Skip to main content

View Diary: The California Frack Wars: Episode V - The Industry Strikes Back (10 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You said: (0+ / 0-)
       In reality, they have created 61,440 direct jobs and maybe 12,000 indirect jobs as of 2013---that's a grand total of 73,440 jobs.
    That is still a considerable amount of employment which will apparently be lost due to the moratorium on hydraulic fracturing that you are advocating.....and is reason why you are getting push-back from union Democrats whose jobs are at risk.
       Contamination: There have been more than 100 proven cases of water contamination from fracking operations.
    That reference to Pennsylvania doesn't compute.   There is no indication that Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection attributed the cases cited to being caused by hydraulic fracturing so your suggestion that "fracking operations" caused the cases of water contamination from oil and gas operations in Pennsylvania is erroneous.  

    Even the Dimock, PA cases of water contamination were not deemed by PA DEP to be caused by hydraulic fracturing.  Instead, well cementing and construction problems were the cause....not hydraulic fracturing.

    The Salon article indicates 98 cases over a period from 2008 to 2013, so that would be 98 / 6 or about 16 cases per year out of all of the hundreds of natural gas wells developed in that state.

       Methane: When leaking wells make up more than 1% to 2% of the fracking fleet, the leakage of methane during shale gas development makes fracked natural gas more carbon intensive than burning coal.
    This claim has been rejected by U.S. EPA and U.S. DOE as not valid, primarily because it assumes far greater methane release during well completion activities than is realistic when flare control is available to oxidize the methane prior to release, or when field gas is collected for marketing during well completions instead of being flared.
       The leakage rates nationwide have been measured to be a staggering 5.7% +/- 2.3%. In the Los Angeles basin, leakage has been measured to be somewhere around 17%---
    There was no emissions measurement at least by emission sampling of individual emission units in any of the aircraft studies.  All of the aircraft and tower methane studies are ambient air contamination determinations, not measurement of emissions at emission units.   While the aircraft/tower ambient methane studies produce a quantitative estimate of emission rates across an entire geographical area, they do not make measurements of emissions.  Instead, such studies use model determinations in an attempt to put a quantitative number on emissions from emission units.

    This means that predictions about emission units and emission rates is subject to error introduced by application of the models to relate aircraft ambient methane data at altitude with ground-based emission units.   Typically, such determination have to made several assumptions about non-oil/gas-industry target emission units.   This introduces considerable variances to predicted estimates.

    Aircraft and tower ambient methane determinations and related modeling determinations and estimates are important work to address, but such studies are not emissions sampling of emission units operated by the oil and gas industry.

    Finally, aircraft and tower ambient methane determinations say nothing at all on whether methane releases are caused by hydraulic fracturing.  

    During hydraulic fracturing, methane emission from casing wellheads is physically impossible because of the high pressure hydraulic liquid pressure maintained at the casing wellhead.

    After hydraulic fracturing has been completed, methane emissions from produced water tanks and produced liquid hydrocarbon tanks is possible, unless such emissions are controlled with readily available closed vent system and flare technology, or by collection and marketing.

       worse yet, in California, we are primarily fracking for oil, some of which is more carbon intensive than the Alberta Tar Sands.
    Only a fraction of California liquid hydrocarbon development even approaches this concern....and those units would be ones where tertiary recovery methods using steam injection are employed.  Steam cycling is explicitly stated as not coming under SB 1132....See Section 2(b) of the bill at...

    As a result, the California "fracking moratorium" does not affect these sort of tertiary recovery operations because these are not considered "well stimulation" under the bill.

    Here is data on greenhouse gas emission intensity on a lifecycle basis for liquid fuels:

    Note that the greenhouse gas intensities for tar sands heavy sour crude vastly exceed the California average for liquids on greenhouse gas intensity at 12.9 gCO2e/MJ.  While some California fields indeed have a higher GHG intensity that both this state average and for the intensities listed for tar sands sources, those are not the majority of CA liquids production fields.

    •  You should change your twitter name... (0+ / 0-)

      Sounds like you are more anti-environment than an "Enviroenforcer" ... very misleading name.

      You chose the number that represented the average GHG intensities... If you look again, you'll see this:

      The Alberta Tar Sands:

      Suncor Synthetic A: 24.49
      Suncor Synthetic C: 24.49

      California Crudes (On the next page):

      BOLD = Greater Carbon Intensity than the Alberta Tar Sands

      Midway-Sunset: 21.18
      Kern River: 9.55
      Belridge, South: 14.49
      Cymric: 19.91
      Wilmington: 6.36
      Elk Hills: 5.36
      Lost Hills: 11.40
      San Ardo: 28.82
      Coalinga: 25.36

      Hondo: 4.27
      Ventura: 4.35
      Pescado: 3.45
      Sacate: 2.33
      Belridge, North: 5.00
      Kern Front: 25.06
      Round Mountain: 28.73

      Inglewood: 8.74
      Poso Creek: 28.41
      Point Pedernales: 6.00
      Point Arguello: 8.68
      McKittrick: 15.47
      Huntington Beach: 7.80
      Long Beach: 5.12
      Beta: 1.74
      Sockeye: 5.82
      Brea-Olinda: 2.97
      Dos Cuadras: 3.83
      Orcutt: 12.52
      Belmont, Offshore: 3.19
      Elwood, S., Offshore: 4.18
      Beverly Hills: 3.33 (Fracking Banned Here)
      Edison: 9.03
      Placerita: 31.66
      Buena Vista: 13.61
      All Others: 6.69

      EPA & DOE claim that methane's impact is 25 times that of CO2, when in reality it's more like 75 times. It makes sense that they would have information that is different from the scientific consensus that I mention.

      Furthermore, let's not get technical on the details. Your attacks are purely based in semantics... 17% leakage rate is from overall production... and that leakage starts at the well head at a fracking site. And according to Tony Ingraffea, a real engineer, leakage at the well head is most certainly possible...

      You clearly don't understand what it means to sign a non-disclosure agreement with a drilling company... There would be a hell of a lot more than 98 cases if people weren't forced to take a settlement. Again, this is where Ingraffea, a real engineer, would say that you are absolutely wrong. It can and has contaminated drinking water.

      And that really isn't a considerable amount of jobs... 73,440 jobs in a state with over 30,000,000 people is like a needle in a haystack... And we are not get push-back from Democrats, plural... there is only push-back from Governor Brown. The democratic party's official platform calls for a moratorium on fracking immediately, and 78% of California Democratic Voters want a moratorium. Unions should look to the clean energy sector as an opportunity for real long-term job investment. Fossil fuels are finite, and renewable energy installations are only going to grow from here on out.

      Damien Luzzo @damienluzzo

      by FractivistForce on Sun May 25, 2014 at 04:48:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (155)
  • Community (62)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Bernie Sanders (34)
  • Elections (30)
  • Culture (30)
  • Economy (30)
  • Law (25)
  • Texas (24)
  • Labor (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Education (20)
  • Environment (20)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Politics (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Racism (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site