Mother Jones championed the laborers of West Virginia

From an Article by Alexander C. Kaufman, Mother Jones Magazine, August 17, 2018

Fracking companies used 770 percent more water per well in 2016 than in 2011 across all the United States’ major gas- and oil-producing regions, according to a new study.

The number of new fracking wells decreased as gas prices fell, but the amount of water used per well skyrocketed, with up to 1,440 percent more toxic wastewater generated in the first year of each new well’s production period by 2016.

The research, published Wednesday afternoon in the peer-reviewed journal Science Advances, raises new concerns that hydraulic fracturing, the controversial drilling technique used to extract oil and gas trapped deep in bedrock, imperils vital drinking water reserves.

In regions where the warming climate is drying sources of fresh water, fracking intensifies pressure on an already-strained system while increasing the availability of fuels that cause emissions, speeding up the rise in temperatures.

Fracking also produces huge volumes of wastewater laced with cancer-causing chemicals, salts and naturally-occurring radioactive material that can cause earthquakes and contaminate aquifers when pumped underground.

“We saw this dramatic rise in water use and wastewater,” Avner Vengosh, a co-author of the study and professor of geochemistry and water quality at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment, said in a phone interview. “They’re drilling much more.”

The study found that if gas and oil prices rise and production increases to the levels of the early 2010s, when fracking first took off, water use and wastewater production could multiply 50-fold for gas drilling and 20-fold for oil extraction by 2030. Even if future drilling rates stay at 2016 levels, the study predicts “a large increase of the total water use for both unconventional oil and shale gas basins,” with a surge in wastewater creation to match.

To conduct the analysis, the researchers compared well information from the US Energy Information Agency and state environmental and natural resource agencies to data collected by the services DrillingInfo and the FracFocus Chemical Disclosure Registry. The data set covered six years and more than 12,000 individual wells.

Mounting research shows that rising fossil fuel emissions, which increase the temperature of the planet, pose grave risks to water supplies. Water levels in 21 of the world’s 47 largest known aquifers are trending negative, according to a 2015 study published by a group of NASA scientists in the journal Water Resources Research. Another NASA study, published in the journal Nature in May, found that California alone lost four gigatons of water from 2007 to 2015.

The demand for water, driven largely by agriculture, is on pace to increase by 55 percent globally between 2000 and 2050. Food production already accounts for 70 percent of water withdrawals around the world, but, by some estimates, farmers need to increase water use by 69 percent to feed the total global population by the year 2035.

“At a time when large parts of our county are suffering through persistent droughts and year-round fire seasons, it’s truly unconscionable that the fossil fuel industry would be allowed to divert vast volumes of water to fracking for oil and gas,” Seth Gladstone, a spokesman for the environmental group Food & Water Watch, said in an email. “The fact that the burning of this oil and gas is driving our climate chaos and intensifying the droughts and fires makes this reality all the more shameful and absurd.”

The American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry’s biggest lobby, declined to comment on the findings of the study before it was released, stating that it would review the details of the report. But, in an email, spokesman Reid Porter said the industry focuses on “reclaiming and practical reuse of waste, using treatments that reduce the waste produced, thereby reducing the amounts that have to be disposed.”

Despite oil and gas industry pushback, other research shows wastewater can contaminate drinking water. In April 2016, former Environmental Protection Agency scientist Dominic DiGiulio concluded that methanol, a chemical that causes permanent nerve damage and blindness, seeped from unlined pits holding fracking wastewater into a massive aquifer in Wyoming.

The EPA later found diesel and benzene, a carcinogen, in wells near the water reserve, but held off on linking the contaminants to fracking, which the Obama administration touted for increasing natural gas production and reducing the nation’s reliance on carbon dioxide-spewing coal.

In December 2016, the EPA issued a landmark finding that fracking can contaminate water.

But the agency failed to put any regulations in place to establish a national standard for addressing the issue before President Donald Trump took office, installing former Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, a man with brazenly public ties to the oil and gas industry, as EPA administrator. Almost immediately after the Senate confirmed his nomination, Pruitt began eliminating regulations on the fracking industry.

“We don’t have a national policy, and each state will have different ways of dealing with [fracking],” study co-author Vengosh said. “Given that there’s no uniform regulation in the US, and the weakening of the EPA to have no say in anything these days, that could be a problem.”

Fracking isn’t the only source of contaminants putting stress on water systems. The study comes amid rising concerns over perfluorinated chemicals, including compounds used in firefighting foam and nonstick Teflon, in water sources across the country.

A growing number of states are setting strict new limits on the cancer-causing chemicals, which remain in the water for decades. But the EPA has yet to regulate perfluorinated chemicals―and went as far as to suppress a federal report that recommended lowering the maximum limit by nearly seven times the current standard.

Toxic Chemicals, Water Pollution, Dangerous Pipelines

From an Article by Dillon Carr, Pittsburgh Tribune – Review, 9/25/17

A Washington D.C.-based environmental advocacy group is hosting a meeting in Oakmont on Tuesday to discuss local efforts to restrict Marcellus shale drilling.

Tuesday’s meeting will be the first of three meetings scheduled by Food & Water Watch at the Oakmont Elks.

Each meeting will have its own topic of discussion:

• Sept. 26: The basics of zoning, planning and land-use.

• Oct. 10: Legal issues involving oil and gas companies and local governments.

• Oct. 24: Reviewing Oakmont’s updated draft of the oil and gas ordinance being proposed by council.

The meetings were spurred by Oakmont’s ordinance in July that set limits to seismic testing.

It’s a step that usually precedes the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking — a process of extracting gas by injecting rock deep in the ground with high-pressure water, sand and chemicals.

“Drilling for unconventional gas is a pretty complex process,” said Doug Shields, an outreach liaison for Western PA Food & Water Watch, the regional branch of the Washington group.

The meetings are part of the organization’s effort to give its take to residents on the controversial topic, he said.

Oakmont is also working to update its zoning and land-use laws under its oil and gas ordinance, Borough Manager Lisa Cooper Jensen said.

Shields was part of a five-member panel at a Plum Council meeting recently aimed at answering questions about a proposed fracking wastewater injection well. “Food & Water Watch’s role is to just provide technical assistance on the issue,” he said. “We want to give people the light and they will find their own way — that’s our goal.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Food and Water Watch Presentation, 6:00 PM, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 – Broadway, VA

You are invited to attend a presentation by Doug Lakey (Director of Development) and Jorge Aguilar (Southern Region Director) with Food and Water Watch. This is a unique opportunity to hear a presentation by a national environmental organization without having to travel to Washington, D.C. or New York City. The presentation is free of charge.

If you oppose the proposed Atlantic Coast or Mountain Valley pipelines or are concerned with the environmental effects of fracking, our continued over-reliance on fossil fuels or factory farms, this presentation will provide you with timely and reliable information.

The topics that will be discussed are:

1. Background & History of FWW

2. Our Water Work: Why We Took On Fracking

3. Victories On Fracking, Oil and Gas Infrastructure Projects

4. Fracking and Virginia

5. Pipelines and VA: The Atlantic Coast and the Mountain Valley Pipelines

6. How we won in NY/ MD on fracking & pipelines

7. Off Fossil Fuels national campaign: Getting to 100% renewables by 2035

8. Problems with factory farms

9. Factory farms in VA

10. What can YOU do? Q and A

Where: 202 North Main Street, Broadway, VA 22815

Directions From Rt. 33 & Rt. 42 in Harrisonburg: Take Rt. 42 north for 13 miles into Broadway. 202 North Main Street is on the left (1 block after the BB&T Bank).

U.S. Fracking Oil Industry in Trouble: Investors Losing Faith?

From the Editor of Marketslant, August 10, 2017

Even though U.S. shale oil production continues to reach new record highs, investors might be finally losing faith in the industry that just isn’t profitable. A perfect example of this, legendary oil trader Andy Hall, known as “God” in the industry, is shutting down his main hedge fund. Hall, who is a noted bull in the oil market, saw his hedge fund, Astenbeck Master Commodities Fund II, lose 30% in the first half of 2017.

While Hall’s hedge fund likely lost money betting that oil prices would rise, the entire energy complex took a beating last week, even though oil and natural gas prices increased. According to the article, Oil Has A Crisis Of Faith, the situation in the U.S. E&P energy sector took a turn for the worst:

If tumbling oil and gas prices aren’t the obvious reason for the sell-off in E&P stocks, then what is?

The likeliest culprit is fear that, even if oil prices aren’t falling further, they are low enough to affect E&P firms’ growth plans — as evidenced in guidance given on a number of quarterly earnings calls this week and last.

One of the biggest losers this week has been Pioneer Natural Resources Co., down 16.5 percent since reporting results on Tuesday evening. Part of the reason it was clobbered so badly is that while it merely trimmed its overall growth rate, it sharply cut its guidance for how many more barrels of higher-value oil it will produce this year. Pioneer blamed this on problems it had with what it called “train-wreck” wells suffering from changes in pressure and the amount of water coming up, forcing the company both to delay its drilling schedule and spend more to strengthen wells.

As we can see in the chart above, all types of energy stocks sold off even though the price of oil increased. In addition, Pioneer Resources stock price is now down nearly 17% since their second quarter news release:

Pioneer Resources is one of the larger players in the Permian oil basin in Texas. According to the data put out by Gurufocus.com, Pioneer suffered a negative Free Cash Flow of $155 million Q1 and $252 million in Q2. Actually, Pioneer spent a great deal more on capital expenditures (CAPEX) in the second quarter of 2017, by investing $731 million versus $519 million in the first quarter.

Which means, Pioneer spent $212 million more on CAPEX in the second quarter, only to suffer a larger negative free cash flow of nearly $100 million more versus the previous quarter. Of course, this makes perfect sense in our TOTALLY INSANE business world today to spend $212 million on CAPEX only to lose an additional $100 million in free cash flow.

Another large oil player in the Permian, Occidental Petroleum, lost $300 million in its core upstream U.S. segment. The upstream segment of an oil company’s earnings comes from its oil and gas wells. Downstream is the selling of its petroleum products in retail markets and etc. Not only did Occidental lose $300 million in its domestic U.S. upstream earnings in Q2, it also lost $191 million in the first quarter.

Big 3 U.S. Oil Companies Still Struggling Even With Higher Oil Prices

The Big Three U.S. Oil companies have also suffered losses in their U.S. upstream earnings. Exxonmobil lost $201 million and Chevron lost $22 million in the first half of 2017 in its U.S. upstream earning segment. ConnocoPhillips lost $2.7 billion in its U.S. earnings segment during the first half of 2017, however this was mostly due to a huge impairment write-down.

Regardless, no one is really making money producing oil and gas in the United States. While some of these companies may now be reporting positive free cash flow, this has been mainly due to the huge cutting of their of CAPEX spending. For example, these top three U.S. oil companies were spending a great deal more on CAPEX in 2013 than they will in 2017:

Top 3 CAPEX Spending (Exxonmobil, Chevron & ConnocoPhillips):

2013 = $86.6 billion …….. 2017 Est. = $31 billion

These top three U.S. oil and gas majors will reduce their CAPEX spending by $55.6 billion in 2017 compared to 2013. This is a decline of two-thirds in CAPEX spending in just four years. When a company drastically cuts its CAPEX spending, it becomes easier to make free cash flow. However, by cutting their capital expenditures by two-thirds, these U.S. oil majors will not be adding much in the way of new discoveries or additional oil production in the future.

Moreover, Occidental Petroleum, the largest oil producer in the Permian, enjoyed decent free cash flow during the second quarter of 2017. However, a large percentage of their $1 billion in free cash flow was due to a NOL- Net Operating Loss adjustment of $737 million. Occidental actually suffered a negative free cash flow of $111 million in the first quarter of 2017.

That being said, Occidental, was able to enjoy free cash flow because it cut its overall CAPEX spending from $8.4 billion in 2013, down to an estimated $3.3 billion in 2017. So, by cutting its CAPEX spending by $5 billion, it’s much easy to make positive free cash flow:

Not only has Occidental CAPEX spending declined since 2014, so has its cash from operations. Hence, the reason for the huge cut in CAPEX spending. Occidental reported a healthy $11 billion in operating cash in 2014. However, this fell to $3.4 billion last year as the price of oil dropped to an annual low not seen since 2004.

As U.S. oil companies continue to sacrifice exploration and capital expenditures to become profitable or at least break-even, this will cause big problems for oil supplies in the future. That being said, the oil industry has another negative factor to deal with that could spell additional trouble for the fracking oil industry in the future.

One little factor that seems to be overlooked in the media is the staggering amount of water consumed in the production of shale oil and gas in the United States. According to a study reported by Scientific America back in 2015, stated:

Oil and natural gas fracking, on average, uses more than 28 times the water it did 15 years ago, gulping up to 9.6 million gallons of water per well and putting farming and drinking sources at risk in arid states, especially during drought.

Though fracking is used to produce natural gas in less-arid regions such as Pennsylvania, many of the nation’s fracking operations occur in places where water may become scarcer in a warming world, including Texas, the Rocky Mountains and the Great Plains—regions that have been devastated by drought over the last five years.

As the USGS study indicates, a lot of the oil and gas fracking is taking place in more arid climates. One such arid climate is the Permian Basin in West Texas. According to another article titled, As The Oil Patch Demands More Water, West Texas Fights Over Scarce Resource:

“The Permian Basin is basically a desert, and that immediately presents challenges in finding adequate water,” French said. “You can do without a lot of things. But you can’t do without water.”

At least three other companies in the region are selling or planning projects to sell water to energy companies that use it by the billions of gallons to crack shale rock and release oil and gas. Water use in the Permian has risen six-fold since the start of the shale oil boom, from more than 5 billion gallons in 2011 to almost 30 billion last year. Energy research firm IHS Markit predicts demand will double by the end of this year, to 60 billion gallons, and more than triple by 2020, to almost 100 billion.

As we can see in the chart above, oil and gas companies in the Permian are estimated to consume a staggering 60 billion gallons of water in 2017, double from the 29.6 billion gallons last year. And if these energy companies get enough silly investor money, they will need nearly 100 billion gallons of water by 2020 to produce oil in gas in the Permian. See the graph below!

Unfortunately, water is a scare resource in West Texas as farmers, ranchers, environmentalists and residents are worried that the tapping into billions of gallons of water in underground aquifers will impact the local cattle industry, agricultural crops and possibly dry up natural springs in the area.

The race for the U.S. to produce more oil than we have in more than four decades is costing an arm, leg and a foot, as well as consuming one heck of a lot of fresh water. I believe we are going to look back at this point in history and wonder… WHAT IN THE HELL WERE WE THINKING???

As I have mentioned in several articles and interviews, the wonderful U.S. Shale Oil & Gas Industry really hasn’t made any money for nearly a decade. However, they have added a great deal of debt. Let me present this chart one more time because nothing has changed since the last time I posted it:

Over the next three years, the debt (low investment grade energy bonds) that these energy companies will have to pay back jumps from $67 billion in 2017 to over $230 billion in 2020… just at the time the Permian Basin is forecasted to peak in oil production. However, I have my reservations on that prediction.

While the U.S. continues to produce oil that isn’t really profitable, the overall debt level in the energy sector will likely increase. The only way for this FACADE to continue is under the Fed Policy of low or zero interest rates. If the Fed continues to raise rates, this will certainly put a real KIBOSH on the U.S. Shale Oil and Gas Industry’s ability to finance their ever increasing amount of debt.

Lastly…. oil production in the U.S. will likely continue to rise for a while. The Mainstream media will point to American ingenuity and the push for energy independence as the reasons for all this wonderful new oil production. Unfortunately, someone along the way forgot to mention that most this oil was produced at a loss. The POOR SLOBS that are really going to feel the pain are the investors who went after HIGH YIELD returns as they couldn’t find it in the market today.

Even though the U.S. shale oil and gas companies continue to pay their interest expense (yield to these investors), that has an expiration date. Once that expiration date arrives, and these investors ask for the original funds back….. is when they wish they had purchased gold and silver instead.

But….. sometimes it really takes getting beat up financial to wake up to the fundamentals of owning physical precious metals.

Fracking Oil Wells In The Permian Basin Consumes A Staggering Amount Of Fresh Water

White Sulfur Springs, Flood Damages, WV 2016

Hooked! The Unyielding Grip of Fossil Fuels on Global Life

From an Article by Michael Klare, Common Dream (TomDispatch), July 14, 2016

Here’s the good news: wind power, solar power, and other renewable forms of energy are expanding far more quickly than anyone expected, ensuring that these systems will provide an ever-increasing share of our future energy supply. According to the most recent projections from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the U.S. Department of Energy, global consumption of wind, solar, hydropower, and other renewables will double between now and 2040, jumping from 64 to 131 quadrillion British thermal units (BTUs).

And here’s the bad news: the consumption of oil, coal, and natural gas is also growing, making it likely that, whatever the advances of renewable energy, fossil fuels will continue to dominate the global landscape for decades to come, accelerating the pace of global warming and ensuring the intensification of climate-change catastrophes.

How to explain the world’s tenacious reliance on fossil fuels, despite all that we know about their role in global warming and those lofty promises made in Paris?

The rapid growth of renewable energy has given us much to cheer about. Not so long ago, energy analysts were reporting that wind and solar systems were too costly to compete with oil, coal, and natural gas in the global marketplace. Renewables would, it was then assumed, require pricey subsidies that might not always be available. That was then and this is now. Today, remarkably enough, wind and solar are already competitive with fossil fuels for many uses and in many markets.

If that wasn’t predicted, however, neither was this: despite such advances, the allure of fossil fuels hasn’t dissipated. Individuals, governments, whole societies continue to opt for such fuels even when they gain no significant economic advantage from that choice and risk causing severe planetary harm. Clearly, something irrational is at play. Think of it as the fossil-fuel equivalent of an addictive inclination writ large.

The contradictory and troubling nature of the energy landscape is on clear display in the 2016 edition of the International Energy Outlook, the annual assessment of global trends released by the EIA this May. The good news about renewables gets prominent attention in the report, which includes projections of global energy use through 2040. “Renewables are the world’s fastest-growing energy source over the projection period,” it concludes. Wind and solar are expected to demonstrate particular vigor in the years to come, their growth outpacing every other form of energy. But because renewables start from such a small base — representing just 12% of all energy used in 2012 — they will continue to be overshadowed in the decades ahead, explosive growth or not. In 2040, according to the report’s projections, fossil fuels will still have a grip on a staggering 78% of the world energy market, and — if you don’t mind getting thoroughly depressed — oil, coal, and natural gas will each still command larger shares of the market than all renewables combined.

Keep in mind that total energy consumption is expected to be much greater in 2040 than at present. At that time, humanity will be using an estimated 815 quadrillion BTUs (compared to approximately 600 quadrillion today). In other words, though fossil fuels will lose some of their market share to renewables, they will still experience striking growth in absolute terms. Oil consumption, for example, is expected to increase by 34% from 90 million to 121 million barrels per day by 2040. Despite all the negative publicity it’s been getting lately, coal, too, should experience substantial growth, rising from 153 to 180 quadrillion BTUs in “delivered energy” over this period. And natural gas will be the fossil-fuel champ, with global demand for it jumping by 70%. Put it all together and the consumption of fossil fuels is projected to increase by 177 quadrillion BTUs, or 38%, over the period the report surveys.

Anyone with even the most rudimentary knowledge of climate science has to shudder at such projections. After all, emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels account for approximately three-quarters of the greenhouse gases humans are putting into the atmosphere. An increase in their consumption of such magnitude will have a corresponding impact on the greenhouse effect that is accelerating the rise in global temperatures.

At the United Nations Climate Summit in Paris last December, delegates from more than 190 countries adopted a plan aimed at preventing global warming from exceeding 2 degrees Celsius (about 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial level. This target was chosen because most scientists believe that any warming beyond that will result in catastrophic and irreversible climate effects, including the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps (and a resulting sea-level rise of 10-20 feet). Under the Paris Agreement, the participating nations signed onto a plan to take immediate steps to halt the growth of greenhouse gas emissions and then move to actual reductions. Although the agreement doesn’t specify what measures should be taken to satisfy this requirement — each country is obliged to devise its own “intended nationally determined contributions” to the overall goal — the only practical approach for most countries would be to reduce fossil fuel consumption.

As the 2016 EIA report makes eye-poppingly clear, however, the endorsers of the Paris Agreement aren’t on track to reduce their consumption of oil, coal, and natural gas. In fact, greenhouse gas emissions are expected to rise by an estimated 34% between 2012 and 2040 (from 32.3 billion to 43.2 billion metric tons). That net increase of 10.9 billion metric tons is equal to the total carbon emissions of the United States, Canada, and Europe in 2012. If such projections prove accurate, global temperatures will rise, possibly significantly above that 2 degree mark, with the destructive effects of climate change we are already witnessing today — the fires, heat waves, floods, droughts, storms, and sea level rise — only intensifying.

Exploring the Roots of Addiction

How to explain the world’s tenacious reliance on fossil fuels, despite all that we know about their role in global warming and those lofty promises made in Paris?

To some degree, it is undoubtedly the product of built-in momentum: our existing urban, industrial, and transportation infrastructure was largely constructed around fossil fuel-powered energy systems, and it will take a long time to replace or reconfigure them for a post-carbon future. Most of our electricity, for example, is provided by coal- and gas-fired power plants that will continue to operate for years to come. Even with the rapid growth of renewables, coal and natural gas are projected to supply 56% of the fuel for the world’s electrical power generation in 2040 (a drop of only 5% from today). Likewise, the overwhelming majority of cars and trucks on the road are now fueled by gasoline and diesel. Even if the number of new ones running on electricity were to spike, it would still be many years before oil-powered vehicles lost their commanding position. As history tells us, transitions from one form of energy to another take time.

Much of the world now seems to find it easier to fill up the car with the usual tankful of gasoline or flip the switch and receive electricity from coal or natural gas than to begin to shake our addiction to fossil fuels. As in everyday life, so at a global level, the power of addiction seems regularly to trump the obvious desirability of embarking on another, far healthier path.

Then there’s the problem — and what a problem it is! — of vested interests. Energy is the largest and most lucrative business in the world, and the giant fossil fuel companies have long enjoyed a privileged and highly profitable status. Oil corporations like Chevron and ExxonMobil, along with their state-owned counterparts like Gazprom of Russia and Saudi Aramco, are consistently ranked among the world’s most valuable enterprises. These companies — and the governments they’re associated with — are not inclined to surrender the massive profits they generate year after year for the future wellbeing of the planet.

As a result, it’s a guarantee that they will employ any means at their disposal (including well-established, well-funded ties to friendly politicians and political parties) to slow the transition to renewables. In the United States, for example, the politicians of coal-producing states are now at work on plans to block the Obama administration’s “clean power” drive, which might indeed lead to a sharp reduction in coal consumption. Similarly, Exxon has recruited friendly Republican officials to impede the efforts of some state attorney generals to investigate that company’s past suppression of information on the links between fossil fuel use and climate change. And that’s just to scratch the surface of corporate efforts to mislead the public that have included the funding of the Heartland Institute and other climate-change-denying think tanks.

Of course, nowhere is the determination to sustain fossil fuels fiercer than in the “petro-states” that rely on their production for government revenues, provide energy subsidies to their citizens, and sometimes sell their products at below-market rates to encourage their use. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), in 2014 fossil fuel subsidies of various sorts added up to a staggering $493 billion worldwide — far more than those for the development of renewable forms of energy. The G-20 group of leading industrial powers agreed in 2009 to phase out such subsidies, but a meeting of G-20 energy ministers in Beijing in June failed to adopt a timeline to complete the phase-out process, suggesting that little progress will be made when the heads of state of those countries meet in Hangzhou, China, this September.

None of this should surprise anyone, given the global economy’s institutionalized dependence on fossil fuels and the amounts of money at stake. What it doesn’t explain, however, is the projected growth in global fossil fuel consumption. A gradual decline, accelerating over time, would be consistent with a broad-scale but slow transition from carbon-based fuels to renewables. That the opposite seems to be happening, that their use is actually expanding in most parts of the world, suggests that another factor is in play: addiction.

We all know that smoking tobacco, snorting cocaine, or consuming too much alcohol is bad for us, but many of us persist in doing so anyway, finding the resulting thrill, the relief, or the dulling of the pain of everyday life simply too great to resist. In the same way, much of the world now seems to find it easier to fill up the car with the usual tankful of gasoline or flip the switch and receive electricity from coal or natural gas than to begin to shake our addiction to fossil fuels. As in everyday life, so at a global level, the power of addiction seems regularly to trump the obvious desirability of embarking on another, far healthier path.

On a Fossil Fuel Bridge to Nowhere

Without acknowledging any of this, the 2016 EIA report indicates just how widespread and prevalent our fossil-fuel addiction remains. In explaining the rising demand for oil, for example, it notes that “in the transportation sector, liquid fuels [predominantly petroleum] continue to provide most of the energy consumed.” Even though “advances in nonliquids-based [electrical] transportation technologies are anticipated,” they will not prove sufficient “to offset the rising demand for transportation services worldwide,” and so the demand for gasoline and diesel will continue to grow.

Most of the increase in demand for petroleum-based fuels is expected to occur in the developing world, where hundreds of millions of people are entering the middle class, buying their first gas-powered cars, and about to be hooked on an energy way of life that should be, but isn’t, dying. Oil use is expected to grow in China by 57% between 2012 and 2040, and at a faster rate (131%!) in India. Even in the United States, however, a growing preference for sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks continues to mean higher petroleum use. In 2016, according to Edmunds.com, a car shopping and research site, nearly 75% of the people who traded in a hybrid or electric car to a dealer replaced it with an all-gas car, typically a larger vehicle like an SUV or a pickup.

The rising demand for coal follows a depressingly similar pattern. Although it remains a major source of the greenhouse gases responsible for climate change, many developing nations, especially in Asia, continue to favor it when adding electricity capacity because of its low cost and familiar technology. Although the demand for coal in China — long the leading consumer of that fuel — is slowing, that country is still expected to increase its usage by 12% by 2035. The big story here, however, is India: according to the EIA, its coal consumption will grow by 62% in the years surveyed, eventually making it, not the United States, the world’s second largest consumer. Most of that extra coal will go for electricity generation, once again to satisfy an “expanding middle class using more electricity-consuming appliances.”

And then there’s the mammoth expected increase in the demand for natural gas. According to the latest EIA projections, its consumption will rise faster than any fuel except renewables. Given the small base from which renewables start, however, gas will experience the biggest absolute increase of any fuel, 87 quadrillion BTUs between 2012 and 2040. (In contrast, renewables are expected to grow by 68 quadrillion and oil by 62 quadrillion BTUs during this period.)

At present, natural gas appears to enjoy an enormous advantage in the global energy marketplace. “In the power sector, natural gas is an attractive choice for new generating plants given its moderate capital cost and attractive pricing in many regions as well as the relatively high fuel efficiency and moderate capital cost of gas-fired plants,” the EIA notes. It is also said to benefit from its “clean” reputation (compared to coal) in generating electricity. “As more governments begin implementing national or regional plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, natural gas may displace consumption of the more carbon-intensive coal and liquid fuels.”

Unfortunately, despite that reputation, natural gas remains a carbon-based fossil fuel, and its expanded consumption will result in a significant increase in global greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the EIA claims that it will generate a larger increase in such emissions over the next quarter-century than either coal or oil — a disturbing note for those who contend that natural gas provides a “bridge” to a green energy future.

Seeking Treatment

If you were to read through the EIA’s latest report as I did, you, too, might end up depressed by humanity’s addictive need for its daily fossil fuel hit. While the EIA’s analysts add the usual caveats, including the possibility that a more sweeping than expected follow-up climate agreement or strict enforcement of the one adopted last December could alter their projections, they detect no signs of the beginning of a determined move away from the reliance on fossil fuels.

Success in any global drive to avert climate catastrophe will involve tackling addictive behavior at its roots and promoting lasting changes in lifestyle. To do that, it will be necessary to learn from the anti-drug and anti-tobacco communities about best practices, and apply them to fossil fuels.

If, indeed, addiction is a big part of the problem, any strategies undertaken to address climate change must incorporate a treatment component. Simply saying that global warming is bad for the planet, and that prudence and morality oblige us to prevent the worst climate-related disasters, will no more suffice than would telling addicts that tobacco and hard drugs are bad for them. Success in any global drive to avert climate catastrophe will involve tackling addictive behavior at its roots and promoting lasting changes in lifestyle. To do that, it will be necessary to learn from the anti-drug and anti-tobacco communities about best practices, and apply them to fossil fuels.

Consider, for example, the case of anti-smoking efforts. It was the medical community that first took up the struggle against tobacco and began by banning smoking in hospitals and other medical facilities. This effort was later extended to public facilities — schools, government buildings, airports, and so on — until vast areas of the public sphere became smoke-free. Anti-smoking activists also campaigned to have warning labels displayed in tobacco advertising and cigarette packaging.

Such approaches helped reduce tobacco consumption around the world and can be adapted to the anti-carbon struggle. College campuses and town centers could, for instance, be declared car-free — a strategy already embraced by London’s newly elected mayor, Sadiq Khan. Express lanes on major streets and highways can be reserved for hybrids, electric cars, and other alternative vehicles. Gas station pumps and oil advertising can be made to incorporate warning signs saying something like, “Notice: consumption of this product increases your exposure to asthma, heat waves, sea level rise, and other threats to public health.” Once such an approach began to be seriously considered, there would undoubtedly be a host of other ideas for how to begin to put limits on our fossil fuel addiction.

Such measures would have to be complemented by major moves to combat the excessive influence of the fossil fuel companies and energy states when it comes to setting both local and global policy. In the U.S., for instance, severely restricting the scope of private donations in campaign financing, as Senator Bernie Sanders advocated in his presidential campaign, would be a way to start down this path. Another would step up legal efforts to hold giant energy companies like ExxonMobil accountable for malfeasance in suppressing information about the links between fossil fuel combustion and global warming, just as, decades ago, anti-smoking activists tried to expose tobacco company criminality in suppressing information on the links between smoking and cancer.

Without similar efforts of every sort on a global level, one thing seems certain: the future projected by the EIA will indeed come to pass and human suffering of a previously unimaginable sort will be the order of the day.

Marcellus Shale under Electron Microscope

Studying the contaminated water that comes up from fracking

Essay by S. Tom Bond, Retired Chemistry Professor and Resident Farmer, Lewis County, WV

Slick water hydraulic fracturing, as most readers know, is using water solutions to break shale rock far below the earth’s surface, so that gas from pores containing oil and gas may be mobilized and brought to the surface.

The pores are very irregular in shape and size, ranging from a micrometer to a few hundreds of micrometers in dimensions, the size of a typical bacterium to the diameter of a human hair.

Pressures used at the surface are typically are up to 10,000 pounds per inch (psi), and at the depth the shale being fractured, more by the weight of the column of fracking liquid, which frequently goes than a mile down. At one mile down, if the fracking solution has the density of water (and it would usually be more) the pressure would be up to 12,280 psi. Over six tons to the square inch!

As the reader knows, temperature goes up as the depth increases, and the temperature is about 180 Fahrenheit at that depth. You don’t get far into chemistry without learning that solubility of substances is different, usually greater, at elevated temperature. Pressure also affects solubility, very much for gases, but usually somewhat less than for temperature. A particularly important pressure effect in drilling involves calcium sulfate, which precipitates out on the way up. Other solubility effects may be involved at these extreme pressures.

So, at this point, you and I have these understandings: the pores are very tiny and irregular, and the solubility of compounds is different at the bottom of the hole. Let’s add one more, it takes about ten barrels of water to produce one barrel of oil or gas energy equivalent to a barrel of oil.

All the solution that goes down the hole, in the order of 4.4 million gallons (105,000 barrels), more or less, since individual wells vary a lot, does not come back up when the pressure is allowed to drop. What does is called “flowback,” and amounts to 20 per cent, again more or less, while the rest stays in the ground. What comes up has the chemicals in it that went down, diminished in quantity by reactions below, plus such chemicals as result from the reaction and what chemicals will dissolve out of the formation quickly.

Flowback occurs for a few days, diminishing to a smaller constant flow. This smaller flow lasts the productive life of the well, some 7 or 8 years, and is called “produced water.” Produced water is more strongly influenced by what dissolves in water underground, and in time includes more water in the formation which has been there for millions of years.

Solutions that come up, flowback and produced water, usually go in the same holding pit, which is lined with one or two layers of 60 mil polyethylene plastic.

What we call fracking sprang from the ground full grown like the fierce warriors which from dragon’s teeth sown by Cadmus in Ancient Greek mythology.

This is very much unlike other large scale chemical industry operations. It did not go through a pilot plant stage and scale up stage, with careful analysis of effluents by chemists. Diverse entrepreneurs tried it with the old mixtures used in vertical fracking, with additives they thought might be helpful. No doubt salesmen from suppliers played a far more important part in drillers choices than engineers.

There is an illustration of the quantity of chemicals used in a typical well in Beaver County, Pennsylvania here. The quantity of chemicals shown is 757 barrels, including 373 barrels of “mystery chemicals,” so called because the identity is not known to the public. The reason given to the public and regulators is that this is “proprietary information.” It would give competitors an advantage if they could use them, too. The reader can take that claim as he/she sees fit.

So, here we are, a decade after fracking appeared to be heading for the big time, wondering what those “mystery chemicals” are. And wondering what else, and how much of it comes up with water from the deep. An important recent contribution to the question of what comes up that originates from the shale formation is an article titled “Scientists seek more data on existing water in shale formations,” located here.

The article is concerned with the composition of the water in the formation (really, what is dissolved in it) before fracking and thus can come to the surface. The reason for studying this “super-salty liquid with elevated levels of heavy metals, radium and other chemicals” is to “lead to safer disposal options and other actions to protect public health and the environment,” according to the article’s author.

Is there such a need? There certainly is. This “brine” has been eagerly sought by some road authorities as a dust suppressant and for a wintertime de-icer. “Brine” is widely understood by many people to be a salt (sodium chloride, ordinary table salt) solution. The fact is that chemists use “brine” for a a large category of compounds, not just one. Salts are the product of reaction between metals and highly non-metallic elements. Some are harmless and some are poisonous. Soluble barium compounds, some times present in these waters, are very poisonous.

The reader hardly needs to be warned about radioactivity. “Acceptable” levels of radiation have declined dramatically from when I first became aware of the “acceptable” concept in the 1950′s while an instructor at the Army Chemical Corps training school. I will predict they will decline further in the future.

An immense class of poisonous compounds is known, both organic and salts, that are called “endocrine disrupters”, but hardly recognized in formal toxicology. The endocrine glands are the ductless glands of the body, such as the pituitary gland, the thymus, the thyroid and parathyroid, the adrenal gland and many others. Their hormones go directly to the blood, in very small amounts, as with various body processes. Frequently they control other glands which produce far larger quantities of hormones.

Due to the small amount of hormone produced by these glands, a very small amount of disrupting toxins is needed to destroy their function, and disrupt body processes. These compounds, because they are present in such small quantities are difficult to analyze and study. Often, the amount required is near the limit of chemical detection.

“So to be able to understand all these things, we really need to understand the natural formation water,” says Madalyn Blondes of the United States Geological Survey, quoted in the article. The change from “flowback” water to “produced” water over time makes determining the composition of the water originally in the formation particularly difficult. Knowledge of composition also improves drilling efficiency by reducing “salting out” (deposition of solids, such as calcium sulfate) in drilling equipment.

Water in the shale formation started out as ancient sea water, which became more concentrated as the water evaporated. Some of what is there today exists in pores of the shale or surrounding formations and other could have been precipitated into the rock, but is re-dissolved by the fracking solution. Taras Bryndzia, a geologist with Shell International Exploration and Production, Inc., says of his research: “This data also showed that some brine could come from an adjacent layer.” Brian Stewart, a geologist at the University of Pittsburgh believes, “Indeed, it would be unlikely for the Marcellus shale layer to be the source for all of the produced water.” They have analyzed drill cuttings from the State of New York. “There’s not enough salt or water in those pores to really explain the super salty water that comes back,” Stewart said.

Stewart acknowledges the possibility of cracks outside the shale layer and even to the level of shallower wells above, but thinks contamination of ground water is from improperly functioning new well with leaks near the surface.

Fracking has been developed largely through trial and error by entrepreneurs. Let us hope more and more science, including solution chemistry and toxicology, can be applied as soon as possible.

#   #   #   #   #   #   #

Entrance to Existing Antero Facility

WDTV.COM 5 News: Concerns Over Antero Wastewater Complex

Part I: Citizen Concerns Over Antero Wastewater Complex

In August, Antero Resources announced plans for a state-of-the-art advanced wastewater treatment complex in Doddridge County. The new treatment facility is expected to create hundreds of new jobs and about $1.5 million dollars in tax revenue for Doddridge county, but citizens in the county and nearby areas have concerns over the radioactive waste the facility will produce.

“You know radioactivity isn’t something that is easily disposed of, you know we hear about these landfills, we just don’t know,” said Don Jackson, a Richie County resident and also retired inspector for the DEP.

Bill Hughes is a chairman for Wetzel County’s Solid Waste Authority and an avid follower of Marcellus Shale operations. “It has been known for decades that Marcellus Shale is remarkable higher in radioactivity than almost any other black shale that they’ve tested,” said Hughes.

And many people wonder what is exactly in the brine. “Well it’s a cornucopia of different elements. Essentially we don’t know without further testing. But with the data that we have seen, the variability in these samples is tremendous. We had a sample in Wheeling with a pH of 2.6 which is very strongly acidic, you know hydraulic acid and if a truck like that spills it would form an acid fog cloud that would harm first responders,” said Dr. Ben Stout, a Biology professor at Wheeling Jesuit University.

WDTV 5 News spoke with Antero’s Chief Administrative Officer and Regional Vice President Alvyn Schopp, he said their pilot studies find the radioactivity from the materials produced to be below background levels and are qualified for West Virginia landfill purpose.

In regards to disaster readiness, Schopp said once Antero is further along into the facility development and construction, they will be sure to have an excellent relationship with first responders. Antero said they will also hold tours for the first responders and provide specific training. Schopp also said while they will be prepared for emergency situations, safety prevention is always a priority for first responders, employees and the surrounding community.

Construction is set to begin sometime in early spring and the facility should be operational by the end of 2017.

Part II: Citizen Concerns Over Antero Wastewater Complex

Antero officials told 5 News their pilot studies show safe levels of radiation for West Virginia landfills, but some people have their concerns about the state’s current regulations.

“At this point in time, West Virginia has absolutely no framework to properly to legislate regulate and enforce radioactive waste disposal of any level and any landfill. We are doing a fairly poor job of it as we speak, complete proper testing is not yet been done at a lot of the landfills,” said Bill Hughes, Wetzel County’s Solid Waste Authority and an avid follower of Marcellus Shale operations.

“I think that’s a potential solution, proper testing all the way through every step of the way. If this company intends on doing this, they get the necessary permits, which isn”t much from the state. They should have them [the landfills] monitored all the way through. If were going to be an experiment, let’s take some data,” said Dr. Ben Stout, a Biology professor at Wheeling Jesuit University.

Antero’s Chief Administrative Officer and Regional Vice President Alvyn Schopp said they are looking at plans for a landfill close to the plant but they have not yet filed any permits.

Other concerns involve the actual recycling process of the wastewater itself. “If we can recycle large quantities and be relatively confident that the end product is in-fact clean and usable and any leaks or spills would be safe, that’s highly desirable. I get the impression that this [waste water recycling] is still unproven technology, on a small lab scale it might work, but unproven technology is risky,” said Hughes.

“And you know this plant may not be what it set out to do, but once it’s in practice and producing large quantities of a waste, who knows where it goes from there. Our drinking water is certainly a concern,” said Don Jackson, a Richie County resident and also retired inspector for the DEP.

In response to some of the citizen concerns, Schopp said: Antero does not want to do anything that would endanger citizens. We feel this new facility is taking the flowback water and dealing with in the most responsible way. We will work closely with the DEP to ensure everything we do is properly tested and will be no harm to the watersheds or community.

At the most recent Doddridge County Commission meeting, about 60 people gathered for an informational session with Antero about the new wastewater treatment facility.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

“Make gas drillers pay for using, ruining water”

Letter to the Editor, Morgantown Dominion Post, Page 6-A, August 27, 2015

The 2000 Water Resources Group (a public-private partnership that assists government water officials) predicts that water demand will exceed supply by 40 percent in 15 years.  We are fortunate to live in a state with a plentiful supply.  By comparison, California is in its fourth year of a drought and water rationing is the law.

While our supply is abundant, we cannot take this resource for granted.  With our climate in flux, we should be doing everything we can to protect and preserve our water resources.  According to the West Virginia Water Resources Protection Act, “The waters of the State of West Virginia are claimed as valuable public natural resources held by the State for the use and benefit of its citizens.”  Citizens – that’s us.

So what are we doing with our plentiful and precious water? Besides drinking and recreating in it, we give it away to industry.  Extracting natural gas from the Marcellus and Utica shales is a water-intensive process.  Every time one of these wells is drilled and fracked, an average of 4 million gallons of water is used.

With approximately 1,200 active wells and more than 3,000 permitted, the gas industry needs a lot of water.  Environment America (a federation of state-based environmental advocacy organizations) estimates that West Virginia has used 17 billion gallons of water for hydraulic fracturing from 2005 – 2013.

In most cases, this water is sucked right out of our rivers and streams.  There are about 155 water withdrawal sites permitted in West Virginia. The water is mixed with a cocktail of chemicals and pumped underground to fracture the shale and permit the escape of natural gas.

Once a gas well has been drilled, the water resurfaces essentially as industrial waste.  This water is too polluted to return it to the rivers and streams from which it was taken.  So instead this toxic water is disposed of in underground injection wells in many cases.

Whey is the natural gas industry allowed to waste our water? These companies do not pay a cent for taking this water from our rivers and streams and ruining it.  It’s only fair that these companies compensate us for its use.  West Virginia citizens should not be required to give away such a vital resource to enhance the profits of gas companies.

It’s time for gas drillers and frackers to pay – even a very modest amount – for the water they take from West Virginians.  You want it? You use it? You spoil it? You should pay for it.

>>> Jim Sconyers, West Virginia Sierra Club, Terra Alta, Preston County, WV

Wastewater Evaporators

Antero Announces 60,000 Barrel per Day Advanced Wastewater Treatment Complex

Press Release from Antero Resources Corp., Denver, CO, PRNewswire, August 19, 2015

Antero Resources Corporation announced today that it has signed an agreement with Veolia Water Technologies Inc. and Veolia North America to design and build a state-of-the-art advanced wastewater treatment complex in Doddridge County, West Virginia.

This complex includes an initially designed 60,000 barrel per day facility that will allow Antero to treat and reuse flowback and produced water rather than permanently dispose of the water in injection wells. Antero will own the treatment assets including any ancillary facilities.

The complex will be centrally located in Antero’s footprint in the southwestern core of the Marcellus Shale play with the ability to serve the Company’s development in both the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays.

Announcement Highlights:

>> Veolia will design, build, operate and maintain a 60,000 barrel per day advanced wastewater treatment facility under a turnkey contract for Antero in Doddridge County, West Virginia

>> Antero will own the $275 million treatment complex, which is expected to take two years to build, and generate on a standalone basis $55 million to $65 million of EBITDA at full utilization three years following the in service date

>> Complex will allow Antero to treat and reuse flowback and produced water rather than permanently dispose of the water in injection wells

>> Treatment facility will save Antero approximately $150,000 per well on future completion costs

>> Combined with Antero’s existing freshwater pipeline distribution system, the advanced wastewater treatment complex places Antero at the forefront of environmentally conscious water management in U.S. shale plays

>> The complex will be an integral part of Antero’s water business and is subject to Antero Midstream’s option to purchase the business

Advanced Wastewater Treatment Complex

The Antero advanced wastewater treatment facility will incorporate Veolia’s proprietary AnoxKaldnes™ MBBR biological treatment and its CoLD Process®, an advanced evaporation and crystallization technology, to treat a full range of water qualities including Antero’s completion flowback and produced water.

This same technology has been successfully utilized in dozens of facilities around the world. The 60,000 barrel per day facility will produce fresh water that meets stringent fresh water quality specifications, resulting in the treated water being delivered back into Antero’s existing fresh water distribution system and reused for ongoing completions and development.

In addition to reusable fresh water, the facility is expected to produce marketable byproducts with commercial value including salt and other brine products currently used by oil and gas operators for drilling and completion activities.

Veolia has agreed to build the complex under a turnkey contract and will operate it under a 10-year agreement. The contract contains performance guarantees including uptime availability, which considerably de-risks the project economics and reliability. The treatment facility is expected to be in service by the end of 2017, pending finalization of project logistics including regulatory permitting and construction.

Estimated Capital Expenditures for Advanced Wastewater Treatment Complex

Capital investment for the advanced wastewater treatment complex is estimated to be $275 million, which includes site preparation and construction, byproducts processing equipment and five miles of water pipeline that will connect the Antero treatment facility to its existing fresh water distribution system.

Potential Water Business Drop Down to Antero Midstream

On July 9^th, 2015, Antero Midstream Partners LP notified Antero of its intent to exercise its option to purchase Antero’s water business and transaction negotiations between the parties are ongoing. If Antero Midstream purchases Antero’s water business, it is expected to enter into a 20-year water services agreement covering all of Antero’s areas of operations in West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, as well as any future areas of operation. The existing water services agreement with Antero would be included in the expected drop down of the water business. The water business will include the advanced wastewater treatment complex.

>>> See also the Article in the PowerSource section of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette titled “Winners and losers in Antero’s $275 million announcement”

Mountaineers Always Free?

A Plea to West Virginians: Throw off your oppressors before surrendering or joining the exodus, get educated and fight – peacefully – against the powerful interests which control The Mountain State

From an Article by Michael M. Barrick, Appalachian Chronicle, July 20, 2015

Alum Bridge, WV – The recent admission by Secretary Randy Huffman of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WV-DEP) that the agency he heads can’t do its job because powerful business and political interests control The Mountain State is a wake-up call to all West Virginians.

It is time for us to throw off our oppressors so that Huffman and other public officials can do their jobs.

In the last two years, I have put thousands of miles on my little car covering the energy extraction industry. What I have discovered is that West Virginians are basically in four camps:
1. Some work for the industry and truly believe they are doing good work; these folks are in the minority.
2. Others are working against the industry through established environmental or social justice groups and alliances because they consider the industry an assault upon the people and ecology of West Virginia; they, too, are in the minority.
3. Still others have just given up and have joined the exodus of West Virginians going to what they hope are greener pastures; these folks are also a small minority, though it is causing a brain drain that will have an impact upon the state that is greater than their numbers.
4. Finally, there are the docile West Virginians. They just roll over and accept whatever their public officials, business leaders or church leaders tell them. They, sadly, constitute the majority of West Virginians.

This is an appeal to folks in all four categories, as well as those few prophetic voices in our hills and hollows, to get educated and fight – peacefully – to rescue our home from the powerful people and interests that have made West Virginia their own personal playground to enrich themselves.

According to a handout I received recently from a representative of the WV-DEP, the agency’s mission is a simple one: “Promoting a healthy environment.” This, one presumes, applies not only to the ecology, but also public health, as the two are inseparable.

Looking at a map of the central part of WV tells a story. It is a topographical map of the Vadis quadrangle. It includes parts of Lewis, Doddridge and Gilmer counties. Published in 1964 and revised in 1978, it is dotted with more gas and oil wells than one can count. There are certainly well over 100. Again, if the energy extraction industry was and is so good for the people of West Virginia, where is the wealth to show for it? It is certainly not in the pockets of West Virginians. Instead, as it has since the late 1800s, the money has flowed out of state to corporate barons, many who then stash the cash away in offshore accounts.

The  jobs (in drilling & fracking) are temporary and very unreliable as we have seen as oil prices fluctuate. Additionally, it is becoming increasingly clear that the jobs come at a great cost, as those working in the fracking fields are working in a very unhealthy environment. The residents, though, suffer the most. The loss of land, sleepless nights, water supplies destroyed, children and adults experiencing everything from nosebleeds to cancer, public roadways ruined and communities divided (Divide & Conquer is a fundamental strategy of the energy extraction industry), make it clear that the only people benefitting from the process are corporate CEOs, most of whom are from out of state.

Regarding pipeline construction, the gas companies – in particular EQT and Dominion – are audacious enough to argue that they should be granted eminent domain by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This reveals just how allied political and business interests are in exploiting the mineral resources of The Mountain State. No matter how the companies spin it, the proposed Mountain Valley and Atlantic Coast pipelines are not for public benefit (the standard FERC must apply before granting the companies the right of eminent domain); they are for the companies’ shareholders. Most significantly, the gas that would be shipped through the pipelines will end up in foreign countries, which should be the fact that causes FERC to deny the company’s applications. That, however, would take a miracle.

For those who think pipeline construction is benign and that the companies employ a bunch of good ole’ boys from West Virginia looking out for their neighbors, you need to visit Doddridge, Harrison, Lewis, Ritchie, Tyler and Wetzel counties.

Conclusion: Civil Disobedience is the Answer
In short, our state motto – Montani Semper Liberi (Mountaineers are Always Free) is a joke. The people of this state – whether they will admit it or not – continue to be abused and oppressed by political and business interests. Those appointed to protect the people – such as WV-DEP Secretary Huffman – are unable or unwilling to honor their vocations. Additionally, those we should be able to count upon to advocate for and protect us – church leaders and law enforcement – have been compromised.

So, it is up to us. In an upcoming essay, solutions to address West Virginia’s many problems will be offered in detail. For now, an overview of possible solutions include local communities supporting one another economically and socially in new ways; reforming our political system to open ballot access, setting term limits and establish ethical training for potential political leaders; and, ensuring that local officials are prepared for the inevitable disasters that will occur from the fossil fuel mono-economy. We need greater regulation of the energy extraction industry. We need to truly empower people like Secretary Huffman so that he can’t say his hands are tied.

However, I have concluded these actions will not be enough. It is time for nonviolent civil disobedience. That will require training. It will require resolve. Those of us who recall the Civil Rights and Vietnam eras know that civil disobedience works. The achievements of those eras include voting rights legislation and ending the Vietnam War.

You can fight. You can leave. Either choice is legitimate. But indifference is nothing short of surrender. That is inconsistent with what most West Virginians say they would do. So why do the powerful still control our state?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also: “WVDEP Secretary Randy Huffman Acknowledges Political and Business Climate in Charleston Limits Agency’s Effectiveness” — Remarks made at public forum after Huffman and WV-DEP staff tour fracking fields of Doddridge and Ritchie counties. (From an Article by Michael M. Barrick, Appalachian Chronicle, July 17, 2015)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Alternative access to above articles and more: www.AppalachianChronicle.com

We have no rational energy policy

Local ethane headed to Europe  while local ethane cracker(s) sought

From an Article by Casey Junkins, Wheeling Intelligencer, June 19, 2015

Wheeling, WV – As officials in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia hope to attract multibillion-dollar petrochemical projects with Marcellus and Utica shale ethane, European companies plan to sail much of the natural gas liquid across the Atlantic Ocean for cracking.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s Natural Gas Weekly Update, Switzerland-based Ineos Olefins & Polymers Europe is going to ship ethane drawn from the Marcellus and Utica formations to feed crackers in Scotland and Norway, likely before the end of this year.

The federal energy agency said the ethane destined for the Ineos sites would first flow from the local region across Pennsylvania via the Sunoco Mariner East 1 pipeline to the Marcus Hook Industrial Center, near Philadelphia. Ethane drawn from Range Resources’ operations is expected to fill a portion of the 70,000 barrel per day capacity of Mariner 1. Once reaching Marcus Hook, the ethane would be loaded onto ships destined for Europe.

“We need to take advantage of the significant shift in ethane availability triggered by the U.S. shale gas boom,” said Mark Garrett, CEO of Borealis, a petrochemical firm based in Vienna, Austria. “In an increasingly challenging environment in Europe, this is an exciting opportunity to increase the competitiveness of our integrated polyolefins business.”

Statements from both Borealis and Antero Resources show the firms reached an agreement to export 11,500 barrels of ethane daily drawn from Antero operations to fuel the Borealis cracker in Stenungsund, Sweden.

“The ethane contract with Antero Resources, in combination with the recently renewed North Sea-based ethane contract with Statoil, provides us with an ideal portfolio of sources balancing cost competitiveness and supply security,” Markku Korvenranta, executive vice president for base chemicals for Borealis, said.

Borealis said the Antero agreement takes effect upon the start-up of Mariner East 2. The U.S. EIA believes this larger capacity pipeline should be operational before the end of 2016.

The administration said total U.S. ethane production grew by an average of 212,000 barrels per day from 2010 to March of this year. Moreover, industry leaders believe ethane yields from just the Marcellus and Utica could reach 590,000 daily barrels by 2020, which is up from none at all in 2012.

As the Europeans determine how to use the U.S. ethane, public officials in Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania continue hoping companies will make multibillion-dollar investments to crack the product locally. Thailand-based PTT Global Chemical and Tokyo’s Marubeni Corp. announced tentative plans to build a $5.7 billion petrochemical complex in the Dilles Bottom area of Belmont County; Royal Dutch Shell is still evaluating a final decision on whether to build an ethane cracker on the former Horsehead Corp. property near Monaca, Pa.; and West Virginia officials are still hopeful for the Odebrecht ASCENT Project, which would be built near Parkersburg.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Shell buys more land at possible cracker site but still hasn’t decided whether to build

From an Article by Jon Hurdle, NPR StateImpact PA, June 18, 2015

Shell Chemical on Wednesday confirmed its purchase of the site of a former zinc smelter in Beaver County but said it still hasn’t decided whether to go ahead with construction of a major petrochemical complex that would include an ethane cracker. <This location is in the Ohio River valley northwest of Pittsburgh and a few miles from the northern panhandle of WV.>