Click HERE to view this video on Energy In Depth’s YouTube page.
-
“Pennsylvania has had gas wells for 150 years. And in the last probably decade, many, many vertical wells have been drilled into the tight sandstone formations, and they have been fracked. So it’s not like this was just something invented for the Marcellus shale.
-
“There is nobody in the industry … who objects to disclosing the content of the frack fluid. In fact, you can go on DEP’s website and you can see what’s in the frack fluid.
-
“You can’t just say benzene’s a carcinogen at any exposure, because if it is, please stop putting gasoline in your car. Because you’re probably exposed to 10,000 parts per billion every time you fill up your gas tank.
-
“We want to develop the gas, there’s no doubt about it. And we think it’s a valuable resource for the commonwealth. But, we’re committed to doing it the right way. Being involved in our community. Having local employment, either directly or through contractors. So, that’s what we’re all about.”
Dimock, PA resident Ted Jules:
- “If they do [the gas drilling] right, I’m for it.”
READ MORE
- Release: EPA Water Chief: States Doing “A Good Job Already” in Regulation of Key Energy Technology
- Fox News: PA Marcellus Shale Development, Job Creation Featured on Fox
- WHAT THEY’RE SAYING: Safe, Well-Regulated Development of Clean-Burning Shale Gas “The Single Biggest Thing That’s Ever Happened to this Area”
- Fact Sheet: HF Opponents Say the Darndest Things
- Penn State: An Emerging Giant: Prospects and Economic Impacts of Developing the Marcellus Shale
- GWPC Study: State Oil and Natural Gas Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources
- Graphic: What’s In Frac Fluids?
The production of clean-burning, American shale gas, enabled by the 60-year old critical energy technology called hydraulic fracturing, is not only helping to drive down energy prices for families and small businesses that are struggling through this economic downturn, but this safe and effectively-regulated homegrown energy production continues to represent a shining light of economic activity in an otherwise downtrodden economy.
Last week, we blogged about the nearly 350 jobs directly tied to responsible natural gas production from the Marcellus shale that are now en route to the struggling Ohio river valley. And this week comes word of yet another round of uplifting economic news from northeastern Ohio.
The Associated Press pipes in the good news via an item filed today:
An oil-and-gas pipe maker says it plans to open a new facility close to the Marcellus Shale natural gas reserve beneath Appalachia. TMK IPSCO said Tuesday it has signed a lease on a building where it plans to produce up to 100,000 tons of threaded pipe annually. The building is in Brookfield, Ohio, about 60 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. TMK IPSCO said it expects to begin operations there in the coming months. The company says up to 120 people could eventually be employed there. President and CEO Vicki Avril says the new facility is in direct response to the growing demand for infrastructure at Marcellus Shale well sites.
In Trumbull County, where the unemployment rate was recently as high as almost 14 percent, this uptick in economic activity is a welcome development to most, but not necessarily to all. Truth is, some folks continue to oppose the production of clean-burning, American natural gas on the grounds that hydraulic fracturing is not adequately regulated by the states. But these arguments continue to fall on the opposite side of the facts, especially as it relates to hydraulic fracturing’s long, clear and unmistakable record of safety.
Energy In Depth’s Lee Fuller appeared in two major, regional papers in just the past few days, responding to mischaracterizations about fracturing.
In the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Fuller writes:
Readers should also be aware that earlier this week, a top EPA drinking-water official stated the same thing — suggesting further that states, and not the federal government, are best positioned to regulate this critical technology in a way that balances the imperative of responsible energy exploration with the safeguarding of our environment.
And in the Wilkes-Barre (PA) Times Leader, Fuller notes:
Your readers should know that a top EPA official responsible for drinking water regulation recently said that “State regulators are doing a good job overseeing hydrofracking and there’s no evidence the process causes water contamination.”
Geoff Styles, an environmental consultant with an MBA and a chemical engineering degree to boot, blogs on Energy Collective about hydraulic fracturing, dispelling baseless attacks on this critical, safe and effective 60-year energy technology. In his post, Styles writes:
The key fact from the perspective of fracking safety is that the deepest of these aquifers lies no more than about 500 ft. below the surface, and typically less than a couple of hundred feet down. By contrast, the Marcellus Shale is found thousands of feet down–in many areas more than a mile below-ground–with a thickness of 250 feet or less. In addition, the gas-bearing layers are sealed in by impermeable rock, or the gas would eventually have migrated somewhere else. In other words, the shale gas reservoirs are isolated by geology and depth from the shallower layers where our underground drinking water is found.
Closing strongly, Styles adds:
The real choice here isn’t between energy and drinking water, as critics imply, but between tapping an abundant source of lower-emission domestic energy and what looked like a perpetually-increasing reliance on imported natural gas just a few years ago.
If you’re like us, and support producing more job-creating energy here at home – and agree with the EPA’s top drinking water regulator that states are effectively regulating fracturing – then send Washington the message to call off the unnecessary attacks on fracturing.
Local PA Audubon Society Chief Grouses over Responsible Shale Gas Exploration – His Cardinal Sin? No Facts
Keep Reading »
Press Release: EID Statement on House Inquiry into Safe, Responsible Use of Hydraulic Fracturing
“Fracturing is safe, effective and very much needed in the context of today’s enormous challenges
related to energy, the economy, and the environment”
WASHINGTON – Energy In Depth executive director Lee Fuller issued the following statement today subsequent to news from the House Energy & Commerce Committee that the panel is interested in learning more about a critical, 60-year-old energy technology known as hydraulic fracturing:
“Hydraulic fracturing is an essential component of producing clean-burning energy in America today, and to the extent the committee’s inquiry into this process helps clear up some of the misconceptions that have come to be associated with the technology, it’s a study we look forward to contributing to. In our view, the committee will benefit enormously from learning more about the procedures, practices and regulations in place to safeguard underground sources of drinking water – and in particular, the steps that are taken at every wellsite in America to ensure the proper casing and cementing acts as an effective barrier between the inside of the wellbore and the environment outside it.
“If the responsible development of shale gas represents a potential game-changer for the United States, hydraulic fracturing represents a non-negotiable tool needed to leverage that potential into reality – and the jobs, revenue and opportunity that come with it.
“It’s understandable that lawmakers would take an interest in learning more about this critical technology moving forward. But as they begin their latest study of the fracturing process, we’d also commend to their attention the various statements, studies and testimonials by and from organizations like EPA, the Department of Energy, and the Ground Water Protection Council – all of which have found, and consistently so, that fracturing is safe, effective and very much needed in the context of today’s enormous challenges related to energy, the economy and the environment.”
READ MORE
- Frac In Depth: For more than 60 years, America’s energy producers have relied on an innovative technique known as hydraulic fracturing, used more than 1 million times
- Top EPA Water Official: No “documented cases that the hydro-fracking process was contaminating water supplies”
- EPA Report on HF: “No credible evidence” that hydraulic fracturing endangers groundwater
- Senate Hearing: Top Brass from Obama Admin Tell Congress They’re “Not Aware” of Even “One Case” of HF-Related Contamination
- Fact Sheet: HF Opponents Say the Darndest Things
- Issue Alert: When Gummy Bears Attack
- Graphic: What’s In Frac Fluids?
- Browner Memo: Letter of Support for Hydraulic Fracturing from Carol Browner, Fmr. EPA Administrator
ICYMI: Medvedev’s “Red” Herring Targeted at Shale Gas
Chief of Russian gas giant parrots discredited OGAP, NRDC talking points in trying to tear down America’s shale gas
Gazprom, The Unlikely Environmental Evangelist
James Herron
Wall Street Journal
Feb. 10, 2010
The quality of drinking water in France or Texas is not something you’d expect to be troubling a top executive from one of the world’s mightiest energy companies–Russia’s Gazprom. Yet time and again at a press conference yesterday in London, Alexander Medvedev, head of the export arm of the world’s largest gas producer, expressed his concern about pollution of the water table in Europe and the U.S. resulting from the production of shale gas.
“Not every housewife is aware of the environmental consequences of the use of shale gas,” said an exasperated Medvedev. “I don’t know who would take the risk of endangering drinking water reservoirs. …
But this isn’t pure environmental altruism. A huge boom in the production of shale gas, which is released from rock by blasting a mixture of water and chemicals into tiny fractures, has created a supply glut in the U.S. that has edged Gazprom out of what it hoped would be an important new market for its shipments of liquefied natural gas.
NOTE:Click HERE to view this full article.
Gazprom says shale gas poses environmental risks
Tom Bergin
Reuters
Feb. 10, 2010
Russian gas export monopoly Gazprom warned of environmental risks from shale gas drilling in the United States and Europe on Tuesday …
Last week, Gazprom said it was delaying development of the Shtokman field, one of the world’s largest, which it hoped would supply liquefied natural gas to the United States, citing expansion of U.S. shale gas production and the subsequent fall in U.S. gas prices.
NOTE: Click HERE to view this full article.
GUEST BLOG: An Open Letter to the Citizens of New York State
To my friends in New York: With all of the recent discussion about development of the Marcellus Shale gas, and the idea that this will lead to dire environmental consequences in your state, realize the true discussion should be about energy consumption versus production in the Northeast. And the question you should be asking is, where is the origin of the energy you are consuming … your state … another state … a foreign country? Where do you want to spend your energy dollars – boosting New York State’s economy or that of Texas?
We will get to the environment question in a minute. But first let’s take a look at sources of electricity generation in New York State. My assumption is all of you use electricity in some form: at home, work, school etc.; for lighting, heat, traffic signals, phones, TV, cooking, computers, life support; and on and on and on — a form of energy which is familiar to all of us.
Take a look at the electric energy generated in your state and where it comes from.
The following information is from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) Annual Electric Power Generation by Primary Energy Source Report for 2007, the most recent year reported. We also assume that most of this generated electricity is utilized in-state, though some obviously moves across state lines in both directions. The EIA information goes back years, and the 2007 numbers are representative of the trend of the past decade. The percent numbers total more than 100%, but .5%, as pumped storage, is a negative number that makes the total = 100%.
|
I can hear you asking: what’s the point? Well, let’s see. The number one source for electric power generation in New York State is natural gas … natural gas that has been produced outside the state of New York. According to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), geologists estimate that the entire Marcellus Shale formation contains between 168 trillion to 516 trillion cubic feet of natural gas throughout its entire extent. Other experts have estimated as high as 1,300 trillion cubic feet (tcf). Although it’s not yet known how much gas will be commercially recoverable from the Marcellus in New York, the state ranks about third in the amount of acreage underlain by the formation. To put this into context, New York State uses about 1.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas a year.
Yet there is currently a raging debate in New York about the safety of developing a significant source of natural gas within your state.
You, no doubt, have heard that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of drinking water contamination cases across the country. A claim of contamination is not proof of contamination.
In every instance, state and federal regulatory agencies investigate the claim and utilize the power of state and federal laws to ensure any problem has been addressed and is not a risk to human health and the environment. Numerous studies have been conducted. To date, the processes of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing have not been proved to have resulted in contaminating an underground source of drinking water.
Make no mistake, oil and gas drilling and production are industrial operations and accidents can and do occur. The question is, just like with any other industrial operation, are sufficient safeguards already in place to protect health and the environment?
New Yorkers: ask those of us living in the states where thousands of gas wells have been drilled, if we are being harmed by the development of the resource. Ask us if our water is safe to drink. Ask us if our children live normal healthy lives or are somehow adversely affected by natural gas. Ask us if our rivers, streams, forests, farms, ranches or urban areas have been decimated by the drilling and production of natural gas. Ask how many of us have heard of, or been adversely affected by, the drilling, fracturing and completion of a natural gas well. Ask us “regular Americans” — not representatives of some group that is anti-development, or paid consultants involved in law suits.
Let’s be honest. Looking at the numbers from EIA, are you guys building any new nuclear plants? Didn’t think so. How about new dams for hydro? Nope? Well, shucks. Want more coal and oil-fired plants? You’ve got lots of coal close by.
Ahh … renewables!
You could burn a bunch more trees (I mean a big bunch). Put up more wind and solar, right? Let’s be generous and say the entire 2% of renewable electricity generated currently in New York is all wind and solar. Can you double the number of windmills and solar panels? Heck let’s quadruple the number of windmills and solar panels in place today. How long will that take? You are now at 8% of your electric generation needs, and I hope the sun shines and the wind blows non-stop — otherwise you will need a back up for that 8% (most likely using fossil fuels) or a mega storage system that does not yet exist.
As you can see, in electricity generation alone, New Yorkers manage to use more than a little fossil fuel energy. Think of your total energy usage when you include transportation fuels, industrial processes, etc., that are not electric. By the way, if everyone in New York had electric cars, about 50% of the electricity used to recharge their batteries would come from fossil fuels.
In the end, as its citizens debate development of New York shale gas, it might be prudent and practical to cut through the environmental scare rhetoric and renewable energy dreams not yet achievable, to consider the following: Do you want to have responsible development of an available and valuable New York natural resource; collect the associated taxes; employ New York people and keep the lights on if there’s a disruption in supply?
Or, if you prefer, your state can continue to use gas from elsewhere and let others benefit from the production revenue, employment and taxes. We don’t really care what you decide. We have been supplying your energy needs for decades and those northeast dollars sure do bolster our economies in the “Oil Patch.”
Mr. Simmons is the executive director of the Tulsa, Oklahoma-based National Association of Royalty Owners, Inc. (NARO). Visit www.naro-us.org to learn more.
Marcellus Shale-Related Jobs Headed to Ohio by the Hundreds
Good news for southeastern Ohio’s struggling economy: 350 good-paying jobs – directly tied to the safe, responsible development of the Marcellus shale – are coming to the region.
The Youngstown Vindicator went with the headline “The area could use some good news, and it got it” in an editorial today hailing the expansion of V&M Star Steel, which will initially produce 350,000 tons of steel tubing a year in support of Marcellus shale gas development in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio.
This from the editorial:
“The area could use some good news, and it got it …The facility will provide new, well paying jobs to 350 people. They will be producing oil-country tubular goods, a product that has a bright future as long as there is a need to extract energy from the ground. And as much as everyone talks about new, green sources of power, we’ll be running on fossil fuels for some time to come.”
According the Youngstown-Warren Regional Chamber of Commerce, this expansion is a “defining moment” and “a pivotal step in the rebirth of the Mahoning Valley’s economy.”
V&M Star President Roger Lindgren told WYTV News that “We are ideally situated to serve the Marcellus Shale,” in a segment entitled “Steel Is Back.”
Lindgren adds this: “We are going to build a state of the art mill here in Youngstown and Girard to supply the growing market for the smaller OD [outside diameter] pipe used for the shale drilling. It will be high-grade pipe for the very challenging requirements of shale drilling.”
U.S. Congressman Tim Ryan (D-OH), a member of the powerful Energy and Water Development appropriations panel, called the shale-gas related economic development “a game-changer.”
Here are several local news articles about this announcement:
V&M Star to Officially Expand, Create 350 Jobs
WYTV, 2/16/10“For a French company to recognize this as a place they want to make a $650 million investment, is a game-changer for us,” said Congressman Tim Ryan (D-OH).
The mill should be fully running by the end of 2012. About 350 jobs will be created once production begins.
“It’s jobs, first and foremost,” said Ryan. “There are people, families who are going to go work, get off the unemployment line, make a good living. These wages, benefits, vacations. These are well-paying jobs.”
Youngstown area to get 350 more jobs when new steel tube plant opens
Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2/15/10In addition to the manufacturing jobs, which are expected to pay more than $50,000 per year, many indirect jobs will be created in other areas like construction, shipping and the service industry.
“We’re talking about thousands of jobs that are going to be created here,” said U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan, a Democrat whose district includes the region. “It’s going to be transformational for the Mahoning Valley.”
Williams, Melfi: Success shows value of regional cooperation
Youngstown Vindicator, 2/16/10The expansion will create 400 construction jobs. When the plant opens, there will be 230 employees working directly for V&M and 120 specialized service providers who’ll work at the plant.
“I hope that we all recognize that when we work together and do things together and check our egos at the door in the best interests of our community, great things happen,” said U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan of Niles, D-17th, whose office was involved heavily in the negotiations.
V&M announces $650M Youngstown expansion
Salem News, 2/16/10U.S. Rep. Timothy J. Ryan, D-Niles, said the announcement marks another turning point away from the Mahoning Valley’s image as a Rust Belt area. “Today’s unprecedented announcement by Vallourec is a watershed event for the Mahoning Valley,” he said in a statement.
“This $650 million investment will result in 350 new jobs, and sends a clear message that we have a world-class work force and a globally competitive business climate.
“Simply put, this is the game-changer for the Mahoning Valley.”
Energy In Depth: “Fracturing is safe, effective and very much needed in the context of today’s enormous challenges related to energy, the economy, and the environment”
EPA Officials Confirm Fracturing’s Safety
Steve Heare, director of EPA’s Drinking Water Protection Division: “State regulators are doing a good job overseeing a key natural gas production technique called hydrofracking and there’s no evidence the process causes water contamination, a senior federal environment official said Monday. … I have no information that states aren’t doing a good job already. He also said despite claims by environmental organizations, he hadn’t seen any documented cases that the hydro-fracking process was contaminating water supplies.” (Dow Jones, 2/15/10)
EPA Water Chief Peter Silva, EPA Compliance Administrator Cynthia Giles, and Assoc. EPA Water Director Matthew Larsen were asked the following straightforward question at a recent Senate hearing:
- “Do any one of you know of one case of ground water contamination that has resulted from hydraulic fracturing?”
Their answer?
- “Not that I’m aware of, no.”
Fmr. EPA administrator and current White House energy czar Carol Browner: “EPA does not regulate – and does not believe it is legally required to regulate – the hydraulic fracturing of methane production wells … Moreover, given the horizontal and vertical distance between the drinking water well and the closest methane gas production wells, the possibility of contamination or endangerment of [drinking water] in the area is extremely remote.” (5/30/95)
EPA Study: “EPA found no confirmed cases that are linked to fracturing fluid injection into CBM wells or subsequent underground movement of fracturing fluids.” (2004)
U.S. House Members
Congressman Ed Markey (Mass.): “Ninety percent of all new electrical capacity in America since 1990 has been natural gas, and it’s going to continue on that way as a base load with the new mandates for renewable electricity in the states having a higher percentage increasingly coming from that source. But natural gas is going to do very well in the future, and the discoveries from the Marcellus Shale all the way through Barnett, that is all the way from New York down to Texas, are going to be big source of new electrical generation.” (12/2/09)
Congressman Doug Lamborn (Colo.): “Shale gas and other unconventional natural gas sources such as tight sands and coal bed methane provide more than 47 percent of the natural gas consumed in the U.S. annually. According to the Energy Information Administration, by 2030 these unconventional natural gas resources will provide 56 percent of the natural gas consumed by the United States. All of this was made possible through development of the Barnett Shale in Texas in the 1980s and 1990s, where innovative drilling techniques, horizontal drilling, combined with the safe long-standing practice of hydraulic fracturing, demonstrated that this unconventional fuel could be economically produced on a large scale.” (Roll Call, 2/8/10)
Congressman Dan Boren (Okla.): “Boren said he is working with Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., to tone down her bill to regulate hydraulic fracturing of oil- and gas-bearing formations. The legislation was introduced to protect water supplies from the contamination, but Boren said the procedure is already safe. ‘If you shut down fracking, you shut down the industry,’ he said.” (Tulsa World, 7/21/09)
Congressman John Sullivan (Okla.): “Hydraulic fracking is one of the ways that we’ve been able to get these 120 year reserves. … For 60 years, they’ve been using. There’s not one – not one instance – that it’s leaked into groundwater. … There’s not one instance of it. … It’s going to create jobs in America.” (CNBC’s Mad Money, 2/8/10)
Congressman John Fleming (La.): “For years this process has been safely and effectively regulated by individual States; and of the more than 1 million wells fractured, not a single case of drinking water contamination has ever been recorded. … The casing, cement specifications and cementing process are governed by state and federal regulations as well as industry standards. In every case this process is supervised by state agency officials. Federal regulation of “hydrofracking” under the EPA would result in a sharp increase in costs to small and independent producers, as well as a dramatic decrease in output and job creation.” (Floor remarks, 6/23/09)
Congressman Earl Pomeroy (N.D.): “The [FRAC Act] is potentially very threatening to the oil exploration and recovery activity underway in North Dakota. It’s one of these pieces of legislation that is a solution in search of a problem.” (Dickinson Press, 7/17/09)
Congressman Cliff Stearns (Fla.): “Since the 1940s, hydraulic fracturing has helped to produce more than 7 billion barrels of oil and 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the United States. … Hydraulic fracturing is essential to produce more of the oil and natural gas that the U.S. will consume in the next decades ahead. … Without [fracturing] most of our country’s abundant natural gas resources cannot be produced.” (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
Congressman Glenn Thompson (Pa.): “Despite its clear record of environmental safety (a million wells drilled, not a single documented case of contamination) and stringent regulation by the states, a bill introduced earlier this summer would hand the regulatory reins over fracking to the Environmental Protection Agency in Washington. … In hydraulic fracturing, we now have the tools we need to confront these challenges in a safe and effective way. And if history is a guide, you can bet that’s exactly what we’ll do.” (Washington Examiner, 9/20/09)
Congressman Gene Greene (Texas): “Hydraulic fracturing is a well-tested technology that has been used to develop energy for over 60 years. … Hydraulic fracturing, as used to produce natural gas from shale formations, has created new opportunities for clean energy and employment without causing environmental damage. Recent studies on fracturing conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2004 found no confirmed evidence of contamination of drinking water. …. Congress should not restrict a technology that plays such an integral part of our nation’s energy strategy.” (Floor remarks, 6/25/09)
“With recent advances in technology to extract more natural gas from unconventional gas resources, such as extended reach, horizontal drilling or hydraulic fracturing, we can unlock America’s 100 years’ supply of natural gas. This hydrofracking, U.S.?developed technology, is being exported to Europe and China.” (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
Congressman John Shadegg (Ariz.): “A vast majority of our domestic supply is accessible only through hydraulic fracturing, a technique that has been used to extract gasoline or oil for more than 50 years. The EPA itself found, quote, “no confirmed cases that are linked to fracturing fluid injection into CBM wells or subsequent underground movement of fracturing.” … EPA did not find confirmed evidence that drinking water wells have been contaminated by hydraulic fracturing. … If we ban hydraulic fracturing, either outright or through the unintended consequences of legislation we pass, then all of these numbers that we have been talking about ?? the 100?year supply, the reasonable price that you just talked about ?? you would tell me are gone.” (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
Congressman Fred Upton (Mich.): “The oil and natural gas industry supports more than 9 million American jobs and adds more than $1 trillion to the national economy. I hope I don’t need to remind our colleagues about the state of our economy, that unemployment is still in double digits nationally and 15 percent in Michigan. … Without that hydraulic fracturing, you wouldn’t be able to get, what, 20 percent, maybe out of these fields?” (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
Congressman Mike Doyle (Pa.): “Last year alone Pennsylvania could attribute nearly 50,000 jobs to environmentally safe natural gas production.” (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
Congressman Greg Walden (Ore.): “It looks to me like if we can invest in our own resources using new technologies in environmentally safe ways, we can generate revenues to the government and create jobs in our hometowns. (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
Congressman Steve Scalise (La,): “So this really has nothing to do with safety. It is about a policy decision we are going to make, and do we really want to utilize the resource that this country has and the ability that we have to make our country independent of especially Middle Eastern oil, countries that don’t necessarily want to do good things with the money that they are getting to our country.” (Committee remarks, 1/20/10)
U.S. Senators
Senator Dorgan Byron Dorgan (N.D.): “Decade after decade, no one has found any evidence that there is any contamination with hydraulic fracturing. … I am not aware of any evidence that there is any contamination of groundwater with hydraulic fracturing when companies have followed the appropriate guidelines and regulations.” (Floor remarks, 7/27/09)
Senator Sen. Jim Inhofe (Okla.): “America has tremendous natural gas reserves. The exploration and production of these reserves using hydraulic fracturing has been regulated by the States and conducted safely for 60 years.” (Floor remarks, 7/27/09)
READ MORE
- Release: EID Statement on House Inquiry into Safe, Responsible Use of Hydraulic Fracturing
- Frac In Depth: For more than 60 years, America’s energy producers have relied on an innovative technique known as hydraulic fracturing, used more than 1 million times
- Fact Sheet: HF Opponents Say the Darndest Things
- Issue Alert: When Gummy Bears Attack
- GWPC Study: State Oil and Natural Gas Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources
- Graphic: What’s In Frac Fluids?
Seven Questions for the Mayor of DISH
In advance of Mayor Tillman’s trip to New York next week, EID poses a series of questions residents should ask while he’s there
Keep Reading »
