Went to the Supervisors meeting today with a representative of DOGGR, the California Dept. of Gas and Geothermal Resources. Had to pump water this morning, so i didnt get to hear his entire presentation, but even arriving late there was a lot to think about. The takeaway messages were pointed: one, state regulators and scientists do not have much reliable data to make recommendations. Almost all of the data they are using is from industry sources. Two, a number of oil companies, particularly the smaller companies, are not doing a capable job of doing the reporting that SB4 has mandated. Given that allowing fracking and other high intensity methods of extraction poses risks to ground water, the clear question to answer is: Why would we, the citizens and stewards of SBC, risk our precious and scarce water resources when there is so little data to support the idea that these technologies are benign? There is clear evidence that they are not always benign. If some oil companies are inept at the reporting that is mandated, why would anyone believe that they would be more competent at employing these risky technologies while preserving the integrity of our ground water? If a ban is employed now and the oil companies subsequently build our trust, we can always un-ban the practices when we are confident they are safe. If we allow the unproven practices, and find we are wrong, how long might it take to fix a polluted ground water resource? And how much might it cost our large and hugely important agricultural, tourist and ranching industries? We dont know. This is not a wise bet. Vote Yes on Measure J!
Posted on: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 04:21:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015