The rime of the upstate anti-fracker Daily Star 4/9/11

April 9, 2011

The rime of the upstate anti-fracker

Anonymous By Art Siegel The Daily Star Sat Apr 09, 2011, 03:24 AM EDT

In Samuel Coleridge’s oft-quoted late 18th-century poem of the violation of nature and Christian redemption, “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,” the title character laments, “water, water, everywhere, Nor any a drop to drink.”

An albatross, a good luck omen to sailors, had been pursuing the mariner’s ship for days. The mariner thoughtlessly kills the great seabird, invoking the wrath of the spirits of the sea.

The ship is tossed into the windless doldrums, where it remains until the ship’s water supply is exhausted and the crew severely dehydrated. The vengeful crew wrapped the seabird around the mariner’s neck as a kind of “Scarlet Letter.”

While the fantasy of this faraway mariner’s life-threatening dehydration may seem irrelevant to the risks posed by rural life in upstate New York or urban life in New York City, this fantasy may be a far more imminent possibility than most New York state residents can yet imagine.

Why?

Some of the nation’s richest reserves of natural gas are trapped in the tight, difficult-to-access shales of the Marcellus Formation, some of which lie several thousands of feet below the surface in a broad, 18,000-square-mile swath across New York state’s Southern Tier. The formation covers 95,000 square miles across several states, including Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

The oil and gas drilling industries have already leased tens of thousands of acres in the watersheds that supply 27 million consumers in five states _ New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland _ with clean, potable and mostly unfiltered and affordable water.

Using a relatively new, aggressively intrusive method _ horizontal hydraulic fracturing _ well drillers penetrate the earth vertically to reach the tight shales, then extend horizontally for up to a mile.

The 3 to 8 million gallons of water for each individual well are drawn from local aquifers, streams and rivers to facilitate the drilling process. Eighty to 300 tons of “proprietary” chemicals, the identities of which are unknown to the public, are used with the drilling water.

The Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 exempts the oil and gas industries from disclosing chemical drilling recipes, and exempts them from regulation under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Water and Clean Drinking Water acts.

However, the EPA labels oil and gas drilling by-products as the most hazardous industrial wastes in the nation.

Approximately 1 million gallons of drilling wastewater laden with toxic chemicals, normally occurring radioactive materials (NORMS) and total dissolved solids (TDS) will be recovered from the well bore and stored on site until they can be removed and processed at an appropriate wastewater processing facility _ the type of which only exists in a few locations in the entire country.

After drilling, the gas is released from the shale by water and sand under explosively high pressures. Some of the recovered methane, a greenhouse gas 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide, along with a miasma of volatile organic compounds, will be “flared off” at the wellhead before the useable gas can be contained.

With an economy of scale throughout the full range of the Marcellus’ 95,000 square miles _ 6 to 10 wells per square mile _ the gas drilling industry claims it can provide enough gas to

See Frack on Page D2

meet the nation’s current gas consumption needs for 100 years. Yet the U.S. population of 310 million will reach 450 million by 2050, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That implied increased consumption would considerably shorten that projected supply period, even if current per capita use remained stable.

Moreover, subsidizing the gas industry with costly tax exemptions and EPA exemptions that threaten public health and safety are tantamount to feeding the world’s most consumptive society’s insatiable fossil fuel addiction, instead of treating it with heavier subsidies for genuinely renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. The Rocky Mountain Institute asserts that if the 40 least electrically efficient states in the U.S. were to achieve the electrical efficiency of the 10 most efficient ones, national electricity use would be cut by one-third _ the equivalent of shutting down 372, or 62 percent, of the nation’s 600 coal-fired power plants.

Exclusive use of LED (light-emitting diode) lighting in the U.S. would reduce electrical energy use for lighting by 75 percent. Worldwide exclusive use would reduce global electrical energy consumption by 12 percent. And that’s only the beginning.

The New York City Department of Environmental Protection’s Final Impact Assessment Report (released in December 2009 by a hydrological civil engineering company) details a host of additional risks posed by hydraulic fracturing to the purity of the 1 million-acre New York City watershed in the Catskill region.

Many thousands of trucks laden with toxic wastewater would be simultaneously plying town, county and state roads adjacent to streams, rivers and reservoirs. Naturally occurring and hydraulic-fracturing-related fissures and fractures in rock formations would provide pathways through which highly toxic drilling chemicals and NORMS could migrate under pressure to aquifers and aqueducts.

The “ancient mariner” in Coleridge’s fantastical poem was ultimately redeemed by his own contrition and the forgiveness of Christ, even though all his crewmates perished by dehydration because he had violated the natural law of the sea. Our elected state officials may not benefit from that same kind of redemption and may be compelled to wear an albatross of shame if they fail to act at this decisive moment.

While the DEP report has been available since 2009, two governors, the state Legislature and the state Department of Environmental Conservation still have not acted decisively to ban hydraulic fracturing in New York state. They produce only moratoriums, fatally flawed drafts, and hearings in public auditoriums where concerned citizens speak to DEC stenographers who mechanically record their eloquent remonstrations on an otherwise vacant, unresponsive public platform.

When I interviewed state Assemblyman James Brennan of the 44th Assembly District, he characterized the proposed hydraulic fracturing in the New York City watershed as “the industrialization of the region.” Brennan courageously sponsored a bill in the Assembly that would cut the Gordian knot of disparate opposition and effectively ban hydraulic fracturing in anyone’s watershed. A similar bill, SO 1234, was sponsored by Sen. Tom Duane in January. The bill is now with the Senate’s Environmental Conservation Committee, with little or no support.

This is no time for quibbling over an industrial process that is inherently dangerous, regardless of the most restrictive regulations or oversight, which no state agency has the staff to implement. Budgeted to the bone, the DEC has 19 staff to supervise what could become tens of thousands of hydrofracking wells in the state. Let’s get real.

All that glitters may not be gold or oil or gas, but the sparkling surface of a pristine river or reservoir.

Art Siegel is a certified tree farmer with The National Tree Farm System and an independent filmmaker. His film “Parcelizing the Catskills and the Boiled Frog Syndrome,” which features interviews with local, New York City and state elected and agency officials on environmental issues affecting the Catskill Region, is being screened at the Frank W. Cyr Center in Stamford on Saturday.

State may limit drilling byproduct from being spread on farms – News – Daily Review

State may limit drilling byproduct from being spread on farms

bY Laura Legere (Times-Shamrock Writer)

Published: April 9, 2011

Article Tools

Share

| Font size: [A] [A] [A]

Sign Up newsletter

Pennsylvania is seeking to limit the use of sewage sludge as a fertilizer on farmers’ fields if the sludge comes from sewer plants that treat wastewater from natural gas drilling.

Environmental regulators’ concerns about the sludge was highlighted in a New York Times article on Friday that described the risks of radioactive contaminants in the drilling wastewater concentrating in the sludge during treatment. The sludge, also called biosolids, is sometimes sold or given away to farmers and gardeners as fertilizer if it meets certain standards for pathogens and metals.

The Times article quotes from a transcript of a March 15 conference call between officials with the federal Environmental Protection Agency and the state Department of Environmental Protection about how to better regulate discharges of the wastewater that can be high in salts, metals and naturally occurring radioactive materials.

DEP is developing a guidance document about how to include new wastewater treatment standards into permits for new or expanding treatment plants that handle the drilling fluids. The new standards limit the amount of salty discharge, called total dissolved solids, that can enter state streams.

The draft guidance document would also bar treatment plants that receive untreated drilling wastewater from using their sludge for land application.

Ron Furlan, a division manager for DEP’s Bureau of Water Standards and Facility Regulation, is quoted in the Times as saying sludge was included in the guidance document because “we don’t have a good handle on the radiological concerns right now, and in any case we don’t want people land-applying biosolids that may be contaminated to any significant level by radium 226-228 or other emitters.”

The guidance does not carry the legal weight of a regulation and would not be imposed on treatment plants unless their discharge permit is up for renewal or they apply for a new or expanded permit.

The draft guidance also proposes that treatment plants accepting untreated drilling wastewater develop radiation protection “action plans” and have monitoring requirements for radium 226 and 228, gross alpha and uranium established in their permits.

In a letter this week to the EPA, DEP Acting Secretary Michael Krancer wrote that the state has directed 14 public water supplies that draw from rivers downstream from treatment plants that accept Marcellus Shale wastewater to test the finished drinking water for radioactive contaminants and other pollutants. The state also called on 25 treatment plants that accept the wastewater to begin twice monthly testing for radioactivity in their discharges.

Tests of seven state rivers at sites downstream from wastewater treatment plants last fall showed that levels of radioactivity were at or below normal levels.

In the conference call quoted by the New York Times, environmental regulators also expressed concerns about radionuclides settling in the sediment of rivers where the incompletely treated wastewater is discharged from sewer plants.

“If you were really looking for radionuclides, that’s the first place I would look,” Furlan said.

DEP spokeswoman Katy Gresh said Friday that there are currently no plans to begin testing river sediment for radionuclides.

“We will use the results of the increased testing/monitoring to see what is being discharged before making that decision,” she said.

Contact the writer: llegere@timesshamrock.com

via State may limit drilling byproduct from being spread on farms – News – Daily Review.

Chesapeake CEO: No ‘lasting environmental damage’ from fracking – News – Daily Review

Chesapeake CEO: No ‘lasting environmental damage’ from fracking – News – Daily Review.

Chesapeake CEO: No ‘lasting environmental damage’ from fracking


DALLAS, TEXAS – Issues of water contamination in Northeast Pennsylvania are due to the region’s geology, and they have not – and likely will not – be seen elsewhere, the CEO of Chesapeake Energy Corp. told reporters and editors at a business journalism conference Friday.

Aubrey McClendon, CEO of the Oklahoma City, Okla.-based company, said the drilling issue with Northeast Pennsylvania’s “very unusual surface geology” has been solved and should hopefully mean there are no future incidents of water contamination, but did not elaborate on what contamination incidents he was referring to.

There has been no “lasting environmental damage” from hydraulic fracturing drilling, he added.

Pennsylvania recently established stronger well casing and cementing standards meant to help prevent methane from migrating into water supplies.

In his keynote address, the CEO told business media that while there are stories worth writing on truck traffic, noise and even drilling company transparency, “fracking is not the story.”

McClendon also said an agency would on Monday announce a major step forward for gas drilling companies releasing chemicals used in drilling.

The Groundwater Protection Council and the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission will debut the new online registry of chemical additives used in hydraulic fracturing jobs at fracfocus.org. The well-by-well information is being supplied voluntarily by major natural gas operators. The data is culled from materials safety sheets, which critics have argued are vague and incomplete.

McClendon went on to say “there is no such thing as clean coal” and blasted efforts to produce clean coal as a “waste of money.”

The CEO said fracking has “fundamentally changed the price of gas.” The price ranges around $4 per 1,000 cubic feet now, compared to $8 per 1,000 cubic feet several years ago. But he said the national conversion from using oil as a fuel to natural gas is likely still two decades away.

In a separate panel discussion at the conference, David P. Poole, senior vice president and general counsel for Fort Worth, Texas-based Range Resources Corp., said “it is physically impossible for you to frack a Marcellus well … and have any impact on groundwater.”

Asked what the cause of groundwater contamination is if it is not fracking, he acknowledged that’s something the industry has to address.

“Unless we can prove we are innocent, we are not,” he said, adding that doing baseline testing of water wells before companies do drilling would show what the water quality is beforehand and would also show if there was already contamination.

Contact the writer: cschillinger@timesshamrock.com.

TIME Magazine video: Bradford County

Gmail – TIME Magazine video: Bradford County –

In northeastern Pennsylvania, natural gas from shale rock promises clean, abundant energy for the U.S. and the world. But locals worry about the environmental and social costs.


Drilling opponent to leave Pitt post – Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Apr. 10, 2011

Drilling opponent to leave Pitt post – Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.



Drilling opponent to leave Pitt post

By Luis Fabregas, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Complete coverage

About the writer

Luis Fabregas is a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review staff writer and can be reached at 412-320-7998 or via e-mail.

Ways to get us

.

A University of Pittsburgh researcher who is a vocal critic of Marcellus shale drilling said Saturday he is leaving his post because the university won’t allow him to speak publicly about environmental issues, not because of online criticism of his work.

Conrad “Dan” Volz, director of the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities at Pitt’s Graduate School of Public Health, said he was not fired or under pressure to resign, but finds he has a calling for advocating for public health.

“There is a basic philosophical difference,” said Volz, 57, of West Deer. “What the university is saying is that they don’t want people to talk about things. They want to do scholarly research and publish it in journals and have it go out into the world.”

Dr. Donald S. Burke, dean of the school, could not be reached for comment. Pitt spokeswoman Allison Schlesinger said she was unable to comment without his approval.

Volz claims drinking water is being contaminated by Marcellus shale drilling. He authored a report in March that showed a high concentration of bromide in Marcellus wastewater at the Josephine brine treatment facility, located in Indiana County, in the Allegheny River watershed. Bromide is a natural compound found in seawater that can form chemicals linked to cancer in laboratory animals when mixed with chlorine used to treat drinking water, Volz said.

“It is now starting to affect drinking water in the Pittsburgh area because the bromide levels in the rivers are so high,” Volz said. He and others say a drilling practice known as “fracking,” in which drillers shoot water, sand and chemicals into the shale to fracture it and free the gas, produces chemically tainted wastewater.

Volz’s work came under attack by unnamed critics in the online newspaper Canada Free Press. The critics claimed he misrepresented facts on the report.

Some Volz supporters said he has been honest and objective about drilling’s potential harm to the environment.

“He’s been a wonderful resource for those who want to know what’s happening,” said Mel Packer, a community activist from Point Breeze. “I hope he continues to speak and finds ways to speak out.”

Volz dismissed the online critics. He said there were some errors in his original report about the Josephine plant, but Pitt never challenged any of his research.

“I have made mistakes in all of my research, as we all do,” he said. “Those errors were minor really and didn’t have any influence over our overall recommendations or conclusions.” He did not describe the errors.

Volz is scheduled to testify on Tuesday in Washington before the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, which is holding a hearing titled “Natural Gas Drilling: Public Health and Environmental Impacts.” Robert Perciasepe, deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, also is scheduled to speak.

“If this were an infectious disease, this would be stopped immediately,” he said about Marcellus shale drilling. “If this was Chi-Chis, and we had an outbreak of something, then all the spinach would be sequestered.”

Read more: Drilling opponent to leave Pitt post – Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_731592.html#ixzz1J89ASR2m

Nuclear Woes Could Propel Quest For Natural Gas : NPR

Nuclear Woes Could Propel Quest For Natural Gas : NPR.

Fracking Insiders Score Big in New Gas Bill, But Americans Not Told the True Costs of Massive Drilling Plan | Center for Media and Democracy

Fracking Insiders Score Big in New Gas Bill, But Americans Not Told the True Costs of Massive Drilling Plan | Center for Media and Democracy.

Fracking Insiders Score Big in New Gas Bill, But Americans Not Told the True Costs of Massive Drilling Plan

Corporate insiders peddling the claim that drilling for methane gas will solve America’s energy needs (and fracking for gas is very lucrative business) just scored big in Washington.  House Resolution 1380, given the feel-good moniker of the “New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act ” or “NAT GAS Act,” was announced on Wednesday, April 6, in the U. S. House of Representatives. The bill is 24 pages long and rewards the fracking industry with tax credits and products to help “drive” consumption. The bigger the vehicle, the more tax credits given.

This initiative to expand the controversial fracking process — which has already resulted in contaminated wells and rivers and even ignitable tap water for some — is being spearheaded in Congress by Reps. John Sullivan (R-Oklahoma), Dan Boren (D-Oklahoma), John Larson (D-Connecticut), and Kevin Brady (R-Texas). The bill has 77 co-sponsors, with 40 Democrats in support, and 37 Republicans, from 33 different states.

But, perhaps its most powerful supporter or potential supporter is President Barack Obama.  Just two weeks ago, he alluded to being a strong supporter of a bill of this nature in a speech on March 30 on “America’s Energy Security” at Georgetown University. In that address, he specifically mentioned T. Boone Pickens‘s name when discussing legislation to support expanded fracking for methane.

Pickens Hearts Methane: A Quick Review

As has been documented by PR Watch, T. Boone Pickens is a diehard advocate of methane gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale basin of the U.S. and elsewhere, vis-a-vis what he has coined as the “Pickens Plan“.

T. Boone PickensT. Boone PickensAnnounced in July of 2008, his PR pitch is about, to summarize, “getting off of foreign energy sources” and “using the resources we have at home.” In theory, these soundbites could refer to greater investment in renewable resources like wind and solar energy.  In practice, it has meant a push by Pickens for relentless fracking for methane in virtually every crevice of American land.

Environmentally and ecologically, though hailed by Pickens and other uncritical observers as an “energy efficient solution” and a “clean” energy resource, this PR spin ignores the true dangers and consequences of fracking and of the methane distribution and consumption process.  Fracking–using a drilling technique pioneered by Halliburton that forces a concoction of hazardous chemicals and drinkable water into shale–has been well-documented in movies like Gasland, as well as by the Center for Media and Democracy’s Water Portal, as a dangerous and destructive process that shortchanges land owners, enriches drillers, and spoils land and water.

Obama Embraces the Pickens Plan

President Barack Obama has fully embraced the Pickens Plan. In his March 30th speech at Georgetown, Obama gave a shout out to the Plan, saying,

But the potential for natural gas is enormous. And this is an area where there’s actually been some broad bipartisan agreement. Last year, more than 150 members of Congress from both sides of the aisle produced legislation providing incentives to use clean-burning natural gas in our vehicles instead of oil. And that’s a big deal. Getting 150 members of Congress to agree on anything is a big deal. And they were even joined by T. Boone Pickens, a businessman who made his fortune on oil, but who is out there making the simple point that we can’t simply drill our way out of our energy problems.

Obama also referenced Pickens in a March 11 address, using the same, “This is one emergency we can’t drill our way out of” talking point. In an interview after the March 11 address, Pickens praised Obama in appearances on Fox News and CNN‘s King Live.

The headline of a March 30 Dallas Morning News article gets the headline on what just happened right: “Obama endorses Pickens plan for natural gas vehicles.” Seconding that, the Miami Herald headline from April 3 reads, “Obama, oilman Pickens allied on natural gas push.” The lede of that article states, “The centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s new energy policy mirrors the plan trumpeted for more than two years by a one-time GOP juggernaut: Dallas oilman T. Boone Pickens.”

This is the same oilman who was a huge funder of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth — he gave some $3 million, according to a story by Politico.com, to the organization that is infamous for the smear campaign it ran against John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential Election.

Obama and Pickens both also claim that, for “national security” purposes, we need to end our addiction to foreign oil, particularly from OPEC countries. Yet, government reports show that gas companies are exporting an increasing amount of methane gas drilled in the U.S. to other countries, thus adding to the profits of the industry as it depletes the gas supply available to Americans.

Furthermore, the Wall Street Journal reported that two big Houston, Texas methane gas drilling companies, Freeport LNG and Cheniere Energy, are entering the export market. U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), one of the bill’s original four sponsors, represents Texas’s 8th congressional district, which is located just outside of Houston. These two companies, lo and behold, are headquarted in Houston.

The Wall Street Journal article also mentioned, “Major gas producers, including Chesapeake Energy Corp. and EnCana Corporation, are enthusiastic about the idea.“

Additionally, a cursory look toward Afghanistan and Iraq, two countries the United States military is currently occupying, shows that fossil fuels are on the minds of the powers-that-be and will be for years to come.  The Trans-Afghainstan Pipeline, located in the heart of Pipelineistan, was a project spearheaded by U.S. oil company Unocal. The pipeline procures methane gas.

Similarly, the Sourcewatch article titled “Oil and War in Iraq” also shows that Iraq sits on one of the largest oil reserves in the world, much of it consisting of methane gas. That article, citing a Sept. 2008 article from The Guardian, states, “In September 2008, oil giant Shell became the first western oil company to win significant access to the energy sector in Iraq since the 1970s, in a $4 billion deal…Shell signed an agreement with the Oil Ministry to form a joint venture with the South Oil Company…to process and market natural gas extracted on 19,000 sq km (7,300 sq miles) of land.”

A National Security concern? Certainly a concern for big profits, accompanied by big spin.

How the “NAT GAS” Bill Story Broke and What that Tale Tells

The way the story on the bill was broken reveals a lot about how the bill came to be. The first four entites to break the story are all, as will be seen, in some way, shape and form, well-connected to Pickens: School Transportation News (STN) and Natural Gas Vehicles for America (NGVA), and the American Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA), and Clean Energy Fuels (CEF). All four originally broke the story before the bill was publicly available.

ANGA consists of all of methane’s key players, including Cabot Oil and Gas, Chesapeake Energy, Seneca Resources, and EQT, among others. (SourceWatch has new profiles on these companies and the political donations and activities of their leaders.)  ANGA showered Obama’s March 31 address with praise.

NGVA, on the other hand, is called a “peer group partner” of the so-called “American Clean Skies Foundation“. NGVA has a programming agreement through the Foundation’s PR channel, Clean Skies TV Network, and the Foundation is funded by Chesapeake Energy CEO, Aubrey McClendon. NVGA’s spokesperson is the author of its press release on the announcement of the NAT GAS Act, and Denise McCourt, according to her LinkedIn page, is the former Industry Relations Director of the American Petroleum Institute (API). Before that stint, she was the Director of General Membership and Member Relations.

CEF is another “peer group partner” of the American Clean Skies Foundation that has a programming agreement with Clean Skies TV Network. Coming full circle, Pickens sits on its Board of Directors, as does John S. Herrington, the former United States Secretary of Energy under Ronald Reagan during his second term as President. The President and CEO of CEF, Andrew J. Littlefair, according to his biography on their website, is also the President of NGVA. According to that same biograpy, he formerly served as President of Pickens Fuel Corporation. A glance at the American Clean Skies Foundation webpage shows that he also sits on the Board of Directors with McClendon.

Pickens Fuel Corporation is the predecessor of CEF, which Littlefair co-founded in 1997 with Pickens. It was reincorporated as CEF in 2001. CEF dedicated its first Liquified Natural Gas plant to Pickens in May 2006, according to its website. The plant is called the “Pickens Plant.” CEF’s homepage includes links to the American Clean Skies Foundation, Clean Skies TV Network, and the NGVA website.

A bit trickier to figure out, STN, according to its website, “is a monthly news and feature magazine serving the field of pupil transportation.” Two of its “industry contacts” for “vendors and suppliers” in the “alternative fuel and equipment” category include, lo and behold, NGVA and CEF.

An e-mail exchange with the Editorial Director of STN and the author of STN’s article on the House’ introduction of the NAT GAS Act, John Gray, confirms that he had not yet seen a copy of the legislation when he wrote his article, but was flagged about it via a direct contact from a representative from the NGVA. Gray predicts that NGVA “were likely key authors of the legislation. My hunch is that they helped write it. Standard procedure in DC. They are a lobby.”

Many Questions to Answer, and Avenues to Explore

To be fair, it is unfortunately not uncommon for lobbyists to write drafts of legislation but that does not make it unseemly.  It does raise legitimate questions.  The age-old questions are about wealthy interests dictating law to willing servants in the legislature.  Or to put it another way, the question is whether the gas industry’s money is basically throwing its voice, like a ventriloquist, through the public’s (or industry’s) servants in Congress.  And, relatedly, given all the access expensive lobbyists and donations can procure in Congress, what access if any has been given to ordinary people who have deep concerns about the the methane industry’s grand plans?  Here are some more specific questions:

1. If well-connected and multi-billion dollar entites such as CEF, the ANGA, and NGVA were the first to see this bill and know its details before it was available to the general public, did they actually write the thing, in part or in whole, themselves, as Gray suggested? Why and how did they get a head start?

2. Was there some sort of bargain negotiated between President Obama and Pickens in their mid-August 2008 meetings before he became President? Did candidate Obama promise to support drilling in those pre-election meetings?

3. Did the $4,800 Pickens that gave to two the bill’s sponsors, Rep. John Sullivan (R-Oklohoma), and Rep. John Larson (D-Oklahoma), (figures according to the Center for Responsive Politics) have any influence on their decision to propose this bill? How about the $10,000 Pickens gave to two swing states’ Democratic Parties in the 2008 Presidential election, Colorado and New Mexico? Both of these states also sit on huge potential beds of gas.  How often have these reps or their staff been meeting with gas lobbyists and how much time has been given to citizens with concerns?

4. How much influence did the $327,400 campaign cash doled out in the 2010 election from the hand of Big Oil (much, but not all of which comes from methane gas companies) have on these four representatives?

5. How about the $11,000 from Aubrey McClendon ($4,800 to Boren and $4,800 to Sullivan, as well as $2,300 to Obama)? How about the $37,000 that the corporation he is CEO of, Chesapeake Energy, doled out to the bill’s four co-sponsors? Did that money carry with it any clout?

6. Will there be any public hearings that will let people like Josh Fox and others who have documented concerns about fracking be allowed to testify before Congress?

The Center for Media and Democracy plans to keep digging into this troubling proposal and its details in the coming days and months ahead.

Residents: dozens of wells in Bradford County have been contaminated – News – Daily Review

Residents: dozens of wells in Bradford County have been contaminated – News – Daily Review.

Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry in New York to Influence Public Policy Part II – Lobbying Expenditures A Report by Common Cause/New York April 2011

CC_REPORT_FINAL.PDF (application/pdf Object).

Common Cause/NY Releases Report Reflecting Large Infusion of Money to Influence Policy Decisions on HydrofrackingPro Industry Lobby Groups Outspend Those Opposing

Gas Drilling by 4-1

 

Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause/NY:  “New York State’s policies regarding hydrofracking will have a profound impact on the future of our state.  It is imperative that those policies are not unduly influenced by large infusions of special interest dollars. The fact that natural gas special interests outspent environmental groups 4-1 last year underscores the need for the public to monitor the state’s decision-making process and raises serious questions about our elected officials’ ability to remain independent and impartial.”

—

The proposed use of hydraulic fracturing technology, also called hydro-fracturing or, more commonly, hydrofracking, to drill for natural gas in New York State remains highly controversial.  Industry and some upstate landowners continue to press to be permitted to use hydrofracking, particularly to unlock the natural gas found in the Marcellus Shale, citing job creation and the need for new energy sources, while environmental groups and others urge caution, pointing to potential risks to New York’s water, air and natural resources. To assist the public in monitoring this difficult decision and how it is made, Common Cause/New York has continued and expanded its analysis of lobbying expenditures by those who seek to influence this critical decision.

Today, Common Cause/NY released the results of that analysis in their report, Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets, Lobbying Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry to Influence Public Policy, Part II, which provides a detailed analysis of the presence of a large money push to influence New York State’s public policy decision-making process in regards to natural gas extraction policies.

The report’s analysis of lobbying disclosures shows that it is not only the natural gas industry that is seeking to influence the state’s policies regarding natural gas exploration.  A powerful consortium of business groups has allied itself with the natural gas industry to oppose the moratorium on hydrofracking.  That consortium, made up of energy companies, business and professional associations in addition to natural gas companies, spent a total of $2,869,907 lobbying last year, grossly outspending those that lobbied in support of the bills by $2,143,525 or four to one.

Much of this was due to substantial amounts spent for advertising by Chesapeake Appalachia, the nation’s second largest producer of natural gas and the biggest spender among industry advocates of hydrofracking. In the first half of 2010, Chesapeake spent an astounding $836,386 on advertising to the public via billboard signage, television advertisements focused on the benefits of natural gas, and even a short film production.

New York State’s policies on hydrofracking will have a profound impact on the future of our state. It is imperative that those policies are not unduly influenced by large infusions of natural gas industry dollars. The uneven balance in spending on lobbying and advertising by pro- and anti-moratorium groups  reflects the massive resources at the disposal of natural gas interests and is indicative of  the growing need for special interest money to be countered by the grassroots involvement of an informed public.

To prepare Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets, Lobbying Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry to Influence Public Policy, Part II, Common Cause/NY accessed and obtained copies of the bi-monthly lobbying reports filed by the companies we had previously identified in our July, 2010 lobbying report. In that report, we analyzed the lobbyist expenditures of three natural gas companies from the year 2005 through the first half of 2010, as well as expenditures by five environmental groups. This report brings earlier data up to date with full year 2010 figures and expands our analysis to look more fully at lobbying expenditures spent lobbying in favor or opposition to two moratorium bills introduced last year. We examined the bi-monthly lobbying reports available for 2010 on the NY Commission for Public Integrity website in detail to compile the lobbying data for each company and entity identified as having lobbied on the moratorium bills introduced in the previous legislative session, S7592/ A10490 and S8129B/A1143B.

SEE FOLLOWING SAMPLE CHARTS FROM REPORT BELOW

 

 

###

_________________________________

For more information about Common Cause New York, go to:

http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4847595

Sign up to receive news updates from Common Cause/NY

 

Follow us on Twitter @commoncauseny

Like us on Facebook at:http://www.facebook.com/CommonCauseNewYork

Landowners’ Coalition Opposes Local Protective Ordinances Apr. 9, 2011

Reminder – Central New York Landowner Coalition to Meet April 9th, Topic: Anti-Gas Activism Targeted at Town Boards

For landowners who belong to the Central New York Landowner’s Coalition (a very large coalition in Upstate NY), there will be an all-coalition meeting on Saturday, April 9th to discuss recent developments by those opposed to drilling. The coalition believes drilling permits are likely to start being issued soon, and those who oppose drilling are now “taking the fight” to local town boards in an attempt to regulate and prevent drilling. The coalition wants to address that issue.


MDN will be on hand to cover the proceedings of this event.

From the announcement:
CNY LANDOWNER’S COALITION ALL-COALITION MEETING
Saturday, April 9th, 2011
The Unadilla Valley Central School
4238 State Highway 8, New Berlin, NY 13411

The SGEIS is due out in 2 months, negotiations are heating up and the anti-gas activists are trying to sway your town boards to ban drilling.  It’s time to hear the latest info on our chats with the industry and to unite on a strategy to protect your landowner rights at the town level.  Our coalition maps will be posted and committee members will be available for your questions.  Plus we’ll equip you with everything you need to be sure your town doesn’t strip you of your landowner rights and privileges.

9:30-11:30 Meeting – Last Names beginning with A-K
1:30-3:30 Meeting – Last Names beginning with L-Z

This is an important meeting to attend.  If the state continues on the path to complete the SGEIS and allow permitting, and if we win the battle on the town level, our next meeting after this one very well could be the one meeting that we have been waiting for.  However, if we don’t come to this meeting to be equipped to win at the town level, we may be waiting for a long time to see any drilling take place in our region.  We look forward to seeing you on the 9th.