Progress (or Not) with Energy and the Environment

The hydrocarbon pressure cooker is changing our planet

Part 1 of a Three Part Series, S. Tom Bond, Retired Chemistry Professor and Resident Farmer, Lewis County, WV

Forces are building to displace hydrocarbon burning as the primary energy source. Will the change come in time to save us from economic collapse?

I The Uncounted Costs are Increasingly Recognized

Extreme energy extraction such as mountaintop removal, shale drilling, deep water drilling, and Arctic drilling represent the conjunction of population pressure, increasingly high technology, and extreme social organizations. The pressure is building, and those who are aware must have an ominous sense of the future building toward a breakdown of the systems of civilization.

Science is only beginning to develop energy sources other than heat engines that burn hydrocarbons, using air as an oxidizing agent. Corporate structure and financing of production lack diversity. In short, we have a world society built on energy obtained by almost a single method, by a single type of production organization, a situation not very resistant to perturbation.

What are the perturbations affecting this hydrocarbon burning – big business nexus? Let’s list some of them.

First, resource limitations – the easy stuff has been mined and drilled until most of it is gone, particularly in the nations that were earliest to adopt hydrocarbon fuels. That has involved going elsewhere to get it – overseas colonization – and that is running short, too. Not only is the easy stuff mined out, but the natives in former colonies now realize they have something of value and wish to benefit from it themselves. All of the natives in these former colonies, not just the leadership, now understand the benefits, which previously could be obtained by leaving a portion for the leaders alone.

A second limitation is that the atmosphere is getting too much carbon dioxide in it. We have previously treated the atmosphere as a dump for the principal waste product of burning, carbon dioxide. Trillions of tons of it. The earth’s temperature is being disturbed. A NASA funded study says “industrial civilization is headed for irreversible collapse.”

The American Association for the Advancement of Science has recently started a counter offensive against climate change deniers and presents this authoritative  report which summarizes the vast amount of evidence.

There is another authoritative document which also carries the weight of recognized science.

And still another big report with similar conclusions came from the UN on March 31st.

Finally, geochemist James Lawrence Powell went through every scientific study published in a peer-review journal during the calendar year 2013, finding 10,885 in total (more on his methodology here). Of those, a mere two rejected anthropogenic global warming.

A third perturbation is the amount of solid and liquid waste being generated. It is now known that ten barrels of waste is produced for each barrel of oil (or oil equivalent fuel) in shale drilling. The same article says, ” Even though this waste is hazardous to human health and the environment, EPA is going to exempt it from the federal laws written to protect the public from toxic waste because the problem is so massive (billions upon billions of barrels) that it would make it literally impossible to drill for oil and gas in the U.S. if the industry had to pick up the tab for remediating the contamination it creates.” (This authors emphasis.) Think of that! Treating the waste from shale drilling like other polluters must treat theirs would make shale drilling uneconomic!

Where to put it is a big problem, too. Shale drilling operates on a wing and a prayer anyway, because the development is so over funded that prices are driven below production costs. Mountaintop removal is also excessive, except the waste is piled up where the coal is removed.

A fourth problem is the fact that on dry land the industry doesn’t have to put up sufficient bond to plug the wells when they are drilled. No other provision is made to cause the wells to be plugged at some future date by the companies that drill them, either. This is a scheme between the industry and regulators to cast that expense on the public at some future date when it will be much more expensive. For coal the objective is to stabilize the surface and minimize erosion – no accounting for production of land services, such as forestry, hunting, farming, removal of carbon dioxide from the air and so on. Not cleaning up after itself is the hallmark of the extractive industries. For old wells, old mines, old timberland neglect is an almost universal experience. “[West Virginia] received $20 million to $25 million a year before a 2006 change in the way reclamation taxes are distributed to the states. In 2008 and 2009, the state got about $40 million, then about $50 million in 2010 and 2011. The current rate of about $67 million is in place this year and next, and then it drops down again.” From a 4/27/2012 article titled “Billion Dollars Needed to Reclaim West Virginia’s Abandoned Mines,” in the Hur Herald of Calhoun County, WV.

This time far more surface is affected, for oil and gas and also for coal, including some 100,000 square miles of the Marcellus and Utica shales alone.

A fifth perturbation is the health effects. Thousands of people have problems, but science is thwarted. Investigations were not done in the early stages when more extreme methods were in use. The industry is not cooperative to third party investigations.

The industry buys into universities with substantial donations and promises of more to come, to discourage scientists who might investigate health claims. Here is a site that lists over 5100 persons with health effects from fracking. Four states have acknowledged water contamination from fracking now. Also here. Think of BP’s Gulf of Mexico fiasco. Think of what  mountaintop mining does to people in those areas. How do you think Arctic drilling will go?

A sixth issue is the danger extreme methods of hydrocarbon extraction cause. Drilling is eight times as dangerous as other industries. Even with extensive safety intervention by OSHA, coal mining is dangerous. Shipping of hydrocarbons by trains causes a lot of wrecks and explosions and sidetracks other shipping. And,  pipelines result in almost weekly sensational explosions. Also here.

Last (seventh issue) we mention the potential for social disruption. Almost half (46 percent) of [WV Governor] Tomblin’s $7.6 million in campaign contributions amassed in recent years has come from industry pockets, according to data compiled by the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan group that tracks campaign finance. Nearly one in four Texas lawmakers, or their spouses, has a financial interest in at least one energy company active in the Eagle Ford, a Center for Public Integrity analysis of personal financial disclosure forms shows. Here is an example of the Public Relations approach to control hydrocarbon burning’s global warming problem. Another example of public relations run amuck is when the little ol’ Clarksburg WV newspaper is tripled in size for two days in a row with ads lauding the natural gas revolution. This real state of shale drilling is described here.

Tagged as: climate change, drilling, energy sources, environmental impacts, fossil fuels, fracking, global warming, greenhouse gases, hydrocarbons, marcellus shale, multiple impacts, natural gas