Gov. Jerry Brown Clashes With Environmentalists: No Evidence Fracking Has Harmed California

FILE -- In this March 8 2014 file photo, California Gov. Jerry Brown speaks as protesters opposing fracking hold up signs during the general session at the California Democrats State Convention, in Los Angeles. Brow... FILE -- In this March 8 2014 file photo, California Gov. Jerry Brown speaks as protesters opposing fracking hold up signs during the general session at the California Democrats State Convention, in Los Angeles. Brown has angered environmental activists for his refusal to ban the practice of hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, for oil. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — In the 1970s, the environmental movement had no bigger political hero than California Gov. Jerry Brown. He cracked down on polluters, ended tax breaks for oil companies and promoted solar energy.

Forty years later, in his second go-around as governor, conservationists are among his harshest critics.

Climate change is one of Brown’s key issues, and he said in his inaugural address last month that his goal is to have California get half its energy from renewable sources within 15 years.

But because he has refused to ban hydraulic fracturing for oil, protesters, or “fracktivists,” have dogged Brown for more than a year, even interrupting his speech at the Democratic Party convention last spring.

“Climate leaders don’t frack,” said Kassie Siegal of the Center for Biological Diversity, a group that praises Brown’s programs to boost renewable energy. “The oil and gas boom threatens to undercut all the other progress that our state may make on climate.”

Fracking opponents have planned their largest protest so far, a rally Saturday in Brown’s hometown of Oakland that they hope will attract thousands. More than 100 environmental and community groups have signed on, and protesters are being bused in from around the state.

These days, Brown rarely engages with his critics. He barely campaigned for re-election last year and holds few public events.

The exception is appearances promoting the use of solar energy or other environmental initiatives. Still, Brown has noted that Californians love their freeways and gas-guzzling vehicles.

“As we speak, protesters and non-protesters are burning up gasoline that is being shipped from Iraq, from Russia, from Venezuela and all sorts of other places, and coming in on trains, so whatever we don’t here we are going to get from someone else until we get that moratorium on driving — which I haven’t heard proposed yet,” Brown said in response to a reporter’s question Friday.

California is the No. 3 oil producer in the nation and has added an average of 300 wells each month for the past decade, about half of them using hydraulic fracturing, which involves forcing fluid, sand and chemicals underground to break rock formations and extract oil and gas. A fifth of the state’s oil production comes through fracking.

Through a spokesman, Brown declined to comment on the protest, referring questions to the California Department of Conservation. In a prepared statement, chief deputy director Jason Marshall avoided using the term fracking, instead calling it “well stimulation.”

“We have no direct evidence that any harm has been caused by the practice in California,” he said. “We believe the regulations we’ve created, atop existing well construction standards, will protect the environment.”

California regulators have also authorized oil companies to inject production fluids and waste into federally protected aquifers more than 2,500 times, risking contamination of underground water supplies, an Associated Press review found.

State officials are conducting a series of fracking reviews as California sets up its first comprehensive regulatory framework, after Brown signed a bill imposing new rules.

Oil producers say they will be the toughest regulations in the nation; environmentalists say they were watered down after legislators caved in to oil companies.

Brown is also seeking to ramp up targets set in the 2006 global warming law signed by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Last year he persuaded lawmakers to devote revenue from fees charged to polluters to help fund the proposed $68 billion bullet train, which Brown touts as an environmentally friendly approach to transportation.

Environmentalists want Brown to follow the lead of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a fellow Democrat who bannedfracking last year. But reports by the California Council on Science and Technology contend the kind of frackingdone in California is less risky, with little horizontal drilling to expose large areas underground to potential contamination.

“I don’t agree with the notion that Jerry Brown is in the pocket of big oil. Some people think that, I don’t,” said Ross Bates, who headed a successful campaign last November to ban fracking in San Benito County. “When you try to take a middle road, people on either side have a problem with it.”

Still, environmentalists were hoping for a more aggressive approach from Brown when he returned to office in 2010. Brown’s ballot measure committee last year accepted more than $600,000 from oil companies and energy interests that also gave nearly $200,000 to his re-election campaign.

“In general we expected more of him because we as a state expect more, period,” said Marta Stoepker, a spokeswoman for the Sierra Club in California, one of the groups taking part in Saturday’s protest.

___

Associated Press writer Ellen Knickmeyer in San Francisco contributed to this report.

___

Online: Fracking opponents’ website: www.BigOilBrown.com .

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. I have no idea if fracking has caused any harm in California, but I think it’s pretty safe to say that it has caused harm in other states. Can’t we evaluate it’s harmfulness by examining other places with longer histories of fracking, rather than waiting to see if fracking is somehow magically environmentally neutral here in CA? Once it’s discovered to be damaging, I can’t imagine it will be easy to reverse that damage. And fracking is causing earthquakes in areas that have never had earthquakes before, can we all agree it’s a bad idea to mess with the San Andreas fault, or any other faults? Jerry, Jerry, Jerry… bad idea.

  2. Avatar for chammy chammy says:

    Nobody’s perfect and neither is he and for someone who is such an environmentalist, it is difficult to understand

  3. “I don’t agree with the notion that Jerry Brown is in the pocket of big oil. Some people think that, I don’t,” said Ross Bates, who headed a successful campaign last November to ban fracking in San Benito County. “When you try to take a middle road, people on either side have a problem with it.”

    I think that, like this guy quoted in the article said, people who try to stake out positions in the middle get attacked by both sides. So, to some, he is still the ultra-leftist “Gov. Moonbeam,” and to others he’s a greedy tool of Big Oil. Maybe the truth is that he’s somewhat in the middle and trying to chart a path between responsible exploration and responsible stewardship of the environment.

    Just like with President Obama, some environmentalists will not be satisfied with his record: even though Obama is championing stronger emissions standards on power plants, unilaterally reached a deal with the automakers to boost fuel efficiency, reached a climate deal with China and a climate understanding with India.

    I am by no means an expert on fracking, but it could be that the restrictions/regulations in place in California are more stringent and help to avoid some of the problems seen in Pennsylvania, for example.:

  4. The tale of Starrh v. Aera in itself should cause the governor to reverse his assertion. However, there is a much wider issue of production water, especially in Kern County where about 90% of all the state’s fracking permits have been issued. We’re talking about 10,000 18-hole golf courses worth of water. Brown is a lawyer, so I think this was actually a great time to throw the frackers a bone. Because the break-even price in some of these fields is $80 a barrel, many oil companies are idling capacity.

  5. This guy wants to send most of the water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin river delta, which feeds San Francisco bay (and a huge bulk of California’s agriculture - wine, walnuts, etc.) south to thirsty desert areas, LA, etc.
    Besides being an economic disaster, it would absolutely destroy one of the nation’s most important and largest wetlands areas, migratory bird stopovers, etc.
    It’s an absolutely insane idea, far worse than anything Mulholland did.

    The man has lost his mind.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

7 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for eggrollian Avatar for chammy Avatar for grokenstein Avatar for randyabraham Avatar for otterqueen Avatar for jafafahots Avatar for c6Logic Avatar for dnl Avatar for ecoalex

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: