil spill. This is a company that sees the environment merely as a convenient place to dump its wastes, where every pristine land mass is a landfill in waiting and every waterway an opportunity to dilute their toxics. If Chevron has environmental concerns about a project, then you know that truly unmitigated devastation of biblical proportions is imminent. The end may truly be near. 

Chevron’s issue with the Spectra project is related to the release of benzene, a known human carcinogen, into the surrounding waterways and communities should the pipeline be built as planned. Of course, Chevron doesn’t really care about the ecological impacts of the Spectra pipeline – they’re concerned with their own liability for the additional releases of benzene from the highly polluted parcel of land they own that the pipeline would bring. Predictably, they’re not looking out for the environment, they’re looking out for their pocketbook. It just happens to be one of those very rare moments when corporate greed and community health happen to overlap. 

Nevertheless, Chevron’s concerns add to a long list of environmental and public health problems cited by environmental groups and community members who have been opposing the Spectra pipeline since its inception. The pipeline will cut through some of the most heavily industrialized and densely populated areas of New Jersey and New York – areas that already bear a disproportionate share of environmental burdens. The impact from construction activities alone will expose members of these communities to increased levels of health-damaging particulate matter in an area that is chronically in Non-Attainment for the Clean Air Act’s ambient air quality standards for PM2.5. Construction of the pipeline will also potentially impact numerous freshwater wetlands and other waterbodies and the species they support, in addition to disturbing already contaminated areas and thereby raising the potential for further exposing these communities to harmful contamination. Moreover, the operation of the pipeline in the midst of vulnerable communities increases the risk of exposure to hazardous air pollutants.

FERC, the federal agency that licenses and approves the Spectra pipeline, has been ignoring numerous concerns raised by the local and environmental communities. Just three days after Chevron filed its emergency request to halt the pipeline, FERC issued the final Environmental Impact Statement greenlighting the project. Given the agency’s willingness to kowtow to the big energy industries, one can only assume that Chevron’s request and FERC’s approval must have crossed in the mail. Whatever the case, this may be the only time in life I ever root for Chevron. 

The Spectra pipeline is an accident waiting to happen in one of the most heavily populated regions of the country. In addition, it’s being proposed to help facilitate the devastating practice of gas fracking in the Marcellus shale region. The environmental impacts of the project are undeniable. If you don’t believe the environmentalists, just ask Chevron.

By Kate Fried

March 22 may not be a date that means something to everyone, but around here it’s one of our favorite days of the year. That’s because today is World Water Day, when we reflect on the importance of freshwater resources and advocate for their sustainable management. It’s really not a lot different than any other day of the year, but on World Water Day, we’re reminded more than ever of the momentum behind the global effort to protect our essential water resources.

This year on World Water Day, we’re fired up over fracking. In the United States this controversial form of energy extraction has wreaked havoc on rural communities, polluting drinking water, destroying property values and endangering public health. But apparently this isn’t enough for the oil and gas industry, which has its sites set on conquering lands abroad as well.

Now, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is getting in on the action as well, further fulfilling the Obama administration’s apparent desire to cozy up to the oil and gas industry by suggesting that Bulgaria join the natural gas rush. Too bad for her the Bulgarian Parliament recently voted 166 to six to suspend shale gas exploration.

To celebrate World Water Day and to protect water abroad, we’re reminding Secretary of State Clinton that people everywhere need access to safe, clean, affordable water and energy plans that offer clean, green, sustainable power, not ones that destroy water and cause a mess of public health problems.

Take a stand for fresh water and join us in reaching out to Secretary of State Clinton. Ask her to protect our allies overseas, not do the oil and gas industry’s dirty work.

By Lane Brooks

This past weekend I heard Sandra Steingraber speak before a concert to benefit several New York organizations working to ban fracking. Sandra recently won a Heinz Award, which came with a cash award of $100,000. She is using that money to do what she can to ban fracking in New York. Many people have told her that big oil is spending many millions of dollars on lobbying and advertising and that she is just wasting her money, which, even though she is a noted author, is more than she has ever seen at one time in her life. To the people who tell her that she can’t make a difference, she retells the following fable:

Once, a fire broke out in a dense forest. This forest was home to many animals of every kind. As the fire spread, the animals moved away from it, but the forest was dry and the fire raced through the trees. Now terrified, the creatures fled to the river edge and huddled in fear. But a little parrot, who could not sit and wait for the fire to destroy everything, flew over the river and scooped up a beak of water. Then he flew over the burning forest and let the water fall into the flames. He repeated this over and over, but the fire just grew wilder. The other animals shouted up at him to stop wasting his time, that it was too late to save their homes. But the parrot said, “I am doing what I can,” and kept on.

The flames grew higher, singeing his feathers as he flew over the raging fire, but he continued bringing water a beak-full at a time. Then the gods looked down and said, “Little parrot, you can’t save the forest. Stop before you perish.” But the parrot said to the gods, “I don’t need your advice. I need your help,” and continued to do what he could. The gods, touched by the little parrot’s bravery and humiliated by their own defeatism, began to weep. Their flood of tears put out the fire and saved the forest for all of the animals.

Yes, the oil industry is enormous and not easily stopped.

But what you do matters — whatever it is. Are you a parrot?

By Hugh MacMillan

Faced with the current glut of cheap natural gas, the shale gas industry has begun to slow its overzealous pace of drilling and fracking in the Northeast. Chesapeake Energy has announced it will slash the number of new drilling rigs in Pennsylvania by 68 percent (from 75 to 24). Why? Because natural gas is simply too cheap to justify the financial costs of drilling and fracking; the public health and environmental costs, of course, are another story.

Now, with a convenient new report, the American Petroleum Institute (API) is artfully setting the stage for blaming the U.S. EPA for this slowdown in new shale gas drilling. The report decries soon-to-be-finalized EPA rules that would force the industry to gradually adopt “green completion” technology at new wells. This technology captures volatile organic compounds, which contribute to smog and other public health problems, and also captures methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas contributing to global climate change.

API argues that in the few years it would take to ramp up the availability of green technology, fewer new wells would be drilled. They then warn that this will mean government revenues will decline in these few years. But this ignores the fact that any near-term losses in revenues would be recovered as the finite source of shale gas is depleted in subsequent years.

Reading between the lines of the report, it is clear that API believes it is not economic to drill and frack for shale gas if the industry is forced to take just a small step in reducing its environmental footprint and address only some of its air pollution – never mind the rest of its pollution.

They think they’ve got us where they want us: at their mercy. But this fixation on near-term profit, whatever the long-term consequences, is fueling a response. Communities around the country are working to ban fracking.

These communities want sustainable solutions for economic growth, and they have come to recognize that being at the center of a temporary shale gas bubble will create more problems than it solves.

Read the full article where Susie Beiersdorfer is quoted. Then act to ban fracking.

By Lane Brooks

I watched the Oscars on Sunday and couldn’t help but think optimistically about key decisions that certain leaders—business and political—need to make this year to determine the future of our food and water. Dare I hope that by next year’s awards season, we’ll have a whole new slew of awards to hand out to those that have taken decisive leadership in the face of enormous industry pressure? With that in mind, here are some potential future nominees for such an award—the “Oscars” of food and water, if you will:

Gov. Cuomo of New York. Will he push for a ban on fracking in the Empire State? The energy industry wants badly to drill in New York for the profits to be made from vast a supply of natural gas. Potentially permanent harm to the water and the environment are of little concern to them. What are the chances he will act for the citizens and ban fracking? It’s possible if we keep up the pressure not only on Governor Cuomo, but on Congress, too.

Walmart. Will the largest grocery retailer in the United States decide not to sell Monsanto’s GE sweet corn? If enough of their customers let them know they won’t buy it, Walmart may decide this time to do the right thing. Read the full article…

By Hugh MacMillan

Thanks to the wonders of modern fracking, we are now blessed with 100 years of natural gas from shale rock, right? Wrong. If we follow the logic that leads to the claim of 100 years of natural gas, we actually have only 23 years of shale gas.

It’s understandable that people are conflating the estimated supply of natural gas with that of shale gas. A few weeks ago, in his 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama stated that “we have a supply of natural gas that can last America for nearly 100 years,” and then he quickly pivoted (to land a jab), saying “and by the way, it was public research dollars, over the past 30 years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas from shale rock.”

But the claim that the U.S. has 100 years of natural gas doesn’t just assume drilling and fracking for shale gas, tight sands gas and coalbed methane anywhere and everywhere it can be found. It also assumes unrestricted drilling and fracking throughout Alaska, up and down the Pacific and Atlantic coasts, and all along the Gulf coast. Florida? New Jersey? California? Wouldn’t that do wonders for your billion-dollar coastal economies? Read the full article…