MDN Weekly Update – Dec 11, 2011: Ban Fracking?
MDN wanted to see what your attitudes are about government’s role in promoting (or not) renewable energy sources. A even split between those who think government should have no role, and those who believe the government should promote, but not require, use of renewable sources. This poll was one of the least voted on in recent months, meaning either the issue just doesn’t stir up much interest among MDN readers, or (more likely) the poll question could have been written better! Let’s see if we might improve this week’s poll question.
What should government’s role be with regard to renewable energy sources?
No role in promoting/requiring renewables (41%, 67 Votes)
Promote (not require) renewables (40%, 66 Votes)
Require use of renewables (19%, 30 Votes)
Total Voters: 163
This Week’s Poll: Ban Fracking?
The latest public relations attempt to turn the word “fracking” into a pejorative—firmly implanting a negative concept in people’s minds—is the release of draft findings from the Environmental Protection Agency from a study they have done in Pavillion, Wyoming that supposedly ties hydraulic fracturing to chemical contamination of local water supplies. That is what the headlines are trumpeting, and that is the impression that will be left with the vast majority of people who don’t read much beyond the headlines. And that’s unfortunate, because, as Paul Harvey used to say, there’s “the rest of the story” in Pavillion (see this MDN story for our initial analysis).
MDN will not repeat what we’ve already said on the topic, but rather for this week’s poll, take the pulse of MDN’s readers on their views as to whether or not high-volume (uses lots of water) horizontal hydraulic fracturing should be banned. Let’s just get it out there on the table. Ban it? Or not? That’s certainly where anti-drillers are headed—they want a complete and total ban. They are not interested in safeguards, and frankly they aren’t interested in allowing any more exploration for fossil fuels on U.S. soil (or offshore). That was abundantly clear at recent New York DEC hearings on proposed new drilling regulations.
What say you? Ban fracking? Or allow it? Please vote now on the right side of any page in the site.
Below are the most recent “top 5” lists and the calendar of Marcellus related events for the next two weeks.
Happy reading,
Jim Willis, Editor
Read More “MDN Weekly Update – Dec 11, 2011: Ban Fracking?”
On Thursday, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released draft findings of its investigation into groundwater contamination in the small town of Pavillion, Wyoming (a copy of the EPA draft report is embedded below). The EPA says that water in the town contains chemicals consistent with chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing. Fracking has been used in a number of nearby gas wells. Needless to say, major media outlets like the AP, and anti-drilling environmentalists, are breathlessly calling this the “smoking gun” and declaring that fracking really does cause groundwater contamination after all (ban it now!). Not so fast…
In the ongoing press event that is Dimock, PA, yesterday Gasland creator Josh Fox and actor Mark Rufalo, among others, gathered in Dimock to keep up the pressure and to continue to demagogue what has really happened in Dimock. See MDN’s 
It is no surprise that those who rabidly oppose shale gas drilling in general, and hydraulic fracturing in particular, do so for one primary reason: it threatens renewable energy. In fact, MDN would go so far as to say hydraulic fracturing has single-handedly destroyed the renewable energy movement, and the greenies have brought out the long knives in response.
A new email from the federal Environmental Protection Agency says the water wells for 19 affected families in Dimock, PA have tested fine and do not pose a threat to those families. Yet, some of those families are still grabbing headlines by playing the victim, claiming their water is undrinkable. Who to believe?