Today’s hydraulic fractionation (fracing) is considered injurious to the environment by its opponents who prefer a state-of-nature and less energy to industrialization and more energy in free market settings. As with so many other technologies, today’s methods are far less invasive and safer than earlier-generation technology. A case in point is the 19th century’s oil-well torpedoing.
In the first years of oil production flowing wells were sometimes hindered by a waxy substance, paraffin, left by crude oil in the well tubing and well bottom. Early efforts to remove residue involved injecting steam, boiling liquids, and air down a well’s tubing. These mildly successful techniques were then replaced by a far superior alternative – oil well torpedoing. [1]
Gun powder explosions in water wells had been documented as early as 1808, and between 1860 and 1864, the technique was in use with oil wells as well. …
Continue ReadingThe recent death of George P. Mitchell has revived the discussion of shale gas and brought the extraordinary life of Mitchell into the limelight.
Son of poor Greek immigrants, he embodied the prototypical “rags-to-riches”. His development of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) has been his highlighted attribute and brought justified recognition for his contribution to the global energy supply.
When considering the economic benefits that shale gas production through fracking bring about, it is no wonder why Mitchell continues to win awards, such as “Houstonian of the Century,” even posthumously.
The Bigger Picture
What appears to be absent from most of Mitchell’s praise is his growing contribution to strengthening the global position of the United States. The prodigious supply of U.S. natural gas already has weakened energy-dominate regions, which include Russia and OPEC, and has created a greater potential for foreign partnerships.…
Continue Reading(See part 1.) To identify optimum tactics, we need to start with a clear idea of who the opposition is–and what are their strengths and weaknesses. A careful assessment of this situation will reveal the reality that citizen groups fighting alternative energy promoters are the underdogs.
Briefly, the opponents are:
… Continue Reading1 – The Wind Industry [lobbyists (e.g. AWEA), manufactures (e.g. Vesta), developers (e.g. Iberdrola), installers (e.g. Horizon), investors (e.g. Goldman Sachs), and some utilities].
2 – Most large mainstream environmental organizations (e.g. Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Union of Concerned Scientists).
3 – Some labor unions and businesses.
4 – Many Academics (e.g. at Pace, Stanford).
5 – Many of our representatives and agencies: Federal (e.g. Congress, DOE, FERC); State (e.g. legislators, PSC, DEC); Local (e.g. county, town board, planning board).