Scientific American: Fracking Threatens to Crack Politics

[nationalize the fed]

By David Biello Scientific American November 3, 2014

The city of Boulder wants to block fracking in the Rocky Mountain state. The liberal enclave has banned the combination of directional drilling and cracking subterranean rock with high-pressure fluids known as fracking within its city limits. And local Democratic U.S. Rep. Jared Polis wanted to enable other communities in Colorado to follow suit. He began collecting signatures for a ballot measure that would have vested authority in municipalities to enact their own fracking regulations, no matter what the state as a whole decides, to control the controversial practice that frees more oil and gas. For good measure, the Democrat also wanted to add another ballot measure that would have required a more than 600-meter buffer zone between drilling rigs and any residences.

The only obstacle standing between Polis and the ballot was his fellow Democrats. Current Gov. John Hickenlooper (D), a proponent of fracking and former oil geologist, believes that the anxiety around the method is not necessarily connected to the facts, yet notes that the abundance of natural gas released by fracking cannot be a fuel supply for the long-term, thanks to climate change. "Several communities, including mine, Fort Collins, have passed laws banning fracking and that has led to a clash between the state and the communities, which is not going to go away easily," says biophysicist Michael Fox of Colorado State University. "While there are certainly problems from fracking…, I believe these can be dealt with if proper regulations are enforced. … The view is just that fracking is bad—end of story."

Fracking has proved a divisive political issue in Colorado but it is hardly the only state struggling with the issue. New York has banned fracking pending an environmental and health review that does not seem to be forthcoming, a delay that has pro-fracking and economically depressed communities in certain parts of the state upset. North Dakota is attempting to lock in the economic gains from an oil boom unleashed by the technique yet restrain its ill effects, such as overstrained public resources and the threat to towns that boom then bust. North Carolina is puzzling out what regulations are appropriate to govern the practice in the state whereas Pennsylvania regulators have been revealed to be too lenient in their oversight. And the gubernatorial race in that state revolves in part around how to impose taxes on oil and gas companies to fund schools and other public goods—an idea John Kasich, the Republican governor of Ohio who is running for reelection, also supports.

The Cook Political Report notes that 2014 is likely to see the largest amount of advertising related to energy and environmental issues like fracking in the U.S.—ever. "Some fall in the 'drill, baby, drill' camp while others fall in the 'ban fracking' camp," explains David Ludlam, executive director of the West Slope Colorado Oil and Gas Association. "Colorado has played the role of petri dish for activists seeking bans, moratoriums and constitutional amendments around banning fracking, and by extension oil and gas drilling." SNIP
MORE: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fracking-threatens-to-crack-politics/

Related: How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World
A trove of secret documents details the US government's global push for shale gas.

—By Mariah Blake Mother Jones September/October 2014 Issue

"Frack Baby Frack" -Hillary Clinton

One icy morning in February 2012, Hillary Clinton's plane touched down in the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, which was just digging out from a fierce blizzard. Wrapped in a thick coat, the secretary of state descended the stairs to the snow-covered tarmac, where she and her aides piled into a motorcade bound for the presidential palace. That afternoon, they huddled with Bulgarian leaders, including Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, discussing everything from Syria's bloody civil war to their joint search for loose nukes.

But the focus of the talks was fracking. The previous year, Bulgaria had signed a five-year, $68 million deal, granting US oil giant Chevron millions of acres in shale gas concessions. Bulgarians were outraged. Shortly before Clinton arrived, tens of thousands of protesters poured into the streets carrying placards that read "Stop fracking with our water" and "Chevron go home." Bulgaria's parliament responded by voting overwhelmingly for a fracking moratorium...

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

Obviously Fracking is not a R vs. D thing.

[RiverLover]

1. Dems DO have a fracking problem!

Thanks for posting this.

Here's one guy's take on it, in PA, when his choice at the polls is btn a GOP profracking governor and a profracking Democratic challenger. He's not voting Democratic this year~

"The definition of cognitive dissonance is believing in preserving the environment then supporting someone who is hell-bent on destroying it."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-the-nerd-ferraro/why-i-cannot-vote-democra_b_6037572.html

[caraher]

2. True

In NY Cuomo is triangulating the hell out of the issue, which is deeply divisive and plays out as jobs vs. environment.

And it's not just fracking. Look in Kentucky, where Grimes is trying to compete with McConnell is expressing her everlasting devotion to coal.

Broadly speaking, though, the Democrats are on average far better than the utterly unhinged Republicans. May our Democratic candidates prevail tomorrow... and may they act for environmental sanity in office.