Oh, great: More fracking rules are definitely happening by 2013

posted at 6:41 pm on June 25, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

As if we didn’t already have ample enough reasons to not reelect Barack Obama this November, here’s yet another dagger to our nation’s economic energy outlook: Try as they might to insist that an “all of the above” strategy is their primary energy agenda, the Obama administration has consistently gotten in the way of affordable, traditional energy with unnecessarily crippling regulations.

Despite its moneymaking and fewer-carbon-emissions potential, natural gas just can’t catch a break, either. The environmental lobby hates the very idea of “fracking,” the practice often used to extract natural gas from the ground, and Team Obama needs the environmental lobby for their reelection bid. Ergo:

Heather Zichal, the top White House energy aide, told reporters that she expects the Interior Department rules regulating hydraulic fracturing, dubbed fracking, to be completed by year’s end.

“We are committed to doing the rule and we are committed to finalizing it,” Zichal told reporters after remarks at the think tank NDN.

Advocates of tougher “fracking” oversight will have their eyes on the calendar, especially if President Obama loses the White House to Mitt Romney, his GOP rival. …

In her wide-ranging remarks on energy to the group, Zichal touted White House plans to spur development of both traditional and alternative sources, including natural gas.

Here’s the thing: The Interior Department, the EPA, et al, rolling out new fracking regulations would be totally legitimate… if they had managed to produce any definitive evidence condemning the practice (because right now, irreversible groundwater contamination and earthquakes are leading them nowhere).

But fracking has suffered from a steady and well-monied campaign of misinformation from the environmentalist lobby, which doesn’t like the idea of cheap fuel available to the masses (even though natural gas is relatively cleaner than traditional sources), and unfortunately, the Obama administration knows well enough to keep the greenies appeased.

Natural gas has already demonstrated a great aptitude for fitting in with our infrastructure, and investors are going absolutely bonkers over its potential without any pushing from the federal government necessary. We could all be starting our natural-gas engines in the foreseeable future, if the government would just quit dithering and provide some certainty:

The recent deluge of low-cost shale gas is already changing the way the country runs. Electric utilities are turning to gas to power their turbines, and chemical companies that rely on the fuel are coming back to the U.S. after years of investing overseas.

But the holy grail is transportation.

Every day, we consume 70% of our oil getting from place to place—and produce more than 30% of our greenhouse gases along the way. If we could run our vehicles on natural gas, it could kill two birds with one stone: Not only is natural gas a lot cheaper than oil right now, but its emissions are much cleaner than gasoline or diesel.

“This abundance of natural gas is something we weren’t expecting as a country, but it’s here now, and it’s a gift we should take advantage of,” says Steven Mueller, chief executive of Houston-based natural-gas producer Southwestern Energy Co. “There’s huge savings here and a way to help to environment.” …

“It’s attractive to customers because it’s a domestic product, there’s a steady supply, and the price is right,” says John McHugh, Kwik Trip’s communications manager. “If we can offer the consumer a value, we know people will jump on the bandwagon.”

But alas, the environmental lobby just keeps providing excuses for the federal government to grab power and stick their noses where they don’t belong, one chimerical ecological catastrophe at a time.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Who cares:

As we now know, according to liberals,Team Romney is perfectly free to direct the bureaucracy to stop enforcing environmental regulations. Problem Solved.

Afterseven on June 25, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Hey! It’s election time! Barry needs the votes! SCREW THE COUNTRY AND THE ECONOMY!

GarandFan on June 25, 2012 at 6:49 PM

The Obie Administration reminds me of the bar scene in the movie 48 Hours..Let’s see what we can F up next!..:)

Dire Straits on June 25, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Thankfully we’ll soon have liberal Romneyh shoring up his beloved EPA.

Gary Johnson would drastically cut the EPA.

DannoJyd on June 25, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Necessarily skyrocketing they are. Who says he’s not successful?

PopsRacer on June 25, 2012 at 6:52 PM

“I give you, the EPA!”

-Richard Nixon

portlandon on June 25, 2012 at 6:53 PM

If we could run our vehicles on natural gas, it could kill two birds with one stone: Not only is natural gas a lot cheaper than oil right now, but its emissions are much cleaner than gasoline or diesel.

If?

There is no doubt we could. They had CNG pumps at Service Stations back in 1979 or so. It is fairly easy to convert an car to use CNG the problem come in making them dual fuel. CNG needs a strong tank that takes space and is larger than a Gasoline tank and has to be round. Thus it is harder to design it into an automobile without losing trunk space.

Now Commercial Trucks have no problem as they have plenty of room for the larger tanks.

Steveangell on June 25, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Who’s the POS w/ the cowboy get-up? I love how Obama’s cronies like to play dressup.

cajun carrot on June 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM

When little Bammie whispered a message ‘to be transmitted to Vlad’ re his flexibility after the election, I have to wonder if he was talking about a shutdown of fracking. Russia gets billions in revenue from selling natural gas to Europe, at prices two or three times the going price in the USA. Eventually North American fracking is going to impact Russian gas prices.

slickwillie2001 on June 25, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Steveangell on June 25, 2012 at 6:53 PM

“If?” Was the first thing I thought too. Here in OKC one in five cars I see are natural gas. Those little blue diamonds on the back. There’s a CNG station down the street from my house. “If” she says. We’re doing it now, just leave us alone!

Meric1837 on June 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Who’s the POS w/ the cowboy get-up? I love how Obama’s cronies like to play dressup.

cajun carrot on June 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar

http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm

Heh …see the picture …too funny.

CW on June 25, 2012 at 6:59 PM

You know, I wish liberals were more honest about energy policy. In essence, we are indeed waving off investment in natural gas, but in the interest of a long term strategy. If all energy production resources are devoted to natural gas, truly sustainable energy investment will get pushed down the road, and we will be worse off for it in the long run. As it stands, our best bet is for energy companies to put more and more of their money into research, in the same way that the pharmaceutical industry is investing huge sums of money in university research teams in search of new drugs. A new battery technology is out there, and a fat energy company check will get us there, but only if they’re discouraged from short term thinking.

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

. If all energy production resources are devoted to natural gas…

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

You’re damn naive.

CW on June 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Thankfully we’ll soon have liberal Romneyh shoring up his beloved EPA.

Gary Johnson would drastically cut the EPA.

DannoJyd on June 25, 2012 at 6:51 PM |Delete and Ban

…you’re going to do this krap on almost every thread…until when?

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Regardless of what the EPA has to say about fracking natural gas would be very expensive to replace diesel and gas for typical energy for transportation. Simply put, the infrastructure for natural gas is not available. As for fracking contaminating ground water would take the wildest stretch of the imagination. Ground water in most cases is found about a mile or more above the oil and gas. And if your familiar with drilling activities, then you know casing (steel pipe) is planted in the ground to recover the oil and gas.

DDay on June 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

The Interior Department, the EPA, et al, rolling out new fracking regulations would be totally legitimate… if they had managed to produce any definitive evidence condemning the practice

Nobody had to produce definitive evidence to get DDT banned.

The Rogue Tomato on June 25, 2012 at 7:04 PM

…you’re going to do this krap on almost every thread…until when?

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Hopefully not long!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Gary Johnson would drastically cut the EPA.
DannoJyd on June 25, 2012 at 6:51 PM

I would eliminate it. So there.

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 7:06 PM

You know, I wish liberals were more honest about energy policy. In essence, we are indeed waving off investment in natural gas, but in the interest of a long term strategy. If all energy production resources are devoted to natural gas, truly sustainable energy investment will get pushed down the road, and we will be worse off for it in the long run. As it stands, our best bet is for energy companies to put more and more of their money into research, in the same way that the pharmaceutical industry is investing huge sums of money in university research teams in search of new drugs. A new battery technology is out there, and a fat energy company check will get us there, but only if they’re discouraged from short term thinking.

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Your side is too busy wasting money on Solyndras and Volts. What’s the matter, did your welfare check bounce?

RovesChins on June 25, 2012 at 7:07 PM

DannoJyd on June 25, 2012 at 6:51 PM

So private citizens can do that? Cool, I’m making my list.

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Who’s the POS w/ the cowboy get-up? I love how Obama’s cronies like to play dressup.

cajun carrot on June 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM

…he’s a horses a$$…! – so he thinks it’s part of a uniform!

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Oh joy.

the new aesthetic on June 25, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Fracking causes earthquakes, volcanoes and overflowing toilets. Only a rightie fascist wingnut would want to frack.

Bishop on June 25, 2012 at 7:12 PM

…the environmental lobby just keeps providing excuses for the federal government to grab power and stick their noses where they don’t belong, one chimerical ecological catastrophe at a time.

Of course – they are communists. You should not expect them to do anything else. We would be better off if we just accepted that fact and then killed them. Because the only good commie is a dead commie.

woodNfish on June 25, 2012 at 7:13 PM

California out in front again… er… strike that. Reverse it.

Fallon on June 25, 2012 at 7:13 PM

And T. Boone Pickens’ plans arise from the grave once more…

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on June 25, 2012 at 7:14 PM

The Obama campaign has always been something of a ventriloquism act: talking in the center while sitting way over on the left.

Count to 10 on June 25, 2012 at 7:14 PM

DannoJyd on June 25, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Who in the Hell is Larry Johnson??

BigWyo on June 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

One of our environmental hypocrites posting again. Still hyperventilating on the Poindexter hat to run your iPad?

Battery technology has been incremental for a reason and that is energy density. The more energy you need the bigger the battery. Big checks from energy companies aren’t going to change that. It is a chemistry thing.

“Math is hard, science is harder and research is the hardest of all”

chemman on June 25, 2012 at 7:34 PM

And yet we’ll STILL have the usual suspects coming here whining that Romney isn’t good enough for them and they’re going to vote 3rd party.

MJBrutus on June 25, 2012 at 7:36 PM

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Basic research is one thing. Throwing money away on commercialization of solar panels and batteries is a humongous waste. Sure, playing a role in the exploration of new technologies is definitely part of government’s job. Using public money to try to make Soyndra or Ener1 profitable is grand larceny.

MJBrutus on June 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Don’t you just love all the daily news bho/team come out with to put more, more, more regulations for our oil/gas/shale/coal/ to see to it jobs, jobs, and more jobs are NO where to be found here?

One would think, someone would do something? Could it be bho/team are voted out come Nov.? We plan to do our dead level best to see to it that happens. But we are just two voting at our home.
L

letget on June 25, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Note to Obama- we don’t need any more reasons to vote you out.

We have enough already.

Just stop!

profitsbeard on June 25, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Sooo, more frackin’ fracking regs from the frackin’ Dooms? This should make us even more determined to vote the frackin’ anti-fracking Dooms outta office, re-educate Americans on the frackin’ benefits of fracking, that fracking isn’t frackin’ damaging then get frackin’ fracking for–oil. Dissolve the frackin’ EPA, get the economy back rolling on the right frackin’ track and resistance to fracking will slowly frackin’ subside.

stukinIL4now on June 25, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Oh, great: More fracking rules are definitely happening by 2013

Oh, great: More firings of EPA bureaucrats are definitely happening in 2013.

Archivarix on June 25, 2012 at 7:49 PM

never heard of ndn…but here’s the second term vision from one of their affiliates:

Picture this: a new generation of post-partisan leaders will want to bundle what few federal resources are left (for workforce training, infrastructure, economic development, energy investment etc) and create the outcomes they want to create jobs their way. Interested regions will petition the federal government to get more flexible funding and fewer mandates, and the competitive value of the “race to the top” concept can be offered up as bonus funding for those that deliver on their promises — not a zero-sum competition pitting states and regions against each other.

tom friedman has thrills all up and down his legs…the smell of state run ‘capitalism’ is so exhilarating

and, no, i don’t want barry to ‘switch us’ over to nat gas either. We must let go of the carbon myth. okay? do nothing until we get nukes…lots of nukes…there’s your power plant.

and, btw, here’s tough read…vdh on where we are. not pretty. we know all this, but per usual he combines everything in such a frank, brutal way. (skip to the ‘patch of blue’ if you are too depressed to re-hash the known stuff)

http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/is-the-country-unraveling/?singlepage=true

r keller on June 25, 2012 at 7:50 PM

If liberals were honest, they’d admit that what they truly want is environmental colonization of the third world: Let us get our fuels from third world nations that have far fewer environmental safeguards. It’s a given that we will use oil, but let’s leave the pollution in the third world while we remain pristine as possible.

PopsRacer on June 25, 2012 at 7:50 PM

OBAMA 2012- THE CHOICE OF FRACKING IDIOTS

profitsbeard on June 25, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Don’t worry about it. NPR poll says that the President has nothing to do with jobs anyway.

ChrisL on June 25, 2012 at 8:02 PM

MJBrutus on June 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM

I wholeheartedly agree. Better to give researchers millions and let them figure out commercialization of the technology on their own. That model works extremely well for MIT and others, but it is in the public’s best interest to devote as much money as possible to this. One way to do that is to make investment in natural gas unappealing.

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Hopefully not long!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

May I be of assistance? :)

a capella on June 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

The left had been telling us fossil fuel will run out in our life times, but they purposefully did not include new discoveries and deposits that could and probably would become economically feasible to extract in the future. Those things are happening now, so they have to legislate executive order their lies into reality. Those fossil fuels are there, but you can’t get them. Just like Bill Whittle explained with Fast and Furious and Solyndra in his latest.

Transpo on June 25, 2012 at 8:08 PM

One way to do that is to make investment in natural gas unappealing.

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Turn off your heat and cooling and ride your bike everywhere big fella. Show us how its done.

arnold ziffel on June 25, 2012 at 8:09 PM

If we could run our vehicles on natural gas, it could kill two birds with one stone

As long as is isn’t the spotted owl.

davidk on June 25, 2012 at 8:22 PM

Obama’s “Cowboy” will be packing with the rest of the corrupt cabinet in a few months. Can we ever get this bad dream over with? One term and out the door. Cannot wait for his concession speech!

Amazingoly on June 25, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Who’s the POS w/ the cowboy get-up? I love how Obama’s cronies like to play dressup.

cajun carrot on June 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM

…he’s a horses a$$…! – so he thinks it’s part of a uniform!

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 7:11 PM

All hat and no cattle as they say in a state to my west.

Mini-14 on June 25, 2012 at 8:48 PM

…you’re going to do this krap on almost every thread…until when?

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I’ll keep passing along my relevant information through the days when Romney runs his administration in the same liberal fashion as 0bama has. Call it my ‘Told Ya So!’ moment.

I would eliminate it. So there.

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Who will you be voting for?

Who in the Hell is Larry Johnson??

BigWyo on June 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

According to PC’s for Dummies, all you need to do is click on the colored lettering to find out the relevant info. Give that a try next time.

DannoJyd on June 25, 2012 at 11:05 PM

If I am not mistaken, the rules are more about discharge of methane into the atmosphere, which the EPA is falsely claiming to be much more than it is already.

Kermit on June 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

I take it our stuttering crook is no longer relying on natural gas to make up for shutting down a large percentage of our coal production?

On a brighter note we’re starting to warn of blackouts, as a b!tchin’ heat wave is developing and starting to spread across the south. Have a nice day. :-)

MNHawk on June 26, 2012 at 7:01 AM

One way to do that is to make investment in natural gas unappealing.

ernesto on June 25, 2012 at 8:02 PM

As unappealing as modern leftism?

MNHawk on June 26, 2012 at 7:03 AM

Better to give researchers millions and let them figure out commercialization of the technology on their own… One way to do that is to make investment in natural gas unappealing.

If alternative energy research is admittedly a long-term prospect, what do we gain from creating an artificial shortage of short-term resources?

Driving gas up to $16 a gallon will get everybody’s attention but outrage doesn’t have the mystical property of accelerating research. Remember when AIDS was going to wipe out everyone on the planet who didn’t die of cancer first? Notice how we haven’t cured either one?

Fracking causes earthquakes, volcanoes and overflowing toilets. Only a rightie fascist wingnut would want to frack.

Bishop on June 25, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Why do I detect the hint of a Battlestar Galactica joke in there somewhere?

The Schaef on June 26, 2012 at 8:52 AM