Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) continues to deliver on his
oath to his constituents, to the country and to the US
Consitution...
Rep. Henry Waxman: The Bush Administration has changed
scientific data or suppressed scientific information
to favor an oil and gas practice called “hydraulic
fracturing.” The leading provider of hydraulic
fracturing is the energy company Halliburton,
previously led by Vice President Cheney. According to
the company’s web site, “Halliburton pioneered
fracturing . . . and has consistently led in the
technology.”
Save the Environment, Show Up for Democracy in 2004:
Defeat Bush (again!)
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/example_oil_and_gas.htm
Research on Oil and Gas Practices
Without giving any scientific justification, the EPA changed data on the environmental impact of "hydraulic fracturing" -- an oil and gas practice pioneered by Halliburton.
The Bush Administration has changed scientific data or
suppressed scientific information to favor an oil and
gas practice called “hydraulic fracturing.” The
leading provider of hydraulic fracturing is the energy
company Halliburton, previously led by Vice President
Cheney. According to the company’s web site,
“Halliburton pioneered fracturing . . . and has
consistently led in the technology.”[1]
In carrying out hydraulic fracturing, companies
sometimes inject fracturing fluids containing benzene
and other carcinogenic and toxic chemicals into
geologic formations containing underground sources of
drinking water.[2] In the fall of 2002, EPA officials
briefed congressional staff on an August 2002 draft
agency study on this issue. The data in the study
indicated that hydraulic fracturing could lead to
benzene in underground sources of drinking water at
levels above federal drinking water standards.[3]
After congressional staff raised concerns about these
about these environmental impacts, EPA changed the
data. One week after discussing these results with
congressional staff, EPA officials produced revised
data indicating that benzene levels would not exceed
government standards.[4] EPA gave no scientific
justification for the change, explaining that it was
“based on feedback” from an industry source.[5]
The White House also deleted a discussion of
environmental concerns associated with hydraulic
fracturing, including the potential for water
contamination, from the final White House National
Energy Policy. This deletion occurred after such
discussion had been included in a draft produced by
the Department of Energy.[6]
[1] Halliburton, Fracturing (online at
http://www.halliburton.com/oil_gas/sd0922.jsp).
[2] EPA, DRAFT Evaluation of Impacts to Underground
Sources of Drinking Water by Hydraulic Fracturing of
Coalbed Methane Reservoirs, 5–14 (Aug. 2002) (EPA
816-D-01-006).
[3] Id.
[4] EPA, Calculations for Estimating Fracture Zone
Concentrations for Three Scenarios (Sept. 18, 2002),
cited in Letter from Rep. Henry A. Waxman to EPA
Secretary Christine Todd Whitman (Oct. 8, 2002)
(online at
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs/pdf_inves/pdf_enviro_epa_
hydraulic_oct_8_let.pdf).
[5] Letter from Rep. Henry A. Waxman to EPA Secretary
Christine Todd Whitman (Oct. 8, 2002) (online at
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs/pdf_inves/pdf_enviro_epa_
hydraulic_oct_8_let.pdf).
[6] Bush’s Energy Plan Bares Industry Clout, Los
Angeles Times (Aug. 26, 2001).