The Washington Post editorial page (10/5/12) weighed in on the contentious environmental issue of fracking. No surprise–they’re all for it.
“Fracking’s Green Side” is the headline in the print edition. (The Web version is different.) The editors write:
Those who would ban fracking or regulate it into oblivion ignore the exceptional benefits that inexpensive natural gas can provide in the biggest environmental fight of our time–against climate change.
Of course, many people who fight climate change don’t think fracking is the answer. They point to the considerable local environmental hazards–water and air pollution, for starters–but they also question the argument that fracking is necessarily better for the climate.
The Post makes the argument that gas proponents most often cite: “Burning natural gas produces only about half the carbon emissions as burning coal.”
But as fracking critics point out, this is not the only impact it has on the climate. Here’s Neil deMause in Extra! (7/12):
Any drilling for fossil fuels means more carbon will eventually be released into the atmosphere, but fracking’s effect on climate is compounded by the fact that the drilling process can create huge methane leaks: A study by Cornell scientists Robert Howarth and Anthony Ingraffea estimated that fracked wells leak 40 to 60 percent more methane than conventional wells (Scientific American, 1/20/12). Because methane is 20 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide, the National Center for Atmospheric Research has estimated that at these levels of leakage, switching from oil to natural gas consumption would significantly worsen global warming over the next several decades (Climate Progress, 9/9/11).
The Post doesn’t mention methane leaks. They do, however, approvingly cite research from a group called Resources for the Future, touting an energy future based on increased fracking. Readers might want to know, but aren’t told, that the group is financially backed by a Who’s Who of the energy industry: Shell, Duke Energy, Chevron, the American Gas Association, ExxonMobil, Alcoa, Dow Chemical and so forth.
A few weeks ago, we pointed out that the Post seemed to sell a couple of its news pages to an energy industry sponsor. In this case, no such direct conflict seems to be at work–the paper is pushing a pro-industry line, seemingly for free.
Doug Latimer
Ever notice how “climate change” is hauled out of the closet whenever it’s convenient to use it as a cover for “clean energy” or “sustainable development” scams?
Then tossed right back in when the subject is deep water drilling or tar sands pipelines?
You don’t have to stick to the facts
When you can keep the conversation stuck on the fantasy.
Padre
Ah you just didn’t read it right; there is spot in sentence where you insert the correct ‘words’ to make it understandable and see why they did ‘change’ their position.
“… inexpensive natural gas can provide in the biggest environmental fight of our time–against (the people who believe in) climate change.
Now see, it all make sense (;-)
Miranda Spencer
This greenwashing of fracking is quite common, it seems.
FAIR readers interested in getting the inside stories on fracking where it’s happening can subscribe to the blog feed of “From the Ground Up,” the 8-times-monthly blog of the energy news site ShaleReporter.com. Full disclosure, I’m a contributor. But my colleagues’ work is also stuff you don’t see everywhere. And the ShaleReporter site as a whole has a good mix of stories on the many sides of fracking.
No Difference
Neocons release tons of hot air every day, and not just out of their mouths, mostly in the form of scientific inaccuracies and ignorance. If we could capture all that wasted energy and redirect it to GOOD use, maybe we could stop fracking AND oil drilling altogether.
Gregory Lynn Kruse
I wish I could understand how “Burning natural gas produces only about half the carbon emissions as burning coal.”. Oxidation of carbon is what releases energy in coal or gas or oil. It has long been my belief that heating coal (or wood) to a specific temperature causes natural gas to escape and combust. So take a quantity per each of cellulose, bitumen, crude oil, ethanol or natural gas with exactly the same amount of carbon atoms, oxidize all of the carbon and each quantity will produce exactly the same amount of carbon dioxide. Natural gas is cheaper to produce, more plentiful, easier to distribute, and more convenient (no ashes or soot), but in terms of global warming, it is no better than any other carbon based fuel. This world either has to cut back on energy usage or find a less dangerous source than carbon oxidation. Preferably both.
gloriana casey
I just read that Pennsylvania will start fracking under the colleges. Wow, so I suppose that no one at these schools needs clean water and air? This is all being done, I read so the state can get more money. LOL!
So, now, when parents visit a Pennsylvania institute of higher learning, along with the crime statistics, and how many students die of alcohol poisoning, and what majors are offered, and what corporate sponsors donate, they will need to take along a water testing kit!
Somehow Pennsylvania, I think you will be losing money on this idea, along with losing the health of students, faculty and PEOPLE in the surrounding community!
Please redo your state motto, as ” Virtue, Liberty, and Independence don’t seem to cut it anymore. That state tree, the HEMLOCK, seems a bad choice too.
TeeJae
Gregory says, “This world either has to cut back on energy usage or find a less dangerous source than carbon oxidation. Preferably both.”
Yes, that “less dangerous” source is called alternative/renewable energy.
michael e
Well today the Daily mail in the UK reports that global warming stopped 16 years ago.Since then it has been flat lined.They report there was a window of time 1980-1996 that the earth warmed.Since then and before that…pretty stable.Some of the top Global warming scientists have reported on those released facts.If proven correct(and they are not doubting it)they report it will trash the models, and it will be back to the drawing boards.That aside….We had 500 coal plants.In the last two years 100 have closed.In the next two ,250 more are slated to close due to Obamas openly stated goals..45% of our energy is derived from that coal.What is to replace it?Nothing as we speak.Result…….In two years electric energy costs will go through the roof.Obama stated that “by necessity electric cost WILL skyrocket due to his plans”.And so they will…. if he wins.We have more natural gas and oil that anywhere on earth.Coal as well.Obama is in contempt of court for blocking new well licensing.(All up tics are due now to private wells, and that is all that is keeping our head above water)Fracking(a process around since the seventies) is under attack, The EPA is still not bringing any serious cases against it yet though if you believed the papers,you would believe they have hundreds pending..Innuendo.Flaming faucets proven fake.Foul water proven to pre date the fracking.The list goes on and on.T bone Pickens fracked thousands of times with no problems.Nuclear power is under attack.The gov spent 90 billion on pet green projects with little or no return so far.By the way they spent 30 billion on cancer research.Someday we may all be driving Hydrogen cars.Unlimited fuel.Clean.And taken from our nuclear power plants for pennies while we sleep.But we are not there yet.And the pre meditated strike against all forms of energy by the left could be lethal to this country.Until the new forms come on line(and a free market will speed that process) we must drill baby drill.In doing so we must move to be good stewards of the earth.Obamas energy policies are suicidal.Not long term….Short term.We wont make it to see these new wonder technologies if this goes on any longer.
TeeJae
The Daily Mail, michael e? A conservative tabloid. Seriously?
“the pre meditated strike against all forms of energy by the left could be lethal to this country.”
Let’s try that again: “the premeditated strike against all forms of [green] energy by the [right] [will] be lethal to this country [and the world].”
“we must drill baby drill.In doing so we must move to be good stewards of the earth.”
Oh the irony.
michael e
Teejae….do you mock yourself as you drive your car?Or take a plane ,train,or a boat?Do you enjoy your computer,or your tV?Radio……cell phone.All need energy.You seem to be saying the only good energy is(so called) green energy.Well there aint enough of it.It is not anywhere near ready to pick up the load.So you first give up all forms of modern energy fed life.Me …I will go last.When airforce one rolls down the runway winging Obama to Marthas Vinyard,do you know what powers it?Not a windmill.And only a liberal(you?) would automatically equate drilling for our God given abundance as a stain on the earth by definition.You have been so brainwashed.When a thirsty man comes to a clear mountain stream do you say drink “baby’ drink or do you say,die of thirst less yee may foul that water?Idiots.Stone cold idiots.Veegans who would die, rather than eat what their gut bacteria,teeth structure ,and every other physiology indicates is their natural food.And that not bad enough- yet you would have us all follow your lead.Sir you can be a good Steward of the earth while utilizing its gifts.They are not mutually exclusive.Always it is the same with you lot.Your way or the highway.Well if you have your way there will be no highways.
TeeJae
“Well there aint enough of it.It is not anywhere near ready to pick up the load.”
If BigOil would get out of the way, there would be. Do some research.
“And only a liberal(you?) would automatically equate drilling for our God given abundance as a stain on the earth by definition.”
Well there it is. If “god” gave it to us, we surely MUST use it… even though it will destroy the planet “god” made. Your god sure does have a sense of humor.
“When a thirsty man comes to a clear mountain stream do you say drink “baby’ drink or do you say,die of thirst less yee may foul that water?”
Yeah ’cause that’s even remotely the same as pumping millions of tons of pollution into our dwindling water supply.
“Veegans who would die, rather than eat what their gut bacteria,teeth structure ,and every other physiology indicates is their natural food.”
This is a blatant straw man attempt, and completely irrelevant. Name ONE vegan who died from refusing to eat meat.
“Sir you can be a good Steward of the earth while utilizing its gifts.”
Yes, we CAN, but we’re NOT. Are water, wind, solar rays, and heat from the earth’s core NOT “gifts of the earth?”
Btw, I’m a ma’am, not a sir.
“Well if you have your way there will be no highways.”
Actually, that would be the fault of YOUR “lot” since they refuse to approve a single infrastructure bill.
mc donald
i hate fracking mcdonalds disaproves
mc donald
lalalalallallallalalllalalallalllallalalalalallalaalllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllaQ
mc donald
If BigOil would get out of the way, there would be. Do some research.
“And only a liberal(you?) would automatically equate drilling for our God given abundance as a stain on the earth by definition.”
Well there it is. If “god” gave it to us, we surely MUST use it… even though it will destroy the planet “god” made. Your god sure does have a sense of humor.
“When a thirsty man comes to a clear mountain stream do you say drink “baby’ drink or do you say,die of thirst less yee may foul that water?”
Yeah ’cause that’s even remotely the same as pumping millions of tons of pollution into our dwindling water supply.
“Veegans who would die, rather than eat what their gut bacteria,teeth structure ,and every other physiology indicates is their natural food.”
This is a blatant straw man attempt, and completely irrelevant. Name ONE vegan who died from refusing to eat meat.
“Sir you can be a good Steward of the earth while utilizing its gifts.”
Yes, we CAN, but we’re NOT. Are water, wind, solar rays, and heat from the earth’s core NOT “gifts of the earth?”
Btw, I’m a ma’am, not a sir.
“Well if you have your way there will be no highways.”
Actually, that would be the fault of YOUR “lot” since they refuse to approve a single infrastructure bill.