Sunday, June 10, 2012

Extracting the Facts: Who's getting "fracked?"

As a born again fan of the SciFi series, Battlestar Galactica the word "frack" has a special meaning as a universal expletive used with considerable creativity throughout the show's multiple seasons.  A few years back, when technology, domestic policies and global energy markets began to focus on the extractive process know as "hydraulic fracturing" (its nickname "fracking") my inner teenager couldn't help giggle a bit.  In spite of myself, I found this new use of the word a fascinating foreshadowing of concerns that were emerging regarding the consequences of unrestrained fracking.

In our quest for cheaper, cleaner, more local, less carbon intensive energy sources: are we all destined to get "fracked?"

Concerns and conversations about the industry, with its history of wildcatting and an overeagerness to externalize the negative consequences of its operations, came to light in a number of widely-viewed reports including the film "Gasland" and a 2010 piece on CBS's 60 Minutes "$halegasonaires."  Most environmentalists and industry skeptics came out soundly against the practice.  The industry is lobbying hard to clean up its reputation and ensure regulations stay loose and that processes remain proprietary. To that end America's Natural Gas Alliance and others have spent nearly a billion dollars in the fight to clean up fracking's image, deploying over 800 lobbyists by some estimates.

In today's New York Times, there is a wonderfully balanced editorial, "Natural Gas by the Book," which challenges companies and citizens alike to explore the costs and benefits---not just to corporate profits but to the quest for a more rational approach to meet our 21st century energy needs.  It references the recently released IEA Reports on Shale Gas.  New York State sits atop a large reserve of shale gas and their Legislature's measured approach to regulation has been closely watched policy makers across North America.

This report comes in the wake of an earlier publication, Extracting the Facts: An Investor Guide to Disclosing Risks from Hydraulic Fracturing Operations put out by longtime shareholder activists, the Investor Environmental Health Network and the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility.  The investor-driven approach is grounded in the principles of sustainicity---incorporating natural and social capital into the notion of real investment returns.

As the Times editorial posits, shale gas may provide a bridge to a new energy future. That bridge cannot be justified without an honest, thoughtful dialogue within the communities where operations are taking place. Many of these communities are economically vulnerable and have residents who are willing to accept deals that make light of unexamined risks and are unspecific regarding authentic long term benefits. Barring a national framework of strong regulations or at least an industry standard of voluntary disclosure by energy companies---it is clear that hydraulic fracturing may continue to be an opportunity to "frack" the vulnerable communities who live a top the vast reserves.


No comments:

Post a Comment