E. Manuel Goldstein

Wed, Nov 9, 2011 : 1:21 a.m.

This may be only anecdotal evidence, but here goes: I have a long-time friend who lives in upstate NY, close to the PA border, who sold his mineral rights about 15 years ago. He gets paid by a natural gas firm, to the tune of about $15,000 per year for his 20 acres. I don't know how long he receives these payments into the future. His water in his house is drawn from a well, and now smells so much of sulfur it could make one nauseous. He tells me he made a huge mistake by selling his mineral rights, because he can't replace the water source, and filters just don't do the job of making it palatable. Clothing washed in the water smells of sulfur too. Simply relying on the State DEQ or the EPA to regulate the fracking business isn't going to be enough, and once Michigan's water is contaminated, there won't be any way to fix it. Burning natural gas as a fuel still contributes to the greenhouse gas burden, and pollutes the air we all must breath. My vote would be towards the exploitation of renewable energy sources, and rewarding conservation and efficiency measures.

Nancy Shiffler

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 4:58 p.m.

Deep shale hydraulic fracturing with horizontal drilling is on a different scale from previous gas drilling in this state; it involves greater volumes of water and undisclosed toxic chemicals that are used and must be disposed of. The experiences of states like Pennsylvania, New York, Colorado, Texas, and Arkansas, where thousands of these wells have been drilled, include stories of toxic spills, well and surface water contamination, air pollution, and unexpected seismic activity. Before we find ourselves in the same situation as these states, we need to stop and take a closer look at what additional safeguards we need to have in place to protect our water and air resources. We can't afford to get this wrong. We are stewards of the greatest freshwater system in the world here in the Great Lakes state. Half our residents get their drinking water from ground water wells. Water-dependent industries like fishing , boating, and tourism pump billions of dollars and countless jobs into our economy. With these bills we have the opportunity to take a closer look at what additional safeguards need to be put in place and to open up what has been a rather secretive process to the public for a robust and through discussion. It's a lot cheaper to put the protections in place ahead of time than it is to clean up a mess later on.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 2:08 p.m.

Yeah, there's no problem with Fracking. <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2010/06/fracking-in-pennsylvania-201006" rel='nofollow'>http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2010/06/fracking-in-pennsylvania-201006</a> <a href="http://www.npr.org/2011/09/29/140872251/the-trouble-with-health-problems-near-gas-fracking" rel='nofollow'>http://www.npr.org/2011/09/29/140872251/the-trouble-with-health-problems-near-gas-fracking</a> And North Dakota just loves Fracking. <a href="http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/557175/Fracking-problems.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/557175/Fracking-problems.html</a> Well, maybe not. But, of course, the creation of jobs trumps environmental policy. That is, unless it is YOUR drinking water that is being poisoned. <a href="http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/31/the-fracking-divide-who-will-win-out-in-n-y/?scp=5&sq=fracking&st=cse" rel='nofollow'>http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/31/the-fracking-divide-who-will-win-out-in-n-y/?scp=5&amp;sq=fracking&amp;st=cse</a> But I do hear the burying one's head in the sand and shouting &quot;na na na na na na na na na na na na na&quot; makes the problems associated with fracking go away. Oh, and by the way, for those who see this as out only energy alternative: the cost of solar panels are dropping 7% per year, in large part due to China's subsidizing its solar panel industry. Solyndra and the rest American solar panel industry is struggling not due to poor management but due to unfair trade policies. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/opinion/krugman-here-comes-solar-energy.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss" rel='nofollow'>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/opinion/krugman-here-comes-solar-energy.html?partner=rssnyt&amp;emc=rss</a> But that ruins a great teaparty story line, doesn't it? Good Night and Good Luck

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:51 p.m.

motorcycleminer wrote: &quot;If this was being done by the UFW ( united fracking workers ) union, not only would the democrats praise it as new jobs and it would be underwritten by tax dollars and hailed as a way out of the slumping economy...keep up the fight Rick ..I just love 'sheeple' tapping away on their I-Pads bemoaning the energy that runs them...you can't fix stupid...&quot; What makes you think they aren't organized? Employees in the petroleum industry are represented by the United Steel Workers (the Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers International Union merged with the USW). The United Association of Plimbers and Pipefitters also represent a significant segment in the petroleum industry. Or did I miss something? Or, in the alternative, is motorcycleminer drawing conclusions based on no facts whatsoever? Gee, it couldn't be the latter, could it? But motorcycleminer is correct about one thing: You can't fix stupid. Good Night and Good Luck

motorcycleminer

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:05 p.m.

If this was being done by the UFW ( united fracking workers ) union, not only would the democrats praise it as new jobs and it would be underwritten by tax dollars and hailed as a way out of the slumping economy...keep up the fight Rick ..I just love &quot; sheeple &quot; tapping away on their I-Pads bemoaning the energy that runs them...you can't fix stupid....

ChelseaBob

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 11:35 a.m.

Once again the extremes are shaping the debate. I'm all for full disclosure on fracking chemicals, as I think everyone is. Why would we halt the production of clean energy and study it for several years? That sounds like a back door way to just kill an industry. And a presumption of guilt if chemicals are found in groundwater? Lets just gut the constitution. Natural gas is the short term answer and extreme environmentalists need to get the hell out of the way. Oil companies and drillers can't be trusted to always do the right thing, and the state needs to watch them closely. That about sums it up from those of us in the middle.

Richard

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 8:46 a.m.

Mr. Olson, there are some things in life that are more important than &quot;Jobs Jobs Jobs&quot; and that is life itself. What good is a job when the industry is lightly regulated and a threat to worker health. public health, and the environment? What's wrong with full disclosure? When a company isn't forced to disclose and the Republicans don't care, then likely there is something shady going on. Why is abortion wrong when its okay to potentially harm workers, people who drink water, and the environment. Wouldn't you say the right to life is for everyone? The tobacco companies did the same thing years ago by refuting the cancer link and for years they got away with it because the government didn't want to protect the people.

Stephen Landes

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 4:55 a.m.

Jeff Irwin -- politician in a vain search for relevance.

leaguebus

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 2:55 a.m.

New York and PA are also holding for further study. Oklahoma thinks fracking might be causing earthquakes. Fracking uses millions of gallons of water and a bunch of chemicals to break up the shale. Who pays for all the water used, the people of Michigan. The water that reaches the surface will need to be treated, the rest goes into the aquifer untreated. We in AA know all about an aquifer being polluted. We need more study for something as environmentally dangerous as fracking.

DonBee

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 2:31 a.m.

Mr Briegel - I am not against reasonable regulation. What I object to here is the moratorium on drilling and the driller being pronounced guilty before any investigation. I am all in favor of disclosing the formula, of proper waste treatment, of minimizing the drilling pad size, of keeping rigs miles from the lake shore and well away from rivers. I am in favor of drillers posting bonds and closing the loop holes. I am in favor state taxes on the energy extracted. This is similar to President Obama's website pre-election where he was in favor of Nuclear power once EVERY problem with nuclear power was solved (emphasis added). The people assumed he would favor building nuclear power plants - then he added to the problems by banning the use of the Yucca Mountain Repository that the industry had spent billions building. Rep Irwin is on the same boat, any excuse to avoid ever drilling in Michigan (and if elected to the US House, in the USA).

Joe_Citizen

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 2:27 a.m.

All this fracturing stiff is a hazard to every one and thing evolved. It's a wonder how the federal clean water act only one exception, and that's Halliburton INC. They are allowed to make the well water in our beloved state poisonous. How is that going to fix the energy crisis. Get this company out of here. If you want to see what I'm talking about, just look it up. They already destroyed Tenn, Virginia, and other states water supply. Now they want to come here and do the same. They must be kidding, unless they want to change the atmosphere. There is a rumor that Lizard people control the governments around the planet, and they want to terraform our Earth to a planet that is more like the one they came from. I did not believe it, but the more I see the more I want to believe it is Lizard people. Why else would someone want to fracture our Earth to let the trapped gasses seep and pollute out water and atmosphere. Unbelievable!

David Briegel

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:36 a.m.

Once Upon A Time conservatives stood for conservation and sanity. No longer. Conservatives want to go back to the good ole days of yesteryear when pollution was allowed and the air wasn't fit to breathe. Darn those EPA regulations that are making it difficult on those Oligarch job creators. What kind of silly people want to protect the environment? Oh, just the sane, responsible conservationist citizens. Maybe DDT and turning our rivers into sewers again will bring the promised prosperity.

Ron Granger

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:32 a.m.

Michigan water is a tremendous resource that must not be damaged or squandered to enrich &quot;job creators&quot;. A few jobs and profits from pumping toxic sludge into our groundwater, and draining our water resources, is not worth the potential damage.

InsideTheHall

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:32 a.m.

It is clear that Irwin is totally incompetent on the technology. While other neighboring states develop this proven safe technology Irwin wants Michigan to stick her head in the sand (no pun intended). If Irwin was not in a safe seat his keister would get bounce next November and then he's have to find a REAL job.

futuremi

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:12 a.m.

Jobs are an important issue of course, but not at the expense of the environment. It is insane to bypass clean air / clean water laws just to create jobs for short term gain and long term pain. That is what happens in some of the provinces in China, they are willing to look away from environmental regulations in order to have companies set up shop in their province...but massive environmental issues and health issues are the result. If energy companies were willing to disclose what is in their fracking chemical soup and voluntarily close the Clean Water Act exemption I would have more trust that they are operating in good faith.....as of right now they are operating solely to make the largest profit possible, even at the expense of the environment and people in the immediate vicinity of the wells. (I recommend renting the movie &quot;Gasland&quot; to get a bit educated on fracking before blindly saying &quot;it's awesome, it's clean energy, and it'll create jobs. While a bit one sided, it does raise some solid concerns and questions that need to be addressed)

Tesla

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:02 a.m.

Yeah Gramma? Ya know what? I'll be dead in fifty years and if this state doesn't do something fast it will be dead sooner than that. I am all for fracking and the boon it could bring to Michigan like is happening in North Dakota.

Gramma

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 12:48 a.m.

I strongly support Irwin's bill. Fifty years ago, you could safely swim in any lake in Michigan. The oil companies burned off the natural gas coming from their oil wells. If &quot;progress&quot; with its pollution, consumption and destruction of natural resources and the environment continues at the current rate, everyone may be looking for ways to keep warm in the next 50 years. There won't be trees to burn for firewood. There will be no clean water to swim in or even to drink. Many countries already have trouble supplying adequate water to their populations (who use a lot less per person than we do).

nicole

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 12:34 a.m.

And notice how the Ann Arbor News presents the Democrat view first as if it is the &quot;right one&quot;. Then provides the Republican view second and with less coverage.

DonBee

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 12:11 a.m.

The EPA wants to take away coal electrical generation plants. Jeff Irwin wants to take away natural gas Environmentalists want to stop the pipeline from Canada Birders want to stop wind mills If you don't have a fireplace and a woodlot, I hope you like freezing in the dark.