Hydrofracked? One Man’s Mystery Leads to a Backlash Against Natural Gas Drilling (Kindle Single)
[amzn_product_post]
[amzn_product_post]
Cove Point, built as a natural gas import terminal, destined to be a natural gas export terminal.
Frackers already contaminate America’s groundwater, make people sick, produce radioactive waste, and contribute to earthquakes. Processing and moving the natural gas that they produce leads to nasty spills and deadly explosions. And cheap natural gas makes it harder for renewable energy to compete.
But, hey, at least almost all of that cheap fuel is being used by Americans in America, right?
That may not continue to be the case. The Obama administration is poised to rule on a slew of applications to export natural gas to other countries through hulking industrial terminals dotted along U.S. coasts. Over the weekend, Obama appeared to reveal his hand on the issue, forecasting that the U.S. would likely become a net gas exporter by 2020, reports The Financial Times.
According to the newspaper, administration officials fear that a restriction on natural gas exports, as is being sought by American environmentalists and manufacturers, would send a bad signal about the country’s support for free trade.
Environmentalists fear that allowing such exports would exacerbate the fracking boom, harm the environment along the routes of new natural gas pipelines, and cause pollution and industrial accidents at natural gas export terminals. (The manufacturers aren’t worried about any of that; they just want to keep the cheap gas to themselves.)
One such export terminal is planned at Cove Point, Md., along the shores of Chesapeake Bay and close to the vast Marcellus Shale natural gas reserves. Dominion, the energy company that owns the facility, received federal permission in 2011 to export gas through the terminal to certain countries. Now it is seeking permits needed to liquefy natural gas there before loading it onto tanker ships. Like other planned natural gas export hubs, Cove Point was built to receive imported natural gas, back before America’s fracking boom took hold, and now it’s being converted into an export hub.
The Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and other environmental groups jointly filed documents [PDF] on Friday calling on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to conduct a thorough environmental review of Dominion’s proposal.
From a press release issued by the groups:
The coalition argues the development of this terminal in Lusby, MD would result in major damage to the Chesapeake Bay, coastal forests, and the local economy, which currently support more than a trillion dollars in economic activity from the seafood and tourism industries. …
Major concerns include a substantial increase in ship traffic of huge — and potentially explosive — LNG [liquefied natural gas] tankers on the Bay and to Cove Point, as well as the risks posed by dumping billions of gallons of wastewater into this large and complex estuary, made up of a network of rivers, wetlands, and forests.
Residents of nearby Myersville, Md., meanwhile, object to Dominion’s plans [PDF] to install a large natural gas compressor inside their town.
The issue of natural gas exports is scheduled to be debated today during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing. From The Hill:
The House hearing on Tuesday will touch on 20 proposals under Energy Department (DOE) review that would green light exports to nations that lack a free-trade agreement with the United States.
Such deals face more administrative scrutiny, as federal law requires them to be in the national interest. Democrats have urged the department to exercise caution, fearing approving too many will cause domestic prices to spike.
Meanwhile, energy-hungry foreign governments — including those in Japan and India — have lobbied the White House to promptly approve applications for exports.
Some lawmakers have accused President Obama of slow-walking the decisions. They fear the United States will miss out as countries such as Australia and Canada rush into the market.
So stay tuned on this one. The damage that fracking causes in America could soon be exacerbated, for the good of the world. And for the good of the energy industry.
John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who
, posts articles to
, and
. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:
.
Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology
,
,
Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories
Credit:
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
A new study by leading pediatricians has found that nearly 20 percent of young people between the ages of 10 and 21 who are considered to be at risk for suicide have guns in their homes. The study is being presented Monday at the annual Pediatric Academic Societies meeting in Washington, following a symposium held Saturday that also addressed youth gun suicides, media violence, and gun violence prevention.
For the study, 524 patients were surveyed using a standard suicide assessment screening: 17 percent of the 151 patients determined to be suicide risks said they lived in a home with guns; 31 percent said they knew how to access the guns, and the same number said they knew how to access ammunition; 15 percent said they could get their hands on both.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide is the third leading cause of death of people between the ages of 10 and 24. Among that age group, guns are the top method of suicide. Research elsewhere suggests that having access to guns increases the likelihood that suicidal people will actually kill themselves.
In 1996, the National Rifle Association successfully lobbied for an amendment to an appropriations bill that gutted the CDC’s gun violence research budget. “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control…may be used to advocate or promote gun control,” the amendment read. Since its passage, the agency has been almost entirely absent from gun research, leaving such studies up to others. This January, President Obama announced plans to direct the CDC to resume studying the causes and prevention of gun violence.
Gun rights advocates and groups like the NRA have continued to argue that gun violence studies are politically motivated, and might build a case for greater gun control. After the Tucson shooting in 2011, for instance, NRA chief lobbyist Chris Cox told the New York Times, “Our concern is not with legitimate medical science. Our concern is they were promoting the idea that gun ownership was a disease that needed to be eradicated.” Some have even argued that Obama’s move to restart the research is illegal.
View this article –
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
This story originally appeared in ProPublica.
Ty Inc. became one of the world’s largest manufacturers of stuffed animals thanks to the Beanie Babies craze in the 1990s.
But it has stayed on top partly by using an underworld of labor brokers known as raiteros, who pick up workers from Chicago’s street corners and shuttle them to Ty’s warehouse on behalf of one of the nation’s largest temp agencies.
The system provides just-in-time labor at the lowest possible cost to large companies—but also effectively pushes workers’ pay far below the minimum wage.
Temp agencies use similar van networks in other labor markets. But in Chicago’s Little Village, the largest Mexican community in the Midwest, the raiteros have melded with temp agencies and their corporate clients in a way that might be unparalleled anywhere in America—and could violate Illinois’ wage laws.
Read this article –
[amzn_product_post]
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
This piece originally appeared on the ProPublica website.
Last month, we detailed how Intuit, the maker of TurboTax, has fought a proposal that could make filing taxes easier and cheaper for millions of Americans.
As we noted, tax activist Grover Norquist and other conservatives have also opposed the proposal, called “return-free filing,” which would give many taxpayers the option to receive a pre-filled return that they could simply review, sign and send back, all for free. Return-free filing has been endorsed by many experts and adopted by several European countries.
As it turns out, Norquist has also recently weighed in on the side of the tax prep industry on another issue.
A House bill introduced earlier this year would bar the IRS from offering taxpayers software that would compete with programs like TurboTax. In March, Norquist and others wrote a letter to members of Congress that urged them to support the bill—what they called a “pro-taxpayer, anti-IRS power grab legislation.”
At issue is how Americans file their taxes and whether electronic filing can be offered directly through the IRS.
This article:
The Bipartisan Push to Keep the IRS from Competing with TurboTax
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
This story first appeared on the ProPublica website.
In several men’s prisons across California, colored signs hang above cell doors: blue for black inmates, white for white, red, green or pink for Hispanic, yellow for everyone else.
Though it’s not an official policy, at least five California state prisons have a color-coding system.
On any given day, the color of a sign could mean the difference between an inmate exercising in the prison yard or being confined to their cell. When prisoners attack guards or other inmates, California allows its corrections officers to restrict all prisoners of that same race or ethnicity to prevent further violence.
Link:
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
This story first appeared on the ProPublica website.
Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell took to the New York Daily News op-ed page Wednesday with a message to local officials: stop worrying and learn to love fracking.
As New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo agonizes over whether to allow the controversial natural gas drilling technique, Rendell invoked his own experience as a Democratic governor who presided over a fracking boom. New York state, Rendell argued, has a major part to play in the nation’s fracking “revolution” 2014 and it can do so safely. He rejected what he called the “false choice” of “natural gas versus the environment.”
What Rendell’s passionate plea failed to note was this: since stepping down as governor in 2011, he has worked as a paid consultant to a private equity firm with investments in the natural gas industry.
The op-ed piece was widely noted in other media outlets, and Cuomo wound up being asked about it during a radio appearance on Wednesday. The New York State Petroleum Council promptly issued a press release hailing Rendell’s “strong and confident argument.”
Jump to original:
Ed Rendell Backs Fracking, Fails to Mention His Industry Ties
ReutersHe keeps some questionable company.
The Republican minority in the Senate loves to obstruct confirmation of President Obama’s Cabinet nominees, but it isn’t saying boo about the man who appears set to become the nation’s next energy secretary.
That might be because Ernest Moniz has friendly relations with a number of dirty energy companies — the kind of companies that generously fund so many senators’ campaigns.
President Obama’s pick to become the nation’s next secretary of energy is drawing criticism for his deep ties to the fossil fuel, fracking and nuclear industries. MIT nuclear physicist Ernest Moniz has served on advisory boards for oil giant BP and General Electric, and was a trustee of the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center, a Saudi Aramco-backed nonprofit organization.
Moniz also directs the MIT Energy Initiative, which gets significant corporate funding from BP, Saudi Aramco, Shell, Chevron, and a number of utilities that operate nuclear plants.
At the same time, Moniz has stressed the importance of moving away from coal and has promoted and called for more funding for renewable energy and energy efficiency. That’s earned him praise from the Natural Resources Defense Council. But other environmental and watchdog groups are campaigning against his nomination because of his industry ties.
ProPublica reports on those ties:
[B]eyond his job in academia, Moniz has also spent the last decade serving on a range of boards and advisory councils for energy industry heavyweights, including some that do business with the Department of Energy. That includes a six-year paid stint on BP’s Technology Advisory Council as well as similar positions at a uranium enrichment company and a pair of energy investment firms.
Such industry ties aren’t uncommon for cabinet nominees, and Obama specifically praised Moniz for understanding both environmental and economic issues.
Still, Moniz’s work for energy companies since he served in President Clinton’s Energy Department has irked some environmentalists.
“His connections to the fossil fuel and nuclear power industries threaten to undermine the focus we need to see on renewables and energy efficiency,” said Tyson Slocum, director of the energy program at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen.
Slocum pointed out that Moniz, if confirmed, will set research and investment priorities, including at the department’s network of national laboratories.
The Energy Department hands out billions of dollars in contracts and loan guarantees as it pushes energy research and development and administers the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile and cleanup efforts.
Moniz is also coming under criticism for a big report on natural gas released by the MIT Energy Initiative in 2011. It called the environmental impacts of fracking “challenging but manageable,” endorsed natural-gas exports, and talked up gas as a “bridge fuel” that could help the country move away from dirtier fossil fuels and toward clean energy (a controversial notion).
The Public Accountability Initiative, a watchdog group opposed to fracking, has been particularly critical of that 2011 report and its authors and funders:
MITEI and the study’s authors presented the study as independent, but did not disclose its authors’ significant financial ties to the oil and gas industry. … The MIT report … failed to disclose that a study co-chair, Anthony Meggs, had joined gas company Talisman Energy prior to the release of the study. Another study group member, John Deutch, has served on the board of the LNG company Cheniere Energy since 2006 and owns $1.4 million in Cheniere stock.
The PAI study also notes that the MIT study was funded by oil and gas industry sources, including a foundation closely linked to Chesapeake Energy. … The study was also advised by a committee dominated by oil and gas insiders.
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing on Moniz’s nomination on April 9. He’ll have to release a financial disclosure form by then, so we’ll soon learn more about how much money he’s made advising and consulting for energy companies. He’ll also need to submit an ethics agreement describing how he would avoid conflicts of interest.
A few Democratic senators might toss him hard questions at the hearing, but don’t look for Republicans to put up much of a fuss. Overall, Moniz is expected to be easily confirmed.
John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who
, posts articles to
, and
. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:
.
Read more:
,
Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories
Continue reading:
Energy secretary nominee Ernest Moniz has deep ties to oil, gas, and nuclear industries
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
This story first appeared on the ProPublica website.
When President Obama nominated Ernest Moniz to be energy secretary earlier this month, he hailed the nuclear physicist as a “brilliant scientist” who, among his many talents, had effectively brought together “prominent thinkers and energy companies” in the continuing effort to figure out a safe and economically sound energy future for the country.
Indeed, Moniz’s collaborative work—best captured in the industry-backed research program he oversaw at The Massachusetts Institute of Technology—is well known. So, too, is his support for Obama’s “all of the above” energy strategy—one that embraces, fossil fuels, nuclear, and renewable energy sources.
But beyond his job in academia, Moniz has also spent the last decade serving on a range of boards and advisory councils for energy industry heavyweights, including some that do business with the Department of Energy. That includes a six-year paid stint on BP’s Technology Advisory Council as well as similar positions at a uranium enrichment company and a pair of energy investment firms.
Such industry ties aren’t uncommon for cabinet nominees, and Obama specifically praised Moniz for understanding both environmental and economic issues.
Mother Jones
Continue reading:
Obama’s Energy Pick Has Deep Ties to Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Energy