Pavillion collaboration resumes despite fractures The Pavillion Working Group met this week for the first time since November 2011, delayed by the controversy that erupted over the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s draft report in December suggesting a link between groundwater pollution in the rural Pavillion area and hydraulic fracturing — or “fracking.” The controversy has proven more […]
Locker and his neighbors deserve a conclusive determination of the source of pollution, because their property values have fallen and any new long-term water supply system is going to come with significant costs. If EnCana or its predecessors are responsible for any portion of the polluted drinking water supply, it ought to be held liable to pay its fair share.
All the fuss about fracking centers on two things; the proliferation of oil and gas drilling in and around our drinking water aquifers, and the ability to figure out whether those activities taint the water. People who discover potentially toxic chemicals in their water want to know if they’re coming from oil and gas activities.
The notion that the best thing for our human health, environment and wildlife is more mining and drilling and less (or loosened) regulation somehow continues to gain traction in today’s anti-federal government environment. It was with a straight face that Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming) told a group of reporters in August that companies must be allowed to extract minerals at full-scale so that they are profitable, and in return that profitability allows them to use the best new technologies to minimize environmental impacts.