Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

packman

(16,296 posts)
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 11:27 AM Apr 2016

Fracking excutive admits it - Frack in poorer areas, not the richer ones



On Monday, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported accounts of unusually candid comments by an oil and natural gas industry executive, Terry Bossert, at a Pennsylvania Bar Institute gathering in Harrisburg this April.

“We heard Range Resources say it sites its shale gas wells away from large homes where wealthy people live and who might have the money to fight such drilling and fracking operations,” stated an attendee. "


Kind of honesty we need - of course, we always knew that be it oil storage tanks, factories, mills, etc., etc. - it was always done in the areas of poverty.

Further in the report:

"... oil and gas operations in California are disproportionately located in poor and minority communities. An analysis by the nonprofit FracTracker Alliance conducted for the article determined that the 5 million Californians living within a mile of an oil or gas well had a poverty rate 32.5 percent higher than that of the general population. A related analysis for the Natural Resources Defense Council found that the majority of people living near wells in California are people of color. :


http://inthesetimes.com/rural-america/entry/19069/exec-admits-fracking-targets-the-poor
23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fracking excutive admits it - Frack in poorer areas, not the richer ones (Original Post) packman Apr 2016 OP
Frackiing is not cost effective at this time, oil needs to be $60 or better to cover the cost of Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #1
HRC supports and promoted fracking both domestic and abroad as SoS... HumanityExperiment Apr 2016 #2
But she uh, didn't mean to, uh, do that. truedelphi Apr 2016 #10
TTIP makes whatever she or any legislator says or does after it is signed irrelevant forever Baobab Apr 2016 #21
thanks for pointing that out. truedelphi Apr 2016 #23
Not that nuance carries any weight here.... Adrahil Apr 2016 #13
it's not 'nuance'... HumanityExperiment Apr 2016 #14
As I said. No nuance allowed. Adrahil Apr 2016 #15
Why is fracking even being pushed as a solution... HumanityExperiment Apr 2016 #16
You are - forgetting - the methane bread_and_roses Apr 2016 #17
explain that to OK PatrynXX Apr 2016 #18
Then why do they want to export it til its gone? Baobab Apr 2016 #22
Some shale wells can be profitable again at the $40 per barrel level. karadax Apr 2016 #4
Are you talking about developed fields? Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #5
Maps show it clearly, but a report of a statement's useful also. Hortensis Apr 2016 #3
In Louisiana we used to call that "eco-racism" KamaAina Apr 2016 #6
Ban ALL fracking immediately! Dont call me Shirley Apr 2016 #7
+1 Unicorn Apr 2016 #9
always the case allan01 Apr 2016 #8
And how do we stop this? Voters in both Pennsylvania and California are plagued truedelphi Apr 2016 #11
Well, voting in a fracking promoter is not a smart move fasttense Apr 2016 #20
I see nothing evil in that... King_Klonopin Apr 2016 #12
Ban fracking rockfordfile Apr 2016 #19

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
1. Frackiing is not cost effective at this time, oil needs to be $60 or better to cover the cost of
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 11:32 AM
Apr 2016

fracking. Interesting it seems to be okay to deliver nuclear waste from Vermont to poor areas of Texas and in fact Jane is on the board of TLLRWDCC.

 

HumanityExperiment

(1,442 posts)
2. HRC supports and promoted fracking both domestic and abroad as SoS...
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 11:29 AM
Apr 2016

Interesting that you didn't include HRC stance on fracking...

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/01/16/leaked-epa-powerpoint-presentation-dimock-fracking-water-contamination

One of HRC's biggest supporters Ed Rendell is way deep into pocket ... of fracking special interests

http://littlesis.org/news/2016/01/28/ed-rendell-again-fails-to-disclose-oil-and-gas-ties-in-boosting-philly-energy-hub/

So.. what will HRC do as more and more data comes out against fracking?

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
10. But she uh, didn't mean to, uh, do that.
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 12:38 AM
Apr 2016

And now that she realizes voters want her to state that she will change on this policy matter, she will indeed state that.

And we can offer her our votes,knowing she is so-o-o- trustworthy!

Baobab

(4,667 posts)
21. TTIP makes whatever she or any legislator says or does after it is signed irrelevant forever
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 02:52 PM
Apr 2016

as it eliminates laws against fracking at the supranational level, preempting all national/state/local environmental etc, laws- Plus it turns on the spigot to drill and export it till its gone.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
23. thanks for pointing that out.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 04:30 PM
Apr 2016

That is why I crack up laughing til I cry, each and every time some official, from Obama on down, says "I am doing such and such to protect America's ecology."

Any politician who is supporting any of these trade agreements is selling all of us down the river, no matter how many "ecology-minded" decisions they announce.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
13. Not that nuance carries any weight here....
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 07:11 AM
Apr 2016

But fracking is not a black and white issue. It is too poorly regulated at the koment, IMO, but it has also increased natural gas use, which has helped to severely curtail the coal industry.

It's what we call a wicked problem. There are feedbacks. Pros and cons.

But too often, the left in this country adopts orthodox positions in the same manner as the right and fuck nuance.

 

HumanityExperiment

(1,442 posts)
14. it's not 'nuance'...
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 09:58 AM
Apr 2016

it IS a black and white issue, 'poorly regulated'? Are you referring to the Haliburton Loophole?

The was a HUGE push by special interests to shift from coal to NG

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-04-17/how-to-convert-the-country-to-natural-gas-by-t-dot-boone-pickens

http://www.pickensplan.com/legislation-filed-in-texas-to-move-government-vehicles-to-natural-gas/

a 'wicked problem'? it's completely manufactured by special interests for select few to profit off of... so why is HRC so intertwined with this issue?

http://www.resilience.org/stories/2015-11-05/abandoned-by-epa-landowers-from-dimock-pavillion-parker-county-demand-inclusion-in-epa-national-fracking-study

http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/07/29/obama-epa-censored-fracking-water-contamination-study-dimock-pennsylvania

it's not 'orthodox', it's about JUSTICE and HRC is on the wrong side of the scale on the justice issue on this very important issue

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
15. As I said. No nuance allowed.
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 11:12 AM
Apr 2016

Natural gas is much cleaner than coal. That's a pro. Fracking as currently executed damaged the environment locally. That's a con.

If you don;t know what a "wicked problem" is, google it.

 

HumanityExperiment

(1,442 posts)
16. Why is fracking even being pushed as a solution...
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 11:44 AM
Apr 2016

the 'Haliburton loophole' is a joke, fracking isn't just a 'con' it's an environmental disaster and it's not just 'locally' are you kidding me?

It's not a 'wicked problem' it's not 'resistance to resolution' it should never have been entered into the equation in the first place

again it's SPECIAL INTERESTS that pushed this and HRC is right there are the forefront expediting this 'solution' at the behest of those monied special interest groups to champion it...

take your 'cleaner than coal' and go try to sell that excrement to someone that doesn't know the details, facts and history on this, maybe they will buy into your attempt to gloss this HRC position as a 'wicked problem' that deserves support...

bread_and_roses

(6,335 posts)
17. You are - forgetting - the methane
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 12:10 PM
Apr 2016

If you are actually unaware of the massive methane release from fracking just google it. The info is out there and well known. There is no "pro" to fracking.

PatrynXX

(5,668 posts)
18. explain that to OK
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:26 AM
Apr 2016

another major earthquake well on Tuesday smh not sure whats more harmful. I'd say Fracking by and large. getting Natural gas by Unatural means isn't well Natural. and I can't believe we are having a conversation on how Fracking is actually a good thing. Face palm.

Baobab

(4,667 posts)
22. Then why do they want to export it til its gone?
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 02:54 PM
Apr 2016

Even if they make five times as much in Asia its not worth displacing millions of people.

karadax

(284 posts)
4. Some shale wells can be profitable again at the $40 per barrel level.
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 11:39 AM
Apr 2016

Half of all US oil output comes from fracking. That's significant.

 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
6. In Louisiana we used to call that "eco-racism"
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 01:05 PM
Apr 2016

All the noxious petrochemical plants are located right next to African American neighborhoods and far from white ones.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
11. And how do we stop this? Voters in both Pennsylvania and California are plagued
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 12:45 AM
Apr 2016

By Big Industry going ahead and fracking.

Former Governor Ed Rendell, a "D" supposedly to his core, agreed to sell out his constituents as the negatives around the fracking industry are as yet not totally proven.

And he now heads up an important division of a Texas Energy firm. So what if Pennsylvanians no longer can trust what is in their water supply? Rendell got his Quid Pro Quo.

Same in California. Oh, Governor Brown did issue a statement against fracking, but it was one of the more impotent statements to ever come out of his lips. His words went to the effect of "Well, just what could I do about it?"

Meanwhile the agencies in California that are connected with water supply have rammed rate increases up the rear ends of the citizens. Use a little too much water in summer months, and you could face exorbitant fines. Even if it turns out to be a rather innocent use of the water, such as a leak in your pipes that you didn't know about.

But somehow no one in Sacramento knows how to fine these Big Polluters and Big Water Wasters?

 

fasttense

(17,301 posts)
20. Well, voting in a fracking promoter is not a smart move
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:48 PM
Apr 2016

But hey, eco-racism is better than regular racism...I suppose.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Fracking excutive admits ...