Fracking protests by Joseph Martin 06.11.14 - 02:13 pm Andrews – While the bill allowing fracking in North Carolina has been touted by supporters as a way to create jobs and boost the state’s economy, environmentalists and property rights advocates have concerns and objections. The Energy Modernization Act moved quickly through the General Assembly. Filed in the state Senate on May 15, it passed May 22. The House passed its version on May 29, and Gov. Pat McCrory signed the final bill into law on June 4. The bill opens up the state to natural gas exploration through the use of hydraulic fracturing, otherwise known as fraking, according to online reports. The process drills deep into the earth to the shale rock layers. High-pressure fluid – a mixture of water, sand and chemicals – is injected, and the process creates cracks in the rock, releasing the gas. Some of the chemicals used are known to be toxic and carcinogenic. McCrory’s visit to Cherokee County on Friday drew protests from about 20 fraking opponents, who lined up at the intersection of Main Street and U.S. 19/74. “What kind of energy are they for?” he asked, later adding that all kinds of energy, from natural gas to solar, have opponents. Western North Carolina likely won’t be impacted, McCrory said. “The testing for fracking will be in the sand hills,” he added, pointing out that places that accept natural gas from other areas while rejecting drilling at home are hypocritical, and environmental protections will be in place. “We’re going to do it the right way.” “More than anything else, we need jobs. It will create jobs, and it brings a much-needed energy source,” McCrory said. He added that rural areas are asking for natural gas because “it’s hard to recruit industry” without it. Not everyone agrees with the governor that fracking is a good idea. David Wood, chairman of the Cherokee County Board of Commissioners, said, “I think it’s a terrible idea.” An avid outdoors enthusiast and angler, Wood is known for his water and stream restoration and conservation work. He was harshly critical of the state bill. Environmentalists have concerns about both the volume of water fracking uses and potential to contaminate drinking water, while Wood said the amount of water used will run local lakes and streams dry. “They could frack, and 250 years later a stream will die,” he added. “There’s no possible way they can keep that [expletive] out of the water.” The bill also prohibits local governments from regulating natural gas drilling, he said. Because of compulsory pooling, property owners who don’t want drilling on their land could be involuntarily pooled into a group allowing it. “It’s shortsighted, and it’s greed,” Wood said. “It’s not even American. It’s foreign investors. It’s basically a foreign takeover of our sovereign nation. They’re basically trampling all over the citizens of North Carolina. The governor is stupid.” Callie Moore, director of the Hiwassee River Watershed Coalition has major concerns. “It’s impossible to frack without impacting water quality,” she said. “It’s a shame that all local control has been removed from this process.” State reaction State Rep. Roger West (R-Peachtree) voted for the bill. “That issue’s been around for several years. It came to fruition this year, and I voted for it,” he said, adding that there are safeguards in place, such as the requirement that oil and gas developers be responsible for contamination of water sources within a half-mile radius of their operations. The prohibition on town authority is a safeguard, as the state has geologists and a database on gas extractors. “The towns don’t have that expertise,” West said. Even landowners who don’t agree to allow drilling will get compensated. “You get paid for your gas. If you didn’t, they’d be stealing your gas,” he said. Critics also object to the misdemeanor classification of divulging the chemical composition of the fracking fluid. West said the chemicals used will be posted on site. “There’s no secret to what they’re using,” he said, but the formula used by companies is a trade secret. He compared it to Coca-Cola. “The ingredients are listed, but the recipe is a secret.” State Sen. Jim Davis (R-Franklin), a co-sponsor of the bill, listed several reasons for supporting it. “We’re looking at lowering our carbon footprint,” he said. He also pointed to energy independence and boosting the state’s economy. “For all those reasons, I support it.” Davis echoed much of West’s responses, even citing his Coca-Cola example. “If they’re disclosing proprietary information of a company, that’s a problem,” he said, then added that the bill preserves property rights. “It actually preserves the right of surface property owners to share in the revenue.” Davis said the economic impact to western North Carolina has yet to be determined. “Regionally, it’s more applicable to the Piedmont. There could be significant impact to North Carolina.” Jane Hipps (D-Waynesville), who is challenging Davis for his Senate seat, said of Davis, “Once again, he won’t listen to the people of our region. He was all about local control, but now the state is the one to make the decisions on fracking.” Hipps disputed suggestions that it will help the state economically, as the drilling industry will bring their own employees and local jobs will be low-paying ones. “I don’t see a whole lot of jobs that would be for our people,” she said. Hipps added that the bill could hurt tourism in western North Carolina. “It’s a real threat to the area in so many ways,” she said. “I see it as a threat to our region and our economy.” Local reaction Wood, a Republican, agreed with Hipps. “We’re screwed,” he said. “I hate to see the day when they go to fracking. I might just turn Democrat. They’ve lost their minds.” The issue received attention at the June 2 meeting of county commissioners, when two residents spoke on the issue. “This infringes upon our way of life,” Renee Lamance of Murphy said. “The fact that the industry is now unwilling to disclose the chemicals used concerns me. There’s so many questions that we have. How do you feel about this? How will you prepare for it?” “You can’t just tell us that we can’t do anything,” Denise DerGarabedian of Violet said. “I want you talk to your friends. I want you talk to your neighbors. I want you want your talk to your parishioners. This is not going to go away, and we’re not going away.” Commission candidates also have weighed in. Ed Figueroa of Murphy, who’s seeking the District 4 seat, attended protests during the governor’s visit Friday. “I’m big on property rights myself,” he said, and also was critical of the bill’s lack of transparency. “I’m very disappointed in the governor.” Figueroa, who helped lead local efforts to fight an asphalt plant coming to the county more than a decade ago, said locals passing restrictive laws can make a difference. “I believe we can follow the examples of others state and counties around the country, and take action to stop fracking,” he said. “We as a county can pass such an ordinance against any dirty industry. We do have options.” Dan Eichenbaum of Murphy, who is running against Figueroa for the District 4 seat and also spoke out against the asphalt plant years ago, said his primary concern is the environmental impact on health caused by fracking chemicals. “These chemicals must be properly, and safely, contained and treated,” Eichenbaum said. “Newer ‘greener’ fracking technologies are being developed and implemented to address some of these concerns.” Eichenbaum said he would have no authority over the issue if elected, and anyone who has concerns should contact Davis or West. He added, “Fracking has had a positive effect on the local economy and produces quality, high-paying jobs in areas of the country like North Dakota, where fracking is a major industry.”
Posted on: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 10:19:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015