"Opacity Events" - When Ash (Or Other Toxins) Falls Onto An Unsuspecting Colorado Town - For The 75th Time

Josh Fox from Gasland II, and fracking in Colorado where more and more "opacity events" are being reported, with citizens, kids having to shelter in place.  

Suncor refinery in May this year.

When the ash began falling in Commerce  City on December 11th, no one who saw it covering their cars and the ground had a clue what it was.  But very soon, residents related to each other how it was like trying to breathe in air laced with grit.  This was not surprising given that, subsequently,  car wash attendants, e.g. Vidal Rodriguez, reported having to clean windshields "caked in yellowish white scum".  Well, imagine trying to breath in that crap before it caked?

As reported by Denver news stations on the evening of Dec. 11 there was trouble at the Suncor Energy oil refinery north of Denver.  The Wednesday morning incident triggered a “vapor release alarm,” prompting operators to place one of their units into “safe mode” and announce they’ll launch a full investigation as soon as possible.

Suncor officials called it “an opacity event” in a statement emailed to local officials and posted on the company’s Facebook page. They said the company’s tests showed air quality in surrounding neighborhoods “is within acceptable levels.”

Just before 11 a.m. Wednesday, South Adams County Fire Department got a call to investigate a strange odor at Adams City Middle School. People were also reporting they were seeing ash falling from the sky.  The kids at the middle school were told to shelter in place and not come outside.  Meanwhile, photos were being shared by residents all over Commerce City of cars covered by ash, e.g.

Finally, late in the afternoon Suncor Energy admitted the ash was coming from their facility.   What the hell was it? Suncor's PR release - from its Facebook page- is shown below:


One is entitled to ask what this bejabber really means and at least one Denver TV station went to the Colorado Dept. of Public Health (CDPH) to learn more.  The questions and answers  (from CDPH) are given below from the 9 News web page:

We wanted to better explain to people what an operational upset is? 

"Operational upset" is a term used by Suncor - companies usually define it to mean that equipment failed to operate in a normal and expected manner. We do know there was unusual activity, and that's why we are investigating the incident and will be reviewing the activity logs. We will also require Suncor to give us any data they have."

What was in the ash that fell on people's car?

"Suncor has stated that the material is catalyst from one of the units at the refinery. We are conducting an investigation to confirm the details and verify Suncor's statements, but based on the information we have now, it was likely clay-like particulate matter.  We control emissions of particulates like these to protect health and visibility. Excess emission are not acceptable."

Was that dangerous for them to be near? 

"Particulate matter is a pollutant, and it can cause health problems at high levels. Based on the state's best air monitoring data in that area, the particulate matter was not at levels that exceeded the national ambient air quality standards, which are set to protect public health."

Is Suncor working with the state to remedy the problem? 

"The state has ordered Suncor to provide information and data as part of the investigation. So far, Suncor is complying and has been providing updates on the status of the refinery. Right now, the company is keeping the state informed of their activities around this event. Suncor will be held accountable if it violated any laws or regulations. We are requiring a full accounting of what occurred and will pursue appropriate action."

Has this happened before? 

"There have been other incidents and violations at the Commerce City facility, and the Air Pollution Control has fined Suncor before. We are already in he midst of our investigation and enforcement for prior events and violations.."

Just because a fracking-energy company "complies" - let us note- doesn't mean there aren't scores of repeat violations -  many of which are detrimental to human health.  (In 2019 alone, Suncor’s two operations accrued 75 separate permit “upsets,” according to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.)  

The history of the fracking industry thus far is an appalling indictment of local and state governments across the country and how little they care about their citizens' health - even in an era of exploding medical costs.  The main fracking chemicals list alone constitutes an eye-opening list of horrors, e.g.

Benzene: a powerful bone-marrow poison (aplastic anemia) associated with leukemia, breast and uterine cancer

- Styrene, which may cause eye and mucous membrane irritation, neurotoxic effects in the central and peripheral nervous systems.

- Toluene, which may cause muscular incoordination, tremors, hearing loss, dizziness, vertigo, emotional instability and delusions, liver and kidney damage, and anemia.

- Xylene, with cancer-causing (mainly in the kidneys, liver) and neurotoxic effects, as well as reproductive abnormalities.

- Methylene chloride, which may cause cancer, liver and kidney damage, central nervous system disorders and COPD.

It was Prof.Tony  Ingraffea  - in Josh Fox's amazing documentary 'Gasland II' who explained in detail the cement failure phenomenon in frack wells.  He emphasized that such failure is a "very well known and at least as long as we've been drilling wells and casing them".  He also took pains to point out  that amongst the thousands of gas wells (including those offshore), there is a probability of 1 in 20 that a given well will immediately show a failure (opening between the well casing and rock), and that means methane migration. It also means anything else stored in the rock, including salts, heavy metals, other deleterious things now have a pathway for escape.

Voila! Enter the particulates vented in the "opacity event" spawned by Suncor in Commerce City.   It is clear many of these are likely  PM  2,  5   which I described in an earlier post, e.g.

A New Pollutant Category Appears ( PM_2,5) And L...

Denver Post investigations into the decline of front range air quality ties the degradation almost entirely to the enhanced presence of  PM  2,  5    triggered by coal fire plant emissions, and fracking operations (releasing "organic volatiles").  Meanwhile, the national scale of destruction of our water, soil, air and human bodies continues as revealed in the excellent monograph, 'The Real Cost of Fracking', by Michelle Bamberger and Robert Oswald. 


 Among their primary findings (summarized below):


- The irresponsible behavior of the drilling companies and the state environmental regulatory agencies in handling problems occurring after the onset of oil and gas drilling.

-The same human and animal health problems occurred irrespective of the method of drilling, i.e. shallow, or deep vertical drilling with low-volume hydraulic fracturing.)

- Adverse health events had the potential to spread far beyond the immediate drilling-related events. For example, farmers faced with livestock (cattle) losses "felt pressed to send the exposed animals to slaughter".   Thus, the meat, eggs and dairy products produced from such livestock would also be affected, "making it likely these chemicals could appear in food products" made from these animals. 

- For nearly all the cases investigated, "children and animals became like the canaries in the coal mine" - as to revealing toxic effects of the fracking before they befell adults. The reason is that children, being smaller, eat, drink and breathe more air relative to their body weights- so are more affected by any kind of degraded environment. 

And: "While children are sentinels, animals are even more so, for many reasons. When families leave for work the animals are left either in the house, barn or yard, increasing exposure times dramatically."

For many good reasons, then, the "opacity event" that occurred in Commerce City nearly three weeks ago ought to concern us all.

Pro-Frack PR Letter Writer Joni Inman Tries To Twist Facts on Fracking And Fails

Woe betide any teacher (especially in Weld County) that enters into a fracking protest and also tries to educate her students on the dangers of this misshapen energy industry, including pollution of soil, air and water. She will likely pay dearly when a pro-fracking PR clown attacks her in the media. Apart from that, WHY is it the frackers need so many PR hacks & outfits to defend their abominable operations? Like those mentioned in the book 'Toxic Sludge Is Good For You'.

Such was the case yesterday when a fracker PR hack named Joni Inman tried to push her bafflegab on Denver Post readers in a letter dismissing a Weld Co. teacher's complaints and writings. First, WHO is this Joni Inman?  A cursory Google check reveals she's head of a Lakewood, CO PR firm, Joni Inman Consulting  - obviously helping the frackers to forge their absurd arguments in the media (including in letters to editors) to attempt to convince the gullible to accept fracking the state into oblivion.

In this sense, she and her outfit are no different from the legions of PR mavens already exposed who tried to push smoking on an unsuspecting public.  Thus her "consulting" firm joins the public relations liars from Hill and Knowlton which in the 1950s-60s (and later) was responsible for mounting the phony campaign that tobacco smoke doesn't cause cancer- sowing enough doubt to postpone regulation for decades. No surprise that America's Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA) hired Hill and Knowlton in 2009 as their PR firm,

Most people, sadly, are unaware that much of the "news" today is not truly that, but carefully crafted PR designed to manipulate public opinion. That goes for letters to the editor like that of Inman, appearing in the Post's Op -Ed page yesterday. (Yes, it's on an "opinion page"  - but many hacks state opinions as facts and too many of the hoi polloi can't tell the difference.)

Inman writes, for example:

"The oil and gas industry paid $265 million in property taxes to Weld County in 2013. Schools are supported primarily by property taxes. This industry also supports the jobs of families in the district."

But no mention of the hundreds of millions of dollars lost to Weld home owners in terms of their diving property values - such that most couldn't sell a home now if their lives depended on it - and in many cases they do. Also, no mention of the exploding medical costs to Weld residents, what with respiratory diseases from polluted air on the rise, as well as cancers of lungs, kidneys, breast, and liver. The crock about jobs is also just that and as Bill Maher has often pointed out, what good are these jobs if for every buck earned two bucks are lost in medical treatment or PhrMA drug costs? Get other jobs for fuck's sake!

Another canard:

"Fracking is what makes oil and gas development financially feasible"

To which I say, bull pockey! Read any pages in recent issues of  the Wall Street Journal or Financial Times and see how banks are now calling in hundreds of millions of bucks in loans from the frackers because their exploits are no longer financially sound - given we are in the midst of an oil glut. As we know,  once the cost of oil falls below about $70 a barrel fracking is no longer financially rational since it costs more to extract the oil (actually kerogen) than the cost of the energy put into extraction - including transportation, well maintenance and cost of pumping etc.

Right now then, fracking is adding to the oil glut, driving oil costs down even lower, and making it necessary to lay thousands off, even as many well outlets are shut down. The cost of running them is simply not worth it given the pitiful remuneration.

Inman then minimizes the scale and effects of fractures, writing:

"Hydraulic fractures are half the size of a human hair and occur more than a mile underground."

But no mention of the leaks or well failures.

Tony Ingraffea, a Cornell Professor of geological engineering has shown (on Gasland II) how cement can fail and methane can migrate into ground water. Referencing one of the typical fracking pipes, Ingraffea sketched the interior cement annulus of 1 -inch which is the sole barrier between the fracking contaminants and the water supply, noting,  "what you don't want is for that cement to fail".

"Failure" includes: corrosion, crumbling, or disappearing entirely as a barrier over time. If that happens, then "what's down there" (i.e. the contaminants) can get into the annulus. He then adds:

"So now shallow gas goes into the open annulus, pressurizes the annulus, and the gas migrates into an underground source of drinking water."

Once this happens, other frack contaminants can also migrate into the water, such benzene, toluene and dozens of cancer causing chemicals.

Prof. Ingraffea notes that the cement failure phenomena he illustrates are "very well known and at least as long as we've been drilling wells and casing them".  He adds "there are only three things that are certain: death, taxes, and fracture".  In the latter case, he observes that among the thousands of gas wells including those offshore, there is a probability of 1 in 20  they will immediately show a failure (opening between the well casing and rock), and that means methane migration. It also means anything else stored in the rock, including salts, heavy metals, other deleterious things now have a pathway. This probability means even if a frack well is "only operating 30 days" as Inman cllaims, there is a good chance of immediate failure in one of every twenty wells. If Weld County then puts up 1,000 wells in the next year and runs them for 30 days each, we're looking at 50 "immediate" failures.

That is, 5 percent of all wells will be affected and woe betide any home owners in their vicinity. Ingraffea invoked the 100,000 odd wells in PA alone, noting that failure rate means 5,000 wells have immediately failed in Pennsylvania .  That translates to 5,000 methane migrations into the ground water and ruination of citizens' lives.

So much for Inman's soft soaping..

What about the ANGA PR  liars re: the extent of gas leaking? One document actually retrieved from the frackers,  'Leaking Through Casing' indicated "2,000 components" in the fracked liquid, and problems they've been trying to solve "for decades".  Worse, they conceded in the documents that there's no way of completely preventing or fixing the leakage problem.

In one document, from Southwestern Energy, the diagram clearly showed that the gas well had a cement barrier with a casing that prevented gases from migrating upwards. But this wasn't a Powerpoint about drilling wells but rather about how cement and casings failed  and allowed methane gas and other substances to migrate into aquifers.  Thus, we could see from the frackers' own documents how cement fails.

Thus, Inman's blabber about "hydraulic fractures occuring more than a mile underground." is mere misdirection from the real risks.

Another document from Schlumberger, showed that cement failure occured at alarming rates - as depicted in one of their graphs showing "f'raction of wells affected by cement failure' vs. the well age in years".  Their graphs showed a failure fraction of 40 percent after only 12 years, and a failure fraction of 50 percent after 30 years.  That means if 1.5 million new wells are added in the US of A, as projected, 750,000 will leak after thirty years. If 150,000 are added to CO, that means 75,000 will leak after 30 years.

Another document from Archer, a well servicing outfit, showed the existing percent of wells with "integrity issues" and in the Gulf of Mexico this is 45% of all 6, 650 wells (and according to news reports last night, one is already burning, reminiscent of the BP disaster) and 34% in the North Sea, out of some 1, 600 wells. Moreover, 40 percent are at high risk of "uncontrolled discharge".

Another power point slide is shown from the Society of Petroleum Engineers, showed that given an existing global well population of 1.8 million, and that 35% of them are leaking.  Despite this, the idiots plan to drill MORE wells in the next decade than have been drilled in the last 100 years.

Inman can complain all she wants about the "wasted space" of teachers (and others) attempting to educate the public, but the real wasted space belongs to her and her PR ilk.

Why Oil Spills, Leaks Are Not Ending Anytime Soon

Cleaning up the Santa Barbara oil spill. Feds have now issued a cleanup order to the company.

The horrendous images of sea birds and seals gooed up with black oil on the California coast near Santa Barbara may cause many to want to lose their lunch - and with good reason. This recent underground pipeline failure caused up to 105,000 gallons of crude to spill into one of the most picturesque beaches of the coast and has threatened many species of aquatic animal.  No cause has yet been determined though the spill is among the largest in the U.S. over the past few decades.

The oil covered sand and rocks with a tar-like goo and a fifth of the crude reached the Pacific Ocean turning it into a brackish scene no normal person would stick even a toe into, e.g.


But if you believe such leaks or spills can be stopped anytime soon, you are dreaming. The reason is that neither the oil industry or the government seems willing to invest the billions needed to bring the aging pipeline and delivery infrastructure up to scratch. As a point of reference, nearly two -thirds of all the leaks since 2009 have been linked to the corrosion of the material - as well as welding and equipment failures. These are problems associated with older pipelines - though they can occur in newer ones as well. The so-called failure rate can in fact depend on a number of factors.

The potential for massive failures and leaks also inheres in the fracking infrastructure now operating across dozens of states. In the documentary 'Gasland II'.  Tony Ingraffea, a Cornell Professor of geological engineering.  explained clearly and with easily understood diagrams, how cement can fail and methane can migrate into ground water owing to failure in fracking pipes..  Referencing one of the pipes, Ingraffea sketched the interior cement annulus of 1 -inch which is the sole barrier between the fracking contaminants and the water supply. As he observed, "what you don't want is for that cement to fail".

"Failure" includes: corrosion, crumbling, or disappearing entirely as a barrier over time. If that happens, then "what's down there" (i.e. the contaminants) can get into the annulus. For effect, Ingraffea then rubbed out the chalk barrier representing the cement in the annulus,  and indicated an arrow moving into it from outside. To quote. Ingraffea:

"So now shallow gas goes into the open annulus, pressurizes the annulus, and the gas migrates into an underground source of drinking water."

Once this happens, other frack contaminants can also migrate into the water, such as benzene, toluene and dozens of  other cancer causing chemicals.

In the case of fracking,  Ingraffea noted that the cement failure phenomena he illustrated was "very well known and at least as long as we've been drilling wells and casing them".  He added that in his view there were only "three things that are certain: death, taxes, and fracture".  In the latter case, he explained that among the thousands of gas wells including those offshore, there is a probability that 1 in 20 will immediately show a failure (opening between the well casing and rock), and that meant methane migration. It also meant anything else stored in the rock, including salts, heavy metals, other deleterious things now have a pathway.

That is, 5 percent of all wells will be affected rapidly and woe betide any home owners in their vicinity. Ingraffea invoked the 100,000 odd wells in PA alone, noting that failure rate meant  5,000 wells immediately failed in Pennsylvania alone. That translates to 5,000 methane migrations into the ground water and ruination of citizens' lives. Just one well going bad means one aquifer will be polluted, such as in Dimock. PA

Even the companies don't deny the disastrous leaks and assorted documents Josh Fox obtained show that. For example, in one document, from Southwestern Energy, a diagram clearly showed that the gas well had a cement barrier with a casing that prevented gases from migrating upwards. But this wasn't a Powerpoint poster about drilling wells but rather about how cement and casings fail and allow methane gas and other substances to migrate into aquifers.

Another document from Schlumberger, showed that cement failure occured at alarming rates - as depicted in one of their graphs showing 'fraction of wells affected by cement failure' vs. the well age in years.  The graph depicted a failure fraction of 40 percent after only 12 years, and a failure fraction of 50 percent after 30 years.  That meant if 1.5 million new wells are added in the U.S. by 2025 as projected, 750,000 will leak after thirty years. If 180,000 are added to PA, that means 90,000 will leak after 30 years.
.
Crude oil pipelines fare no better and leaks can often spring from human error - such as a backhoe striking a pipeline in a vulnerable place, as well as natural disasters (e.g. earthquakes) and welding failures. When we visited the Alaska pipeline in March, 2005,

We were informed by our guide that repairs were already underway to several sections they believed wouldn't be able to withstand even a minor (Richter 4.0) earthquake.

In the case of the pipeline causing the Santa Barbara spill, Plains All American Pipeline LP- the company which operates the pipeline and its subsidiaries, have reported 223 accidents since 2006 which have resulted in a total of 864,300 gallons of spilled oil, hazardous liquids with damages payouts topping $32 million. (With 25 enforcement regulations by federal regulators)

In 76 percent of the incidents corrosion was determined to be the major cause. Meanwhile, failures in materials, welds, and other equipment were cited more than 80 times.  The company and its affiliates have the fifth highest number of significant pipeline accidents since 2006.

Last Friday, Plains All American Pipeline insisted it "spent $300 million last year on maintenance and integrity".

Bit what they haven't said, and no other pipeline company likely will (whether for crude transport or fracking) is that the more pipelines generated the greater the incidence of failures. In a world of limited resources the maintenance costs will always exceed benefits beyond a certain level. The question is what is that level? If the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) gets passed there will be no limit on the demand for additional fracking infrastructure and crude pipelines in the U.S. - to meet global demand. There may then be such a frequency of spills, leakage that no amount of maintenance will contain them - or fed enforcement regulations.

Bottom line, if the oil industry continues to get its way - especially with indiscriminate fracking as well as drilling in the Arctic - look for a very bleak, and blackish oil spill future!

Now We Know Fracking Is Making People Sick

Well, many of our fears about fracking have been confirmed as the largest study to date of the link between natural gas drilling and public health shows that those forlorn folks living near fracking sites and relying on well water are more than twice as likely to report skin and respiratory problems. But this shouldn't be news given the hundreds of nasty chemical toxins used in fracking, including toluene, benzene and other carcinogens.

The study, from Yale University and published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, surveyed 492 people living in 180 randomly selected households in southwestern Pennsylvania, an area containing more than 600 active natural gas wells. A full 39 percent of those living less than a kilometer (0.6 miles) away from a well, researchers found, said they’d experienced upper respiratory symptoms, including coughing, itchy eyes and nosebleeds, compared to 18 percent living 2 kilometers away or more. And 13 percent of those living close to wells reported skin conditions like persistent rashes and unexplained hair loss, compared to just 3 percent of the others.

The researchers have asserted that they are only reporting on the correlation so they can’t say whether fracking caused these symptoms.   Nor could they be more specific about what mechanism might have been at play. Drawing on past research, they say it’s possible that fracking is contaminating underground wells or causing air pollution, but it could also be that "the symptoms are just being caused by the stress and anxiety associated with living near major drilling operations — or by something else entirely."

This take, however, is hardly plausible given the first hand visual evidence seen, for example, in Josh Fox's Gasland II and the evidence we now have from Colorado investigations revealing that soil, air and ground water have been contaminated. The psychological proximity theory is also bollocks, given all those cases of animals that have died horrific deaths from drinking fracked water - leading their owners to have to send in hundreds of gallons of bottled water for their use too.

Ok, so it’s not a smoking gun and the evidence is primarily anecdotal but it still counts for something.  We also know, predictably, that diehard fracking supporters have been quick to underplay the findings. Enter PR misfit Katie Brown, spokesperson for the pro-drilling Energy in Depth, who asserted after the new results that it’s “just a poll.”

But this is typical dismissive PR reaction such as noted in the terrific anti-PR book by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, Toxic Sludge Is Good For You.

In the book, people who have been the recipients of toxic sludge -based fertilizers,  replete with hundreds of chemicals,  were asked about ill effects and they detailed them. However, the PR industry backing the fertilizer manufacturers argued that the people are wrong because it's "just a poll" and besides,  this toxic sludge was great for crops.  Never mind the vomiting, breakouts in rashes and convulsions, which could also be just in their minds. (They saw and smelled the sludge fertilizer and it induced a violent psychological reaction.)

So it's definitely uncanny to behold the parallels to what the pro-fracking PR hacks say here.

The Yale researchers also take care to note that their findings are consistent with earlier studies of these same health symptoms, including those reported by Michelle Bamberger and Robert Oswald. Bamberger, a veterinarian, and Oswald, a professor of molecular medicine at Cornell,  recently explained to Salon that industry secrecy and lax regulations made it difficult to prove a definitive link between fracking and health symptoms. In some states, for example, it's against the law to disclose the content of fracking liquids - though it seems to be ok for a Neoliberal gubernator assholes like John Hickenlooper to drink them to show "they're okay" . It is also against the law in many fracking states for physicians to run tests for the presence of fracking chemicals causing adverse health effects and to disclose them to patients.

Given this Neoliberal foreclosure of evidence, the so-called polls and surveys (such as those made by the Yale researchers in the recent study) assume supreme importance in exposing what these turkeys are doing to us - along with documentaries like Gasland I and II. Let's keep in mind the PR factories will never tolerate the truth, as in the case of anthropogenic global warming, so we must always expect their egregious and reckless counter attacks.

In Pennsylvania, where drilling has exploded in the past six years, whistle-blowers recently accused the state Department of Health of deliberately ignoring health complaints. Critics added that the state has yet to conduct even one study on fracking’s potential health risks.  We want to make sure people know it’s a preliminary study,” lead author Peter Rabinowitz told the New Haven Register, adding, “to me it strongly indicates the need to further investigate the situation and not ignore it.”

But you may be sure these fracking maniacs and their paid off pols won't be put off. They are determined to poison us all for a temporary profit - for energy, fuels likely not even to be used in the U.S. but shipped to China or other places that will pay top dollar.

Despicable! To see the partial list of the chemicals exposed in fracking liquids thanks to the work of those like Colorado Sen. Dianne Dégette, check out the list below:

---

 Benzene: a powerful bone-marrow poison (aplastic anemia) associated with leukemia, breast and uterine cancer
Keep i
- Styrene, which may cause eye and mucous membrane irritation, neurotoxic effects in the central and peripheral nervous systems.

- Toluene, which may cause muscular incoordination, tremors, hearing loss, dizziness, vertigo, emotional instability and delusions, liver and kidney damage, and anemia.

- Xylene, with cancer-causing (mainly in the kidneys, liver) and neurotoxic effects, as well as reproductive abnormalities.

- Methylene chloride, which may cause cancer, liver and kidney damage, central nervous system disorders and COPD.

---

Now that this new study is circulating we need to come down even harder on the frackers and that means no longer buying into their codswallop.  They must be made also to conform to the precautionary principle, meaning they must prove fracking is safe - it's not our duty or job to prove it's unsafe!
 

Mensa Bulletin Looks At The Two Sides of Fracking - What Should You Believe?

The latest issue of the Mensa Bulletin featured two interesting back to back articles on fracking. The first, 'Energy and Economic Freedom' by Leonard Gaston, sang the praises of fracking for both natural gas and shale oil (kerogen) and how it is helping to make us energy independent. The second, 'Selling Our Health and Homes', by Al Bell, examined how fracking is undermining not only our environment - devastating water sources and ecological systems - but also our own health by extension.


 According to Gaston, in his frack- praising piece (p. 20):

"The Independent Energy Agency indicated in its 2012 world energy outlook, that by 2018 North America will provide 40 percent of new supplies  through the development of tight oil and oil sands and that the expected steep rise in U.S. shale oil reserves will change the global balance of power between existing producers and new producers."

 Note that "tight" oil means that extracted at or near the "breakeven point", i.e. the energy input to extract it is nearly equal to the energy that will be delivered by it. In most instances of kerogen fracking, I am putting in about 1.1 barrels of high EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) light crude oil, to get about 1 barrel back.  This is based on the additional energy needed to clean up nasty fracking waste pits, spills, leaks and other collateral damage. And btw,  this is heavy, volatile, 'skank'' oil of the type that has recently been traced to explosions in rail way storage cars - in Canada and in the U.S.

From there, Gaston goes on to sing even more praises and presses the case for pie-eyed optimism, quoting the head of British Petroleum (surely a font of insight), stating that the rise in U.S. oil production -  largely due to shale oil - would make the United States "completely independent of imported oil, likely by 2030."

Maybe, but what condition will the planet be in by then- with over ten million fracking wells and more added all the time? Is it really worth all that extra energy and to boast of "energy independence" to live in a ravaged world where you can barely breathe and looking across the landscape you see only barren, shredded terrain, with barely any water left to drink (all poisoned by methane and other effluent)? What kind of a parent would even want to bring a kid into such a world?

These questions are left to Al Bell to answer, but even before he does, Robert Heinberg ('Snake Oil: How Fracking's False Promise Imperils Our Future'  ) has butchered the whole Pollyannish nonsense that fracked oil and natural gas are our energy saviors - oh, and will be kind to the environment.

As Heinberg observes, while it may cost less to extract a cubic foot of natural gas or a gallon of oil shale today, it will cost much more in just five years and even more in ten - such that one would have to spend as much or more to get the energy as the benefit it delivers. Heinberg summons a point that most of the snake oil salesman humping fracking won't tell you, that it costs energy to get energy. And if you are a nation that resorts to employing 15 to 1 EROEI energy to extract  5 to 1 EROEI  oil shale energy.....well, can we say 'stupid'?

As Heinberg puts it (p. 116):

"No evidence suggests that the technology of fracking has actually raised the EROEI for natural gas production. It temporarily lowered prices but only by glutting the market."

Heinberg's book is essentially a tour-de-force exposing the false promise of fracking with hard statistics and basic energy principles.  Regarding the much ballyhooed "shale oil" or kerogen, Heinberg is blunt (ibid.):

"Kerogen is not oil. It is better thought of as an oil precursor that was insufficiently cooked by geologic processes. If we want to turn it into oil, we have to finish the process nature started: that involves heating the kerogen to a high temperature for a long time. And that in turn takes energy- lots of it, whether supplied by hydroelectricity, nuclear power plants, natural gas, or the kerogen itself. Therefore the EROEI in processing oil shale is bound to be pitifully low. According to the best study to date, by Cutler Cleveland and Peter O'Connor, the EROEI for oil shale production would be about 2:1. That tells us that oil from kerogen will be far more expensive than regular crude oil."

Many Mensans, I think, would not have read any of this before seeing Bell's account, and hence may be skeptical (especially since way too many Mensans buy into the libertarian nonsense.)  I will be looking to see what sort of responses come in over the next few months,

Bell's bona fides and familiarity with oil and natural gas came from his father who had been president of the Southern Gas Association and a member of the American Gas Association. No surprise he had largely been into the "drill, baby, drill" meme.  His education on the deleterious effects of natural gas fracking, however, came by virtue of seeing Josh Fox's Gasland and Gasland II documentaries, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/07/gasland-ii-too-intense-for-wifey-to.html

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/07/gasland-ii-fracking-is-worse-than-you.html

As Bell observes (p. 22):

"My views have now been completely reversed by two documentaries, Gasland and Gasland II, and by the all out and totally unscrupulous efforts by the gas industry to discredit the information provided by those two films.  I have little love for environmentalists, but when they are right we must pay attention and this is such a case."

He goes on to elaborate on the pro-frack propaganda, leading to too many brainwashed citizens:

"Gas industry ads blanketing television now are intended to show you how safe this process is and how we all benefit from it. The ads show how this fracked shale is separated by thousands of feet of rock from the aquifers high above and how steel casings and cement liners prevent any gas escaping into the aquifer."

He goes on to show what bollocks this is by citing the gas industry's own stats that disclose 5 percent of cement liners fail immediately, and more fail progressively with time.  In Gasland II, for example, Josh Fox shows an actual document from Schlumberger, revealing that cement failure occurs at alarming rates - as depicted in one of their graphs showing 'fraction of wells affected by cement failure' vs. the well age in years'.  The document showed a failure fraction of 40 percent after only 12 years, and a failure fraction of 50 percent after 30 years.  That means if 1.5 million new wells are added in the US of A, as projected, 750,000 will leak after thirty years. If 180,000 are added to PA, that means 90,000 will leak after 30 years.

So the natural gas and other ads pumping "safety" are all BS.

The result of all the leaks, as Bell notes (p. 23): "The result is tap water that contains methane, other gases and chemicals" (Like benzene).  He also shoots down the idiocy, pushed e.g. by Niall Ferguson, that the quality of air is unaffected. He writes (ibid.):

"Special FLIR cameras have captured scenes of massive amounts of methane escaping from the drilling sites, polluting the air."

As here in Colorado, Bell has noted "frequent fogs of brown gas escaping from wells, blanketing homes and herds".  Such instances have caused gas companies to erect enormous walls, some fifty feet high and blocks long, in some Denver metro communities - to try and prevent the noise and effluent from affecting communities excessively.  One of them near Denver is shown below:


But the negative health impacts can't be cordoned off so easily - especially as the frackers can extend their drilling underneath the walls, even into neighboring properties.  Bell observes (ibid.):

"You may now be eating meat from cattle raised in this environment. Much of our country is being destroyed by fracking. Just the sight of dead wildlife, poisoned streams, sick children and burning wells  - and government mendacity and collusion will disgust you."

Indeed! And lo and behold there on CBS Early Show this a.m. was the little shyster, Lloyd Blankfein - of Goldman Sachs - which made out like bandidos in the aftermath of the '08 financial meltdown ( by making credit default bets against good lenders). Here he was proclaiming what a "blessing" it is to now have energy independence in the near future. As the little rat said:

"Here we had all taken it for granted that we'd have to import energy from the most troubled places in the world. Now, all of a sudden, we have a completely different view forward.  And if you want to think how that will change the world going forward - just think of how the world might have been different if we didn't have the energy situation we had. Going forward, we have a terrific situation and we should recognize it. It's a gift and it has to be picked up."

Which makes me wonder what turnip truck this little prick fell off of. For one thing, his reference to what "might have been" is totally disingenuous. What is he saying? That if we'd only started to plumb natural gas and shale oil sources 40 years ago we'd have avoided becoming embroiled in Middle East geopolitics? Or the Arab Oil Embargo? Hello! It was precisely that HIGH EROEI light sweet crude that enabled everything that advanced the nation - from powerful machines leading to efficient manufacturing, to jet aircraft in modern aviation (and mass transport via such) to air conditioning, and  petroleum byproducts (including fertilizers for growing crops). It was that HIGH quality oil, not degraded kerogen, that enabled it,  you doofus! Hence, without that Arabian  (and domestic) light sweet crude, our economic growth up until the 1970s or so never would have been what it was!

As for shale oil fracking being a "gift", tell that to the kids dealing with sores and rashes all over their bodies, and unable to breathe without coughing half the time.

Blankfein also pointed to the creation of "2 million new jobs"  but as Al Bell observes, these are mainly in Texas, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and North Dakota where the frack craze has brought in drillers by the tens of thousands, to try and grab their brass ring.  The result? "Motels in Texas and Louisiana are doubling all their prices" and roads are clogged with many more thousands that the towns were not developed to accommodate. Meanwhile, pollution and noise reigns supreme.

Meanwhile, the claim that  these new fossil fuel "plays" are resulting in a "5 percent reduction in greenhouse gases" is just plain balderdash. In fact, greenhouse gases- including methane and CO2 -are now increasing at an ever more dangerous level (See 'The Years of Living Dangerously' which can also be viewed online.)

At the end of his PR appearance, Blankfein claimed that:

"Everybody is pro-environment and everybody is pro-energy. It's not a question of somebody being right and somebody being wrong".

But in Al Bell's essay, it is! Key among the issues is the loss of water supplies, especially, since each fracked well consumes 3-5 million gallons of fresh water  So that question, not to be facetious, becomes:

"Would you rather have clean water to drink and use, OR energy?"

This puts the issue in a more objective form than Blankfein's.   Since no one can live without water, and we can live with less energy (though yes, it might be hard to surrender all those smart phones and notebooks) it is a no -brainer. "Balancing" the two seems to be a fool's errand, because as it is,  the gas industry isn't interested in being balanced. They will not, for example, allow communities here in Colorado to establish limits to fracking. (It has been left to Jared Polis to table such a referendum for vote in November  - to enable all CO communities to decide for themselves if they want fracking or not).

Given the lack of balance, the environment and human health must trump the energy mandate. However, don't look for industry, government or Wall Street to go along with anything citizens want.  On this score, Bell is perhaps correct when he ends his piece with:

"If we do not stop plans to frack (in the CA Central Valley, where most of the nation's produce is grown) we will be totally fracked!"

West Virginia Water Catastrophe Could Happen Anywhere

As 300,000 water-deprived citizens of the Charleston area of West Virginia continue to grapple with the six day old contamination of their water supply, it behooves Americans to understand this could happen to any of us - as the fracking insanity expands to many communities. Yes, those scenes of West Virginians in long lines to get a couple gallons of fresh water could in the future arrive at any place in which fracking wells and waste pits exist.

In the W Va case businesses in downtown Charleston are all shuttered as one beholds  'DO NOT USE WATER” signs taped over sinks at the airport.    What went wrong?  A chemical used in coal processing leaked from a storage tank upstream of the affected communities. The chemical, dubbed  “crude MCHM" and the technical name is 4- methylcyclohexane methanol.  In the water supply, the chemical betrays a licorice odor, and if the water is ingested it can wreak havoc on organs, from immediate nausea and vomiting to cancer of the pancreas, colon, liver and kidneys in the long term - as well as likely skin afflictions if bathed in.

Indeed scores of people in the affected area have reported to hospitals, complaining of rashes, upset stomachs and other ailments.  The problem is that despite the authorities telling citizens the water has been cleared (in progressive stages) the MCHM solvent has invaded the entire system from the treatment plant to the pipes in people's homes. Thus, even if the water itself may have been restored to its original drinkable-washable form, it is still subject to re-contamination as it passes through the now MCHM -laden pipes.  Thus, the complaints of people (as reported on the news shows last night) that they still smell the chemical. Of course they do, because the water is collecting it as it's transferred into and out of the pipes. To be truly clear, all the pipes will have to be replaced, though the authorities are unlikely to admit it. Meanwhile, one mother - a food stamps recipient with an infant -  said last night she will have to use a significant portion of food stamps on fresh   bottled water. (At the Dollar General in Charleston, a 20 oz Dasani bottle sells for $1.60, and a flat of 24 bottles can be had for $39. 

Seeing, reading of this brings to mind Jeremiah Gee, featured in Josh Fox's 'Gasland II'.  Viewers may recall the interior scenes of Gee's barn and the loads of bottled water which he needed to ship in monthly by the truckload, because ingesting the fracked water would be a death sentence. At a cost of over $1,000 a month he had no other choice, and as he noted, he even had to provide it to his chickens and pet dogs. The alternative was obviously too horrific to contemplate, the creatures would've died in agony from drinking the methane-laden crap.  This after the frack company, Shell Appalachia, despoiled the area reservoirs with its frack operations. When Gee inquired  about his tap water and why it was no longer clean, he was told that  "fresh" now meant "fresh to THIS site" - where the Co. was now fracking.  It didn't mean pure or free of contaminants, just free of contaminants from previous frack sites.   

In West Virginia, meanwhile, we learn two state employees tracked the MCHM leak to Freedom Industries which owns a row of vintage storage tanks along the banks of the Elk River. The chemical had leaked from a hole in the bottom of one tank. It had been pooling in a containment area and then seeped out through a porous, cinderblock retaining wall., down the bank and into the river. 

The water system itself was primed for a catastrophe. The intake for the West Virginia American Water Company's is just downriver by about a mile - and on the same side of the river -  as the leaking tanks with the MCHM.   Ironically, Freedom Industries had set aside $1 million in escrow to upgrade the containment area around the tanks, but the work had not yet begun.

Not so ironically, a state regulatory report in 2002 noted no fewer than 53 major sites of potential water contamination located upstream of the currently effected Elk River communities. The total number of potential contaminating sites was estimated "in the thousands".  West Virginia regulations, undoubtedly written by the corporatists and their political bedfellow, omitted any oversight on storage or containment facilities. Now, the citizens must pay.

But none of the rest of us ought to feel smug or secure, because if we have fracking nearby then we also can fell victim to a water contamination catastrophe. Any fracking pipe near or around a water supply can undergo failure. In one segment of Gasland II, Tony Ingraffea, a Cornell Professor of geological engineering sketched the interior cement annulus of 1 -inch frack pipe,  the sole barrier between the fracking contaminants and the proximate water supply. As he said, "What you don't want is for that cement to fail".

"Failure" included: corrosion, crumbling, or disappearing entirely as a barrier over time. If that happened, then "what's down there" (i.e. the contaminants) would get into the annulus

Prof. Ingraffea then rubbed out the chalk barrier representing the cement in the annulus, using his fingers and indicates an arrow moving into it from outside. To quote Prof. Ingraffea:

"So now shallow gas goes into the open annulus, pressurizes the annulus, and the gas migrates into an underground source of drinking water."

Once this occurred, other frack contaminants could also migrate into the water, such benzene, toluene and dozens of cancer causing chemicals.


Gasland II also showed how the frack well failure rates are progressive. As more years go by a greater and greater percentage of wells fail meaning leakage of pollutants.  Graphics presented showed a failure fraction of 40 percent after only 12 years, and a failure fraction of 50 percent after 30 years.  That means if 1.5 million new wells are added in the US of A, as projected, 750,000 will leak after thirty years. If 180,000 are added to PA, that means 90,000 will leak after 30 years. (Recall from Gasland II the citizens of Dimock were deprived of fresh water and had to get bottled shipped in, especially after being denied a water pipeline connection to the public supply in Montrose, PA after Repuke Guv John Corbett came to power (with the help of $1.6m in donations from frackers).

Rest easy as those in West Virginia are left without clean water? No way because we are all at risk. How else explain the writing and passing of a law that actually exempts the frackers from the Safe Drinking Water Act?  Read more at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/06/gasland-part-ii-sequel_n_3554756.html

and: https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/04

Also, see this Youtube presentation on the gas industry's misinformation campaign and why you, as a citizen, need to see this documentary however you can. What befalls and affects your fellow citizens also affects you. The corporate gangster state laying waste to your fellow citizens' lives will also one day come to destroy yours, if you are passive, blasé  and non-engaged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNhpxIkhgBc

As Josh Fox observes, quoting the mayor of Dish, TX, "Now you know. Once you know, you can't  not know".

See also:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/20/erin-brockovich-chemical-spill_n_4629472.html

and:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-rivers-pitt/54061/diary-of-a-dying-country

Mail Brane Blog: Readers Seeking Answers to Questions

I was very interested in your blog post on Josh Fox's Gasland II and how your wife found it too intense to keep watching (on to Part 2).  But I still find it incredible that these fracking interests and state security folks would put citizens onto terrorist rolls. Do you really believe that, or is Fox exaggerating for effect?  -  Alicia, Louisville, KY

A. I don't think Fox is exaggerating at all. As a person involved in deep politics I am well aware of the extent of the existing spy-surveillance state and how it networks (through fusion centers) throughout the country.  I also noted (June 19th) on the COG or 'continuity of government' program, and the recent discovery that a representative for the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation told a group of concerned citizens that "complaining about water quality could be considered an act of terrorism,”.  (See: http://www.alternet.org/environment/tennessee-official-says-complaining-about-water-quality-could-be-considered-act)

Make no mistake the same rubric was adopted to harass and persecute Occupy protestors two years ago. Idealistic kids merely trying to exercise their supposed 1st amendment rights, but actually put in the sights of sniper rifles, e.g. in Houston. So no, it's not a stretch to accept that now all domestic protests are to be considered "terror",  ever since the Bushies' expanded such adaptations to COG  which haven't been altered. And to reinforce that, you might also wish to read William Rivers Pitt's recent blog:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-rivers-pitt/50167/you-terrorist

I am interested if you ever found out for sure if you contracted the corona virus in Europe? Were any tests ever done to confirm it? -  Ramone, Pacifica, CA

A. No tests were ever done, because as I noted in the blog post I had no intention of seeing a doc. However, about two weeks after the post went up the symptoms vanished entirely and I was back to my usual jogging-walking exercise routine 3-4 times a week.  So what I suspect is that I'd actually caught a bad (cold) virus that might have been exacerbated because of a depressed immune system (this brought on by the long, sleepless plane flight home). If it was the worst (MERS) form of the corona virus I doubt the symptoms would have ended with no other effects. Of course, I could be wrong and you are right that only a test would confirm it, or negate it.


I enjoyed your posts about Germany, especially the one about Garmisch-Partenkirchen and the one on how the Germans you met dissed Tom Hanks' upcoming HBO series. I have two questions here: 1) Is Hanks really considering still going through with it, after all the buzz? and 2) Why do you suppose the National Archives refuses to release the records on George Joannides the CIA guy who tried to set up Oswald? - Murray, in Enid, OK

A.  Hanks definitely plans to go ahead, from all accounts I've heard. But he's also wise to try and stay under the radar until the immediate premier because he likely knows how it will be skewered by those in the serious research community. This is why there really isn't that much "buzz" - except on a few blogs like mine, which let's face it - don't have the audience of Politico, Daily Kos or Buzzfeed.  Maybe very soon they will catch wind of what Hanks is up to and scrutinize him and his self-professed reasons for doing it. (Which I still believe make for sophisticated brainwashing)

As to why the National Archives refuses to release the Joannides' files, it's fairly obvious: if the government was involved at any level in the assassination - and it's pretty clear it was - then they'd surely want to suppress anything that would impugn guilt or association. This also serves another purpose: keeping the process of ambiguation ongoing. That is, by not releasing anything definitive most people (not in the research loop) are kept guessing and their doubts keep growing: 'Hmmmm....maybe I'm wrong and Oswald is guilty after all!'. Indeed, recent polls now show only 59% reject the Warren Report compared to 73% a few years earlier. Ambiguation works because most people, average citizens, aren't confident enough of their sources or their own research to stand with a position and so flow or blow whichever way the last pundit heard or seen on the tube blows.

Look for the 'Oswald did it' reactionaries (including embedded CIA and NSA assets)  to pump up the volume of their PR- disinfo cant as we approach Nov. 2nd  this year, since it's the 50 th anniversary. The astute reader, however, can obtain a number of excellent antidotes for his brain, mental health by obtaining books such as James Douglass' 'JFK and the Unspeakable' and the new book, Dallas 1963 (available by Oct.) which shows what a nasty, reactionary place Dallas was ca. 1963 and why it wasn't Oswald that put up those ten thousand or more "Wanted for Treason" posters.  I am also planning to have my scifi novel, The Lancer Expedition, out at least by early October, and will keep readers informed.



After all your posts on fracking, I am really REALLY worried about it! I've seen Gasland II but is there any book you can recommend that is worth reading?- Cary B., Tampa, FL

A. I would say it's Robert Heinberg's Snake Oil: How Fracking's False Promise of Plenty Endangers Our Future.  Recall Heinberg is the author of The Party's Over, which warned of the imminent approach of Peak Oil (and the consequences - which we're seeing all over now) years before it happened. Thus, I'd actually advise getting both books because to me, they represent a continuity of argument. Peak Oil transpired when the easiest available, high EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) oil bottomed out, now we're forced to put up millions of natural gas and shale oil frack wells to make up for it. Most people don't even know that the natural gas taken from all the wells marring the countryside isn't even for American use, it's dispatched overseas to places like China where the market price for natural gas is much higher than in the U.S.


You've written a lot on the NSA mass spying stuff. What is your opinion of the Bradley Manning verdict and what do you think will become of Snowden?- Albert H., Detroit


A. Personally, I believe the Manning verdict (20 odd "espionage" charges) was nonsense,  but the judge did get one thing right: tossing out that idiotic "aiding the enemy" charge. As Chris Hayes' explained last night ('All In With Chris Hayes'), had THAT stood, we'd all(using the internet) be in a bad situation, because anything we ever wrote, say in a blog,  complaining about the country, how it does things, its aggressive military empire, the killing of JFK in a coup d'etat, the inequality, the Wall Street vultures, and infrastructure decline - found later on an al Qaeda laptop- could have us condemned for "aiding the enemy". It is total horse manure and based on the egregious use of the 1917 Espionage Act, in the era where the U.S. first began to get neurotic about "Reds". This was after the Russian Revolution, and the resident capitalists in the U.S. had just begun to get paranoid about "Reds" or anarchists, especially making complaints about U.S. entry into WWI.

It is incredible that Obama, a constitutional scholar and former prof, would even remotely consider resorting to this draconian measure to try to stifle speech and let's admit it - letting the people know what their gov't is doing in their name in these misbegotten "wars".   I have to believe, as I wrote earlier e.g. http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/06/one-blog-every-citizen-needs-to-see.html, that Obama is so fearful of the shadow players who really run things, that he feels he has no alternative. After all, what happened to JFK 50 years ago still conveys a terrifying message to any sitting president not to rock the boat. JFK did, in multiple ways, and he paid dearly.

My other problem with the "justice" thrown at Manning is that it ignores the true traitors (Cheney, Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Gee Dumbya etc)  who got us into an illegal war in Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands, as well as condoning the practice of torture on dozens of people - violating the Geneva conventions. WHY let those bastards go while you pile on to Manning, who merely exposed war crimes? Hell, the man did us all a favor showing how low the militarists will go to preserve their war -spy state. But such is the nature of "law" and "justice" now in this nation that the traitors escape it and the patriots get prosecuted. It's nuts! NO wonder 44% of the American population is certifiably mentally ill!

As for Edward Snowden, another TRUE patriot, as opposed to the state terrorists who try to claim the label, I believe he will ultimately get asylum in Russia and live there. I certainly don't believe he'd be dumb enough to turn himself in despite those ridiculous promises not to torture or kill him. And the Russians will make no deals unless they can get something out of it, like some of their own (e.g. Viktor Bont)  returned. Quid pro quo.


I just read a book, How We Survived Prostate Cancer,  by Victoria Hallerman, which was depressing as she related the horrible after effects of the brachytherapy radiation treatment her husband received and how he totally lost his sex drive. Is this book really serious? How does it compare to your experience?  - Abby W., Des Moines, IA

A.  Hallerman's book was written before  high dose rate brachy  (using the "IPSA" contouring procedures) became available. Hence, the method she described was still based on the actual implantation of radioactive iodine seeds into the prostate which of course, wrought havoc on the poor guy having it done - ok, many of them. Such was the case with her husband, for whom the burning at urination was so bad he apparently screamed aloud in agony - even when using urinals in restaurants.  Well, when you place 100 odd seeds into the prostate this is what can happen.

In my own case, I received one high dose (1920 CGy) which was geared to a specific region and which targeting could be done superbly because of the IPSA (inverse planning) contouring program (that avoided bladder, rectum) which had been perfected at the Univ. of California at San Francisco Helen Diller Cancer Center, see e.g.

http://radonc.ucsf.edu/research_group/jpouliot/pages/ipsa/ipsa_hdr.htm

 The bottom line is that the method her husband received and that I received is like comparing chalk and cheese. My total treatment (administered by the hDR afterloader) lasted barely 20 minutes, though granted the prostate implantation surgery lasted about an hour. But the worst effects I had - burning urination, frequent bowel movements- were gone within 2 weeks. His lasted months. Bear in mind Hallerman's husband also had to go on a regimen of hormone therapy to try to reduce the size of his prostate from 95 grams to about half - so the seed implantation could be done properly. The hormone treatment itself is what apparently stole his sex drive, as it would any male's.