Tag Archives: oil

Tapping Into the Land, and Dividing Its People

Rich Addicks for The New York Times

An oil rig on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Montana. More Photos »

BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION, Mont. — The mountains along the eastern edge of Glacier National Park rise from the prairie like dinosaur teeth, their silvery ridges and teardrop fields of snow forming the doorway to one of America’s most pristine places.

Rich Addicks for The New York Times

Oil companies have leased out the drilling rights for a million of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation’s 1.5 million acres, which some see as a boon for the tribe. Continue reading

Fracking Moratorium Urged

This is re-posted from Jan. 9 (Bloomberg Business) — The U.S. should declare a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in populated areas until the health effects are better understood, doctors said at a conference on the drilling process.

Gas producers should set up a foundation to finance studies on fracking and independent research is also needed, said Jerome Paulson, a pediatrician at George Washington University School of Medicine in Washington. Top independent producers include Chesapeake Energy Corp. and Devon Energy Corp., both of Oklahoma City, and Encana Corp. of Calgary, according to Bloomberg Industries.

“We’ve got to push the pause button, and maybe we’ve got to push the stop button” on fracking, said Adam Law, an endocrinologist at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York, in an interview at a conference in Arlington, Virginia that’s the first to examine criteria for studying the process.

Fracking injects water, sand and chemicals into deep shale formations to free trapped natural gas. A boom in production with the method helped increase supplies, cutting prices 32 percent last year. The industry, though, hasn’t disclosed enough information on chemicals used, Paulson said, raising concerns about tainted drinking water supplies and a call for peer- reviewed studies on the effects. The EPA is weighing nationwide regulation.

Longstanding Process

“We need to understand fully all of the chemicals that are shot into the ground, that could impact the water that children drink,” Representative Ed Markey of Massachusetts, a senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a phone interview. The industry is trying “to block that information from being public,” he said.

The gas industry has used hydraulic fracturing for 65 years in 30 states with a “demonstrable history of safe operations,” said Chris Tucker, a spokesman for Energy In Depth, a Washington-based research and advocacy group financed by oil and gas interests, in an e-mail. Drilling in shale deposits in the eastern U.S. began in 2004.

Gas drillers have to report to the U.S., state and local authorities any chemicals used in fracking that are “considered hazardous in high concentrations” in case of spills or other emergencies, Tucker said. Those reports don’t include amounts or concentrations, he said.

The industry created a public website last April for companies to voluntarily report lists of chemicals used in individual wells, including concentrations. Colorado and Wyoming have passed laws requiring drillers to file reports to the website, Tucker said.

Hazards Unknown

Despite those disclosures, U.S. officials say they don’t know all of the hazards associated with fracking chemicals.

“We don’t know the chemicals that are involved, really; we sort of generally know,” Vikas Kapil, chief medical officer at National Center for Environmental Health, part of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at the conference. “We don’t have a great handle on the toxicology of fracking chemicals.”

The government has found anecdotal evidence that drilling can contaminate water supplies. In December, the EPA reported that underground aquifers and drinking wells in Pavillion, Wyoming, contained compounds that probably came from gas drilling, including glycols, alcohols, benzene and methane. The CDC has detected “explosive levels of methane” in two wells near gas sites in Medina, Ohio, Kapil said.

He said he wasn’t authorized to take reporters’ questions after his presentation.

Chemicals Used

Fluids used in hydraulic fracturing contain “potentially hazardous chemical classes,” Kapil’s boss, Christopher Portier, director of The National Center for Environmental Health, said last week. The compounds include petroleum distillates, volatile organic compounds and glycol ethers, he said. Wastewater from the wells can contain salts and radiation, Portier said.

U.S. natural gas production rose to a record 2.5 trillion cubic feet in October, a 15 percent increase from October 2008.

A moratorium on fracking pending more health research “would be reasonable,” said Paulson, who heads the Mid- Atlantic Center for Children’s Health and the Environment in Washington, in an interview. His group is funded in part by the CDC and Environmental Protection Agency, he said, and helped sponsor the conference with Law’s organization, Physicians Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy.

Tucker called the CDC’s participation in the conference “disappointing,” saying the conference is “a closed-door pep- rally against oil and natural gas development.”

Representatives of Chevron Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp. and the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group, registered to attend the conference.

–With assistance from Katarzyna Klimasinska in Washington. Editors: Adriel Bettelheim, Reg Gale

To contact the reporter on this story: Alex Wayne in Washington at awayne3@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Adriel Bettelheim at abettelheim@bloomberg.net

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2012/01/09/bloomberg_articlesLXJW7C0YHQ0X.DTL#ixzz1j13gAv00

First US Tar Sands Project Approved in Utah

by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York

“This is what the tar sands did to Alberta’s boreal forests.

Image via Boreal Song Bird Initiative

You’ve likely heard about the infamous Tar Sands in Alberta, Canada. They’re a major source of controversy in the energy world and the environmental community (to put it lightly), and for good reason. Extracting oil from tar sands is far more degrading to the environment than typical oil extraction, as the process destroys forest, emits substantially more greenhouse gas, contaminates nearby habitat, and consumes mammoth amounts of water. And now, the United States could be getting its very first commercial tar sands project in Utah.

The Associated Press reports that “A top Utah regulator approved plans Monday for the first commercial U.S. oil sands project. John Baza, director of Utah’s Division of Oil, Gas & Mining, upheld an earlier decision by his staff to give Earth Energy Resources Inc. a permit to mine a 62-acre pit in eastern Utah.” Now, the project is still seeking funding — Earth Energy is trying to drum up $35 million to finance the project — and it could be halted by national regulators. But if it does get underway, it, like the Canadian tar sands, will be absolutely devastating.

There’s a reason that many environmental groups consider the already existing tar sands the most environmentally deadly operation around: It’s hard to conceive of a project that’s more destructive in more areas. The Huffington Post has a pretty good, brief rundown on Canada’s Alberta tar sands: According to Alberta’s government, their oil sands are the second largest source of oil in the world following Saudi Arabia.

In 2008, Environmental Defence released a report condemning Alberta’s tar sands as “the most destructive project on Earth,” polluting water with toxic waste, destroying a large portion of the boreal forest, provoking acid rains, and drastically contributing to greenhouse gases in the environment. By some estimates, greenhouse gas emitted over the course of the tar sands extraction and refinement process are up to three times as great as those produced by a typical oil refinery. And it has a habit of absolutely soiling the surrounding environment.

Furthermore, the Utah tar sands is projected to impact Utah’s billion dollar tourism industry, and could lead to job loss in that sector. Needless to say, this is not something we need at a time when we should be seeking to reduce national emission levels and keep our natural wilderness as pristine as possible.