Research

The Obama EPA has bungled a lot—chief among their bungles was their attempt to prove a connection between fracking and water contamination in Pavillion, Wyoming. The EPA hoped that Pavillion would be the smoking gun—the single, solitary case (any case!) they could use as an excuse to (illegally) start regulating oil and gas drilling through the back door of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. But something happened on the way to the “we’ll take over regulating fracking from the states” ball: The wells the EPA used for their data in Pavillion were drilled by the EPA and the high levels of chemicals in the wells may have come from their own botched drilling job. Oops—maybe they ought to leave drilling to the experts. Lots of backpedaling ensued (see this MDN story).

Pavillion is in the news once again. The U.S. Geological Survey yesterday released a mother load of new data about the test wells (see their two reports embedded below). What do the new reports say? Neither those in favor of drilling nor those against drilling have weighed in yet—they’re now pouring over the data. Here’s three things you need to know about Pavillion and a possible link between fracking and water contamination:

Read More “3 Things to Know about Pavillion, Fracking & Water Contamination”

A report authored by the Dept. of Energy (DOE) and published at the end of June (but only now is being pushed by the DOE as a “new report”) takes a close look at natural gas and its role in the larger U.S. energy picture. The report, titled Role of Alternative Energy Sources: Natural Gas Power Technology Assessment (full 165-page copy embedded below), uses seven criteria to evaluate the role of natural gas and concludes that it’s the best current choice for powering electrical generating plants in the U.S.

But what about greenhouse gases—the so-called “fact” that methane leakage from shale gas drilling is contributing “dangerous” amounts of GHG to the atmosphere (as say Cornell profs Robert Howarth and Tony Ingraffea)? The report says fugitive methane escaping into the atmosphere is more than offset by reduced emissions from power plants burning clean natural gas as opposed to alternatives like coal and oil.

Read More “New DOE Study Says Natural Gas Best Choice for Now”

In the ongoing drive to smear shale oil and gas any way they can, anti-drillers have turned to attacking research from respected universities, like research from the University of Texas. If the research doesn’t reflect their own biases, they attempt to discredit it any way possible. You don’t agree with my “enlightened” view? Your independent research is wrong! That’s the anti-scientific attitude of these politically-motivated hucksters.

Along the way, innocent people (and their reputation) become roadkill. Like Dr. Charles Groat, one of the authors of the University of Texas (UT) study titled “Fact-Based Regulation for Environmental Protection in Shale Gas Development,” released in February (see this MDN story).

Read More “Soros-backed PAI Makes University of Texas Look Foolish”

MDN has observed that for weeks now news outlets have recycled the same story with variations on a common theme: Some university studies that have produced reports “favorable” to the drilling industry were partially funded by the drilling industry, or at some point a researcher worked for the industry, and that calls into question the findings of said studies. The latest example is on display in the left-leaning Buffalo News.

MDN is disturbed. Not because the energy industry—which by the way keeps your lights on, keeps your home warm in the winter and cool in the summer, keeps relatively cheap gas in your automobile’s tank, and has helped create the most prosperous country on earth—helps fund some of these scientific studies (who else will pay to defend them?). No, we’re disturbed because the same media so wholly devoted to picking apart anything to do with fossil fuels, willfully and (we would say) criminally ignores the other side of this debate.

Let us explain with a few examples from the latest Bloomberg article:

Read More “Is Big Oil & Gas Just Like Big Tobacco?”