What CA fracking advocates can learn from PA

What CA fracking advocates can learn from PA

Jan. 31, 2013

By Chris Reed

FrackingAs Californians begin to appreciate the immense economic potential of the state’s underground natural gas and oil reserves, the debate will sharply intensify over the safety of hydraulic fracturing — the newly refined and improved tool used to access previously unreachable reserves. Fracking, the shorthand term for the process, involves using high-powered streams of water, with a small amount of chemicals and solids or sand, to break up rock formations thousands of feet underground.

Of the states most associated with fracking — North Dakota, Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania — what has happened in the latter is of most interest to Californians. In the Keystone State, the use of fracking to tap vast natural gas reserves in an underground formation called the Marcellus Shale flourished under a liberal Democratic governor, Ed Rendell. The former Philadelphia mayor simply never gave credence to the various scare tactics used to try to block fracking and brushed off the criticism from the Philadelphia Inquirer editorial page, environmental groups and others with an ideological, quasi-religious abhorrence of fossil fuels.

If Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown is to be persuaded to follow Rendell’s path, advocates of fracking need to learn from Pennsylvania and how the debate unfolded there.

Stick to the facts to counter hysterics

Advocates should argue that fracking is not perfect, but that no oil exploration is, and note that when properly regulated, it has a strong safety record. Scott Perry, who was the director of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s Bureau of Oil and Gas Management under Rendell, liked to respond to the harshest critique with this just-the-facts statement: “There has never been any evidence of fracking ever causing direct contamination of fresh groundwater in Pennsylvania or anywhere else.”

The argument that fracking, which is typically at a depth of 5,000 feet or more, might affect water tables thousands of feet higher isn’t one that most scientists take seriously. John M. Deutch, an MIT chemistry professor who served in high posts in the Carter and Clinton administrations and has been a key adviser to the U.S. Energy Department on fracking, says careful regulation addresses environmental fears in comprehensive fashion. He adds that fracking “is by far the biggest event that I’ve seen” in 50 years of monitoring world energy developments.

What’s striking about media coverage of fracking safety questions is how it largely ignores the fact that the Obama administration rejects the alarmism of the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council. In House testimony in May 2011, EPA Director Lisa Jackson said she was “not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water.” The U.S. Geological Survey dismissed the idea that fracking causes earthquakes. Most definitively, a November 2011 Energy Department study concluded that there were legitimate pollution concerns surrounding hydraulic fracturing. But the concerns involved the worries about surface air and water quality and about community effects that would come with any heavy industrial project, and were not due to the deleterious effects of fracking underground.

Efficiency gains: It’s not the chemicals, it’s the computers

In explaining why fracking is so much more effective than it used to be, advocates should stress that it is a result of computing power — not more toxic and dangerous chemicals. Drillers are now able to use extraordinarily sophisticated sensors to take the equivalent of a gigantic MRI of underground rock formations, then focus their water cannons on weak spots in the formations surrounding the shale formations with natural gas and oil reserves.

Now, as in the past, by volume the chemicals and sand used are less than 1 percent of the total water used. Because of fracking’s increased efficiency, this means much less water is used than in past versions — and thus fewer chemicals.

Another claim regularly invoked by fracking critics is that the process wastes an extraordinary amount of water. But the Marcellus Shale Coalition says 90 percent of the water used is recycled, and that far more water is used in Pennsylvania on golf courses than in fracking. The recycling percentage is only going to improve as focus grows on the importance of reuse.

The ‘Goebbels’-like anti-fracking documentary

Fracking supporters can shore up their case by pointing to the intentional deception in a 2010 anti-fracking documentary, “GasLand.” The movie’s most unforgettable image is residents of a town in a heavy drilling area — Dimock, Pa. — lighting their tap water on fire, leaving the plain impression this was the result of fracking. Instead, even director Josh Fox acknowledged in an interview with McClatchy-Tribune that it resulted from local conditions unrelated to the chemicals used in fracking. Fox, however, insisted it wasn’t misleading.

Defenders of Pennsylvania’s fracking record like to bring up “GasLand” because they know it is so easily discredited. In a 2011 interview with a newspaper in Lancaster, Pa., Teddy Borawski, chief oil and gas geologist for the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, relished the chance to tee off on the documentary. “Joseph Goebbels would have been proud,” he said. “He would have given him the Nazi Award. That, in my opinion, was a beautiful piece of propaganda.”

And in the war of talking points, the fact is that fracking has actually led to the single best news on the U.S. environmental front in many years. Natural gas is much cleaner than coal and oil, and fracking has increased supplies so dramatically that it now costs only a third or less of what it did in 2008 in the United States. The result: “The amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years,” as AP reported last summer.

The irony could hardly be greater. For decades, environmentalists have argued that renewable energy such as solar and wind power are the only way to reduce the release of dangerous emissions into the atmosphere. But it is plentiful new supplies of a fossil fuel, natural gas, that has been the game changer. The U.S. has reduced carbon dioxide emissions more than any other nation since 2006, according to the International Energy Association.

ed.rendellCalifornia could thrive if it joins the “brown energy” revolution. The  Monterey Shale formation under the Central Valley is far bigger than the Marcellus Shale formation under Pennsylvania and other northeastern states. As the Wall Street Journal reported on Jan. 15, “The overall economic benefits of opening up the Monterey Shale field could reach $1 trillion.”

Allowing fracking to work its magic will be especially difficult in a state that is home to AB 32 and that is ground zero for regulatory excesses in the name of preventing pollution. But while governor of Pennsylvania from 2003-2011, Ed Rendell overcame reflexive green objections with his just-the-facts approach. It can work in California, too.


Write a comment
  1. The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm)
    The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm) 31 January, 2013, 06:53

    Oh– you anti Cali guys will hate this–from the very liberal OC Register— former Tony Rackacas breeding pond and home of Grreny!


    Reply this comment
  2. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 31 January, 2013, 07:00

    Ted, that was funny. The poll showed Californians optimistic about the economy on the same day the federal government released data showing the economy actually shrunk in Q4 2012!

    — John Seiler

    Reply this comment
  3. loufca
    loufca 31 January, 2013, 07:30

    John, the poll you mentioned should be discredited. Look at the last 5 points in the Register article. Almost laughable. Notice that they didn’t provide a break out of conservative vs liberal interviews nor political leanings. Lastly, take a look at who heads the Policy institute: A life long lib with a Phd. in Soc from UC Berkeley in 73. You know his political leanings. Oh one last thing they all work in San Fran.

    Reply this comment
  4. Hondo
    Hondo 31 January, 2013, 17:38

    I say, lets follow the advice of that Democrat Ed Rendell.

    Reply this comment
  5. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 31 January, 2013, 21:10

    Ted, that was funny. The poll showed Californians optimistic about the economy on the same day the federal government released data showing the economy actually shrunk in Q4 2012!

    If you take OUT the ZIRP pumping I would bet we have had negative growth the last 3 years…….

    Reply this comment
  6. Marten Purdy the metro man
    Marten Purdy the metro man 1 February, 2013, 11:34

    As a refresher: In Ecology, you learn that it costs much more energy to create a tertiary consumer than it does to create a primary consumer, and that only 10% of the energy used on each trophic level actually gets passed to the next “higher” level on the food chain: the rest is lost in waste and reduced output of information and energy. In other words, it costs much more energy to create a Fox or a Hawk than it does to create a vegetarian Great Ape. Why? Because of the amount of food that it took (entirely dependent on plants as a keystone species), the energy, time and circumstance that it took each animal in that food chain in order to “be”, while the Ape skips that whole process and eats directly from the fruits/vegetables of the earth. Thus, much less vegetables are consumed in the long run because it takes 85% of our food in America to feed livestock for slaughter that could instead be going around the world to feed hungry people 3 times over, while currently half the world is starving.

    Reply this comment
  7. Marten Purdy the metroman
    Marten Purdy the metroman 1 February, 2013, 11:56

    The United States is in the biggest pickle of all, with 5 percent fo the worlds population but using up an astonishing 25 percent of the oil the entire world produces every year, the US economy feels even the smallest fluctuations in the price of oil more than other countries.
    Dates for when oil production will peak range from anyday now to 2040. But most group in tight around 2010-2015.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Fresno mayor obstructs initiative process to save water rate hike

Fresno residents could see their water rates double, and in the process, all Californians could see their petition powers diminished,

Coastal Commission Evicts Families

Lloyd Billingsley: Staff of the California Coastal Commission (CCC) had sought to limit the time residents of Lawson’s Landing, a

State Dems eager to implement Obamacare train wreck

The wheels may be starting to come off the Obamacare train as it rolls out nationally. But California Democrats are