EPA says no evidence that fracking has 'widespread' impact on drinking water

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. Donald Rumsfeld said the same thing about WMD in Iraq

Last edited Fri Jun 5, 2015, 12:49 PM - Edit history (3)

It’s clever, but not true.

If you’re looking for something, and not finding evidence it exists, that is evidence (although not proof) of its absence.


In Rumsfeld’s case, UN weapons inspectors had looked for WMD and not found evidence. He didn’t like that, so, “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” (Let’s go to war!)

In this case, the EPA looked for evidence of “widespread” contamination of drinking water. They didn’t find it.

I don’t care for fracking, however, I tell people “fracking is a side issue.” Not because I don’t think that there is widespread contamination of drinking water. My reason is much simpler. Fracking allows us to produce and burn “unconventional” oil and gas. Which (according to Hansen et al) we cannot afford to do.

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_13/

[font face=Serif][font size=3]…

The second figure shows that if coal emissions were thus phased out between 2010 and 2030, and if emissions from unconventional fossil fuels such as tar shale were minimized, atmospheric CO₂ would peak at 400-425 ppm and then slowly decline. The peak CO₂ amount would depend upon whether the smaller oil and gas reserve estimates of IPCC or the optimistic estimates of EIA are more accurate. The authors note that even if the large EIA reserve estimates are valid, peak CO₂ could be kept close to 400 ppm if the most difficult to extract oil and gas is left in the ground via a rising price on carbon emissions that discourages remote exploration and environmental regulations that place some areas off-limits.



…

The authors conclude that "humanity today, collectively, must face the uncomfortable fact that industrial civilization itself has become the principal driver of global climate." Specifically, they say that humanity "must begin now to move toward the era beyond fossil fuels", and "the most difficult task, phase-out over the next 20-25 years of coal use that does not capture CO₂, is Herculean, yet feasible when compared with the efforts that went into World War II. The stakes, for all life on the planet, surpass those of any previous crisis. The greatest danger is continued ignorance and denial, which could make tragic consequences unavoidable."

Reference

Hansen, J., Mki. Sato, P. Kharecha, D. Beerling, R. Berner, V. Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, M. Raymo, D.L. Royer, and J.C. Zachos, 2008: Target atmospheric CO₂: Where should humanity aim? Open Atmos. Sci. J., 2, 217-231, doi:10.2174/1874282300802010217.[/font][/font]