As the year 2015 ends it’s important to know that we are part of a much larger movement that recognizes the dangers of fracking and is working to get America to do the right things.  Here is a report I received from California’s Faith against Fracking organization:

This past year has been one of the most gratifying years in organizing – we accomplished a lot – but it’s also been one of the most challenging funding-wise. And that’s why I’m writing to ask you for your help. While grants partially fund our work, we need to bridge the gap. Can you chip in to help the Rootskeeper team continue our critical organizing work or help fund the Faith Against Fracking campaign? Even a little goes a long way!

Coming off a historic win for a ban on fracking in New York, here’s what we’ve been up to this past year in California:
• Organized the California Crossroads Tour which stopped in 8 cities and held a press conference in Sacramento. After the tour, we produced the California Crossroads Movie where and did house-parties around the state.
• Delivered thousands of petition signatures to Governor Brown calling for a ban on fracking and extreme extraction
• Organized the Clean Not Extreme Day of Action, with 18 distributed actions around the state, calling on Governor Brown to listen to the science laid out in the CCST Report, and to ban fracking.
• Delivered over 150,000 petitions to Governor Brown following Clean Not Extreme at a press conference featuring three state legislators, all of whom called for a ban on fracking in California
• Ramped up momentum on the Faith Against Fracking campaign, producing the short film Faith Against Fracking and holding over 30 screenings around the state
• Delivered the Faith Against Fracking letter to Governor Brown at a multi-faith day of prayer, meditation and inspiration in Sacramento (we hear that faith leaders make Governor Brown nervous).
Through all these actions, we were able to identify and grow a number of strong grassroots leaders who are working with us to strengthen the movement to end fracking and extreme extraction in California.

Next year, we plan on continuing:

• Our work with faith leaders and the Faith Against Fracking Campaign
• Organizing grassroots leaders and holding rallies and press conferences in the state capitol
• Organizing with health professionals, and highlighting health impacts.
• Moving Californians Against Fracking downfield – to win a ban, just like we did in New York!

We’re clearly moving the needle on fracking, but we can’t do it alone. Can you help us continue this important work and make a donation to Rootskeeper, or help us with our Faith Against Fracking campaign?

Thank you for your love and support!
David
David Braun

www.americansagainstfracking.org
www.californiansagainstfracking.org

With domestic needs more than satisfied and prices low the carbon fuel industry is turning to global markets, seemingly heedless of climate change. In a item focusing on the pending end to the embargo on export of US crude oil, The Economist said this:

Cherry blossoms bloom in Newtown, PA on December 17th after a week of 60 degree weather.

“OPEC is about to receive a dose of its own medicine. The bold decision, expected by the end of the week, to lift a 40-year-old ban on American oil exports is not just a victory for the principles of free commerce. A dollop of American crude on world markets would put even more pressure on the faltering cartel. In a frenzy of trading in the last few days, expectations of a policy change have virtually wiped out the premium that Brent, the global benchmark, has habitually enjoyed over West Texas Intermediate, its American equivalent. Some of this may be premature. Without a discount to Brent, paying to transport American crude abroad is less attractive. But lifting the ban may also encourage international oil-traders to finance shale production in America in order to secure its easily refined, light, sweet crude. Result: Shale 1, Sheiks 0. Hats off to Congress.”

Market forces and the relentless corporate drive for growth and profit will drive carbon energy companies to find ways to get their product out of the ground and off to market.  Without a balancing force like CCD (Carbon Fee and Dividend) and with our legislators unable or unwilling to take the climate situation seriously, there seems little hope of keeping the carbon in the ground where it must stay for the sake of future generations.

After reading about the proposed Elcon site in Falls Township, a resident asked if there was any actual record of flooding on the 33 acre site. She recalled her experience of nearly buying a Yardley home that, unbeknownst to her, had been gutted and restored after the Delaware flooded a few years ago. She was amazed that Pennsylvania DEP would even consider such a site. What follows is my response.

While one could certainly follow up and get answers to those questions, they would only tell us more about the probability of a flood without assuring us it could not happen.  It’s a matter of risk assessment, not a matter of history.

For the sake of argument let’s assume that the Elcon site has never flooded in recorded history. That does not mean it can’t flood.  Nor does it mean that there is some level of risk that locals should accept.

The risk of flood is different with Elcon than with other businesses.  The other facilities at that location stand to lose their investment in physical assets, as would Elcon. But in the case of Elcon there will be tanks, equipment, containment ponds, and residue storage that would contaminate the river if flooded. Why accept any such risk? What is the upside public benefit? Elcon will do nothing to improve the environment where it is located; there is only downside.

What is the downside risk? Imagine a site handling large volumes of toxic liquids having a mishap: a leak, a spill, a wreck, or whatever. Why should millions of people be at risk of losing their water source for even a day?  With the facility located on a site surrounded  by the river and bodies of water that connect to the river, what possible public good is served by building it there as opposed to a less vulnerable upland location.  Just because Elcon wants it there, and their customers find it convenient doesn’t justify it.

Finally, we know that sea levels are rising and that the river is tidal at the proposed Elcon site.  With extremes of weather more likely in future years, historical risks may be a poor predictor.  Torrential rains can be expected to increase the frequency and severity of river flooding. Polar vortexes may produce unprecedented ice flows and ice dams. Unusually large hurricane surges and the tides they produce may flood low-lying sites that been spared in the past.  Again, why risk it?

The Elcon “thermal oxidizer” vents to the air we breathe. For air quality we rank among the worst in the state.  Should we tolerate more assaults on air quality?

Unfortunately, our permitting system does not consider whether an application is in the public interest or is necessary. It presumes that a property owner should be allowed to do whatever he/she wishes so long as it doesn’t adversely impact the neighbors.

500,000

The number of abandoned gas and oil wells in PA. Many are leaking already, most will eventually leak, and we have no record of where 95% are!

30,000

The number of miles of gas and oil pipeline the PA DEP predicts will be built before 2035 in Pennsylvania.

0

The number of inspections actually conducted by US EPA – it relies on industry reports.

0

The number of wells bleeding methane to the atmosphere that the industry classifies as leaking if no groundwater contamination is discovered.

0

The additional carbon fuel development needed to meet domestic US fuel needs. We already are a net exporter of energy.

10%

The portion of the gas in the fracked shale layer that is extracted before a well is considered exhausted. The rest (90%) is a lost asset.

11th

Pennsylvania has the lowest (11th of 11 states) severance fees, the taxes and fees charged for produced gas and oil.

2000%

The global warming effect of Methane (natural gas) 20 times an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide in a year.

8400%

The global warming effect of Methane is 84 times an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide over ten years. (Methane degrades naturally, carbon dioxide does not.)

PennLive reporter Wallace McKelvey says a recent reorganization of the Pennsylvania DEP has resulted in less oversight of drillers. This should be shocking news but it’s not. Our state’s record of protecting its citizens from the depredations of the energy industry is far from admirable, and the legislature routinely acts against the interests of locals in favor of shale gas exploration. 

McKelvey writes:

It all started with a two-line email that filtered out to Pennsylvania’s shale inspectors.

‘Effective immediately,’ wrote executive deputy secretary John Hines, ‘any violations related to natural gas drilling operations would need approval from the top of the agency.’

‘Any waiver from this directive will not be acceptable,’ wrote Hines, who now works at Shell and declined to comment for this project. (Read the whole Story)

It speaks worlds that Hines now works at Shell.

When one works for the government the internal political winds make or break careers. Too often the decision to do the right thing requires that one consider whether one’s superior will back you if there is push back from the regulated party.  At the very least, being reversed  is embarrassing.

Maybe the boss’s next career move is to take his or her knowledge and that all-important high level access and cash it in by landing a job in the regulated industry as a high paid relationship manager and expediter. The proverbial revolving door and such cozy connections with industry do not make for stringent or aggressive enforcement.

Is it any wonder that we don’t trust our DEP to protect us? When we see “the Secretary,” as his staff refer to John Quigley, personally ramrodding the fast-paced agenda of the Pipeline Infrastructure Task Force should we worry? Should we question his objectivity when he speaks about creating a grid of pipelines that will touch every county in the state, all without any discussion of whether it’s prudent in the face of global warming, the glut of gas in the world market, and shaky drilling industry financial prospects?

Beware the Carbon bubble. How much of our beautiful “common-wealth” will be sacrificed and bulldozed in the name of shale gas development?  Today it looks like tens of thousands of miles of clear cut hillsides and disrupted neighborhoods. The fox is in the hen house and most everyone who could stop the carnage is looking away.

Sigh. Well, maybe we can re-purpose those costly pipeline right of ways to build vast linear solar and wind farms when the climate gets bad enough.