EPA tells science to "shut the frack up!!"
JC29856
Posts: 9,617
big business telling govt regulators what to do
Now a confidential report obtained by The Associated Press and interviews with company representatives show that the EPA had scientific evidence against the driller, Range Resources, but changed course after the company threatened not to cooperate with a national study into a common form of drilling called hydraulic fracturing. Regulators set aside an analysis that concluded the drilling could have been to blame for the contamination.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... d/1839857/
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wir ... ing-study-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj
Now a confidential report obtained by The Associated Press and interviews with company representatives show that the EPA had scientific evidence against the driller, Range Resources, but changed course after the company threatened not to cooperate with a national study into a common form of drilling called hydraulic fracturing. Regulators set aside an analysis that concluded the drilling could have been to blame for the contamination.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... d/1839857/
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wir ... ing-study-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
http://www.businessinsider.com/epa-dece ... dy-2012-12
The Associated Press (AP) has a breaking investigative story out today revealing that the Obama Administration's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) censored a smoking gun scientific report in March 2012 that it had contracted out to a scientist who did field data on 32 water samples in Weatherford, TX.
That report, according to the AP, would have explicitly linked methane migration in groundwater to hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") in Weatherford, a city with 25,000+ citizens located in the heart of the Barnett Shale geologic formation 30 minutes from Dallas.
It was authored by Geoffrey Thyne, a geologist formerly was on the faculty of the Colorado School of Mines and University of Wyoming before departing from the latter for a job in the private sector. He now works for Interralogic Inc. in Ft Collins, CO.
No, I don't believe California will fall into the ocean but still...fracking Monterey?? :roll:
Fracking debate aside, that sounds incredibly stupid
This company isn't by chance called Lex Luthor Enterprises?
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Hmm... I think supervillain sounds about right.
arizona bay.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
glug glug
gurgle gurgle
Learn to swim
Learn to swim
Learn to swim
learn to swim
Before Gus Van Sant’s latest film Promised Land even premiered, the energy industry was up in arms, gearing up to counter the film's apparent anti-fracking stance with a barrage of “community” responses (read: thinly veiled corporate PR). James Schamus, chief executive of Focus Features the distributor of the film, expressed shock about the attacks on Promised Land: “We’ve been surprised at the emergence of what looks like a concerted campaign targeting the film even before anyone’s seen it.” cover for the movie "promised land"With blogs, astroturf websites, Facebook pages, internet ads, and theater ad buys in advance of the movie, the industry is working hard to spin the conversation in a more fracking-friendly direction.
At first, it was kept secret for months, cryptically referred to only as an "unidentified third-party contractor."
Finally, in November 2012, Reuters revealed the name of the corporate consulting firm the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) hired to produce a study on the prospective economic impacts of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports.
LNG is the super-chilled final product of gas obtained - predominatly in today's context - via the controversial hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") process taking place within shale deposits located throughout the U.S. This "prize" is shipped from the multitude of domestic shale basins in pipelines to various coastal LNG terminals, and then sent on LNG tankers to the global market.
The firm: National Economic Research Associates (NERA) Economic Consulting, has a long history of pushing for deregulation. Its claim to fame: the deregulation "studies" it publishes on behalf of the nuclear, coal, and oil/gas industry - and as it turns out, Big Tobacco, too.
Alfred E. Kahn, the late "Father of Deregulation," founded NERA in 1961 along with Irwin Stelzer, now a senior fellow and director of the right-wing Hudson Institute’s Center for Economic Policy.
Desmogblog (http://s.tt/1yTVF)
http://energypolicyforum.org/2012/12/06 ... portation/
The US Department of Energy (DOE) released a report on 5 December, 2012 which examined the question of economic benefit to the US of natural gas exportation. Last December, Deloitte issued an independent report regarding exportation which had hauntingly similar conclusions. Interestingly enough, many of the conclusions in the Deloitte report are now known to be erroneous only one year later.
The DOE/NERA report claims favorable consequences for the US economy should natural gas be exported. But a closer look at both reports, its authors and the underlying economic assumptions is warranted due to inherent biases.
http://www.nera.com/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERA_Economic_Consulting