First of two parts
For months, ideologically motivated activists have been running a fact-less fear campaign against oil and gas development and lobbying local officials to support a statewide ban on the use of hydraulic fracturing.
The most recent example, according to the activists, was a March 20 symbolic resolution in favor of a hydraulic fracturing moratorium from the Los Angeles Community College District’s Board of Trustees.
To get that resolution passed, I am betting the activists concealed many facts from the trustees, facts that show hydraulic fracturing is a proven technology that’s been safely used for more than six decades.
I am also betting the activists failed to mention that a week before the Board meeting, Gov. Brown flatly rejected talk of a ban on hydraulic fracturing. His comments were reported by Reuters, Public Radio and others. You can see an edited transcript and access a recording of the governor’s remarks here.
Here’s what Gov. Brown said about updated regulations, proposed by DOGGR, California’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, which would allow the continued use of hydraulic fracturing under tougher oversight and disclosure conditions:
“I support our Division of Oil and Gas. They are excellent people, and I look for them to navigate the issues as we go forward. The fossil fuel deposits in California are incredible. The potential is extraordinary. But between now and development lies a lot of questions that need to be answered. I feel confident that the people are in place in my administration to handle the issues as they come up. They’ll be decided based on science, based on common sense, and based on a deliberative process that listens to people, but also wants to take advantage of the great opportunities we have in this state.”
A reporter asked Gov. Brown about how he responds to people who “would like to see an outright ban on fracking in California.” Gov. Brown’s answer completely dismantled the arguments of the activists, who falsely claim that domestic oil and gas production must be immediately halted for governments to promote renewable energy and pursue policies to reduce greenhouse gases:
“Do you know how much oil is imported to keep our cars going? … [When people in California] can get around without using any gasoline, that’s the time for no more oil drilling. Maybe. Because there will be many other people still driving. We’re importing oil from many places. It means you’ve got to bring it in by ship or by truck or by pipeline – by something.
“Taking care of our own problems is a good thing. If we need to have everybody driving around, as we do … we’ve got to get some oil. “Now, do you want to get the oil from Venezuela [or from] 100 miles away? … We want to get the greenhouse gas emissions down, but we also want to keep our economy going. That’s the balance that’s required…
“We have 30 million vehicles in California. That’s a lot of oil. I think we have room to supply our need even as we reduce oil consumption. We should be reducing it much faster than we are, and hopefully we can get some national policies to do that. That still doesn’t mean that in the meantime there isn’t oil under the ground in California that can’t be made very useful.”
But Brown’s closing remarks probably were the most damaging to the activist cause:
“Whether it’s fracking, or whether it’s a low-carbon fuel standard, or anything else, we keep our eyes open and we’re not jumping on any ideological bandwagons.”
(To be continued)
Mr. Quast, California Director of Energy in Depth, may be contacted at dave@energyuindepth.org
