Tag Archives: pennsylvania

Help Me Out On This Whole Cell Phone on Airplanes Thing, OK?

by t07c6o Posted on December 10, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Hereditary Rep. Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania is a pretty conservative guy who believes the government should keep its nose out of private enterprise. Unless, that is, private enterprise happens to annoy him:

Political momentum to keep a ban on cellphone calls during flights gained momentum Monday as lawmakers said it would be crazy to allow them….“Let’s face it, airplane cabins are by nature noisy, crowded, and confined,” said Shuster, the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. “For those few hours in the air with 150 other people, it’s just common sense that we all keep our personal lives to ourselves and stay off the phone.”

….Lawmakers in favor of keeping the ban say they’re not worried about the safety of passengers. They’re worried about their sanity. “For passengers, being able to use their phones and tablets to get online or send text messages is a useful in-flight option,” Shuster said. “But if passengers are going to be forced to listen to the gossip in the aisle seat, it’s going to make for a very long flight.”

So what’s next? A federal ban on cell phones in buses? Restaurants? Movie theaters? Cell phone yakkers are pretty annoying in those places, too.

Don’t get me wrong: If I were your benevolent overlord, I’d ban them in all these places. In fact, that would just be the start. And punishment for violating my benevolent statutes would be harsh. Very, very harsh.

But even as a meddling, big-government-loving, knee-jerk liberal, I’m having a hard time coming up with a good reason for this. If Delta Airlines wants to allow cell phone use even though half their customer base rebels, why shouldn’t they? The safety arguments are pretty specious, and in any case, Shuster doesn’t even try to go there. He just wants to prohibit private companies from allowing behavior that he finds annoying.

I don’t know. Maybe this is one of those things like the Do Not Call List, where I should decide that I just don’t care about first principles. Cell phones on airplanes are so self-evidently infuriating, and banning them is such a trivial infringement on personal liberty, that we should be in favor of it regardless. But I confess that I’d still like to hear a more coherent argument. Why should the federal government be in charge of telling companies where they can and can’t permit their customers to use cell phones?

See the original article here: 

Help Me Out On This Whole Cell Phone on Airplanes Thing, OK?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Help Me Out On This Whole Cell Phone on Airplanes Thing, OK?

Study reveals how badly frackers lie about jobs

by Vonnie Criswell Posted on November 22, 2013

Study reveals how badly frackers lie about jobs

By

Shutterstock

The fracking industry wouldn’t lie, would it? But how else to explain the massive discrepancies between the number of jobs that it claims to create and the number of jobs that it actually creates? Perhaps it’s just confused about what’s going on at its own operations.

Whatever the reason, the gulf between fracking propaganda and reality has been laid bare in a new report led by the Multi-State Shale Research Collaborative, a watchdog group that studies employment trends, economic development, and community impacts associated with fracking and proposed fracking in New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia.

“Industry supporters have exaggerated the jobs impact in order to minimize or avoid altogether taxation, regulation, and even careful examination of shale drilling,” Frank Mauro, one of the authors of the report, told the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.

For example, the report debunks industry-backed claims [PDF] that each fracking well in the Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale directly employs 31 people. From the report summary:

Between 2005 and 2012, less than four new direct shale-related jobs have been created for each new well drilled, much less than estimates as high as 31 direct jobs per well in some industry-financed studies.

Region-wide, shale-related employment accounts for just one out of every 795 jobs. By contrast, education and health sectors account for one out of every six jobs. …

The report also questions claims about how many indirect jobs are supported through fracking:

Industry-funded studies have used questionable assumption in economic modeling to inflate the number of jobs created in related supply chain industries (indirect jobs) as well as those created by the spending of income earned from the industry or its suppliers (induced jobs).

The fracking industry blithely dismissed the findings in the report, pointing out that it was financed by philanthropic groups that have provided grants to opponents of fracking. “It’s like the pot calling the kettle black,” John Holko of the Independent Oil and Gas Association told the newspaper. “They complain about the industry, but yet it’s a report done by an anti-industry group.”

Hey, we just remembered another time the fracking industry lied, when it forged Colorado business owners’ signatures on a pro-industry petition. So it’s not completely unprecedented.


Source
New Report Examines Shale Drilling Impact, Fiscal Policy Institute
Report: Industry-backed studies exaggerate fracking job estimates, Rochester Democrat & Chronicle

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Taken from:  

Study reveals how badly frackers lie about jobs

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Study reveals how badly frackers lie about jobs

In 2 Charts: Why Hillary (and Bill) Clinton Damn Well Better Hope Obamacare Succeeds

by Julie Plunkett Posted on November 13, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Bill Clinton did it again. On Tuesday, he interjected himself into the ongoing political tussle over the implementation of Obamacare by declaring that President Barack Obama “should honor” his “commitment” to allow people to hang on to their preexisiting health insurance plans. With this comment, the Secretary of Explaining Stuff gave ammo to the foes of Obamacare, and he, unintentionally or not, undermined a core element of the health care law. And, no surprise, he kicked off a spasm of speculation among the politerati: What are the Clintons up to? Will Hillary, if she runs for president, distance herself from the White House? Will she somehow suggest she’s more competent than Obama? All this commentary was to be expected. There’s something about the Clintons that encourages folks to sniff out clever schemes, intricate plots, and self-serving conniving.

But there’s a basic fact that cannot be escaped: The Clintons need Obamacare to succeed. Just look at the chart in the video below:

After Bill Clinton won the presidency in 1992, he placed his wife in charge of health care reform. (It was part of the two-for-one deal.) And she subsequently unveiled a complicated reform plan that was quickly dubbed Hillarycare by Republicans and conservatives. The Clintons did seem to have a decent amount of political momentum on their side, and their GOP foes, fretting about being rolled, initially entertained the crazy idea of working with the White House to hammer out compromises and shape the legislation a bit more to their liking. Then came Sen. Arlen Specter, a cantankerous Pennsylvania Republican (who years later would switch parties). He hit the Senate floor with charts—complicated wire diagrams that appeared nearly impossible to sort out—that purportedly showed that Hillarycare would create a bureaucratic nightmare. It looked incomprehensibly complicated.

Meanwhile, Rep. Dick Armey, a leading House Republican, created his own chart:

Courtesy of Freedomworks

Armey’s office captioned the chart, “Simplicity Defined.” Dole showcased it in his 1994 response to Clinton’s State of the Union address.

After first toying with a get-along strategy for dealing with Hillarycare, the Republicans mounted a fierce opposition against it, and these charts fueled that effort (along with the Harry and Louise ad campaign orchestrated by the health insurance industry). Waving these charts, the GOPers succeeded in killing Hillarycare—and, decrying the Clintons’ health care proposal, they went on to seize control of the House in the 1994 midterm elections.

Hillarycare ended up a political failure and set back the cause of health care reform for nearly two decades. It’s not an episode that Hillary Clinton would want discussed during a 2016 presidential campaign. If Obamacare thrives, there will be no reason to look back to Hillarycare and drag these charts out of the dustbin of history. But should the Affordable Care Act falter or collapse, a question will loom: What would Hillary do about health care? Her past record would be raked over and that would likely not boost her presidential prospects. Having screwed up in the early 1990s, could she argue that she would do a better job in reforming the health care system than Obama?

It would be best for a Clinton 2016 campaign for health care to be off the table—with no need to revisit all this inconvenient ancient history. That means she and Bill should be hoping that the implementation of Obamacare proceeds well—and they should do all they can to encourage that. So Bill Clinton ought to coordinate (closely) with the White House on what stuff he should be explaining. It’s not only the president’s political fortunes that are tied to Obamacare.

Source:

In 2 Charts: Why Hillary (and Bill) Clinton Damn Well Better Hope Obamacare Succeeds

Posted in alo, Anker, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on In 2 Charts: Why Hillary (and Bill) Clinton Damn Well Better Hope Obamacare Succeeds

Updates on America’s Persistent Air and Water Pollution Challenges

by Myrna Posted on October 25, 2013

A look at ways to clean up America’s lingering air and water pollution problems. Source article: Updates on America’s Persistent Air and Water Pollution Challenges Related Articles Dot Earth Blog: Updates on America’s Persistent Air and Water Pollution Challenges A Climate and Energy Roundup A Tonic for Computer Hell: Getting Lost in the Woods

Continued:

Updates on America’s Persistent Air and Water Pollution Challenges

Posted in alo, alternative energy, Casio, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, oven, PUR, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Updates on America’s Persistent Air and Water Pollution Challenges

Wisconsin’s sand-mining boom could fuel fracking abroad

by romek52 Posted on October 14, 2013

Wisconsin’s sand-mining boom could fuel fracking abroad

By

Carol Mitchell

Frac sand piled up behind a Wisconsin farm.

When most people think about Wisconsin, cheese, breweries, and cornfields spring to mind. But the fracking industry is interested in something else the Badger State has to offer: sand.

A sand-mining boom has gotten rolling in Wisconsin over the last three years. The state’s quartz-based sand is strong and spherical, nicely suited for injecting underground with water and chemicals to prop open cracks in fractured shale, allowing natural gas and oil to be fracked.

The spoils of Wisconsin’s $1 billion frac sand–mining industry are already being hauled by rail to fracking fields as far away as Texas and Pennsylvania. But the sand miners have their sights set higher. At a conference last week, one industry leader said the silica could eventually be shipped to South America and China, helping other countries plunder their own lands for cheap fossil fuels. “Wisconsin is the global epicenter, and we’re just getting started,” said Richard Shearer, president and CEO of Superior Silica Sands. More from The Capital Times:

“I like to say thanks to God and the glaciers” for leaving behind the right kind of sand in Wisconsin, [Republican Gov. Scott] Walker told the receptive audience that included lobbyists, attorneys and rail officials.

Walker’s 2013-15 budget includes two new positions within the Department of Natural Resources to help process applications for sand mining operations, along with investments in freight rail as part of a $6.4 billion package of transportation improvements. …

“I honestly think the sky is the limit for you guys,” said Rayola Dougher, senior economic advisor for the American Petroleum Institute.

The conference attendees seemed much less interested in the impact the sand-mining boom is having on Wisconsin’s residents and environment. The number of mines and processing facilities in the state has risen to more than 100, up from just five in 2010. From an August article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

The fast-growing sand mining industry is grappling with a rising number of environmental problems across western Wisconsin.

Many of the cases involve water pollution — where vast piles of sand, sediment and dirt have washed off properties, often after heavy rains, and contaminated waterways. …

“It’s really changing the nature of western Wisconsin,” former Natural Resources Board member John Welter told board members in September at a hearing in Eau Claire. …

The cases the [Department of Natural Resources] has referred to the state Department of Justice include an April 2012 accident in Burnett County, where sediment flowed from a site owned by Interstate Energy Partners of Plymouth, Minn., into a wetland, then into a creek and ultimately into the St. Croix River, a federally protected national scenic waterway. …

In another case referred to the Justice Department in spring 2012, a dike collapsed in Blair, in Trempealeau County, “resulting in a river of mud flowing in excess of 2,100 feet, causing extensive damage to private property,” a DNR report shows. The owner, Preferred Sands, headquartered in Radnor, Pa., is accused of failing to prepare and implement a storm-water control plan.

In April of that year, Preferred Sands’ processing plant also violated limits for particle and carbon monoxide pollution.

One day, we would love to write a story about how fracking is helping the environment. But between water contamination, earthquakes, air pollution, deforestation, industrial accidents, and sand mining, that just doesn’t seem likely.


Source
Wisconsin at ‘global epicenter’ of frac sand mining industry, The Capital Times
Sand mines in Wisconsin unearth environmental problems, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Link: 

Wisconsin’s sand-mining boom could fuel fracking abroad

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wisconsin’s sand-mining boom could fuel fracking abroad

Leaked EPA document raises questions about fracking pollution

by Palahnajje Posted on July 30, 2013

Leaked EPA document raises questions about fracking pollution

By John Upton

William Avery Hudson

The EPA isn’t looking too hard at what Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. is up to behind this fence, or anywhere else.

The EPA doesn’t seem very interested in finding out whether fracking pollutes groundwater. The latest indication of this emerged over the weekend in the Los Angeles Times.

Residents of the small town of Dimock in northeastern Pennsylvania have long been convinced that Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. was poisoning their drinking water by fracking the land around them. In July of last year, the EPA announced that although water from some local wells contained “naturally occurring” arsenic, barium, and manganese, the agency was ending its investigation there without fingering the any culprits.

Now we find out that staff at a regional EPA office were worried about the role of fracking in polluting the town’s water, but their concerns appear to have been ignored by their bosses.

An internal EPA PowerPoint presentation prepared by regional staffers for their superiors and obtained by the L.A. Times paints an alarming picture of potential links between water contamination and fracking. And it reinforces the perception that the EPA is giving a free pass to the fracking industry, perhaps because natural gas plays a key role in President Obama’s quest for “energy independence” and an “all of the above” energy portfolio. From the L.A. Times article:

The presentation, based on data collected over 4 1/2 years at 11 wells around Dimock, concluded that “methane and other gases released during drilling (including air from the drilling) apparently cause significant damage to the water quality.” The presentation also concluded that “methane is at significantly higher concentrations in the aquifers after gas drilling and perhaps as a result of fracking [hydraulic fracturing] and other gas well work.” …

Robert B. Jackson, professor of environmental sciences at Duke University, who has researched methane contamination in the Dimock area and recently reviewed the presentation, said he was disappointed by the EPA’s decision.

“What’s surprising is to see this data set and then to see EPA walk away from Dimock,” Jackson said. “The issue here is, why wasn’t EPA interested in following up on this to understand it better?”

The EPA confirmed the authenticity of the PowerPoint presentation, but dismissed it as “one [on-scene coordinator’s] thoughts regarding 12 samples” that was never shared publicly because “it was a preliminary evaluation that requires additional assessment.”

The Natural Resources Defense Council puts this latest retreat by the EPA into some context:

Unfortunately, what appears to have happened in Dimock is just the latest in a larger, troubling trend we’re seeing of EPA failing to act on science in controversial fracking cases across the country. Instead, the agency appears to be systematically pulling back from high-profile fracking investigations.

First, in March of 2012—without explanation—EPA abruptly withdrew an emergency order it had issued two years earlier against Range Resources Corporation after the agency found nearby natural gas production operations from the company had likely caused methane and toxic chemical contamination in Parker County, Texas drinking water supplies. … [T]he Associated Press reported that a leaked confidential report proved that EPA had scientific evidence against Range, but changed course after the company threatened not to cooperate with the agency’s ongoing national study of fracking. AP also reported that interviews with the company confirmed this. When asked to explain its actions in light of all of this, EPA’s silence has been deafening.

Then, in late June 2013, EPA made an equally abrupt and unexplained announcement that it was abandoning an investigation into a high-profile drinking water contamination case in Pavillion, Wyoming. …

Now it seems the third shoe drops in Dimock — the latest in what was a triumvirate of highly anticipated federal fracking-related investigations.

Maybe the EPA has forgotten what its middle initial stands for?

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

See original: 

Leaked EPA document raises questions about fracking pollution

Posted in Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Northeastern, ONA, ProPublica, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Leaked EPA document raises questions about fracking pollution

ExxonMobil subsidiary, with arm twisted behind back, agrees to treat fracking wastewater

by 7MelansonHayden940 Posted on July 23, 2013

ExxonMobil subsidiary, with arm twisted behind back, agrees to treat fracking wastewater

By John Upton

eutrophication&hypoxia

XTO’s fracking waste made its way into a tributary of the Susquehanna River.

XTO Energy, an ExxonMobil subsidiary, will reluctantly shell out $20 million to properly treat and dispose of fracking wastewater in Pennsylvania and West Virginia. It will also pay a $100,000 EPA fine as part of a settlement agreement [PDF] over water-pollution charges [PDF].

From PennLive:

The company is accused of violating the Clean Water Act by releasing over approximately 65 days between 6,300 and 57,373 gallons of fluids that contained barium, calcium, iron, manganese, potassium, sodium, strontium, bromide, chloride and total dissolved solids.

A DEP inspector discovered a valve open on one of 57 tanks and its contents flowing on the ground. The fluids got into a subsurface spring and a tributary of the West Branch of the Susquehanna River.

Each of the tanks had a capacity of 21,000 gallons and the one with the valve open was connected with five others, EPA says.

ExxonMobil last year narrowly missed beating its own record for the highest annual profit of any company in history, so we’re guessing it could help out subsidiary XTO with a little cash if need be.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Read More:

ExxonMobil subsidiary, with arm twisted behind back, agrees to treat fracking wastewater

Posted in Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on ExxonMobil subsidiary, with arm twisted behind back, agrees to treat fracking wastewater

Connecticut will label GMOs if you do too

by Edbre23ne Posted on June 4, 2013

Connecticut will label GMOs if you do too

By Claire Thompson

CT Senate Democrats

Connecticut is poised to become the first state to require labeling of genetically engineered food — in theory, at least.

On Monday, the state House of Representatives passed an amended version of a labeling bill that the state Senate approved two weeks ago, and Gov. Dannel Malloy (D) has said he’ll sign it. The bipartisan bill passed unanimously in the Senate and 134-to-3 in the House, with little debate in either chamber — a major contrast to California’s contentious GMO-labeling ballot initiative that ultimately failed last year. Differences between the two states aside, it goes to show you how much more difficult passing such progressive measures becomes once corporate money and gullible voters are involved.

The Hartford Courant’s political blog reports that “Immediately after the vote, cheers could be heard outside the Hall of the House from advocates who had been pushing the labeling requirement.” The bill’s success is certainly an important victory for the GMO-labeling movement, which seems to have been motivated, not discouraged, by last year’s loss in California. Thirty-seven labeling proposals have been introduced in 21 states so far this year.

But the final version of the Connecticut bill includes quite a crucial catch: The labeling requirement won’t actually go into effect until similar legislation is passed by at least four other states, one of which borders Connecticut. Also, the labeling adopters must include Northeast states with an aggregate population of at least 20 million. So if, say, New York passed a labeling law, that would help a lot, as New York borders Connecticut and has a population of 19.5 million, which, combined with Connecticut’s 3.5 million, easily passes the population target.

This “trigger clause” is meant to allay fears that Connecticut could suffer negative economic impacts by going it alone — higher food prices and lawsuits from major food companies. Lawmakers are counting on safety in numbers, and hoping their state’s precedent will encourage others to follow suit. The Connecticut Post reports:

“Somebody has to go first and say it’s OK to do it with some kind of trigger,” [Senate Minority Leader John McKinney (R-Fairfield)] said. “This gives great momentum for advocates in Pennsylvania and New York, for example, for GMO labeling, because if they’re successful in New York we’ll probably see it along the entire East Coast.”

OK, Pennsylvania, New York, and all those other states considering GMO labeling: It’s on you now.

Claire Thompson is an editorial assistant at Grist.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Continue reading here – 

Connecticut will label GMOs if you do too

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Connecticut will label GMOs if you do too

Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

by Delores Crane Posted on April 24, 2013

Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

By John Upton

Shutterstock

A truck carrying fracking waste was quarantined and then sent back to where it came from after its contents triggered a radiation alarm at a Pennsylvania hazardous-waste landfill. The truck’s load was nearly 10 times more radioactive than is permitted at the dump in South Huntingdon township.

The radiation came from radium 226, a naturally occurring material in the Marcellus Shale, which being fracked for natural gas in Pennsylvania and nearby states. “Radium is a well known contaminant in fracking operations,” writes Jeff McMahon at Forbes.

From the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Township Supervisor Mel Cornell said the MAX Environmental Technologies truck was quarantined Friday after it set off a radiation alarm at MAX’s landfill near Yukon, a 159-acre site that accepts residual waste and hazardous waste.

[Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection] spokesman John Poister confirmed the drill cutting materials from Rice Energy’s Thunder II pad in Greene County had a radiation level of 96 microrem.

The landfill must reject any waste with a radiation level that reaches 10 microrem or higher.

“It’s low-level radiation, but we don’t want any radiation in South Huntingdon,” Cornell said.

Poister said DEP instructed MAX to return the materials to the well pad where it was extracted for subsequent disposal at an approved facility.

Pennsylvania is currently studying radiation issues associated with fracking of the shale and disposal of the industry’s waste.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Source: 

Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

Environmentalists and gas companies sing Kumbaya, create voluntary fracking standards

by Arkady549e Posted on March 22, 2013

Environmentalists and gas companies sing Kumbaya, create voluntary fracking standards

By John Upton

Shutterstock

/ Alexander IshchenkoEnergy companies and enviros are totally holding hands and singing around a campfire in Pennsylvania.

Environmentalists struck a rare accord with oil and gas companies this week, agreeing on fracking standards that aim to protect air and water quality and the climate as the Marcellus Shale formation in the northeastern U.S. is mined.

The new and oxymoronically named Center for Sustainable Shale Development was created through an agreement struck by energy companies, the Environmental Defense Fund and other green groups, and Pennsylvania philanthropies. The center will provide certification for oil and gas companies that follow the new standards while fracking the expansive shale formation, which is centered in Pennsylvania and stretches from New York to Kentucky.

Oil and gas companies have no binding requirement to achieve certification from the new center, and environmentalists say it is no substitute for regulations. That said, both camps think its neat.

From the Los Angeles Times:

The center, which was developed over two years of sometimes contentious negotiations, hopes to address the widespread health and environmental concerns about hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, by holding companies to standards that exceed federal and state rules.

For instance, federal law currently permits companies to use diesel fuel as part of the fracking fluid they inject deep underground to break open shale formations and unlock the gas. The standards would require that companies certified by the center would not use diesel and would demand more detailed disclosure of other substances than called for in many states.

The center also would push companies to conform to new federal emissions standards at wellheads faster than established by the Environmental Protection Agency.

“These ideas didn’t come from left field,” said Andrew Place, the center’s interim executive director. “You look at the suite of good ideas out there in industry, federal agencies and the states and you adopt” the best of them.

Certification under the 15 standards [PDF] will be available to fracking companies beginning later this year. Areas addressed by the standards include:

Air and climate protection:
• Limitations on flaring
• Reduced emissions, including from storage tanks and engines

Surface and ground water protection:
• Maximizing water recycling
• Groundwater protection plans
• Well casing design
• Groundwater monitoring
• Wastewater disposal
• Reduced toxicity of fracking fluid

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Read more:

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Link:  

Environmentalists and gas companies sing Kumbaya, create voluntary fracking standards

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Northeastern, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Environmentalists and gas companies sing Kumbaya, create voluntary fracking standards