Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
And the EPA seemed to be in retreat on numerous fronts: a probe into groundwater
pollution in Dimock, Pennsylvania, was canceled; a claim that methane released
by a driller in Parker County, Texas, was contaminating residents' tap water was
dropped; and a 2010 estimate that showed gas leaks from wells and pipelines was
contributing to climate change was sharply reduced.
“We are seeing a pattern that is of great concern,” said Amy Mall, a senior
policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council. The EPA needs to “en-
sure that the public is getting a full scientific explanation.” 28
The agency has said that the series of decisions were unrelated, and that
the Pavillion case could be handled more quickly by Wyoming officials. Yet, in
private, EPA officials have acknowledged that brutal political and financial pres-
sures are tying their hands when it comes to enforcing environmental protections. 29
The EPA under President Obama has paid close attention to hydrofracking op-
erations, but this may have collided with the president's plan—outlined in a major
policy speech in 2013—to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by relying heavily on
natural gas. 30 The Obama EPA, critics say, has not always rendered clear and con-
sistent decisions. 31
When a family in the Fort Worth suburb of Weatherford found their water bub-
bling “like champagne,” suspicions fell on nearby hydrofracking by Range Re-
sources, a leading independent natural gas driller. In late 2010, the EPA issued
a rare emergency order declaring that at least two homes in Weatherford were
in immediate danger from a well saturated with methane and benzene. EPA re-
quired Range to clean up the well and provide the homeowners with safe water.
The state backed up Range, who denied the contamination had been caused by
their drilling, but an independent investigator found that chemicals in the well were
nearly identical to the gas that Range was producing. Then the dispute shifted in-
to federal court just as the EPA was asking Range and other energy companies to
participate in a national study of hydrofracking. Range declined to participate so
long as the agency pursued its action in Texas. In March 2012, EPA retracted its
emergency order in Weatherford, ended the court battle with Range, and refused to
comment on the case other than to say it was moving on to focus on “a joint effort
on the science and technology of energy extraction.” The homeowner who brought
the case was outraged, and critics charge that the EPA had “dropped the ball.” 32
As a consequence of the EPA's shifting stance, environmentalists and some en-
ergy analysts have not been impressed with the regulatory oversight of hydrofrack-
ing. But the agency insists it takes such contamination issues seriously. As of this
Search WWH ::




Custom Search