It appears fracking has gone virtually unregulated in California for
decades and now lawmakers are pushing back with legislation to expose
the truth.
Thanks to the smoking gun of Josh Fox's sobering documentary Gasland,
hydraulic fracturing has finally entered our renewable news cycle. Yet
despite poisoning groundwater, freeing methane and literally creating
earthquakes back east, fracking has a visibility problem in California.
The
situation became less clear after a recent investigative report from
DC-based nonprofit Environmental Working Group explained that California has experienced 60 unregulated years of widespread fracking,
whose technical methods and geographical locations in the seismically
active state exist outside of the public purview. It got darker after
Governor Jerry Brown's administration wiped the state government's
Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) Web site of fracking fact-sheets and documents. Good luck finding anything about fracking on the governor's official site either.
"Since our report came out, the Brown administration hasn't been happy with it," Bill Allayaud, EWG's
California director of government affairs, told AlterNet by phone.
"They said we quoted their meetings but left out important quotes. But I
don't know what we left out, or how we could shine a better light on
the situation. We've been trying to work with them now for over a year."
There
has also been a great disappearing act. According to Allayaud, gone is
the issue's main page, an account of fracking in other states, as well
as what he calls an "inaccurate and misleading factsheet about fracking
in California." Gone also is a copy of a letter sent by the state in
response to questions from Senator Fran Pavley (D-Santa Monica), chair
of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water, whose rebuffed
inquiries about the extent of California fracking inspired assembly bill
591 (AB 591),
currently at the center of a tug-of-war between the interested
citizenry and an industry that seems desperate to avoid transparency.
Punch
the term "fracking" into DOGGR's search today and you'll receive a
white screen with the perhaps accidentally ironic query "Did you mean: cracking"
in response. That's probably funny to even most Californians, whose
fault-laced state is due for its next catastrophic earthquake, but it
doesn't inspire confidence that DOGGR is taking fracking seriously.
"No
word on that, sorry," DOGGR spokesman Don Drysdale told AlterNet via
email when asked for clarification on the division's online document
scrub, or whether they will be replaced or upgraded. Drysdale also
explained that DOGGR doesn't have regulations requiring that operators
report when, where and how they use hydraulic fracturing to stimulate
production. He also said that information from DOGGR regarding fracked
wells in the San Joaquin-Sacramento River delta gas fields near shallow
groundwater is "not available, and that "we do not have records" of
offshore fracking operations in the Long Beach-Santa Barbara drilling
area.
"However, the City of Long Beach
has its own oil and gas department and may have some information," he
added. "We recently began to request that operators voluntarily report
their hydraulic fracturing operations (PDF) to FracFocus, a public Web site run by the Groundwater Protection Council and Interstate Oil & Gas Compact Commission."
This
Kafkaesque labyrinth doesn't exactly inspire confidence that DOGGR "has
regulations designed to ensure well integrity and to protect
underground resources," as Drysdale claimed to AlterNet. If it did,
there's a good chance that AB 591 wouldn't exist in the first place.
That law proposes to legislatively define the fracking technique and
disclose its "chemical constituents," recognize its "long history of its
application within the state," evaluate its impact on California's
natural resources and "geologic and seismic complexity," disclose its
sources and amounts of water used and relay any data on "recovery and
disposal of any radiological components." That a bottomless well's worth
of disclosure demands for a regulatory regime professing to do its job
just fine, thanks.
It is also why "DOGGR was raked over the coals" in a March
28 budget hearing "that was more about fracking than anything else,"
according to Allayaud, who attended. At that meeting, California
Department of Conservation (DOC) director Mark Nechodom was rebuffed in
his efforts to procure more funding and positions for DOGGR. That fact
that he repeatedly assured Assembly members that DOGGR was regulating
fracking but was unable or unwilling to disclose the location of any
fracked wells or well-casing failures to those members might have had
something to do with it. By meeting's end, Nechodom promised to prepare
fracking regulations, undertake a scientific inquiry into its practice,
and conduct a series of listening sessions in the state.
Better
late than never, but DOC and DOGGR still need to speed the plow.
According to a report from the Center for Investigative Reporting's Tia
Ghose, both the Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club are suing the Bureau of Land Management to prevent fracking on federal lands (PDF)
-- 2,500 "environmentally sensitive" acres in Monterey and Fresno
counties have already been leased. The BLM has suggested that it's
mostly grazing land that has been leased before but still remains
undeveloped, and consoled worriers by explaining that the agency
executes environmental reviews in the drilling permit process.
"Our
case is proceeding in the district court on a normal schedule, but
there hasn't been any merits briefing or rulings yet," Sierra Club
attorney Nathan Matthews told AlterNet. "Nobody from the state has
contacted us about this suit. The BLM Web site lists who purchased the
leases, but presumably the land could be developed by someone else. Our
claim demands that BLM assess these types of risks before proceeding to
allow development."
Like
DOGGR before them, the BLM's distaste for transparency on an issue as
controversial as fracking is counterproductive, and could prove costly
in the final analysis if the problems that continue to plague the
practice back east migrate westward. But their profit-oriented
perspective nevertheless comfortably aligns with the industry itself,
which seems all too content to rely on hindsight rather than foresight
when it comes to tragedies large and small.
"An
original version of AB 591 we had last year asked the industry to map
where it was fracking in California, and indicate any active seismic
fault within five miles," said Allayaud. The industry's non-profit trade
group Western States Petroleum Association "said it wanted that out.
When I asked why, the answer I got was, 'Look, if we were causing
earthquakes through drilling, injection wells or fracked wells, you
would know it. Look how many geophysicists are running around the state
looking at earthquakes.'"
That
flippant industry response, taken together with those of the California
agencies overseeing that very industry, has only galvanized regional
opposition. Many more will inevitably follow AB 591 and the joint
complaint against BLM if industry and government alike condescendingly
assert that everything is under control to a citizenry told too many
times to keep its nose out of its own affairs. The fight over AB 591
exists precisely because the industry won't release its fracking data,
from the location of its wells to the chemical makeup of its
bedrock-fracturing injection cocktails, without rigorous enforcement.
To
play fair, the EWG stripped the mapping requirements near active
seismic faults. "We agreed to take it out because the industry is trying
to be cooperative," Allayaud told AlterNet. "They're not opposing the
bill."
For his
part, Allayaud isn't too concerned about California's fault-riddled
seismology or inevitable earthquake catastrophes. So far, neither is the
United States Geological Service,
whose Web site search results on fracking are more extensive than
Governor Brown and DOGGR's blank pages. The USGS explains that
California's faults are better studied and understood than anywhere else
in the nation, and that its populaces are also better prepared for
earthquakes large and small. "Hydraulic fracturing has been taking place
for many decades in California," the USGS Earthquake Science Center's
Art McGarr told AlterNet, "mostly to stimulate oil and gas production in
old fields."
"In any event, there is little likelihood that any
fracking operation could perturb a nearby active fault so as to trigger a
major earthquake," he added. "The stress changes associated with
fracking are much too small and localized to interact with a fault
capable of producing a significant earthquake. In other parts of the
country where fracking has enabled gas production from tight shales, the
fracking has not caused earthquakes of any consequence."
To
McGarr's knowledge, there are no high-volume waste-water injection
wells in California located within areas of high population density, and
he guesses that will continue to be the case. But we'll never know
until the federal and state government is compelled by a plugged-in
citizenry to force the industry's hand, and disclosure. Until that
happens, they will side with controversial corporations like
Halliburton, which is leading the opposition against AB 591 by arguing
that disclosing the chemical cocktails it uses to fracture wells would
be a violation of trade secrets. And the last-gasp natural gas bubble
that fracking enables will continue to create flammable groundwater and
destabilized grounds. Once it becomes apparent that the green defense of fracking is negated by more methane, which is 25 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2, then hydraulic fracturing's disclosure game will be up.
In hindsight, it will look like a bunch of junkies who just didn't know when to stop tapping fossil fuel's disappearing veins.
"We
need strong disclosure rules with narrow trade secret protections,"
Matthews explained to AlterNet. "BLM will be announcing a proposed
disclosure rule in the coming weeks, and the public will be able to
submit comments on that."
"The
Brown administration still says there is no urgency to create
regulations to deal with fracking," said Allayaud. "Their focus is on
getting permits for regular oil drilling out the door faster. We think
they have the capability to do both, and I think AB 591 will push them
in that direction, because they need to be pushed. I've never seen a
state agency behave this way, and I've been working around them for 36
years."
No comments:
Post a Comment