Banning Fracking, Globally

greens copy.jpg


This is a simple image of fracking, notice the bore hole goes through the water table and way below that the rock is fractured to release the gas. It seems reasonable to expect some damage to the ground water but the industry has denied it and tried to prevent the EPA from studying the dangers of fracking for years. After the fracking takes place, the waste sludge is injected into the earth, creating more risk to the ground water.
More on fracking in a diary by Joe Shikspack and I, 2012

From Inside Climate a Pulitzer Prize winning blog

Report Fuels Fracking Ban Push in California

The State of California Report, 2015:

The study's key takeaway is that "the state does not have adequate information to effectively regulate the process," said Andrew Grinberg, oil-and-gas program manager at the environmental group Clean Water Action. "To me, it is a clear indication that a moratorium is needed." [...]
It offers a snapshot of fracking in the state. Over the last decade, an average of 300 new oil wells have gone online per month and 125 to 175 of those are fracking wells. Unlike the fracking boom states like Texas, North Dakota, Colorado and Pennsylvania, California's fracking occurs at relatively shallow depths and involves less water per well.

But the study's assessment of current practices and recommendations has activists concerned. The analysis revealed that 36 percent of pits in the vast Central Valley operate without appropriate permits; it also exposed errors in the state regulator's reporting of wastewater disposal. And it identified how little is known about the impact or toxicity of 38 percent of the chemicals found in fracking fluids.[...]

[RL Miller is a Daily Kos contributor.
RL Miller, chair of the California Democratic Party's environmental caucus and founder of the Super PAC Climate Hawks Vote, is not impressed. Miller said Pavley's new amendment "is
really a way of saying that it's OK to keep fracking. And that's not what the activists want. Period. Full stop. We know that fracking is harmful to the climate and we know that fracking wastewater is not being handled well in California and we know that we don't know a real lot."

The Health Department of New York report, 2014:

called attention to "significant uncertainties" concerning fracking's threat to public health. The agency recommended a moratorium on the extraction method, which involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals into bedrock, under very high pressure, to release oil and gas.

In Canada, a ground-breaking law-suit will take place in 2016. I originally wrote about this in 2012 and these delays have cost the litigant time and money.

Supreme Court [of Canada] Rejects Argument to Dismiss Landmark Fracking Case
Eight years ago oil patch consultant Jessica Ernst sued Alberta Environment, the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB, which has since become the Alberta Energy Regulator) and Encana -- one of Canada's largest unconventional gas drillers -- over the contamination of her well water with hydrocarbons (including methane) and the failure of government authorities to properly investigate the fouling of groundwater.

Industry, however, cannot always control the direction of the fractures and there have been hundreds of cases of groundwater contamination and methane leakage as well as scores of "felt" earthquakes triggered by the industry in Canada and the United States.

A list of Bans of Fracking Worldwide

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

joe shikspack's picture

complaining about harper's promotion of the tarsands. she apparently castigates harper, but then the article reveals that she is a little lame about the tarsands issue herself, promoting what seem like pretty toothless "solutions."

Canada's PM blocking climate reform, says Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne

The leader of Canada’s biggest province has escalated her feud with the country’s prime minister, accusing Stephen Harper of obstructing efforts to fight climate change and calling on Canadians to make global warming a decisive issue in the coming elections.

In an interview with the Guardian, Kathleen Wynne, the Liberal premier of Ontario, brought long-simmering tensions with Harper over energy and economic policy to a rollicking boil, repeatedly calling out the Conservative prime minister for blocking efforts to cut carbon pollution. ...

Despite her strong language, Wynne opposes a ban on new projects and pipelines in the Alberta tar sands – the fastest-growing source of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions, and the reason Canada is the only industrialised country to fall short of its emissions targets.

The Ontario premier reached an agreement with other provincial leaders on Friday that campaigners said would expand tar sands pipelines without sufficient protections for the environment. The new national energy strategy does not include targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

In his nine years as prime minister, Harper has vigorously promoted the tar sands, presiding over an expansion of production and lobbying for more exports and pipelines to build up Canada into his vision of an energy superpower.

up
0 users have voted.
MarilynW's picture

in Canada, it's so hard to tell them apart. Saving the environment might cause loss of JOBS they say, but the real reason is fear of reducing corporate profits. We could have job creation like the CCC during the Depression era. Government could create jobs that would actually benefit people in every way including slowing down the 6th extinction.

up
0 users have voted.

To thine own self be true.