Skip to main content

Josh Fox of Gasland fame was on the Daily Show last week Wednesday with an interview with John Oliver.   He had an interesting and provocative comment about leaking oil and gas wells and what the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) has to say about this problem.

This was the extended part 2 online only segment:

The part where Fox mentioned the Society of Petroleum Engineers was here in the third interview Part 3  - start viewing at 3:15 for context:

Several specific points Fox stated in the interview set off my "BullXXXX Detector," including his claims about massive, uncontrolled methane emissions from oil and natural gas well drilling, well completion and production operations -- claims which are not supported in EPA's background documents on air emissions from the oil and gas industry.

But what really caught my eye was Fox's claim about the Society of Petroleum Engineers.    Fox stated:


“Society of Petroleum Engineers says that 35% of the world’s wells are leaking”.

In the main interview portion Fox claimed that the oil and gas industry carried out
wells with 'fatally flawed engineering' and I suppose that Fox thought his claims about the Society of Petroleum Engineers would buttress his point.  

When I first heard it, I immediately thought Fox's claim about SPE was an absolutely unbelievable fabrication and conflation.   So I decided to contact SPE to see what they said about what Josh Fox said about them.

I just received an email from the Society of Petroleum Engineer official Paige McCown, Senior Manager Communication and Energy Education:

Hi Alex,

The actual quote from Mr. Fox on the Daily Show was that the “Society of Petroleum Engineers says that 35% of the world’s wells are leaking”.  Neither SPE, nor anyone representing SPE, has ever made the claim that 35% of the world’s (oil and gas) wells are leaking.  We have no basis for making such a determination.

Thank you,

Paige McCown

Society of Petroleum Engineers

Senior Manager Communication & Energy Education

pmccown@spe.org

713-457-6826 office

832-776-3511 cell

 

Josh Fox's claim stating that the Society of Petroleum Engineers says that 35% of the world's oil and gas wells are leaking is a total and complete fabrication.

This diary is the first of what I hope to be a series of diaries called 'Fact Checking Josh Fox / Gasland' that I'll be posting from time to time.   My next diary on this topic will discuss how Fox/Gasland makes erroneous claims about regulation of the oil and gas industry under the Clean Air Act and why the BREATHE ACT promoted by national environmental groups is an extremely bad idea and constitutes malpractice in the legislative stewardship of the Clean Air Act and a threat to public health in communities around pulp mills, petroleum refineries and synthetic organic chemical manufacturing operations.

Originally posted to LakeSuperior on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:18 PM PDT.

Also republished by Climate Hawks.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What % are leaking ? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action

    34 ? 87 ? 100 ?

    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. David Morrison

    by indycam on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:23:26 PM PDT

    •  Fewer leak now than (0+ / 0-)

      before but it would be difficult to get that number.  Paige is right she/he doesn't know and probably doesn't care.

    •  indycam: depends how you define "leak" (0+ / 0-)

      gas gets flared off of a lot of land-based wells in Texas / New Mexico/ Oklahoma/Louisiana (don't know about other oil patches, haven't seen 'em) and some offshore wells in the Gulf of Mexico routinely.

      I"m talking about oil production practices here.

      If gas is so damn valuable we have to destroy our water to get more of it, why are we wasting it in flares?

      You'll hear that that's to prevent contaminating the pipelines, etc.
      That's bullshit. It's cheaper to flare it than capture it for use. Period.

      LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

      by BlackSheep1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 10:03:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  No one can answer that for sure because (0+ / 0-)

      the state is in charge and state regulators are captured agencies. Just a few months ago the Texas Railroad commission had no ruling on the annular spacing. The annular space is where the cement goes so if there is no space or not enough space or way too much space...well the cement job is screwed.

      The new ruling calls for .75" in the upper part of the casing and .5" in the lower casing. Does that instill confidence?

      Here is a list of casing failures/violations for just one company in the Marcellus shale. http://www.texassharon.com/...

  •  Those who go up against the petroleum industry (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LakeSuperior, Wee Mama, BlackSheep1

    have an obligation to be 100% accurate on anything presented as a fact.

    I know that's a double standard because big petroleum will never be held to the same standard, but given who they are going up against, one little misstep costs far more than being 100% certain in all presented facts.

    John Roberts? Melville Fuller?? WTF is the difference???.

    by Walt starr on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:30:13 PM PDT

    •  Those who present anything as fact..... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlackSheep1

      ......always are under an obligation to be 100% accurate.

      •  I can agree with that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LakeSuperior

        but the petroleum industry will never be held to that standard, especially by the media.

        John Roberts? Melville Fuller?? WTF is the difference???.

        by Walt starr on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:55:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You are presenting this as fact ? (0+ / 0-)

        You are under the obligation to be 100% accurate .

        The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. David Morrison

        by indycam on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:12:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes..... (0+ / 0-)

          ....and what is fact is that Josh Fox's characterization that 35% of the world's oil and gas wells are leaking and that this is a finding of the Society of Petroleum Engineers......all of that is fabrication and conflation that has nothing to do with reality.

          •  So you will not say what the real number is , (0+ / 0-)

            but you are willing to say someone else is wrong ?

            As to your claim that when presenting fact people have to be 100% accurate , that isn't the truth , you are misstating the truth .

            The truth is all oil wells and gas wells leak .
            No oil well or gas well is 100% perfectly sealed .

            Asking one person to confirm something
            and having that person say its untrue
            doesn't prove anything .

            I called a company yesterday ,
            I talked to a few people ,
            and they told me opposite things .

            The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. David Morrison

            by indycam on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:29:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Of course I'm willing to say Fox is wrong (0+ / 0-)

              about his SPE claim because there isn't any doubt about what SPE said.   I'm not here to tell you how many oil and gas wells are leaking in the world.   Absolutely nothing I've said is a mis-statement of the truth.

              As to well leakage, Fox makes claims about massive methane leakage from drilling and well completion operations including hydraulic fracturing, but these claims of massive methane emissions aren't supported by EPA's background documents on air emissions from this industrial sector.

              •  Oh really ? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Tinfoil Hat
                because there isn't any doubt about what SPE said.
                You know what they have and have not said in the past ?

                Anyway , it looks like you are out to get someone , you are not presenting the truth of the matter nor does it seems like you care to find what the truth is .

                but these claims of massive methane emissions aren't supported by EPA's
                So what is the real amount ? I bet you will not come up with any info , you just will go after someone else for not telling the truth .

                http://www.scientificamerican.com/...

                Scientists at Duke University detected elevated levels of methane, ethane and propane in groundwater samples near active fracking sites. The scientists conclude that the gasses come from the wells, not natural sources, but that the problem could be solved with better-designed casings. "We think there's a well-integrity problem in this part of the Marcellus,” says Robert Jackson, a professor at Duke and lead author on the paper describing the findings. "And well problems are relatively easily fixed. They’re especially easier to fix than if there's some fundamental problem with fracking."
                http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/...
                Unless too much methane leaks into the atmosphere. As U.S. CO₂ emissions fell between 2005 and 2010, methane emissions rose. By 2010, EPA says, the rise was equivalent in global warming potential to around 40 million metric tons of CO₂ annually, which means it offset 10 percent of the CO₂ decline. More than half of that methane increase, says EPA, came from the natural gas industry—the country’s biggest emitter.
                http://www.scientificamerican.com/...
                Robert Howarth, an ecologist and evolutionary biologist, and Anthony Ingraffea, a civil and environmental engineer, reported that fracked wells leak 40 to 60 percent more methane than conventional natural gas wells. When water with its chemical load is forced down a well to break the shale, it flows back up and is stored in large ponds or tanks. But volumes of methane also flow back up the well at the same time and are released into the atmosphere before they can be captured for use. This giant belch of "fugitive methane" can be seen in infrared videos taken at well sites.

                Molecule for molecule, methane traps 20 to 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than does carbon dioxide. The effect dissipates faster, however: airborne methane remains in the atmosphere for about 12 years before being scrubbed out by ongoing chemical reactions, whereas CO2 lasts 30 to 95 years. Nevertheless, recent data from the two Cornell scientists and others indicate that within the next 20 years, methane will contribute 44 percent of the greenhouse gas load produced by the U.S. Of that portion, 17 percent will come from all natural gas operations.

                The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. David Morrison

                by indycam on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 08:15:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I take SPE's denial that they ever made a (0+ / 0-)

                  determination that 35% of the world's oil and gas wells and their statement that they don't have any basis for such a determination as uncontested and unchallenged fact as to what position and declarations are made by the Society of Petroleum Engineering.  

                  On your first paper shown as to the findings of gas in well water around within a short radius from natural gas drilling and well completion sites.....that is absolutely irrelevant to the matter of the methane emissions characterization for casing wellheads and other exploration/production site process equipment, flares, vents and piping fugitive emissions at gas well development and production sites.

                  EPA's emission characterizations for the methane do not include or address claims of general soil gas methane at the surface around natural gas development.

                  Your second link and citation does not support Fox's claim that natural gas borehole drilling operations and multi-stage hydraulic fracturing operations are, in fact, uncontrolled and/or massive emission sources, or that typical industry wellhead operations is to allow uncontrolled venting of methane from gas wells as a usual and ordinary practice going on for long periods of time during natural gas drilling and well completion operations.

                  On your third link and the Howarth/Ingraffea paper and its claims.....    First, nothing about the Howarth/Ingraffea paper is considered to be an emission determination or measure.   It is an emission calculation only that depends on assumption, many of which have been successfully challenged by the natural gas industry.   Ingraffea is a mechanical engineer and is not a petroleum engineer, by the way.

                  Second, EPA has not accepted the emission characterization for methane portrayed by Howarth/Ingraffea.

                  Third, Howarth/Ingraffea don't account for common  industry practices required in many jurisdictions to collect and burn methane emissions during well completion operations.   The same site flares are used to control tank methane releases from unstable produced liquids/flowback in flash tanks.   It is technical error to claim that wellhead organic carbon emissions and flash tank emissions that are flared are uncontrolled releases of methane.

                  •  You are amazing . (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BlackSheep1, julesrules39

                    Tell me , how many % of oil wells / gas wells leak ?

                    It is technical error to claim that wellhead organic carbon emissions and flash tank emissions that are flared are uncontrolled releases of methane.
                    Amazing use of the English language .

                    Its very clear to me what you are doing .

                    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. David Morrison

                    by indycam on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 08:29:47 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You are apparently unfamiliar with (0+ / 0-)

                      principles of air pollution control and the effect of combustion that occurs in flares on process gases directed to a flare which is a control device which achieves substantial destruction of the methane contained in the process gases directed to the flare.

                      Flare combustion isn't perfect and there is controversy over the level of the destruction efficiency achieved.   However, calling a flare a "leak" of a oil or gas well that is uncontrolled is not recognizable as a legitimate engineering description of the emissions and the process gas destruction process implicit in flare control of oil/gas well collected from well heads and other site equipment.

                  •  Correction (0+ / 0-)

                    Dr. Ingraffea contacted me to inform me I was mistaken about his qualification.   He is a civil and environmental engineer and not a mechanical engineer.   I apologize for this error.

            •  It's not just the wells that leak. If you are (0+ / 0-)

              putting millions of gallons of water at high pressure mixed with sand and a toxic cocktail of chemicals into the ground the break up shale, shit happens.  The gas as well as dangerous chemicals can end up coming up to the water table or surface groundwater.  

              They are drilling down and then out likes the spokes on a bicycle in different directions, sometimes fracking the same well up to 18 times.

              I have seen the new movie already.  I think that every American should see it.  People need to wake up.  

              Here's a Bloomberg articleabout the risks and one from earlier today in the Guardian with the Gasland II HBO trailer.

          •  Wait a minute. Parse that. Josh Fox misrepresented (0+ / 0-)

            the SPE.
            Don't make the same mistake in the other direction.

            You can't say what percentage of wells leak until you define leak.

            But yeah, wells leak. Wellheads leak. Fittings leak. Wear and tear creates microfractures (metal fatigue) in pipeline joints, and those leak.
            You sometimes get spectacular explosions in natural gas pipelines.
            You sometimes get failures in pipleines that spread crude oil over the countryside.
            Those are the "leaks" that make the news.
            The ones that don't are the greasy spots around wellheads or under transport trucks or trailing in the water behind the oceangoing tankers.

            LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

            by BlackSheep1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 10:10:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  OK, did you contact Fox? (0+ / 0-)

        Some of what he presents are documents that the industry may not want made public.  Did you really expect a PR person representing the industry to release a statement that 35% of their wells are leaking?

      •  Someone should inform political leaders of such (0+ / 0-)

        because they missed that memo.  

      •  that's how the journalism teachers used to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LakeSuperior

        hold our feet to the fire when I went to school (full disclosure: 1981-85).

        SPE has a pretty active chapter at my alma mater. They're engineers, and engineers are reluctant to make blanket claims without data.

        LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

        by BlackSheep1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 10:04:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That's bullshit (0+ / 0-)

      That kind of thinking allows a massive expansion at the expense of our communities, water, air and land. Kind of like what is happening right now.

      A few brave people made assumptions about cigarette smoking and a link to cancer and that still can't be proven. We are dealing with the same situation here.

      I connect dots about fracking and have been for years. I was called all kinds of names and ridiculed but guess what? It turned out I was right about 90% of the time.

  •  Question about the validation (4+ / 0-)

    Do you think that the SPE are the best people to ask about whether or not they had findings of 35% leaking?  Or would it be better to try to check with a third party?

    Just seems to me that they may potentially have reasons to try to hide that info, perhaps via an interpretation of data favorable to their industry.  This is not an accusation of them at all, but if you're going to investigate you might as well make sure that you're not being fed PR speak.

    •  Their denial of Fox's claim (0+ / 0-)

      is clear and unambiguous.

      Fox's claim was fabrication.

      •  And simplistic. She didn't tell you what the % is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        julesrules39

        and we know there is some leakage. I am not impressed by statements from the petroleum industry.

        To thine ownself be true

        by Agathena on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:04:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The SPH representative didn't cite a percentage (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wee Mama

          because SPH does not have an basis for making a percentage claim of that nature.   Nothing untoward or evasive about that response....

        •  Oil and Gas push back Gasland II (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LakeSuperior, Kingsmeg, julesrules39
          Josh Fox's Gasland Part II Faces Aggressive Oil and Gas Public Relations Campaign
          With funding from an array of oil companies, front groups like Energy in Depth have created entire websites devoted to “debunking” the first-hand reports shown in the first Gasland, produced their own film titled Truthland, and maneuvered behind the scenes to undermine Gasland’s credibility amongst the media.

          Now the oil industry is gearing up for a new campaign to attack the sequel. And early signs indicate they plan to pull out all the stops.

          To thine ownself be true

          by Agathena on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:10:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I"m not part of that. (0+ / 0-)

            I don't work for any industrial clients or trade associations at all, and never have.

            In fact, all of my client projects involving the natural gas or oil industry issues are for national, state or local environmental groups, local government and/or labor unions....or Plaintiff attorneys in environmental enforcement cases.

            What I'm opposed to is turning environmental science issues into a clown act as Josh Fox does with his Gasland conflation/fabrication campaign.

            •  Of you had a child going to school where they are (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Agathena, BlackSheep1

              about to start fracking, you might think differently.

              Since when do businesses operate without impunity if harming public health or property?  

              If the industry is not polluting or endangering anyone or private property, then get rid of the Halliburton loophole.

              •  What specific Haliburton loophole are you talking (0+ / 0-)

                about?   I suppose the main loophole is the matter of not requiring a Safe Drinking Water permit for hydraulic fracturing  flowback.   However, even if such a permit would be required, it would probably end up making very little difference from the standpoint of the type of liquid waste disposal well to be used for disposing of such flow back.    And the exemption for hydraulic fracturing itself through exempting a natural gas production well from SDWA permit wouldn't make much difference either in the physical implementation of drilling and well completion operations.

                •  R u kidding me now? Google it. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Agathena, BlackSheep1

                  Energy Policy Act of 2005
                  "This bill exempted fluids used in the natural gas extraction process of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) from protections under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and CERCLA.[19] It created a loophole that exempts companies drilling for natural gas from disclosing the chemicals involved in fracking operations that would normally be required under federal clean water laws — see exemptions for hydraulic fracturing under United States federal law. The loophole is commonly known as the "Halliburton loophole" since former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney was reportedly instrumental in its passage.[20] The proposed Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act would repeal these exemptions."

                  How would you feel having a well upstream of your child's drinking water source?

                  •  I'm not kidding when I asked which Haliburton (0+ / 0-)

                    loophole your were talking about as there are a number of them.   I mentioned the issue of produced water disposal wells being the most signficant loophole provision.

                    However, no provision of Energy Policy Act of 2005 amended the Clean Air Act in any way.   There is no Halliburton Loophole in the Clean Air Act that exempts the oil and gas industry from categorical regulation under the Act as claimed by Gasland.....that is also another example of total fabrication and conflation by Josh Fox/Gasland.

                    There are several oil and gas wells here in the county where I live and none pose any threat at all to my water supply.

                  •  A recent study at Cornell proves fracking (0+ / 0-)

                    is a danger to drinking water. There was also a study in Wyoming proving it. I'm not going to provide links because it's beyond me to try to convince anyone. Let them watch the movie, Gasland 2.

                    To thine ownself be true

                    by Agathena on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 05:44:11 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Movies always exaggerate, even documentaries (0+ / 0-)

              If all you can find is that Josh Fox misquoted The Petroleum Engineers, or conflated the Clean Air Act with the Safe Drinking Act that's not much. He is a citizen whose land was destroyed by fracking, he has a right to speak out about it.

              I look forward to your in-depth review after you see the movie.

              To thine ownself be true

              by Agathena on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 05:50:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Agathena: ask anybody in the oilpatch (0+ / 0-)

          they'll all say the same thing: wells leak. Casings leak. Pipelines leak. Fittings leak. Tanks leak. Hoses leak. Trucks leak. Ships leak. Christmas trees leak. Injection wells leak -- one in Yoakum County in 1975 killed some friends of mine from junior high: they lived in a house nearby when a hydrogen sulfide injection fitting failed. The poison cloud that leaked out of that well killed people sent to fix it: H2S causes vehicles to stall, and you can't breath the stuff.

          Not every leak is as bad in terms of size and spectacularity as Exxon-Valdez or Deepwater Horizon; some are only as bad as Ixtoc I or the leak off Santa Barbara in the late 1960s. But no leak is actually good.

          I got out of the Permian Basin to stay in '90 ... but fracking's got money behind it, and the scarlet-heart-of-Bush-League-Nation dimbulb nimrod city council here wants to see if the city can get in on the fracking boom now. Not having enough water to support the people who live here already be damned, they want the dollars.

          LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

          by BlackSheep1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 10:19:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Looks like he got the percentage.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action, julesrules39

    ...from Power Point presentations:

    http://www.realclearenergy.org/...

    I've seen one person come up with an impressive number for a presentation, article or whatever, and others pick it up for their presentations.

    That may be what happened here.

  •  I think the Society of Petroleum Engineers (4+ / 0-)

    has a lot of skin in the game. So I tend to advise that anyone looks at their stuff as bullshit in the defense of fracking.

    "Societies strain harder and harder to sustain the decadent opulence of the ruling class, even as it destroys the foundations of productivity and wealth." — Chris Hedges

    by Crider on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:29:28 PM PDT

    •  It sounds like you don't think that science and (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlackSheep1

      engineering knowledge are the proper analytical and knowledge jurisdiction venues for
      review of the environmental safety of oil and gas drilling, well completion and production operations.

      •  They have skin in the game (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        julesrules39

        They have a lot to gain by lying about fracking. We've seen big oil's lying propaganda about climate change. I wouldn't trust those guys to mow my lawn.

        "Societies strain harder and harder to sustain the decadent opulence of the ruling class, even as it destroys the foundations of productivity and wealth." — Chris Hedges

        by Crider on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:16:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Do you really think that it is the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wee Mama

          purpose and mission of a professional organization of engineers to lie about what they do?   You've
          never spent any time or ever had any interactions with engineers before, have you?

          •  I have spent plenty of time around engineers (0+ / 0-)

            of various stripes less likely to be compromised by their own dependency on special interests than the SPE. I can tell you that I wouldn't be surprised by them lying in the least.

        •  No, actually, they don't. SPE is not pro-fracking (0+ / 0-)

          or anti-fracking. Think of them as a voluntary association of engineers. They don't issue licenses.
          They do lobby, some.
          They're the SPJ of engineering.

          LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

          by BlackSheep1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 10:24:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I believe all the affected homeowners, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agathena, julesrules39

    who the industry has ignored and/or railroaded, just like every other fossil fuel industry. And the government just rolls over.

    Prove they're all lying.

    This ought to be interesting.

    Let sleeping yawners lie. It's not like you can stop them. ☮ ♥ ☺

    by Words In Action on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:50:54 PM PDT

  •  Recced for discussion purposes. n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lurkyloo, LakeSuperior, WakeUpNeo

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 08:20:03 PM PDT

  •  This is one of Fox's SPE references (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    julesrules39

    http://www.hydrorelief.org/...

    The author says that tens of thousands of wells are leaking in North America.  And since there are hundreds of thousands of wells, it's hard to say "35%"

    More on leaking oil and gas wells:

    http://www.propublica.org/...

  •  Hey Lake Superior (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LakeSuperior, BlackSheep1

    Thanks for fact-checking.  We have to be careful to speak from actual knowledge and not knee jerk opposition.

    I have a lot of issues with fracking, and I also am an analyst at EPA and appreciate a clear and honest approach to the facts.

    I saw the interview with Josh Fox and was left with some unanswered questions. I appreciate his flair for speaking to the public and bringing to light real problems that real people are having with fracking in their backyard, but I wish he would keep his facts straight.

    Facts matter. We need to understand what we're talking about.

    “Better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.” -- FDR, 1936

    by SolarMom on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 10:04:40 PM PDT

    •  My next time posting will address (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SolarMom

      the most misguided proposal [the BREATHE ACT] ever made by environmental groups to amend the Federal Clean Air Act that I've ever seen in my 37 years of stewardship of the Federal Clean Air Act.   Here is a little taste of what will be coming:

      http://www.great-lakes.net/...

      •  Yikes (0+ / 0-)

        Ok, so I understand how listing hydrogen sulfide under section 112 could nullify pre-existing PSD rules that cover it, and I agree, that would be very bad.

        I used to work in both the PSD program and the toxic programs, but I don't recall hydrogen sulfide being covered by PSD. Is it an indicator for VOC or particulate controls?

        (casual reader, if there are any: PSD = prevention of significant deterioration, which is a Clean Air Act regulatory program, and VOC = volatile organic chemical. VOCs, and also nitrogen oxides, react with sunlight to form ozone).

        “Better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.” -- FDR, 1936

        by SolarMom on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 06:49:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The movie will be on HBO at 9 PM EST on Monday (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LakeSuperior

    That's Monday, July 8th.  People should view it and decide for themselves.  

  •  BTW, the IEA just announced criteria (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LakeSuperior, BlackSheep1

    for addressing major climate change threats, one of which was, specifically, that the industry must control methane leakage.  I don't have the link handy, but here's an article by their chief economist

  •  and here is why they should be enforced: (0+ / 0-)

    http://lubbockonline.com/...

    This is the stuff we're talking about:
    http://www.safetydirectory.com/...

    http://www.neogap.org/...

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/...

    Call me prejudiced. I went to school with Clara. I grew up in that oil patch. Steve Sparger was in high school just ahead of me.

    http://royblizzard.hubpages.com/...

     Fishgrease knows that oilpatch too. It's a dangerous place, and leaks are why.

    Any "new legislation" designed to relax controls on H2S is a bad idea.

    http://www.alken-murray.com/...

    LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

    by BlackSheep1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 10:36:48 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site