This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
"It was like science didn't matter," she said. "The industry was going to get what it wanted, and we were not supposed to stand in the way."Her experience wasn't isolated. "More than a quarter-century of efforts by some lawmakers and regulators to force the federal government to police the industry better have been thwarted, as EPA studies have been repeatedly narrowed in scope and important findings have been removed."
Pressure is applied to cut red tape to help energy companies reduce dependency on foreign imports. Natural gas drilling companies are exempted from at least parts of seven sweeping environmental laws, regulating clean air and water.
In 2004, EPA studied hydrofracking, discovering hazardous contamination of one or more acquifers. However, a sanitized report said the process "poses little or not threat to drinking water."
Afterwards, "EPA whisleblower (Weston Wilson) said the agency had been strongly influenced by industry and political pressure.""It was shameful," he said, explaining that "five of the seven members of the study's peer review panel were current or former employees of the oil and gas industry."
Yet the study became "the basis for this industry getting yet another exemption from federal law when it should have resulted in greater regulation...."
In 2010, the EPA began studying hydrofracking's environmental impact. However, responding to industry pressure, its scope is limited and final results won't be published until 2014.
Initial plans called for considering toxic fume dangers released during drilling, the impact of drilling waste on food and water, and risks of radioactive waste.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
