http://www.audubon.org/magazine/march-april-2015/big-oils-best-kept-secret
Big Oil's Best-Kept Secret
To keep itself off the Toxics Release Inventory, the fossil fuel
industry might have a new trick up its sleeve—putting state attorneys
general on the payroll.
By now most of us have a basic grasp of the way fracking works: Pumps
shoot a high-pressure cocktail of water, silt, and chemicals hundreds of
feet underground, shattering ancient rock and releasing pockets of
natural gas, a whole lot of money, and a brew of toxic byproducts. What
we don’t know is exactly how much of which toxins are collecting in the
soil, seeping into groundwater, or wafting into nearby communities.
Fossil fuel companies have kept it that way, with help from governors,
congressmen, senators, and, increasingly, state attorneys general.
The energy industry is exempt from portions of many of our major
environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water
Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. And yet, according
to a coalition of environmental groups suing the EPA, the industry emits
an estimated 127,000 tons of air pollutants—including such proven
carcinogens as benzene and ethylbenzene—from more than 25,000 wells
every year. You won’t read that number in any EPA report, though: The
agency doesn’t give it out, says Adam Kron, a lawyer for the
Environmental Integrity Project.
But now, if a lawsuit filed in January by Kron’s organization and a host
of other environmental groups is successful, that opacity could finally
come to an end. The suit aims to force the EPA to bring frackers and
drillers under the control of what’s known as the Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI), a public database that tracks hazardous waste on behalf
of communities near industrial sites. It’s as much a public health issue
as it is an environmental one, explains Kron, who says that communities
afflicted by burning skin and seared lungs “would finally have
information to show a doctor.”
The tale of the TRI, from its passage to the latest court case, is an
object lesson in government complicity. The industry has been able to
stay off the TRI since its inception in the late 1980s by resorting to
all kinds of tricks. For the past two decades, for example, its lawyers
have argued that extraction sites do not fall under the legal definition
of “facility.” But all those evasions were successful largely because of
a loophole written into the inventory nearly 30 years ago. The Community
Right-to-Know Act, the very law that created the Toxics Release
Inventory, includes a provision that allows any company to classify its
waste products as “trade secrets.” An oil company can claim that
disclosing its pollutants would also reveal the technologies and
processes that provide its competitive edge. That logic may seem
elusive, but it’s worked for three decades. (A spokeswoman for the EPA
declined to comment on the lawsuit.)
But cash-flush companies, tenacious lobbyists, bootlicking
lawmakers—these are just the usual culprits. Nowadays attorneys general
themselves are looking to influence political outcomes more and more,
including joining the fight over the TRI. That can be a good thing. In
2005, for instance, a coalition of 12 AGs objected to the EPA’s plan to
water down the database’s stringent reporting requirements.
More recently, however, it’s become clear that some AGs are getting
pretty cozy with Big Oil. A blockbuster New York Times investigation in
December presented a mountain of evidence that lobbies had pocketed at
least 12 attorneys general across the United States. One revelation: In
2012 oil refiners and utility companies joined Oklahoma Attorney General
Scott Pruitt in a lawsuit against the EPA to stall the retrofitting of
coal-fired power plants. Another doozy: In a letter—printed on official
stationery—to the President, Pruitt accused federal regulators of
grossly overestimating air pollution from new natural gas wells in his
state. The letter, it turned out, had been ghostwritten by lobbyists for
Devon Energy.
“They grab [officials] by the hors d’oeuvre table, order them another
drink, and explain why the energy sector is good for America,” says
Robert W. Painter, a fellow at Harvard’s Safra Center for Ethics,
describing how Pruitt and others might become shills for oil and gas.
Now Painter is pushing for ethics reforms to prevent prosecutors from
canoodling with company reps out to buy them. “It’s a lot like bribery,”
says Painter, “and [my proposal] is a prophylactic for it.”
There’s one more worry. Attorneys general have the power to shape—or
outright gut—state environmental laws, not just federal ones. For
example, just last year Texas Governor Greg Abbott, then the attorney
general (and whose two attorney general campaigns raked in $2.5 million
in contributions from energy companies), ended public access to the
hazardous chemical inventory. The scale of the alleged misconduct has
raised a question long thought settled: What should an AG’s job
description be? Painter has one answer. “Their primary function is to
follow the law,” he says, “not debate what it ought to be.”
_______________________________________________
Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list
Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org
http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel