View Article
05
“I really don’t see it as an issue,” said Senator Buck Newton. “If it went from County A to County B, I’m not sure why County B would have a major objection to that.”
 
“It” is waste brines and toxins from fracking, which – John Murawski reports in the N&O – could end up being injected into deep wells in coastal North Carolina.
 
Believe me, Buck: “County B” will object. County B always objects when someone proposes dumping waste there from County A.
 
Ask Governor McCrory. Voters down east dumped him in 2008 when the Perdue campaign ran an ad that said he supported dumping New York City’s garbage in Eastern North Carolina.
 
Ask Governor Hunt. He caught hell in Halifax County when he pushed for a landfill to store PCB-contaminated soil.
 
Ask Governor Martin. He went radioactive in Northampton County when he proposed dumping low-level nuclear waste there.
 
Or just ask your Republican colleagues in the legislature. Like Rep. Rick Catlin, a Republican from Wilmington who is a hydrogeologist and environmental engineer. He said: “It’s going to be very controversial…You’re basically contaminating an aquifer forever. Please don’t inject any down here.”
 
Sounds like it’s an issue.
 
Tyler Clark, a former state geologist, warned: “Once you put it in the ground, it’s not going to stay there, it’s going to go somewhere. It would be hard to predict where it could travel.”
 
Of course, that may explain why the legislature threw the state geologist off the fracking commission.
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (3) RSS comment feed |

Comments

Carbine
# Carbine
Tuesday, March 05, 2013 9:32 AM
Now why am I skeptical of Gary's description of Senator Newton's stance on this issue?
dap916
# dap916
Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:53 AM
Let's delve into this, okay? Here's a quote from your link here:

"Deep injection into wells is the industry’s preferred method of getting rid of fracking waste and is approved by the federal Environmental Protection Agency".

Now, I'm like you and everyone else on this issue. I have concerns. I worry about fracking damaging the water supply. That's the big issue. And, that's where the left is making their stance on it. But, if even the Environmental Protection Agency (the EPA) says it's "approved" to have deep injection into these wells, what is it, exactly, the libs/progressives/dems/liberals are complaining about?

I'm not wanting any company or any private industry to do anything that would affect our water supply. Hey, even republicans are against that sort of thing...believe it or not. But, hey, if the EPA is all okay and on board with fracking so long as it is done within their boundries, what's the big issue...except, of course, something that can be presented on a political nature.

Be careful, Gary, with what you post. Sometimes it comes back to bite you in the butt.
LuckyStrykur
# LuckyStrykur
Wednesday, March 06, 2013 3:33 PM
The EPA is not "all okay and on board" with fracking, they have the Halliburton loophole to contend with which excludes the fracking fluid from being regulated by EPA. It is more honest to say that Dick Cheney is "all okay and on board" than EPA. They are along for the ride, and for them it has been a bumpy one.

As well as an army of boosters promoting the gas bubble, some investors have just used the fracking rush to justify some interesting financial arangements. Take a look at the most recent shoe to drop on the industry's chief booster, courtesy of the SEC:

http://investorplace.com/2013/03/sec-investigating-chesapeake-aubrey-mcclendon/

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.
Blog by Snyder Interactive : Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement