CITIZEN POWER ALLIANCE
April 16, 2012
Gas Drilling Awareness for Cortland County
April 15, 2012
A presentation, Gas Drilling: A Community Forum, will be held on Wednesday, April 25,
7 pm – 8:30 pm, at the Virgil School on Rte. 392, Virgil. This event is free and open to the public.
Do You Have Questions About Gas Drilling And Its Impacts On The Community
William Podulka, PhD Physicist, will explain the process of shale gas drilling. He will also talk about the possible economic impacts on our area.
Mary Jane Uttech,The Deputy Director of the Cortland County Health Department, will speak about the potential impacts to drinking water, air quality, and public health.
These knowledgeable presenters have given talks to many groups in CNY.
Sponsored by Virgil Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition
April 15, 2012 1 Comment
Fracking-Study Conflicts Prompt Head of Institute to Quit – Bloomberg.

Note: Click the above images to view exclusive Energy Institute documents on the subject of Shale Gas Development. These documents include include: (1) Press Release; (2) Booklet; (3) Report Summary; (4) Full Report; (5) List of Experts at UT; and (6) Links to Video Clips.
The astonishing surge in domestic natural gas production, brought on by the widespread use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, has transformed the outlook for U.S. energy. Conservative estimates project the use of these techniques in shale gas development will all but assure a clean and affordable natural gas supply for generations to come, creating new jobs and enhancing our nation’s energy security.
That sanguine view has been tempered, however, by concerns that hydraulic fracturing may contaminate groundwater and pose other threats to public health. While little evidence exists directly linking the practice to environmental harm, such fears have ignited a controversy that has dominated public discourse on the issue. In fact, some areas have halted shale gas development altogether, at least temporarily.
In response, the Energy Institute at The University of Texas at Austin funded an independent study of hydraulic fracturing in shale gas development to inject science into a highly charged emotional debate.
For this study, the Energy Institute assembled an interdisciplinary team of university experts to examine a broad array of issues associated with hydraulic fracturing in three prominent shale plays — the Barnett Shale, in north Texas; the Marcellus Shale, in Pennsylvania, New York and portions of Appalachia; and the Haynesville Shale, in western Louisiana and northeast Texas.
The Energy Institute team investigated an array of issues related to shale gas development, including groundwater contamination, toxicity of hydraulic fracturing fluids, surface spills, atmospheric emissions, water use, drilling waste disposal, blowouts, and road traffic and noise.
The goal of this research is to provide policymakers a fact-based foundation upon which they can formulate rational regulatory policies that ensure responsible shale gas development.
For this study, the Energy Institute at The University of Texas at Austin assembled a team of experts with broad experience and expertise, from geology and environmental law to public affairs and communications. In addition to university faculty, the Environmental Defense Fund was actively involved in developing the scope of work and methodology for this study, and reviewed final work products.
Dr. Charles Groat
Under the leadership of Institute Associate Director Dr. Charles “Chip” Groat, researchers examined three critical areas related to shale gas development:
“Our mission is to alter the trajectory of public discourse in a positive manner, as exemplified in our credo — good policy based on good science.” – Dr. Raymond L. Orbach, Director, Energy Institute, The University of Texas at Austin.
Dr. Raymond L. Orbach
In these clips, Drs. Orbach and Groat discuss preliminary findings from the Energy Institute’s study on hydraulic fracturing: “Fact-Based Regulation for Environmental Protection in Shale Gas Development.”
Click on the following video clips to view:
The following is an overview of key findings from the Energy Institute’s study.
The public debate over hydraulic fracturing in shale gas production has been marked by fears that the process will contaminate groundwater. Concerns also have been raised that underground methane releases are contaminating water wells.
Though little scientific evidence exists to support such claims, policymakers in some areas have banned the practice, and others have imposed moratoriums on shale gas development until additional research is conducted.
For this report, the Energy Institute research team focused on reports of groundwater contamination and other environmental impacts of shale gas exploration and production in states within the Barnett, Marcellus and Haynesville shales.
Key Findings:
Researchers surveyed federal and state laws and regulations related to shale gas development in 16 states that have or are expected to have shale gas production. This analysis covered all major phases of the shale gas lifecycle — exploration, well siting, drilling and fracturing, production, well plugging, and site closure.
The research team also examined several exemptions of shale gas development from federal environmental laws, including the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Key Findings:
Researchers also reviewed state agencies’ enforcement capabilities, including a review of staff responsible for conducting inspections and attorneys supporting enforcement. The review covered violations recorded, enforcement actions, field sampling, and monitoring.
Key Findings:
Energy Institute researchers analyzed print, broadcast and online news media coverage of shale gas development in the Marcellus, Haynesville, and Barnett shale areas. They found that the tone of media coverage has been overwhelmingly negative in all forms of media. Roughly two-thirds of the articles and stories examined were deemed negative, a finding that was consistent nationally and at local levels.
Researchers also found that less than 20% of newspaper articles on hydraulic fracturing mention scientific research related to the issue. Similarly, only 25% of broadcast news stories examined made reference to scientific studies, and about 33% of online news coverage mentioned scientific research on the issue.
April 14, 2012
The Fracking Debate: A Policymaker’s Guide.
April 2012
By Jacquelyn Pless
Concerns about hydraulic fracturing are behind many states’ reluctance to tap the economic benefits created by natural gas development. Hydraulic fracturing—“fracking”—is an oil and gas extraction method that uses hydraulic pressure to break up rock. Millions of gallons of pressurized liquids, usually a water-based mixture of sand and chemical additives, are pumped deep underground to help release trapped gas.
This report provides an introduction to the domestic natural gas picture, explores the motivation behind state legislative involvement in fracking regulation, and summarizes state legislation that is being developed to address environmental concerns.
Fracking allows access to previously inaccessible resources, such as shale gas, which is making up an increasingly large portion of the overall energy supply in the United States.
Combined with recent advances in horizontal drilling, the technology has opened up resources that, only a decade ago, were too expensive to develop. Some forecast that this increase in supply could sustain current U.S. consumption levels for another 90 years. Rapid expansion of hydraulic fracturing in densely populated regions where the process is unfamiliar, however, has focused attention on its potential to affect public health and the environment.
Domestic Resource and Production Projections
Cumulative natural gas production from 2010 through 2035 is projected to be 7 percent higher than expected just a year ago.1 This is mainly due to technological advances in hydraulic fracturing that now make shale gas more accessible. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), shale gas production alone will increase nearly threefold from 5.0 trillion cubic feet in 2010 to 13.6 trillion cubic feet in 2035. This equates to 23 percent of total U.S. dry gas production in 2010 and 49 percent of total U.S. dry gas production in 2035 (Figure 1).
The EIA expects domestic natural gas production to exceed consumption early in the next decade. By 2016, the United States is projected to become a net exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and an overall net exporter of natural gas by 2021.2
Download PDF (18 page document) to access the full report.
April 14, 2012
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies responsible for overseeing the safe and responsible development of unconventional domestic natural gas resources and associated infrastructure and to help reduce our dependence on oil, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. In 2011, natural gas provided 25 percent of the energy consumed in the United States. Its production creates jobs and provides economic benefits to the entire domestic production supply chain, as well as to chemical and other manufacturers, who benefit from lower feedstock and energy costs. By helping to power our transportation system, greater use of natural gas can also reduce our dependence on oil. And with appropriate safeguards, natural gas can provide a cleaner source of energy than other fossil fuels.
For these reasons, it is vital that we take full advantage of our natural gas resources, while giving American families and communities confidence that natural and cultural resources, air and water quality, and public health and safety will not be compromised.
While natural gas production is carried out by private firms, and States are the primary regulators of onshore oil and gas activities, the Federal Government has an important role to play by regulating oil and gas activities on public and Indian trust lands, encouraging greater use of natural gas in transportation, supporting research and development aimed at improving the safety of natural gas development and transportation activities, and setting sensible, cost-effective public health and environmental standards to implement Federal law and augment State safeguards.
Because efforts to promote safe, responsible, and efficient development of unconventional domestic natural gas resources are underway at a number of executive departments and agencies (agencies), close interagency coordination is important for effective implementation of these programs and activities. To formalize and promote ongoing interagency coordination, this order establishes a high-level, interagency working group that will facilitate coordinated Administration policy efforts to support safe and responsible unconventional domestic natural gas development.
Sec. 2. Interagency Working Group to Support Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources. There is established an Interagency Working Group to Support Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources (Working Group), to be chaired by the Director of the Domestic Policy Council, or a designated representative.
(a) Membership. In addition to the Chair, the Working Group shall include deputy-level representatives or equivalent officials, designated by the head of the respective agency or office, from:
(i) the Department of Defense;
(ii) the Department of the Interior;
(iii) the Department of Agriculture;
(iv) the Department of Commerce;
(v) the Department of Health and Human Services;
(vi) the Department of Transportation;
(vii) the Department of Energy;
(viii) the Department of Homeland Security;
(ix) the Environmental Protection Agency;
(x) the Council on Environmental Quality;
(xi) the Office of Science and Technology Policy;
(xii) the Office of Management and Budget;
(xiii) the National Economic Council; and
(xiv) such other agencies or offices as the Chair may invite to participate.
(b) Functions. Consistent with the authorities and responsibilities of participating agencies and offices, the Working Group shall support the safe and responsible production of domestic unconventional natural gas by performing the following functions:
(i) coordinate agency policy activities, ensuring their efficient and effective operation and facilitating cooperation among agencies, as appropriate;
(ii) coordinate among agencies the sharing of scientific, environmental, and related technical and economic information;
(iii) engage in long-term planning and ensure coordination among the appropriate Federal entities with respect to such issues as research, natural resource assessment, and the development of infrastructure;
(iv) promote interagency communication with stakeholders; and
(v) consult with other agencies and offices as appropriate.
Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 13, 2012.
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 20:58:48 -0400
> From: jr@amanue.com
> To: citizensconcernedaboutnatgasdrilling@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [CCNGD] Obama to Planet: BURN BABY, BURN
>
> > Before we start blaming the POTUS once again for the ongoing affects of
> > previous GOP policies, we should ask ourselves what important budget items
> > were held hostage if the POTUS didn’t sign on to this idiocy.
>
> Well, sorry, but I don’t buy this. Obama is clearly spooked about gasoline
> prices costing him the election. So, he does this:
>
> > Today, three federal agencies announced a formal partnership to
> > coordinate and align all research associated with development of our
> > nation’s abundant unconventional natural gas and oil resources.
>
> Let’s understand what this means. The EPA has just been **STRIPPED** of its
> authority to do its own research. That fracking study that hasn’t quite
> come out yet? Well, that gets to be “coordinated”. With an “Interagency
> Working Group”. Translated into English this means: a group of
> industry-heavy politicos coordinated from the White House. If you saw the
> composition of Secretary Chu’s SEAB (Secretary of Enegry’s Advisory Board)
> — about 2/3 industry types — you’ll get a pretty good forecast of what
> this “Interagency Working Group” will look like. *BUT* it gets worse: What
> do you suppose the EPA is required to do before it can do a rulemaking? Um,
> that little thing called … research …
>
> So, here’s what this means: As far as unconventional gas is concerned, the
> EPA just got ***EVISCERATED***. It’s over. And no, Obama **DIDN’T** “have
> to” do this. And yes, we do have to call him out for it.
>
> This is a dark day. There is no other way to say it.

April 10, 2012
Greater focus needed on methane leakage from natural gas infrastructure. Fulltext
Natural gas is seen by many as the future of American energy: a fuel
that can provide energy independence and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in the process. However, there has also been confusion about
the climate implications of increased use of natural gas for electric
power and transportation. We propose and illustrate the use of
technology warming potentials as a robust and transparent way to
compare the cumulative radiative forcing created by alternative
technologies fueled by natural gas and oil or coal by using the best
available estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from each fuel cycle
(i.e., production, transportation and use). We find that a shift to
compressed natural gas vehicles from gasoline or diesel vehicles leads
to greater radiative forcing of the climate for 80 or 280 yr,
respectively, before beginning to produce benefits. Compressed natural
gas vehicles could produce climate benefits on all time frames if the
well-to-wheels CH4 leakage were capped at a level 45–70% below current
estimates. By contrast, using natural gas instead of coal for electric
power plants can reduce radiative forcing immediately, and reducing
CH4 losses from the production and transportation of natural gas would
produce even greater benefits. There is a need for the natural gas
industry and science community to help obtain better emissions data
and for increased efforts to reduce methane leakage in order to
minimize the climate footprint of natural gas.
April 10, 2012
Greater focus needed on methane leakage from natural gas infrastructure.
Natural gas is seen by many as the future of American energy: a fuel
that can provide energy independence and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in the process. However, there has also been confusion about
the climate implications of increased use of natural gas for electric
power and transportation. We propose and illustrate the use of
technology warming potentials as a robust and transparent way to
compare the cumulative radiative forcing created by alternative
technologies fueled by natural gas and oil or coal by using the best
available estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from each fuel cycle
(i.e., production, transportation and use). We find that a shift to
compressed natural gas vehicles from gasoline or diesel vehicles leads
to greater radiative forcing of the climate for 80 or 280 yr,
respectively, before beginning to produce benefits. Compressed natural
gas vehicles could produce climate benefits on all time frames if the
well-to-wheels CH4 leakage were capped at a level 45–70% below current
estimates. By contrast, using natural gas instead of coal for electric
power plants can reduce radiative forcing immediately, and reducing
CH4 losses from the production and transportation of natural gas would
produce even greater benefits. There is a need for the natural gas
industry and science community to help obtain better emissions data
and for increased efforts to reduce methane leakage in order to
minimize the climate footprint of natural gas.
April 10, 2012
O P E N T O T H E P U B L I C
Lecture and Slide Presentation
Q & A to follow
Data Gathered from Six States
LIVESTOCK, COMPANION ANIMALS AND THE
GAS INDUSTRY
Monday, April 23, 2012
7:00 – 9:00pm
Robert Oswald
Professor of Molecular Medicine
College of Veterinary Medicine, CornellUniversity
Michelle Bamberger
Doctor of Veterinary Medicine
Private Practice Veterinarian
NYSGrangeBuilding
100 Grange Place, off Clinton Ave.
Cortland, NY13045
m
—