Category Archives: fossil fuels and the United States’ Future

Frackers Must Post Bonds To Drill – Doesn’t that mean they are going to do damage

Posted on by
Reply

Yes and the damage they will do is a lot more than 50,000 $$$ they initially put up.

 

Today (Thursday, 11/28/13) is Day 14 of the 49-day Comment Period on Fracking.  On this Thanksgiving Day, we are thankful for your comments to IDNR.
Topic – Inadequate Bonding Requirements for Fracking Companies
  • Click the button: Subpart B:  Registration and Permitting Procedures
  • In the “Section” dropdown box, click:  245.220 Permit Bonds or Other Collateral Securities
  • Submit your comment/s (below)
  • Click “Submit”
Section 245.220 states, “The bond shall be in the amount of $50,000 per permit or a blanket bond of $500,000 for all permits.” (Section 1-65(a) of the Act)
Comment:  Plugging a well alone costs more than $50,000. In the study “Who Pays the Cost of Fracking?: Weak Bonding Rules for Oil and Gas Drilling Leave the Public At Risk”, PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center reported documented instances in which fracking wells have cost $700,000 or more to plug.  What is the motivation for the operator to not simply forfeit the bond when they shut down?  Furthermore, drilling companies typically frack a string of wells and not just one.  If they are cutting corners, using improper well-casings for example, or not sealing them correctly, the violation is likely to occur at each site.  One $500,000 bond for perhaps as many as 100 -150 well sites is as unacceptable as a $50,000 for one well site.
If the purpose of the bond is to protect the state from expenses incurred from an accident or violation, then the bond must be sufficient to cover those occurrences.  It makes no sense to offer a blanket bond—like some bargain basement “buy 2 pairs of socks and get a third pair free”.  Each well should be bonded individually and in the amount necessary to cover real and imagined damages as outlined by the PennEnvironment study.
To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.
510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

alt

:}

Go there and comment. More later.

:}

Frackers Could Take Over Your Town – Illinois cedes sovereignty to the extraction industry

Posted on by
Reply

City and county governments?  We don’t care about your stinking City and County governments. Drill baby drill.

 

 

Today (Saturday, 11/23/2013) is Day 9 of the IDNR 45 day comment period on fracking.  You’re all doing a great job sending in your comments.  We’re a fifth of the way through the comment period.  Let’s keep the pressure on. 

Today’s comment is on the Local Control

Here’s what to do to make your comment today:

·         Click the button: Subpart A: General Provisions

·         In the “Section” dropdown box, click 245.210 Permit Application Requirements

·         Submit your comments (below)

·         Click “Submit”

Comment:

This section states that “when an application is made to frack a well site located within the limits of any city, village or incorporated town, the application shall state the name of the city, village, or incorporated town and be accompanied with a certified copy of the official consent for the high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing operations to occur from the municipal authorities where the well site is proposed to be located.  No permit shall be issued unless consent is secured and filed with the permit application.”

This is excellent for municipalities but what about counties???

*  The intent of the legislation was to recognize that local units of government should have decision-making power regarding whether to allow fracking in their jurisdictions.  

*  This section demonstrates blatant disregard for the realities of the geography of fracking in Illinois regarding cities compared to counties.  Little if any fracking is anticipated within the cities of Carbondale, Marion, Decatur or other metro areas affected by the majority of fracking land leases.  If prior notification and an intentional process of permitting is important for metropolitan communities, why are the proposed rules silent regarding neighborhoods in counties and the families living there?

*  There is no substantive difference between a municipal or county government in Illinois in its powers other than the issue of Illinois Constitutional Home Rule.  However, the lack of county Home Rule has never preempted a county power to issue permits on mineral or oil extraction.  Numerous county governments have long histories and traditions in the permitting process regarding mineral and drilling industries. As the current fracking law is largely silent on the issue of county control, IDNR rules should err on the side of history and citizen decision-making. 

*  Counties and municipalities of government tax, employ law enforcement, provide social services and infrastructure.  The rules provide no explanation why citizens residing in counties of Illinois should have less input regarding fracking permits.  The regulatory differentiation between the rights of residents in municipalities vs. counties creates a group of second class citizens. These second class citizens have fewer rights in their ability to participate and ultimately determine the type and quality of energy extraction allowed in their neighborhoods.

*  There is no reasonable expectation that the personnel at IDNR have any better or more clear understanding of the will of citizens in counties regarding fracking permits than the residents themselves.  As the proposed IDNR rules envision municipalities empowered to decide fracking sites, what possible argument does IDNR have that it is better equipped or knowledgeable on the needs of residents living in Illinois counties? 

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL61701
United States

 

:}

Go there and comment. More tomorrow.

:}

Frackers Free To Violate Illinois – According to the State of Illinois

Posted on by
Reply

This was supposed to be the toughest set of regulations in the United States. This is an outrageous lie created by The Chicago Sellouts, better know as the gang of 5, the IEC, the NRDC, ELPC, the Sierra Club, and Faith in Place. They shall pay for this.

 

Today (Sunday, 11/24/2013) is Day 10 of the IDNR 45 day comment period on fracking.  Thank you for all of the comments you’re making!

Today’s comment is on what constitutes a “serious” violation.

Here’s what to do to make your comment today:

This section of the rules states that every applicant applying for a permit must disclose to the Department  “all findings of a serious violation or an equivalent violation under federal, Illinois or other state laws or regulations in the development or operation of an oil or gas exploration or production site via hydraulic fracturing by the registrant or any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of the registrant within the previous 5 years.”

  • What does IDNR define as a “serious” violation?  There is no guideline here making it easy for violators to claim that they didn’t report a violation because “we didn’t think it was serious.”  Instead, applicants should be required to disclose ALL violations alleged by public authorities and any fines or findings therefrom.
  • What is the reason for the 5 year time limitation?  When fracking violations potentially pose a threat to public health and safety, all previous violations and alleged violations should be considered when issuing a permit, regardless of how long ago they occured.

To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.

510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

 

:}

Go there and comment, More tomorrow.

:}

A Whole Lot Of Shaking Could Go On – Those old Sky Scrapers could come a tumblen down

Posted on by
Reply

It is true none of the tall buildings in either St. Louis or Memphis are even earthquake resistant let alone earthquake proof. To top that off they are built on alluvial soil. Then there are the bridges across the Mississippi, Nebraska and Ohio rivers.So even a moderate earthquake in the area could be its own little disaster movie.

Today (Tuesday, 11/19/2013) is Day 5 of the IDNR 45 day comment period on hydraulic fracturing, aka “fracking.” 
We’re asking for a little something extra from you today.  In addition to making today’s comment, which is about fracking-induced earthquakes (see below), will you also sign a petition that would allow Johnson County–which is in the heart of the New Madrid fault zone–to assert its right to local self-government in order to ban corporate fracking?  This would be a test case for Illinois and might open the door to local county governments banning fracking.  They need signatures.  You can sign here:
Today’s comment is on Seismicity: Insufficient Protection, Two Types of Risk
Here’s what to do to make your comment today:
Comment:  In subsection (a), “Applicability”, DNR proposes that this rule apply ONLY to Class II  injection wells, not to any other.  DNR has not proposed any rules for fracking wells.  This is insufficient protection of the population in southern Illinois where citizens are at risk of a major earthquake.  Southern Illinois sits above two active seismic zones: the New Madrid and the Wabash Valley.
There are two distinct earthquake risks: (1) the risks from injection wells inducing earthquakes that would not otherwise occur and (2) the risks of substantial injuries and damages created when the toxic fracking fluid left in the ground, in pipelines, and in wells (injection and otherwise) is let loose as a result of a major earthquake.  There are NO rules establishing guidelines for stopping fracking wells in the event of earthquakes, and NO considerations for siting any wells specifically in active seismic zones.  That omission is a reckless disregard for the safety of Southern Illinois residents, their property, and the ecology of the region.
Furthermore, in light of recent studies (see below), the risk of earthquakes can extend far beyond local areas.  See:
  • http://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/3072 :  A new study is the latest to tie a string of unusual earthquakes, in this case, in central Oklahoma, to the injection of wastewater deep underground. Researchers now say that the magnitude 5.7 earthquake near Prague, Okla., on Nov. 6, 2011, may also be the largest ever linked to wastewater injection. Felt as far away as Milwaukee, more than 800 miles away, the quake—the biggest ever recorded in Oklahoma–destroyed 14 homes, buckled a federal highway and left two people injured.
  • http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/early/2013/03/26/G34045.1
  • http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3706&from=rss#.UohRF40hRL8  “Why America’s Heartland is Earthquake Country”, United States Geological Service, September 30. 2013
  • “Enhanced Remote Earthquake Triggering at Fluid-Injection Sites in the Midwestern United States”, Nicholas J. van der Elst et al., DOI: 10.1126/science.1238948, Science 341, 164 (2013).
We would love it if you would let us know if you made a comment today!  And please feel free to call us with questions, comments, or to volunteer your time at (309) 827-9627.  Please share this with others you know and encourage them to make comments too.
In solidarity in the struggle for environmental justice,
Your friends at IPA
To remove your name from this email list click here. To unsubscribe from all emails from us click here.
510 E. Washington St. Suite 309
Bloomington, IL 61701
United States

alt

:}

Go there and comment. More tomorrow.

:}

Fracking Will Set Off The New Madras Fault – In Illinois a whole lot of shaking going on

Posted on by
Reply

This whole earthquake thing has me shaking in my boots. No really. The last time New Madras went off the Mississippi River ran backwards and two mammoth lakes in Kentucky were created. There was no St. Louis or Memphis to be devastated. This is a big deal.

USED on Day 2 on 11/16/13

Topic:  Fracking and Seismic Activity (Earthquakes) 

Radio button: Part 240 : Seismicity (240.796)

Use any of the comments below related to when fracking causes earthquakes (“induced seismicity”)

NOTE: Every topic address must be entered as a separate comment.

·         COMMENT:  The Rules contain language about earthquakes and, on a broader level, they also assume that fracking indeed causes earthquakes.  The rules describe a whole series of fracking created earthquake levels of intensity. Why would the state allow any business activity that includes the real possibility of it creating earthquakes when done in an otherwise proper manner – especially in a geography known for major earthquakes?

·         COMMENT:  The rules are silent regarding broader concerns regarding how fracking created earthquakes will affect existing earthquake prone communities.  There is no mention of scientific review or study of the effect of fracking earthquakes within the Wabash Valley and New Madrid Seismic Zones.  The Illinois Emergency Management Agency identifies southern IL with its most severe earthquake zone ratings of “Destructive “and “Ruinous”.  How does IDNR justify allowing any fracking in these areas when industry best practices say there should be no fracking in seismic zones?

·         COMMENT: Rules define various intensities of fracking caused earthquakes by a color code system.  Enforcement doesn’t begin until “yellow light alert”, (a magnitude of at least 3.0 but less than 5.0).  This color coding system does not appear to be used by the federal USGS, the federal agency responsible for monitoring earthquakes. Why would IDNR use a system not used nationally?  What is the purpose of IDNR’s color coded system and what value does it add to protect citizens who might be affected by said quakes?

·         COMMENT: A fracking site can be responsible for creating up to 4 earthquakes up to a level of 4.9 magnitude WITHOUT a mandatory shut-down order by the state. A 4.9 earthquake is a serious and newsworthy event – (USGS description: “Sensation like a heavy truck striking building.  Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.”)  What justification does IDNR to allow this?

·         COMMENT: Mandatory shut-down of a site is based on a patchwork of multiple earthquakes at multiple times with varying intensity.  For example, if an earthquake caused by fracking “causes significant damage” or a magnitude of 5.0 or greater the state will shut-down the frack site.  A 5.0 earthquake is described by USGS as “Felt by all, many frightened.”   The rules use a dangerous, high threshold of earthquake intensity for a mandatory shut-down.  The fracking caused earthquake literally has to frighten people or break something before the state will step in.  What is the justification for such a high threshold?

·         COMMENT: If a shut-down order is made, the fracking company gets a hearing, the purpose of which is to “mitigate induced seismicity events near the permitted well”.  To “mitigate” is to minimize, not eliminate earthquakes caused by fracking.  As with the overall message of the earthquake rules, the intent appears to not eliminate earthquakes caused by fracking but actually permit them.  What does IDNR have to say to justify this?

·         COMMENT:  The penalty for failing to attend an earthquake hearing or continuing to frack after causing a serious, reported earthquake is $50 for a first time violation.  The rules define these violations as “Administrative penalties”.  This amount is a little less than the cost of a dinner and a movie.  Even with 4 or more earthquake violations, the maximum fine is only $500, arguably an acceptable business expense.  How is this justifiable? 

·         COMMENT:  Will fracking companies be held responsible for all monetary damages caused by earthquakes?

·         COMMENT: If the frack site continues to operate in violation of a state order regarding it creating earthquakes the minimum fine is $100.  Who is making up these ridiculously industry-slanted rules?

 :}

Go there and comment for God’s sake. More today.

:}

Global Warming Slams The Philippines – Yes I will be the first one to say it

Posted on by
Reply

Climatologists and weather people are always nattering on about how you can’t link global warming and a “particular’ WEATHER EVENT. Well I say that is super silly. This last hurricane to hit the Philippines (one of 4 already this season) was caused by global warming. I mean come on, the most powerful storm ever to strike land. When do adjectives like that add up to – caused by. Does the next biggest “ever” storm = global warming. Does a year of the “biggest” storms ever = global warming. Really when can I drop the parenthesis around all the adjectives and just say it out loud. Well I believe today is the day.

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/521536/20131112/climate-change-warsaw-global-warming-typhoon-haiyan.htm#.UoJYfOInN5r

Climate Change Talks: Philippine Representative in Tears Over Haiyan, Receives Standing Ovation

By Reissa Su | November 12, 2013 7:51 PM EST

Typhoon Haiyan has dampened the spirits of climate change negotiators in an international talk on global climate change treaty in Warsaw. Delegates from around the world quickly suggested that the monster typhoon that wreaked havoc in the Philippines was enhanced by global warming.

Typhoon Haiyan has left Vietnam and is now on its way to China at a reduced strength. The super storm has displaced over 600,000 families in the Philippines  leaving most of Tacloban City devastated.

Lead negotiator for an alliance of small island nations Olai Ngedikes said that Typhoon Haiyan should be a “stark reminder” of the lack of action among governments in the world. He said the typhoon should motivate climate change negotiators to push an agreement in Warsaw.

Philippine representative to the UN climate change talks, Naderev Sano said he would fast or refrain from eating in solidarity with typhoon victims or until a meaningful solution will be reached. Mr Sano said the effect of climate change is madness. He added they can put an end to the madness by arriving at an agreement in Warsaw.

:}

Go there and see the video. Go there and read. More next week.

:}

Germany Gets 20% Of Its Power From Renewables – After the renewable gold rush

Posted on by
Reply

I thought I would start us out with a song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOMaqe0LOmo

The days when all the lies are proven false is right here and right now. Wind, solar and geothermal can replace coal gas and oil. And hthey can do it in the industrial heartland. It is the future and ain’t it grand?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/10/17/us-germany-renewables-boom-idUKTRE79G0N420111017

 

Analysis: Renewable “gold rush” powers Germany’s north shore

 

 

By Erik Kirschbaum

ROSTOCK, Germany | Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:04am BST

(Reuters) – Renewable energy has created a “gold rush” atmosphere in Germany’s depressed north-east, giving the country’s poorhouse good jobs and great promise.

The natural resources attracting investors and industry are of a simple variety: wind, sunshine, agricultural products and farm waste such as liquid manure.

The rush to tap green resources in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern state is reminiscent of the frenzies that came with gold or oil discoveries in past centuries. The buzz can be felt in towns and sparkling new factories across the Baltic shore state.

“Renewable energy has become extremely valuable for our state,” said its premier, Erwin Selling, in an interview with Reuters. “It’s just a great opportunity — producing renewable energy and creating manufacturing jobs.

“From an industrial point of view we’d been one of Germany’s weaker areas. But the country is abandoning nuclear power. That will work only if there’s a corresponding — and substantial — increase in renewables. It’ll be one of Germany’s most important sectors in the future. We want to be up there leading the way.”

:}

Go there and read. More next week.

:}

Kill The Ocean And Kill Ourselves – Jacque Cousteau said it 60 years ago

Posted on by
Reply

It is as true today as it was then. We are so much closer to the edge today then we were then and it is frightening.

http://news.yahoo.com/business-urged-more-save-oceans-world-bank-study-041032438.html

Business urged to do more to save oceans: World Bank study

Reuters By Environment Correspondent Alister Doyle

OSLO (Reuters) – Businesses should play a bigger role in helping to save depleted fish stocks as part of efforts to prevent irreversible damage to the oceans, a World-Bank backed report said on Wednesday.

The study, by 21 experts including government ministers, academics, conservationists and company leaders, said policies for protecting the oceans from over-fishing, pollution and climate change were often ineffective and fragmented.

It recommended more public-private partnerships involving companies, governments, local communities and others to protect ecosystems that are the main source of protein for a billion people, mainly in the developing world.

“A paradigm shift is needed in how we use and conserve ocean resources to address current inadequacies,” the report said.

The panel, set up by the World Bank, is one of several groups trying to find ways to deal with threats to the oceans. A separate Global 0cean Commission, for instance, is looking at how to safeguard the high seas, outside national jurisdictions.

:}

Please go there and think. More next week.

:}

The End Of The Smokestack Age – The move to a sustainable future

Posted on by
Reply

The terms he uses are different. Man has always extracted things. A  good case can be made that for much of our species existence we have caused things to go extinct as well. We need to quit both. The human race could survive off our garbage dumps from here to eternity if we just made product loops that left no waste. That is if we treated everything and everybody for their intrinsic value.

That last sentence is a little shaky but that is because we live in a throw away culture.

http://steadystate.org/the-end-of-the-age-of-extraction/

The End of the Age of Extraction

by Brent Blackwelder

BlackwelderToday’s global economy is causing shortages of natural resources (both renewable and nonrenewable) as we come to the end of what might be called the Age of Extraction. A true cost, steady state economy, on the other hand, would prevent resource problems by maintaining population and resource consumption well within the carrying capacity of the planet.

Energy and mineral shortages, along with depletion of forests and fisheries, are driving the extractors and harvesters to evermore remote places. No longer able to find gushing oilfields, vast stands of virgin timber, or waterways teeming with fish, the extraction companies are racing to the farthest reaches of the planet in search of profits.

The end of the Age of Extraction does not mean that such resources will disappear. In his recent book, The Quest, Daniel Yergin describes oil and gas discoveries that he predicts will turn the Western Hemisphere — from Canada to Brazil — into the next Saudi Arabia. But today’s extraction is pursuing fuels that are either dirty or hard to get. We see more pollution, both from accidents and mundane chronic causes, increasingly pushing civilization beyond the carrying capacity of the earth, wiping out more and more species, and accelerating climate destabilization.

Today’s global economic operating system tolerates and even abets severe pollution damages as industries externalize the costs from their books. Scarcity has made some of the most environmentally devastating energy and mining projects “short-term cost effective.” For example, according to price and revenue figures, it’s cost effective to extract oil from tar sands in Alberta, a process that requires huge energy inputs, grotesquely contaminates land and water, and poisons people, fish, and wildlife.

:}

Go there and read. More tomorrow.

:}

Vermont Nuclear Closes – One down and 105 more to go

Posted on by
Reply

Unfortunately the plant will sit there in “safe mode” for 60 years until it cools down enough to begin to dismantle it. Hopeful by then a safe disposal site will be designated for the whole US so that the site can be returned to greenfield status. This country should have started a glassification program a long time ago, but besides getting the idea of nuclear power all wrong for cold war purposes, we have got the whole process wrong to make it at least feasible ever since. What a waste of time and money this last 60 nuclear years have been. Our grandchildren will look back on our time as a sad one indeed.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/27/vermont-yankee-nuclear-plant-closure/2707987/

Vermont nuclear power plant to shut down in 2014

Terri Hallenbeck and Tim Johnson, Burlington (Vt.) Free Press

Company said the plant is no longer economically viable.

BRATTLEBORO, Vt. — Entergy Corp. will close Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, which it had fought so vigorously to keep open, by the end of 2014, the company said Tuesday.

Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin called the shutdown “the right decision for Vermont” and pledged to help the plant’s workers find new jobs.

Entergy (ETR), which bought Vermont Yankee in 2002 from eight Vermont utilities, made the decision Sunday to shut down the 600-megawatt nuclear power plant just outside of Vernon, Vt., on the Vermont-New Hampshire border about 2 miles north of the Massachusetts border but informed the Vermont governor of its decision Tuesday morning

:}

Go there for a joyous read. More next week.

:}