Tag Archives: fracking

Clark Government, Oil Lobby Agree Better Regs Needed for Fracking

Share

Read this report form The Globe and Mail on the Clark Government’s recent announcement that it will be taking steps to better regulate the controversial hydraulic fracturing industry regarding key issues such as water and chemical use. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers also released its own report backing more stringent regulations.

“British Columbia will force oil companies to reveal the chemicals
used in hydraulic fracturing, a move supported by the leading industry
association as it looks to head off public opposition to shale gas
production across the country. B.C. Premier Christy Clark
announced on Thursday that the government will establish a public
registry which will detail where companies are engaged in hydraulic
fracturing, and the chemicals they are using in the fluids that are shot
into the rock to unlock natural gas.” (Sept. 9, 2011)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/oil-industry-backs-more-rules-for-fracking/article2158931/

Share

Shades of Green: Pipelines and Tankers – the Building Pressure

Share

Anyone who is concerned about the arrival of pipelines and tankers to BC’s West Coast should be worried. The forces are mounting to make this province a bridge to an energy-hungry Asia. And the inevitable result will be – sooner or later – a ruptured pipeline despoiling pristine rivers and a broken tanker spilling millions of barrels of oil into one of the few undefiled ecologies remaining on our planet.

This scenario is being set by a dramatic change of circumstances in the last few years. Massive investments in the Alberta oil sands have created supplies of crude that must reach markets. To maximize profits, producers want more export options than the United States, the sole foreign recipient of this crude. As America’s economy slows and Asia’s booms, ocean access to the entire Pacific Rim becomes irresistible.

Meanwhile, the entire energy calculus has changed with the discovery of extraordinary quantities of shale gas in Canada and the US. America estimates it has enough gas to meet its domestic energy needs for 200 years. Canada’s supply, centred mostly in northern BC and Alberta, is similarly generous. Since the US will need less Canadian gas, the obvious place to sell it is to Asian markets. And that means pipelines and liquid natural gas (LNG) terminals for coastal BC.

All the pieces to support the arrival of such gas and oil terminals are falling into place. China has invested $10 billion in Alberta oil sands with the expectation rewards – oil in preference to profits. Royal Dutch Shell, Korean Gas, Japan’s Mitsubishi Corporation and Malaysia’s Petronas are all urgently planning for shipments of LNG from BC’s West Coast to their markets. The Montney and Horn River natural gas fields in BC, responsible for making this province the third largest gas producer in the world, could be supplying 5.5 billion cubic feet of gas per day by 2020 – gas that needs to reach buyers. Shell and Mitsubishi are considering that floating off-shore LNG plants would be ideal for BC’s rugged coast. They and other investors are speculating about at least four coastal pipelines and terminals to tranship LNG and oil to Asian markets (Globe & Mail, June 14/11).

If any British Columbians are nervous that foreign energy corporations are planning our future and threatening our treasured West Coast ecology, they will receive no solace from Canada’s Harper government. Foreign Minister John Baird has recently been to China, calling it our “friend” (Ibid. July 19/11) and emphasizing the critical importance of China’s energy and resource appetite in Canada’s economic plans. In Shanghai he declared that Canada’s “relationship [with China] has entered a new era over the past few years” and that it is “the centrepiece of a larger picture of the priority that we want to raise with Asia-Pacific (Ibid. July 21/11). To reinforce this support, Harper’s Minister of Natural Resources, Joe Oliver, has endorsed Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline – a $5.5 billion project that would bring oil and gas through 1,172 km of BC’s wilderness to Kitimat – before the public environmental assessment has even started (ForestEthics, July 10/11).

Meanwhile, in a disquieting move that is clearly designed to erase some of the inconvenient environmental obstacles that lie between Asian energy hunger and Canada’s export ambitions, the Harper government is eliminating 776 positions from Environment Canada, with a further downsizing of 5 to 10 percent next year. These are the professional biologists, chemists and climatologists who determine the difference between careful and reckless plans, the science-based experts who advise that policy occurs within responsible environmental constraints – if no one knows about any unfolding ecological wreckage, then it obviously doesn’t exist.

Despite huge opposition to the Northern Gateway Pipeline project in British Columbia, Enbridge is sensing success and is massaging the public with a national advertising campaign designed to humanize its image from one of the least responsible of all pipeline corporations to one that cares for the public over profits. Its corporate slogan, “Where energy meets people” has been neatly spliced into nearly full-page colour newspaper ads depicting Canadians energetically engaged in activities that are supposed to connect human challenges to the importance of pipelines, to show that personal fulfilment cannot be separated from Enbridge’s crucial role in our lives. “Where Energy Meets Culture” shows ballet dancers in a dramatic pose on an open stage, “Where Energy Meets Pride” shows four aboriginal runners wending their way along a lonely bucolic road, and “Where Energy Meets Victory” shows a team of five bicyclists racing serenely along a long stretch of prairie highway.

The psychology of these ads is both oblique and devious, effectively designed so people will forget that Enbridge wants to pipe oil to a West Coast port, that oil sands crude is particularly corrosive to pipelines, that this pipeline must traverse hundreds of pristine rivers and streams on its winding wilderness course to Kitimat, and that such a pipeline will invite almost one massive supertanker per day – about 225 per year – to some of the most treacherous, beautiful and vulnerable coastlines in the world.

So this is the scenario being designed for British Columbia. It is to become North America’s western departure point for energy exports to China, Japan, Korea, Malaysia and any Pacific Rim country that belongs to the distribution circuit. Huge profits are to be made by huge corporations. The Harper government’s plan for prosperity is founded on a view that disregards ecological concerns and forgets that all this gas and oil represents greenhouse emissions that are cooking our planet.

British Columbians who love our coastline, revere the Great Bear Rainforest and honour the wild majesty of our province had better gird their loins for a fight. It’s coming, it’s coming soon, and the enemy is amassing its forces. The outcome will determine BC’s future character, alter the world’s energy calculus and decide who is joining or resisting our drift toward environmental Armageddon.

Share
Drills for fracking operations near Hudson's Hope, BC

What “Fracking” is About

Share

Until a couple of months ago I had never heard of “fracking”.
I now understand why. And I should have known.

Governments, by long standing habit, don’t like smarty pants
environmentalists to learn what the hell is going on and thus be able
to alert the masses, for those masses can mess up the process. The BC
government’s policy was neatly summed up by Finance Minister Kevin
Falcon when he was Transport Minister. Frustrated by boo-birds who
were always asking questions, going to public meetings and
demonstrating, said the Chinese “don’t have the labour or
environmental restrictions we do. It’s not like they have to do
community consultations. They just say ‘we’re building a bridge’ and
they move everyone out of there and get going within two weeks. Could
you imagine if we could build like that?”

Here is as good a definition I could find for “fracking”:

Horizontal hydrofracking is a means of tapping shale deposits
containing natural gas that were previously inaccessible by
conventional drilling. Vertical hydrofracking is used to extend the
life of an existing well once its productivity starts to run out,
sort of a last resort. Horizontal fracking differs in that it uses a
mixture of 596 chemicals, many of them proprietary, and millions of
gallons of water per frack. This water then becomes contaminated and
must be cleaned and disposed of.

What happens is that the drilling is not done vertically but
horizontally which allows the company to recover huge quantities of
natural gas unobtainable by vertical drilling and they do it by
forcing huge quantities of water laced with the chemicals mentioned.

Knowing that, what sorts of questions are running through your
mind?

  • Does this process weaken the ground so that it might
    collapse?

  • Where do they get all that water from?

  • What happens to the river or lake from which all that water
    was taken?

  • What happens if it comes from a reservoir for a dam, does its
    loss reduce the capacity of that dam?

  • Does it go into the water table? Assuming that it has to go
    somewhere, how clean is it?

  • Does the process have any greenhouse gas emissions?

  • What about people who live and/or work in the area – does
    this process affect them adversely?

This isn’t something that came down the river on a piece of bark
but is a major undertaking throughout North America. The Atlantic
Provinces are involved and Quebec has suspended fracking until there
has been a detailed environmental review.

What about the BC government? Surely they have done studies,
issued a white paper and encouraged public involvement!

Not a chance. The Minister responsible – the Minister of Forests,
Lands and Natural Resource Operations, Steve Thomson – simply refuses
to comment. You will note that the Minister of Environment is not
involved in this huge environmental question mark.

Here we go again, folks! This is the Campbell/Clark Energy plan
all over again. Bring in a policy with huge implications for the
environment and just refuse to answer obvious questions and, for God’s
sake, don’t have any public hearings! The entire environmental policy
of this, the worst government since the Coalition of the 40s and
probably beyond, is to simply ram things through and the public can go to
hell.

We must assume that companies will lie through their teeth which
is quite understandable when you remember that their sole objective
of existing is to make money for shareholders. I don’t say that with
a sneer – it’s simply that their raison d’etre does not permit
them to utter a discouraging word about anything they do.

“Good corporate citizen” is an oxymoron. Whatever they
do from sponsoring a Little League Team to building a new wing to a
hospital has a profitable pay-back. They don’t make gifts
anonymously.

They hire the most expensive liars of earth, the Public Relations
industry, to distract the public with literature and film that would
make Josef Goebbels blush with pride. That, armed with some crap from
the Fraser Institute and a rigidly right wing government is all
that’s needed.

It’s all rather like the aphorism, “If a husband sends his
wife flowers for no reason, there’s a reason.” If the government
doesn’t want you to know, there is a reason – and the reason with this government is invariably that they and industry are about to
do it to you again. Lie, obfuscate and clam up is the way the game is
played.

The underlying philosophy of this government is as Kevin Falcon
stated – the public is a nuisance. Don’t level with them for it might
worry the little dears.

Share

Are They Ganging up on the People and Environment?

Share

Just before I get down to business, I know that all environmentalists will be saddened that a former member of the group, Patrick Moore, allegedly got stiffed by a client for $120,000. I hate to sound like a “Johnny-come-lately” with good advice but, Pat, there are some professions where it’s wise to get your money up front.
 
Those who specialize in conspiracy theories – I’m a sometime member but inching closer to full membership – might wonder if the despoilers of our environment are ganging up on us. This thought came to me as someone representing yet another very worthy cause came to me asking for advice – this one was on the “smart meters” proposed by the bankrupt BC Hydro, which somehow has a billion plus rattling around in their jeans. This is interesting because the difference between this and a tax is invisible and the Campbell/Clark government hasn’t even bothered to go through the motions of putting it to a vote in the Legislature – in addition to removing oversight authority from the public’s supposed watchdog, The BC Utilities Commission (also stripped of authority over Site C Dam and private power projects).
 
The fish farm debate heats up, if that’s possible, as we learn the scientist who advised the provincial government – standing against all other fish biologists dealing with this subject – was practicing voodoo science. That’s not quite what a colleague said about Dick Beamish but one must infer it from what he did say as he dissociated himself from anything Beamish said or did.
 
We have Independent power being proved by the hour to be an environmental catastrophe as well as being fiscally mad as they drive BC Hydro over a financial cliff.
 
And what is the latest cost of the original $1 billion dollar Site”C” at now? Did I see $8 billion with independent estimates topping $10 billion all for power we won’t need but is deliciously placed to extract natural gas and “mine” the biggest polluter on the planet, the Tar Sands?
 
We still have the Fish Lake (Prosperity Mine – don’t you love the PR slant on that name) supported by Premier Clark.
 
We have a brand new environmental threat in what is called “fracking” where gas is “mined” horizontally with enormous amounts of water taken out of an already overburdened supply. We haven’t even considered the NAFTA ramifications.
 
We have Premier Clark, if not approving pipelines from the Tar Sands to Kitimat and greater capacity of the Kinder Morgan line to Burnaby certainly not disapproving even though the record of the companies involved is appalling. On the same subject, the Campbell/Clark government some years ago wrote the feds saying that they didn’t oppose large oil tankers plying the most spectacular and dangerous waters in the world. The Campbell/Clark crowd are utterly unfazed by the fact that spills on land and sea are not “risks” but mathematical certainties.
 
While all this is going on, the C/C government is paving farm land and threatening wildlife sanctuaries.
 
It’s hard not to sniff a corporate/government conspiracy, with the government thinking they can pile so much on us at one time we can’t get our acts together.
 
They are wrong.            
 

Share

Texas Passes Landmark Fracking Legislation

Share

From EnergyBoom.com – June 20, 2011

Texas Governor Rick Perry has signed into law the United States’
first bill which will require natural gas operators to publicly disclose
the chemicals they use in all hydraulic fracturing (fracking) projects
in the state.

The bill,
sponsored by Representative Jim Keffer (Republican-Granbury), seeks to
be a model other states can use to monitor and regulate the country’s
burgeoning natural gas industry. 

The legislation requires full, public disclosure of the chemical
composition of the hydraulic fracturing fluid used at each and every
well in Texas.

Read full article

Share