During his State of the Union address last night, President Obama made a huge point of promoting natural gas, while also trying to appear concerned about any potential impacts from drilling. Here’s what he said:

We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years.  And my administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy.  Experts believe this will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade.  And I’m requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use.   Because America will develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk.

The development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don’t have to choose between our environment and our economy.   And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of 30 years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock –- reminding us that government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground.

The president didn’t mention the recent downsizing of government estimates of the Marcellus Shale gas play, which we covered the other day here.  But perhaps more importantly, President Obama didn’t mention at all the very vigorous scientific debate over whether natural gas really improved greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal. We’ve covered that issue before here, here, here and here. And it’s worth noting that there’s been another paper published criticizing Cornell scientist Robert Howarth’s work on this issue and a reply by Howarth that vigorously defends his original conclusion:

We believe the preponderance of evidence indicates shale gas has a larger GHG footprint than conventional gas, considered over any time scale. The GHG footprint of shale gas also exceeds that of oil or coal when considered at decadal time scales, no matter how the gas is used. Considered over the century scale, and when used to generate electricity, many studies conclude that shale gas has a smaller GHG footprint than coal, although some of these studies biased their result by using a low estimate for GWP and/or low estimates for methane emission. However, the GHG footprint of shale gas is similar to that of oil or coal at the century time scale, when used for other than electricity generation. We stand by the conclusion: “The large GHG footprint of shale gas undercuts the logic of its use as a bridging fuel over coming decades, if the goal is to reduce global warming.”

(more…)

Here’s the latest from a new report today from Common Cause:

Natural gas interests have spent more than $747 million during a 10-year campaign – stunningly successful so far – to avoid government regulation of hydraulic “fracking,” a fast-growing and environmentally risky method of tapping underground gas reserves.

A faction of the natural gas industry has directed more than $20 million to the campaigns of current members of Congress and put $726 million into lobbying aimed at shielding itself from oversight, according to the report, the third in a series of “Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets” reports produced by the non-profit government watchdog group.

“Players in this industry have pumped cash into Congress in the same way they pump toxic chemicals into underground rock formations to free trapped gas,” said Common Cause President Bob Edgar. “And as fracking for gas releases toxic chemicals into groundwater and streams, the industry’s political fracking for support is toxic to efforts for a cleaner environment and relief from our dependence on fossil fuels.”

The report explains:

… The industry’s political giving also heavily favors lawmakers who voted  in favor of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which exempted fracking from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Current members who voted for the bill received an average of $73,433, while those who voted against the bill received an average of $10,894.

If you’re wondering, Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., led our state’s delegation with $144,603 in campaign donations from the industry. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., received $93,150. Both voted in favor of exempting fracking from the Safe Drinking Water Act, according to Common Cause. Rep. Nick J. Rahall, D-W.Va., received $56,850, but voted against the loophole. Sen. Manchin and Rep. McKinley were not in office at the time.

West Virginia Sen. President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as governor, just finished a press conference called to announce his administration’s plan for emergency regulations governing Marcellus Shale gas drilling. Tomblin said:

This executive order is the first step in my long-term plan to ensure responsible development of Marcellus Shale. The good-paying jobs predicted with this development must include the protection of our public’s health and safety as well as that of our environment. I want to thank our citizens who have voiced their concerns about Marcellus Shale drilling and want to assure them that I recognize this emerging segment of the natural gas industry warrants my immediate attention to ensure responsible development.

The first thing worth knowing about the event is that Mr. Tomblin spent quite a bit of his introductory remarks — at an event he called to announce his plan for protecting the environment — criticizing efforts to protect the environment.  Perhaps when he’s acting as governor, Mr. Tomblin just can’t possibly pass up any opportunity to attack the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to limit the damaging impacts of mountaintop removal mining. He took time out from talking about Marcellus drilling to say:

… They have allowed the EPA to spent out of control. Because of their over-reaching rulemaking, the EPA is killing jobs, which is hurting the economy of America. Washington … needs to take control of the EPA before it does further damage.

Also fascinating is that the acting governor’s executive order directing WVDEP to promulgate emergency rules was made available on the website of a gas industry group’s website well before it was posted on any of the state government’s sites.

You have to wonder if citizens and environmentalists who are concerned about the industry and its political influence will find this very comforting as they review what Tomblin and the WVDEP are proposing.

Among the items that are to be included in the WVDEP’s emergency rules:

– Erosion and sediment control plans for certain drilling permits would have to be certified by a registered professional engineer. Larger sites would have to be  constructed under an engineer’s supervision;

– All well permits applications must specify the amount of water to be used in drilling and fracturing, and larger operations must submit formal “water management plans”;

– Any permit applications for drilling within a municipality or within a one-mile radius of any municipality must publish a public notice of their permit application.

(more…)

The Associated Press had a story over the weekend about the differing views of various candidates for governor of West Virginia about Marcellus Shale drilling … and the Sunday Gazette-Mail included the following questions and answers from the candidates on the issue:

Do you believe West Virginia needs new regulations for oil and gas drilling? If so, what specific requirements should be in the legislation?

– Clark S. Barnes:

We must address: Surface owners’ rights, protection of the aquifer which residents depend upon for their personal needs and for livestock use, the amount and location of water removal needed for the drilling and “fracking” process and, the disposal of chemically treated fluids used in the drilling process.

– Mitch B. Carmichael:

I believe that existing regulations for oil and gas drilling are working well. I do support additional DEP inspectors to ensure that regulations are enforced, water supplies are pure, and surface owners are protected.

– Ralph William “Bill” Clark:

We need lower corporate taxes and a competitive severance tax for energy companies, to guarantee profitability, but higher permit fees to pay for more inspectors. We must protect water quality and quantity and surface owners’ rights — now and for the future — and require disclosure of chemicals used in the fracturing process.

– Larry Faircloth:

While capitalizing on natural resources, the environment and property rights must be respected. As governor I will introduce legislation to protect landowners, water systems, rivers and streams as we explore for and extract oil and gas reserves.

– Betty S. Ireland:

– Predictable regulatory process

– Responsive, consistent, balanced permitting process

– Process for local governments/municipalities to provide feedback

– Citizens assured that drilling provides a direct and significant economic benefit

– Consistent and predictable process for individual landowners to insure fair and equitable treatment

– Assurance of outstanding water resources with exemplary water quality

– Bill Maloney:

We already have regulation on oil and gas, including the Marcellus Shale. When I’m governor, West Virginia will drill. We need to streamline the permitting process to ensure we take advantage of this huge potential, while protecting property rights and addressing environment concerns.

– Mark A. Sorsaia:

Yes we do need new regulations that will insure the quality of ground water, and public safety. Our regulations must place us in a competitive position that will promote the development of our gas resources.

In Sunday’s Gazette-Mail, our political staff asked the Democratic candidates for governor of West Virginia this question:

Do you believe West Virginia needs new regulations for oil and gas drilling? If so, what specific requirements should be in the legislation?

Here are their answers:

Jeff Kessler –

Yes. More DEP inspectors and regulations that include protection of our water resources; protection of landowner surface rights; repair of our roads and highways; fair distribution of the production royalties to mineral right owners; that West Virginia residents are employed in the industry and that adequate severance dollars are collected.

John Perdue -

Before we start drilling in the Marcellus Shale, we should first set regulations that will allow us to extract the gas in an environmentally safe way, provide protections for our water supply and establish landowner’s rights.

Natalie Tennant -

Responsible development of our natural resources will allow West Virginia to create thousands of new jobs and strategic investment in education, research and technology. We must, however, ensure we protect our environment, our roads and our communities. We must also ensure companies hire West Virginians for West Virginia work.

Rick Thompson -

Yes, and that’s why I proposed a special session to deal with the issue. Producers need a process that is understandable, attainable and reasonable. Communities need to be assured that their groundwater and infrastructure are protected and surface owners need assurance their rights are protected.

Earl Ray Tomblin -

Yes. The Marcellus Shale presents an enormous economic opportunity, and I support drilling in a responsible and reasonable manner. I proposed additional funding for inspectors to ensure compliance with regulations, and I will continue pushing the Legislature to provide that money and adopt reasonable regulations.