Fracking The Debate Continues

Scientific American

Fracking Would Emit Large Quantities of Greenhouse Gases

"Fugitive methane" released during shale gas drilling could accelerate climate change

By Mark Fischetti

Add methane emissions to the growing list of environmental risks posed by fracking.

Opposition to the hydraulic fracturing of deep shales to release natural gas rose sharply last year over worries that the large volumes of chemical-laden water used in the operations could contaminate drinking water. Then, in early January, earthquakes in Ohio were blamed on the disposal of that water in deep underground structures. Yesterday, two Cornell University professors said at a press conference that fracking releases large amounts of natural gas, which consists mostly of methane, directly into the atmosphere—much more than previously thought.

Robert Howarth, an ecologist and evolutionary biologist, and Anthony Ingraffea, a civil and environmental engineer, reported that fracked wells leak 40 to 60 percent more methane than conventional natural gas wells. When water with its chemical load is forced down a well to break the shale, it flows back up and is stored in large ponds or tanks. But volumes of methane also flow back up the well at the same time and are released into the atmosphere before they can be captured for use. This giant belch of "fugitive methane" can be seen in infrared videos taken at well sites.

Molecule for molecule, methane traps 20 to 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than does carbon dioxide. The effect dissipates faster, however: airborne methane remains in the atmosphere for about 12 years before being scrubbed out by ongoing chemical reactions, whereas CO2 lasts 30 to 95 years. Nevertheless, recent data from the two Cornell scientists and others indicate that within the next 20 years, methane will contribute 44 percent of the greenhouse gas load produced by the U.S. Of that portion, 17 percent will come from all natural gas operations.

Currently, pipeline leaks are the main culprit, but fracking is a quickly growing contributor. Ingraffea pointed out that although 25,000 high-volume shale-gas wells are already operating in the U.S., hundreds of thousands are scheduled to go into operation within 20 years, and millions will be operating worldwide, significantly expanding emissions and keeping atmospheric methane levels high despite the 12-year dissipation time.

Howarth said he is particularly concerned about fracking emissions because recent data indicates that the planet is entering a period of rapid climate change. He noted that the average global temperature compared with the early 1900s is now expected to increase by 1.5 degrees Celsius within the next 15 to 35 years, which he called "a tipping point" toward aggressive climate change. More and more fracking would speed the world to that transition or undermine efforts to reduce emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. The notion, Ingraffea said, that shale gas is a desirable "bridge fuel" from oil to widespread renewable energy supplies several decades from now "makes no sense" in terms of climate change.

Howarth and Ingraffea spoke from Cornell, where they also released a paper (pdf) that is about to be published by the journal Climatic Change, which details their analysis. It follows up on a paper they published in April 2011 that comprehensively analyzed emissions from fracking. The gas industry disputes that paper. So does Cornell geologist Lawrence Cathles, in a commentary in Climatic Change. He estimates that fugitive emissions are only 10 percent of what Howarth and Ingraffea maintain, and that shale gas would indeed be a good replacement for home heating oil and for coal used in power plants

Capturing the big belch of gas could prevent the problem. Ingraffea said capture is difficult because the gas is emitted along with the flow-back water, but a procedure known as a "green completion," in which special equipment traps the gas, has been shown to work. Regulators do not require that step, however, and the market price of methane is less than the cost of capturing it in that way, so drillers have no incentive to do so for economic reasons.

Scientific American 20th January 2012

Sinn Féin Mountmellick-Serving The Community

Policing Board Concern

‘No confidence’ in leadership of PSNI unit reviewing unsolved Troubles murders

A report published yesterday found that some military cases relating to state involvement were reviewed with less rigor than others.

THE NORTHERN IRELAND Policing Board has said that it has ‘no confidence’ in the leadership of a PSNI unit responsible for reviewing cases of those beavered by ‘The Troubles’ and related unsolved murders.

An inspection report published yesterday outlined a number of issues relating to the accountability and transparency of the Historical Enquiries Team (HET).

It also highlighted inconsistencies in the approach to case handling and found that some military cases, relating to state involvement in violent deaths, were reviewed with less rigor than others.

Yesterday the policing board said it was “seriously concerned” that there were large numbers of areas where the HET do not conform to current policing standards or practice and,  in some military cases noted, it was in breach of human rights requirements.

Today the board issued a statement saying that it had “no confidence in the leadership” of the HET and said that the Chief Constable has been asked to “review and action the management arrangements of the unit” with immediate effect.

It also said that military case reviews by the unit will now be suspended and a dedicated working group has been established to take forward and oversee the 20 recommendations in the inspection report.

“This group, comprising political and independent membership, will also review PSNI failures to respond promptly to issues raised in relation to the work of the HET,” it said.

The group will meet next week to begin this work and will report on progress in the autumn

TheJournal.IE

Sinn Féin Mountmellick-Serving The Community

Labour Party Votes Against It's Own Policy

Léargas by Gerry Adams

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Equality proofing is Labour Party policy – yet they vote against it!

This week Sinn Féin introduced into the Dáil an Equality Proofing Bill. The purpose of the Bill was to amend existing legislation and to provide equality proofing of government policy and budget and public bodies through impact assessments. If passed into law the Bill would have ensured that both government and public bodies  in exercising their functions would so in a way that would reduce the inequalities of outcome which result from socio-economic disadvantage.

As it was the Labour party voted with Fine Gael against the Bill. Government Minister and Labour TD Kathleen Lynch spoke against equality and ultimately against Labour party policy which supports equality proofing.

Essentially the Minister said that we cannot afford equality! From a Fine Gael Minister this would have been understandable – Fine Gael doesn’t believe in equality.

But Labour’s stated policy is for the equality proofing. By opposing this equality proofing Bill Labour TDs are voting against their party’s own policy position!

What is the value of Labour in government if its only role is to bolster the conservative economic and social politics of Fine Gael?

Labour’s founding father James Connolly is accepted as the principal author of that part of the Proclamation which guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens. It contains a commitment to cherish all the children of the nation equally.

Sadly, equality does not exist in this society. It is a republic in name only and the policies of this government and of successive governments are contributing directly to a growing inequality – particularly between the rich and the poor.

I’m an Irish republican. I believe in a republican system of governance. A real republic in which the people are sovereign and equal, and have all–encompassing rights, including economic rights, the right to a home; to a job; to access to education; to a health service from the cradle to the grave; the right to a safe and clean environment; and to civil and religious liberties.

This is what republicanism is about. It is what genuine democracy is about. It’s about embedding equality into the daily life and experience of citizens.

The imposition of equality duties, and the equality proofing of government policies and budgets, and of public bodies through impact assessments, are a means of achieving this and of dictating outcomes. Without this equality will remain little more than a pipe dream. 

It is a fact that inequality is all around us in this part of the island. It exists also in the north but there it has the added dimension of generational sectarian and political discrimination.

Interestingly the other parties in the Dáil reference the continued existence of inequalities in the north as a pretext for attacking Sinn Féin. There is no logic to this position. Or truth. Or rational. They quote poverty levels in west Belfast for example to justify their own position.

They refuse to acknowledge that the citizens of west Belfast in common with other communities in the north are tackling these issues on a daily basis and succeeding against the odds. 

And because they took a stand – and they would be waiting a long time for Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael or Labour to help them – because these citizens took a stand generational sectarianism and political discrimination is being tackled.

There are now equality duties and the equality proofing of government policies and budgets, and of public bodies. If this is good enough for the north why can’t citizens here have these rights?

Equality is cited 21 times in the Good Friday Agreement, including in the Pledge of Office for Ministers. It has a complete section given over to it and is included in legislation designed to ensure equality in employment. We are living in post Good Friday Agreement Ireland. That is obvious in the north.

So it is catch-up time in this state and legislating for equality here must be a key part of this. This should include the Charter of Rights which the Irish government signed up to 15 years ago. Apart from being ethically wrong – no person or community should be treated as second class or as non-citizens.

The refusal to recognise the Traveller community as an ethnic group is unacceptable.

Inequality is also expensive and uneconomic for society. A healthy, more equal, prosperous society is in everyone’s interest. 

Sinn Féin’s Equality Bill is about achieving this. And the need for this approach is all the more obvious if we consider the record of the current Government. Budget 2012 was found by the ESRI to have had a disproportionate impact on the least well off in society. Budget 2013 repeated this.

Everyday sees the removal of citizen’s rights and the reinforcement of privilege for the elites in society. Sinn Féin’s Equality Bill would require an equality impact assessment to prevent the implementation of such blatantly unfair policies.  

That is why the government voted against this Bill.

Sinn Féin is for a new Republic – an all island Republic – a real republic which will deliver the highest standards of services and protections to all citizens equally, guaranteeing parity of esteem and equality of treatment, opportunity and outcome.

This also means equality for the Irish language and for rural Ireland.

While Labour abandoned Connolly and sided with Fine Gael and the elites in voting down the Sinn Féin Equality Bill the Equality Budgeting campaign which represents over 30 civil society organisations welcomed the Bill. While this round was lost the campaign to achieve equality will continue.

Sinn Féin Mountmellick-Serving The Community

Austerity Fine Gael Style?

Global Taxation Committee must be free to invite multi-national corporations – Doherty

July 3rd, 2013 - Pearse Doherty TD

Sinn Féin finance spokesperson, Pearse Doherty TD’s motion before the Oireachtas Finance and Public Expenditure Committee which sought to allow the Sub-Committee on Global Taxation to invite multi-national corporations to give evidence at future meetings was voted down this afternoon.


Deputy Doherty said he was amazed that the committee voted against his motion to invite multi-national corporations to give evidence, at a committee that is discussing corporation tax for multi-national companies.
He said:
“The reason the sub-committee is discussing this issue is because of a motion I put to the committee seven months ago.


“The Sub-Committee on Global Taxation will hear from the OECD, the Department of Finance, the Revenue Commissioner and the Minister of Finance along with 13 other individuals.
“However, despite the fact that the sub-committee is charged with discussing corporation tax for multi-national corporations it is clear that the majority of the committee, are opposed to inviting multi-national corporations give evidence.
“Given the fact that multi-national corporations have appeared at committees in Britain and the United States to give evidence about their tax affairs in Ireland, it is ridiculous that politicians here in Ireland would vote down a proposal for them to do the same here.
“If the committee is to do its job properly it is important that it is free to invite the relevant people and companies to provide all the relevant information.”

Pearse Doherty’s original motion:
I propose that the following motion be discussed in public session at the next meeting:
That the Sub-Committee on Global Taxation may invite, if it sees it as appropriate, and after hearing from the OECD, the Department of Finance, the Revenue Commissioner and the Minister of Finance, and the other named individuals discussed at the Sub-Committee on Global Taxation meeting of 26 June, other witnesses before the committee.

Fine Gael amendment to Pearse Doherty’s proposal:
To delete all words after “That the Sub-Committee on Global Taxation ” and substitute the following:

"shall report to the Joint Committee following its consideration of evidence from the OECD; the Department of Finance; the Revenue Commissioners; the Minister for Finance, and other relevant taxation and academic experts on the global corporate/multinational taxation architecture and Ireland's relationship with that tax architecture. Such report to recommend, if it sees it as appropriate, as to further enquiries and proposed witnesses."

Sinn Féin Mountmellick-Serving The Community