•   
  •   

World The best case for and against a fracking ban

06:15  08 october  2020
06:15  08 october  2020 Source:   vox.com

TikTok download ban temporarily blocked by US judge in a blow to the Trump administration

  TikTok download ban temporarily blocked by US judge in a blow to the Trump administration A federal judge on Sunday ruled in favour of TikTok, blocking the Trump administration's temporary download ban set to take place tonight at 11:59 p.m. TikTok has been a target of the Trump administration since July, and last month, the president signed a pair of executive orders against the app and its Chinese owner, ByteDance, leading to the download ban. The president said last week that a deal between ByteDance and US-based Oracle and Walmart had his "blessing," but the deal has been muddled due to conflicting statements from the involved companies. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The best case against a ban : Fracking has reduced greenhouse gas emissions and helped expand clean energy. Though hydraulic fracturing as a technique has been around since the 19th century and the first commercial fracking for gas took place in the 1940s, the most recent fracking boom started

By 2020, for the first time in 70 years, the US is predicted to become a net energy exporter. Most of this progress can be attributed to the combination of

During the Vice Presidential debate, Vice President Mike Pence accused former Vice President Joe Biden and California Sen. Kamala Harris of wanting to ban hydraulic fracturing.

a lit up city at night: Hydraulic fracturing has made the US a leader in oil production and helped curb greenhouse gas emissions. 2020 Democratic presidential contenders are weighing its role in the fight against climate change. © Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post/Getty Images Hydraulic fracturing has made the US a leader in oil production and helped curb greenhouse gas emissions. 2020 Democratic presidential contenders are weighing its role in the fight against climate change.

“Joe Biden and Kamala Harris want to raise taxes, bury our economy over a $2 trillion Green New Deal,” Pence said. “They want to abolish fossil fuels and ban fracking.”

The definitive case for ending the filibuster

  The definitive case for ending the filibuster Every argument for the filibuster, considered and debunked.That decision? Whether the requirement for passing a bill through the Senate should be 60 votes or 51 votes. Whether, in other words, to eliminate the modern filibuster, and make governance possible again.

“Put a ban on all fracking operations (oil and gas) while we study the best way to transition away from and phase out these hazardous and extreme extraction techniques Klobuchar would support regulations on fracking , a campaign spokesman told The Post. “I see natural gas as a transitional fuel.

In case you haven’t been following closely, American production has soared due to fracking over the last decade. The point must be made, no fracking , no shale oil. Any prudent manager, and I count oil company managers as among the best in the business, would assess the risk of a new permit ban

Harris was adamant that this was not true. “First of all, I will repeat, and the American people know, that Joe Biden will not ban fracking,” Harris said. “That is a fact. That is a fact.”

Biden’s plan to address climate change calls for the United States to zero out its greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 while helping the workers and communities that may suffer job losses in the switch to clean energy. It does not mention fracking at all.

Trump, meanwhile, has no published plan to deal with climate change. He has, however, relaxed environmental regulations around mining and drilling in the United States to boost US fossil fuel production.

Activists have pushed presidential contenders to address fracking — which involves pumping high pressure water, sand, and other chemicals into a rock formation to create fractures that can release trapped oil and gas — because it has radically reshaped the US economic, energy, political, and environmental landscape.

The AFL all-time great alphabet teams: Letter W

  The AFL all-time great alphabet teams: Letter W The W team has a prolific midfield, a talented forward line and a mercurial backline. Read the previous alphabet teams here. Back line David Wirrpanda (West Coast 1996-2009) 227 games, 131 goals David Wirrpanda became the youngest player to debut for the West Coast Eagles when he ran onto the field in Round 5, 1996. Over the next few years injury and poor form saw him play only sporadically, but from 2001 he became a regular in defence for the Eagles. A dashing back pocket or halfback flanker, Wirrpanda’s ability to break lines and clear from defence became a vital part of West Coast’s successes mid-decade.

An immediate ban on fracking -- as these candidates have proposed -- would result in an immediate decline in Because global natural gas demand is growing, countries with LNG needs would in many cases turn to These are some of the things that would happen if fracking was immediately banned .

Oil prices are spiking following the attacks this weekend that disrupted about half of Saudi Arabia's oil capacity. That accounts for about 5% of the daily global oil supply, and is the biggest oil disruption in history.

It’s turned the United States into the largest oil producer in the world. It helped pull the country out of a recession. It’s created boomtowns flush with cash in once sparsely populated parts of the country. At the same time, fracking has led to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the US.

Wastewater injection from fracking wells has also caused a spike in earthquakes. It has caused local air quality and safety problems. And while they’re cleaner than coal, oil and gas from fracking are still fossil fuels.

For policymakers, the difficult choice is deciding whether the benefits outweigh the harm, and if fuels from fracking can be a stepping stone toward cleaner energy. “This is one of those issues where there’s just so much gray,” Sam Ori, executive director of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago, told Vox in 2019. “I don’t think that there’s a really clear case that says fracking is necessarily good or bad, on net.”

AP FACT CHECK: Claims from Pence and Harris VP debate

  AP FACT CHECK: Claims from Pence and Harris VP debate WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris tussled Wednesday in the first and only vice presidential debate before the Nov. 3 election, coming as the coronavirus sidelined President Donald Trump at the White House. A look at how the running mates' statements from Salt Lake City stack up with the facts: RUSSIA INVESTIGATION PENCE, on the conclusions of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation: “It was found that there was no obstruction, no collusion. Case closed. And then, Sen. Harris, you and your colleagues in the Congress tried to impeach the president of the United States over a phone call.

The proposal, SB 200, would ban hydraulic fracturing operations from taking place anywhere in Florida. SB 200 would also ban the well -stimulation process known as “matrix No operators are currently employing fracking operations in Florida, and that has been the case for several years now.

Californians Against Fracking estimated that oil lobbyists spent million solely on defeating the bill. "The overwhelming majority of Californians who support a moratorium on Fracking opponents called the four Democrats who voted to block the ban “shamelessly unprincipled,” according to Reuters.

And for presidential candidates, it’s tough to find the right pitch to voters, who are themselves divided. A 2019 poll by KFF and the Cook Political Report of voters in the key swing states of Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, showed widespread support for proposals like the Green New Deal, but much less support for a fracking ban. In Pennsylvania, 69 percent of swing voters said they support a Green New Deal, but only 39 percent wanted to ban fracking.

It’s a microcosm of the broader policy discussion about the role of the fossil fuel industry in the carbon constrained future, whether it should be fought as an adversary or embraced as a partner.

As for fracking, researchers and analysts have been studying it for years and still continue to debate its merits. Here is a summary of the best arguments for and against a ban on fracking.

The best case against a ban: Fracking has reduced greenhouse gas emissions and helped expand clean energy

Though hydraulic fracturing as a technique has been around since the 19th century and the first commercial fracking for gas took place in the 1940s, the most recent fracking boom started in earnest around 2005. That’s when the rising prices of oil and gas forced energy companies to look for other sources, when related techniques like horizontal drilling and low-cost slickwater fracking matured, and new estimates revealed the gargantuan amounts of gas stored in formations like Marcellus Shale.

Fact Check: The US vice presidential debate

  Fact Check: The US vice presidential debate Mike Pence and Kamala Harris went head to head in the US vice presidential debate on Wednesday, sparring over issues including the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus, taxes and health care. AFP breaks down some of the main topics from the debate below. - Coronavirus response - Harris said US President Donald Trump and Pence knew about the dangers of the coronavirus -- which has killed more than 211,000 people in America -- in late January, but "covered it up" and "minimized the seriousness of it.

Fracking has now become the dominant technique for extracting oil and gas in the US.

a close up of a map: Fracking with horizontal drilling has quickly overtaken other forms of oil and gas extraction in the US. © Energy Information Administration Fracking with horizontal drilling has quickly overtaken other forms of oil and gas extraction in the US.

Fracking has risen against the backdrop of the United States’ massive carbon footprint. The US is responsible for the highest share of cumulative global greenhouse gas emissions of any county. Currently, it’s the second-largest emitter in the world, behind China. It also has some of the highest per capita emissions in the world.

Scientists have warned that if humanity wants to limit warming this century to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, countries would need to halve global emissions by as soon as 2030 and reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

During much of the fracking boom, the US economy grew and emissions declined. One study found that between 2005 and 2012, fracking created 725,000 jobs in the industry, not counting related supporting jobs. “This has been one of the most dynamic parts of the U.S. economy — you’re talking about millions of jobs,” Daniel Yergin, vice chairman of IHS Markit and founder of IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates told CNBC.

That’s largely due to natural gas from fracking displacing coal in electricity production. Natural gas emits about half of the greenhouse gas emissions of coal per unit of energy. It doesn’t have the massive land footprint that open pit mining or mountaintop removal coal mines do. While it has its own pollution problems, burning natural gas doesn’t produce pollutants like ash and mercury, which can pose health and environmental hazards for years.

5 years of hate

  5 years of hate A comprehensive timeline of Donald Trump encouraging hate groups and political violence.While Trump’s refusal to condemn white supremacists was the talk of the debate, his decision to skirt the subject is precisely in line with how he’s historically addressed violence on the part of hate groups and his supporters: He emboldens it.

a screenshot of a cell phone: The advent of fracking has led to a decline in US greenhouse gas emissions. © Environmental Protection Agency The advent of fracking has led to a decline in US greenhouse gas emissions.

“Regardless of what you believe about the future, shale gas has played a substantial role in getting rid of carbon emissions and conventional emissions from coal,” said Ori.

A 2013 report from the Breakthrough Institute titled “Coal Killer” explained that coal-fired power generation declined from producing 50 percent of US electricity in 2007 to 37 percent in 2012. Natural gas from fracking largely rose to fill that void.

The main reason for this shift is that fracked natural gas is cheaper than coal for the energy it produces. That makes it attractive for utilities, especially in competitive markets. Many natural gas power plants use combined-cycle gas turbines. Not only do they produce 50 percent more energy for the same amount of fuel compared to a single-cycle turbine, they can spool up quickly to meet surges in demand or shortfalls from other power producers. Compared to coal and nuclear power plants that have a harder time ramping up and down, this added flexibility makes natural gas power plants particularly valuable on the grid.

Even the newest, cleanest, more efficient coal-fired power plants struggle to compete with natural gas.

Natural gas’s flexibility has also eased the integration of variable renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. When the breezes slow down and clouds form above, natural gas steps in. This has reduced the need for other ways to compensate for intermittency, like energy storage.

Istanbul authorities ban Kurdish-language play

  Istanbul authorities ban Kurdish-language play Turkish authorities have banned a Kurdish-language play that was due to open Tuesday in Istanbul's municipal theatre for the first time in its 106-year history, organisers told AFP. "Beru", a Kurdish adaptation of Dario Fo's "Trumpets and Raspberries," was included in the October programme of the Istanbul Municipality City Theatre, to much fanfare. Istanbul governor Ali Yerlikaya said "Beru" was banned not because it was a Kurdish-language play but because it "contained PKK propaganda," in a message on Twitter.

In fact, as fracking has grown in the US, renewable energy generation has doubled since 2008. Renewables, including hydropower and biomass, now comprise just over 17 percent of total US electricity generation. Coupled with nuclear power, about 19 percent of the electricity mix, that still leaves nearly two-thirds of power generation that needs to decarbonize. And that will take years.

So fracked natural gas’s record as a coal slayer and renewable energy booster makes it a valuable weapon in the fight against climate change.

“If you’re talking about natural gas as a decarbonizing fuel while replacing coal, I think the facts on the ground really support that,” said Alex Trembath, a coauthor of the “Coal Killer” report and deputy director at the Breakthrough Institute. “We’ve actually seen significant growth in solar and wind in particular even alongside the fracking revolution.”

At the same time, fracking has helped insulate the US from global economic shocks, particularly in oil markets. US shale oil has provided more than half the growth in global oil supplies, so rising tensions and disruptions in countries like Iran, Libya, and Venezuela have barely moved the needle at the gas pump.

“The oil price impacts of those big disruptions have been pretty muted and a lot of that has to do with the incredible growth of shale oil as a source of new supply in the global market,” Ori said.

In short, natural gas obtained by fracking has reduced emissions, aided the economy, and helped clean energy rise, while costing less than dirtier fuels.

The best case for a ban: Fracking keeps us dependent on fossil fuels and undermines decarbonization

Both the oil and natural gas produced from fracking have their downsides. Natural gas is mainly used for power generation (it’s now the largest source of electricity in the US) while oil is mostly used for transportation, like cars, shipping, and aviation.

How Australia's travel ban is a breach of the UN human rights charter

  How Australia's travel ban is a breach of the UN human rights charter Australia's ban on travelling overseas or going interstate is a potential breach of Article 13 of the the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Australia was one of eight nations that helped draft this set of principles in 1948.Under Article 13, 'Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.'This clause also states: 'Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

So while low natural gas prices have helped knock dirty coal off the market, low oil prices driven in part by fracking have encouraged more travel. In fact, transportation is now the largest source of greenhouse gases in the US. And after years of decline, US emissions in 2018 rose by 3.4 percent.

a close up of a map: Power-related emissions declined and transportation emissions rose, driving overall US emissions upward. © Rhodium Group Power-related emissions declined and transportation emissions rose, driving overall US emissions upward.

Low oil prices have undermined the business case for cleaner transportation alternatives, like electric cars and fuel cell-powered buses. Instead, the United States has experienced a growing appetite for larger, thirstier cars and more air travel.

Meanwhile, low natural gas prices have had some collateral damage for nuclear power, the largest source of clean electricity in the US. Some of the nuclear power plants that have announced early retirements are likely to see their capacity replaced by natural gas. So while replacing coal with natural gas often leads to a reduction in emissions, replacing nuclear leads to an increase.

Natural gas itself can also become a climate problem. Methane, the dominant component of natural gas, produces less carbon dioxide than coal when burned. But if methane leaks, which it often does in some quantity during normal gas extraction operations, it becomes a potent greenhouse gas. Over 100 years, a quantity of methane traps more than 25 times the amount of heat compared to a similar amount of carbon dioxide.

Of course, methane is the product, so the gas industry has an incentive to limit leaks. But leaks are difficult to track, and they could easily overwhelm the gains from replacing coal.

Robert Howarth, a researcher studying shale gas at Cornell University, recently reported that US shale gas production plays an outsized role in global methane emissions. He estimated that over the past 10 years, more than half of the global increase in methane emissions came from fracking in the US.

“Natural gas production in the United States is leaking somewhere in the neighborhood of 3.5 percent of the gas we produce into the atmosphere which is, you know a relatively small amount of gas if you think about it. Most of it is getting to market,” Howarth said. “But that 3.5 percent is enough to do severe damage to the climate.”

This is a higher leakage estimate than what the EPA and the industry calculate, but with the Trump administration’s ongoing rollbacks on Obama-era regulations on monitoring and restricting fugitive emissions of methane, the problem is poised to worsen.

And then there’s the technique of fracking itself. It requires a massive volume of water. Wells can release toxic chemicals like benzene into the air. Fracking sites can experience explosions and fires. They can contaminate drinking water. More than 17 million people in the US live within a mile of an active fracking well and research shows that fracking can lead to low birth weight in infants born in that radius.

Many of these environmental risks, on balance, are less than those associated with mining and burning coal. However, the sudden surge in fracking means that many people are being confronted with its impacts for the first time, making it a more vivid political concern. That’s in contrast to coal hazards, which are mostly grandfathered into the public consciousness.

Another factor is that the business case for fracking is starting to weaken as more drillers declare bankruptcy. The Rocky Mountain Institute estimates that clean energy is already competitive with new natural gas power plants, and by 2035, it will be cheaper to build new wind, solar, and storage projects than to continue running 90 percent of existing gas power plants.

And when it comes to limiting climate change, a key factor is time. Methane leaked from gas wells can stay in the atmosphere for a decade. Carbon dioxide from burning it can linger for a century. So it is imperative to ramp down greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible. Yet every new natural gas power plant represents a decades-long commitment to continue using the fuel. That means gas plants will have to install carbon capture systems, which would add to their operating costs and worsen the business case further, or some poor investor is going to be left holding the bag.

“Not only is natural gas dangerous and destructive, it’s increasingly unnecessary,” said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. “We do think there should be a national ban on fracking.”

What can a president actually do about fracking?

President Obama often boasted about the rise of the United States as an energy producer. President Trump has pushed to leverage US oil and gas in order to exert energy dominance. But it’s clear that the era of bipartisan support for fracking at the national level has come to an end.

Now some Democrats are openly hostile to the fossil fuel industry, with Sen. Bernie Sanders calling for criminal prosecution of some companies. Democratic presidential candidates were asked about their stance on fracking during the CNN climate town hall, and they will likely continue facing questions throughout the campaign.

The federal government can limit export licenses for oil and natural gas. However, a lot of the energy policy in the United States is governed at the state and local level, so a president can’t easily shape the agenda without local backing.

At the local level, despite environmental and safety concerns, voters have been reluctant to restrict fracking. A ballot measure that would have severely restricted fracking in Colorado failed in 2018, despite Democrats winning the governorship and majorities in both state houses.

Breakthrough’s Trembath argued that a president would best be served by building an off-ramp for the bridge rather than cutting it off. It would be less disruptive and contentious and would allow the country to continue harnessing the benefits of fracking while coming up with better options.

“The first way we hasten the end of the bridge is to make the [alternative] technology cheaper,” he said.

That would require investment in clean energy research and development, particularly for technologies like long-duration energy storage and advanced nuclear. Pricing carbon dioxide would also help ensure that the biggest sources of greenhouse gases get reduced first, and the revenue these prices generate could fund further research. Biden’s climate plan calls for “domestic polluters bear the full cost of their carbon pollution.” So while fracking may continue under a Biden administration, it may become more costly over time.

How Australia's travel ban is a breach of the UN human rights charter .
Australia's ban on travelling overseas or going interstate is a potential breach of Article 13 of the the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Australia was one of eight nations that helped draft this set of principles in 1948.Under Article 13, 'Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.'This clause also states: 'Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

usr: 2
This is interesting!