We’ve been talking for months on our GreenJoyment site about the dangers of fracking.
This is an oil industry practice where they pump water, arsenic (AS IN POISON), sand and other toxic substances deep into the earth.
This creates pockets under the ground, where natural gas and oil fills in and can be sucked out/retrieved.
In other words, fracking sucks.
There has also been much speculation that fracking is related to much of the increase of seismic activity on the planet.
Today I learn, (while we are in Verdello, Italy), that Colorado, (where Carrie and I are from,) has experienced it’s biggest earthquake since 1967.
Not coincidentally, Colorado has not had this kind of earthquake activity since the late 60’s and early 70’s.
Not coincidentally, oil companies have recently drastically increased fracking practices all over Colorado, but particularly in Southern Colorado
Colorado actually had quite a few earthquakes in the 60’s. Several studies were published which demonstrated that the government’s pumping of nuclear waste deep underground at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (and places like it) were causing these shifts.
What can Colorado do about it?
- Buy electric. Build solar. Colorado experiences 300 days of sunshine a year.
- Change buying habits to buy and use less stuff built on the premise that oil will always be available and unlimited.
- Vote for people who will move to actually prevent this kind of practice.
I usually reserve this kind of commentary for our GreenJoyment site.
But this is an environmental issue which is (potentially human-caused) earthquakes hit the state where Carrie and I are from.
In studies which (not coincidentally) are sponsored by the oil/natural gas industry, fracking has been shown to be safe.
The industry has moved to discredit groups of people who are making documentaries about what is going on.
In fact, the EPA released a study in 2004 which showed that fracking was a safe practice and wouldn’t harm drinking water supplies.
research the agency published in 2004, which concluded that the process of hydraulic fracturing did not pose a threat to drinking water. The 2004 report has been widely criticized, in part because the agency didn’t conduct any water tests in reaching that conclusion…
The 2004 report was used by the Bush administration and Congress to justify legislation exempting hydraulic fracturing from oversight under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The exemption came to be known in some quarters as the “Halliburton loophole” and has inhibited federal regulators ever since.
If fracking actually is safe, why does the industry (as well as the big companies behind this) fight actual independent studies every time someone tries to get one commissioned?
Why do they work to discredit anyone who questions the practice of fracking?
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Colo.—U.S. Senator Mark Udall says there is no reason to worry about the use of hydraulic fracturing to free up oil and gas deposits if it’s done properly. Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves injecting vast amounts of water and chemicals to open deeply buried gas formations.
People living near drilling areas have complained about water and air quality. According to the Glenwood Springs Post Independent ( http://bit.ly/n7X4uN), Udall says it’s a safe technology that has resulted in a lot of home-grown energy being produced.
“Home-grown energy”? That’s political jargon for “Stuff that was here long before we were that we’re not able to easily remove without sand, water, and poison blasting our way into the earth”.
“Home-grown jobs” might also come into play on this as political jargon. There are so many more jobs to be had if the same kind of interest and investment is generated around solar and wind energy.
People in this part of the state have been fighting fracking for months.
The approval process was fraught with controversy, as the planning and zoning commission refused to let members of the public speak at preliminary meetings on the approval. Scott King, chair of the commission, threatened to forcibly remove citizens from meetings, according to Ceal Smith, of the San Luis Valley Renewable Communities Alliance.
When audience members protested this action, King responded with, “So sue us,” according to Smith.
The group, Citizens for Huerfano County, requested a public hearing with the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, but was turned down because the request did not come from a local government body.
Oil and gas industry officials maintain that fracking, in which water, sand and undisclosed chemicals are injected deep into gas wells to force open tight sand and rock formations and free up more gas, has been going on for decades without a documented case of groundwater contamination. Critics charge that’s because the industry has been allowed to keep the chemicals used in the process secret for proprietary reasons there’s no way of knowing for sure.
Let’s say I’m just a planet loving greenie. Fine.
But do you think it’s good to be pumping arsenic into the ground and releasing methane and natural gas into man-made underground pockets in an effort to extract natural gas from under the space where people live?
I would love to find out who funds this publication, and if the lines match up with fracking practices in the map on page 3.
Do you think it’s good to leave poisoned “recovered” water sitting on the surface while it waits to be taken away for treatment?
And do you think it’s good to do so with potential water contamination risks, in particular in an area of the state where water is already scarce?
The groups in support of fracking are large, have big money, and are well-connected. They say that the “technology” to do this is more than 65 years old.
I’m suggesting that it’s time for this “technology” to be retired.