Posts Tagged ‘ natural gas ’
Fracking Racking up Lawsuits (#Fracking #NIMBY)
May 23rd, 2011. By AbiK
This time we leave the Marcellus Shale region and set our sights a bit southwest, to Clinton—er, former Clinton—territory: Little Rock, AR. Seems folks there aren’t convinced that fracking’s the way to go to drill for natural gas—at least not in their backyard. Also seems like fracking’s become the NIMBY hot-button issue of the day, reminiscent of the tenor that swept the nation when the Three Mile Island core meltdown was hot and heavy in the news. NIMBY indeed.
The backyard in question here, however, happens to be government-owned land—namely the Ozark National Forest, and also Greers Ferry Lake. The plaintiffs, which are a collective of environmental groups and concerned citizens, are calling for three US government agencies (US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), US Forest Service and the US Army Corps of Engineers) to stop drilling operations from going forward until proper studies are done that show that fracking is not harmful to the environment.
Hydraulic fracturing (aka “fracking”) has been getting a fair amount of attention in the press lately—thanks in large part to the work that Public Citizenand other consumer advocacy groups have been doing. The issue with fracking is that the drilling process calls for massive amounts of water combined with chemicals—chemicals that have not fully been disclosed yet to the public by the oil companies—to be forced into the ground in order to facilitate (ie, by helping to “fracture” the underground) the release of the natural gas below.
Environmental groups, farmers and homeowners alike who live in areas where fracking is going on are concerned for the safety of their drinking water, their land—their very health. The EPA is conducting a study to assess the overall impact on water quality and human health—but those results are not available yet, and of course, there are plenty of oil-industry-backed or -initiated studies proclaiming the merits and safety of fracking. So bottom line, until the EPA study is available, anecdotal information—such as that of flammable tap water—doesn’t have too many folks grabbing a glass of their local water well’s finest with much confidence.
It’s that lack of information and lack of confidence that forms the backdrop to the current charges of the lawsuit. The plaintiffs’ allegations state that the number of wells in which drilling is already going on in the region surpasses the number that were estimated in 2005 by the BLM—and its the agencies listed as defendants in the lawsuit that are responsible for leasing the gas and issuing drilling licenses on land owned by the government. (thesuntimes.com)
What is Fracking? Catchy Video Explains the Fracking Fuss
May 17th, 2011. By AbiK
If you haven’t seen the My Water’s on Fire Tonight (The Fracking Song) video, here’s a chance to check it out. It’s quick, but it delivers its message—and there’s something about the bobbing oil towers and retro “What the Frack is Going on…” sound that’s making me have some sort of Soul Train flashback moment.
Credit must be given to ProPublica and the students at NYU Studio 20 who set out to create a video to explain what hydraulic fracking is all about—or at least what the primary concern of anti-fracking groups is. You can also read more about hydraulic fracturing (nickname: fracking) on the following pages here at LawyersandSettlements.com…
Topic Page: Hydraulic Fracturing Water Contamination
Fracking and Flammable Tap Water? NY Says Hell No…for now
BP Spill, San Bruno Fire, Fracking…Time to Stop Blind Faith in Gas
On Shaky Ground? Fracking Lawsuits, Earthquakes and Bad Water (oh my)
With Focus on BP, Don’t Lose Sight of Fracking Issues
BP Experience Should Have us Catching a Fracking Clue
BP Spill, San Bruno Fire, Fracking…Time to Stop Blind Faith in Gas
September 12th, 2010. By AbiK
As I read the accounts of those living in the area affected by the San Bruno gas fire, one phrase keeps coming back to me: “I didn’t know…” While the specifics of each “I didn’t know” or “had I known” vary, they all stem from one thing—we—homeowners and residential gas consumers—don’t really know what the heck we’re sitting on top of when it comes to underground gas lines.
In an odd way, the BP oil spill has been our wake-call—albeit at a terrible price. But, thanks to BP, we now question how gas is obtained and distributed. Sure, the folks living in the heart of the Marcellus Shale region have long been sitting on pins and needles wondering what hydraulic fracking means to their water supply, for example, but that type of regional concern wouldn’t have gotten some of the more national press coverage it has recently received had it not been for BP.
Ditto the San Bruno gas fire. Sure, it would’ve made the headlines, but, as with other localized gas pipe explosions of years gone by, it would’ve been reported as a tragic explosion affecting a very small area in the scheme of things. There may have been a few localized investigative reports—but that would’ve been about it. Now, however, people are starting to question a few things about the US natural gas industry. Things like, just how safe is it? And things like, what happens to San Bruno in the aftermath of the gas line rupture—did any gas leak into the ground? are the remaining pipes in the area safe? what about those reports of a gas smell? and on and on…
I’ve posted about hydraulic fracturing—you can read more about that and the concerns folks have about it from upstate New York to West Virginia here on LawyersAndSettlements.com. It only took a few reports about livestock becoming sick from leaks coming out of nearby fracking operations to make me raise an eyebrow and join the anti-fracking side. Of course, the gas companies continue to tout its safety—and, I suppose when you look at aggregate numbers, it is relatively “safe”—but would you want your kids drinking water that potentially contained chemicals (or gas?) involved with the fracking process? Didn’t think so…
So, back to the “I didn’t know”.
A report the other day in the PressDemocrat.com talks about how we really don’t know Read the rest of this entry »
With Focus on BP, Don’t Lose Sight of Fracking Issues
July 12th, 2010. By AbiK
I’m sure you’ve been hearing about the new oil well cap that’s—possibly—going on the BP well today in the Gulf. It’s been top news all weekend—that, and of course Spain and Lance Armstrong. But crawling around in the background has been a little news story that you most likely missed. About another fossil fuel: natural gas. About Fracking. And, about cattle.
Yes, cattle.
First, some background. I’ve been posting about hydraulic fracturing (aka “fracking“) in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania, New York and West Virginia and how not everyone is thrilled that they’re living on top of a veritable gold mine of natural gas. Most of those who oppose fracking are concerned about the possibility of contamination of underground sources of drinking water (usdw). The idea behind fracking is that once a well is drilled into reservoir rock, a mixture of water and high viscosity fluid additives (i.e., chemicals) is injected into the rock to force the rock to fracture. A propping agent, like sand, is then pumped into the fractures to keep them open. The fractures then allow the natural gas to flow more freely to the production well that can then bring the gas to the surface.
Sounds simple enough. But then, what about those fractures? The process Read the rest of this entry »
EPA Gets Fracking on Study
March 23rd, 2010. By AbiK
After growing concerns over the use of hydraulic fracturing to access natural gas, the EPA is now going to begin a “comprehensive research study” to investigate whatever the effects—potentially not good—the process may have on water quality and public health. According to the EPA’s press release (3/18/10), “There are concerns that hydraulic fracturing may impact ground water and surface water quality in ways that threaten human health and the environment.”
Hydraulic fracturing, aka “fracking”, has become a hotly debated extraction method in states like New York, Pennsylvania and West Virginia where there are shale formations—the Marcellus Formation stretches out through the Appalachian Basin. Over the last three years, the Marcellus Shale has become increasingly important as gas discoveries in the area point to a vastly undertapped energy source. Estimates put the amount of natural gas held within the Marcellus Formation at 168 trillion to 516 trillion cubic feet, which the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (dec.ny.gov/energy) puts into context by stating that NY state uses about 1.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas a year. That’s potentially a lot of years of gas supply…
To help put things in perspective further, according to an article in Business Week (3/10/10), shale gas currently accounts for 20 percent of the US gas supply—and is expected to jump to 50
percent of the supply by 2035.
But environmentalists—and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg—have been opposed to natural gas fracking. Bloomberg wants to ban drilling at the upstate New York Marcellus Shale area. Why? Two words: water supply.
So what exactly happens with hydraulic fracking?
According to the EPA site (epa.gov), first a well is drilled into reservoir rock that contains oil, natural gas, and water. Then, a fluid—usually water that contains “specialty high-viscosity fluid additives” —is injected under high pressure into the rock. Because of the immense pressure of the fluid being driven into the rock, the rock splits open further—i.e., it creates “fractures” (can’t help but have a flashback to Wile E. Coyote in free-fall off the side of a cliff resulting in “fractured” bedrock below).
Once the rock is fractured, a propping agent (such as sand) is pumped into the fractures to keep them from closing once the pumping pressure is released. The fractures allow the natural gas to move more freely to a production well so that it can be brought to the surface.
Sounds straightforward—and back in 2004, the EPA conducted a study to determine the potential for contamination of underground sources of drinking water (usdw) from the injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids by coalbed methane wells. At the time, the EPA concluded that the injection of fracturing fluids by coalbed methane wells posed little or no threat to underground drinking water sources.
According to the Business Week article, there haven’t been any documented cases of fluids injected into wells migrating from the wells into the groundwater. However…
Earlier this year, the PA Environmental Protection Dept. fined Talisman Energy, Inc. $3,500 for violations in 2009 that “included discharging drilling fluids into Sugar Creek in Troy Township.”
There are other concerns, too. In New York City, the water supply is the nation’s largest unfiltered system. According to Cas Holloway, NYC Environmental Protection Department commissioner, should the city lose a federal filtration waiver, it could cost between $10 – $20 billion to build a treatment plant.
The EPA is re-allocating $1.9 million for the peer-reviewed study for the full-year 2010 and is also requesting funds for full-year 2011 in the president’s budget proposal.
Find us on
Archive by Category
- Accidents (24)
- Airlines (9)
- Asbestos Mesothelioma (262)
- Automotive (25)
- Celebrity (14)
- Class Action (84)
- Complaints/Comments (15)
- Consumer Fraud (84)
- Contest (2)
- Court of Public Opinion (5)
- Crazy Sh*t Lawyers See (61)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Defective Products (111)
- DePuy ASR Hip Recall (2)
- Discrimination (22)
- Drugs/Medical (248)
- Elder Care Abuse (4)
- Emerging Issues (462)
- Employment (54)
- Environment (52)
- Financial (28)
- Food Illness (15)
- Human/Civil Rights (4)
- Insecurities (5)
- Insurance (16)
- Intellectual Property (16)
- Internet/E-commerce (19)
- lawsuits (161)
- Lawyers (20)
- Lawyers Giving Back (43)
- Lex Levity (10)
- Personal Injury (106)
- Pleading Ignorance (53)
- Real Estate (2)
- Recall (6)
- Scam (3)
- Securities (13)
- Settlement (81)
- Tort Reform (2)
- Totally Tortelicious (81)
- Veterans (11)
- Whistleblower (9)