Skip to main content

View Diary: Situation Normal, All Fracked Up: Obama embraces fracking (150 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  EPA had already weighed in in 2004. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NYFM, Sylv, A Siegel, antirove, Argyrios

    This newest EPA study is just a re-look, one prompted more by politics than by any new need, since certain parties didn't like the approval given in 2004.

    I'm quite willing to wager the 2012/2014 report is probably going to say the same thing, save with some caveats about proper cementing and surface contamination precautions. (I actually have "wagered" stock-wise)

    On a vaguely related note, I think we're actually several years into the natural gas glut in the United States.

    •  Which way are prices moving? Which way is gas (0+ / 0-)

      moving? Sounds like you know more than we do.

      “The first principle [in science] is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman

      by the fan man on Tue Jan 17, 2012 at 09:33:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  the last report was in 2004; (13+ / 0-)

      the Cheney's-lobbyist-pals-written Energy Policy Act of 2005 greatly expanded fracking and wrote in a loophole allowing fracking companies to keep their lists of chemicals secret.

      I am willing to wager (agree) with you that the next EPA report will say substantially the same thing.

      The world is on pace for 11 degrees F warming. Nothing else in politics matters. @RL_Miller

      by RLMiller on Tue Jan 17, 2012 at 09:39:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  doesn't seem to matter what EPA (6+ / 0-)

        says or does in the this Admin., the Extractionists continue to carry the day

        recall finally getting reality based studies on Mountaintop Removal Mining from EPA, but didn't stop the Admin. from approving 2nd largest MMR operation in West Virginia

        @random
        President Obama signed symbolic agreement with Reliant India to sell them "tranches" of the Marcellus Shale while in Mumbai -- and continues to outpimp Cheney again and again on natural gas

        Army Corps of Eng. Brig. Gen (?) Pete DeLuca stated very clearly that he was sent to meetings of the Delaware River Basin Commission by the President, and proceeded to browbeat Congr. Hinchley and others who were arguing against expansion

        as to that whole "cleaner than coal" bs the WH and it's syncophants in the Sierra Club are bleating -

        there's the recently published Cornell White Paper irrefutably showing otherwise -- of course,  WH aides could not get out there fast enough to dismiss and concern troll the report and the science behind it

        as to the Cheney Loophole, Congr. Diane DeGette offered up a truth-in-fracking bill, but went strangely silent on the subject some time around 1/19/09 -- and of course mysteriously unable to make to the Press Conference with Congr. Hinchley, Josh Fox, and Mark Rufalo last spring

        good diary - T & R'd

        •  Regarding the Cornell Paper (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RLMiller, Fogiv, slothlax, huttotex

          I think it's worth mentioning (and it is indeed mentioned in the paper itself) that shale gas only compares unfavorably to coal because a majority of operators don't use "green completions" to capture a fair amount of waste gas.

          It's quite possible new fracking and EPA regulations will in fact mandate "green completions" making the comparison largely moot.

          •  And groundwater contamination? (0+ / 0-)

            I'm sure that's "green" as well.

            ;)

            Every election either the democrats lose or the republicans lose. But in every election there is always the same winner. And he drives a Mercedes.

            by Methinks They Lie on Tue Jan 17, 2012 at 04:09:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site