EID: Six Questions for EPA on Pavillion

Energy-in-Depth offers its view on EPA linking fracking with groundwater contamination in Wyoming.

EID writes,

Call it a sign of the “Times,” let’s say, that less than 24 hours removed from the release of EPA Region 8’s report on groundwater sampling near Pavillion, Wyo., nearly a thousand different news stories have been generated — in 12 different countries, and best we can tell, four different languages. But set aside the breathless headlines for a moment and the triumphant quotes from a small segment of folks committed to ending the responsible development of natural gas, and one’s left with a pretty straightforward question: Is EPA right? And if so, what exactly does that mean moving forward?

Of course, before you can answer the second question, it’d be helpful if you had a good answer for the first. And the truth is, as we sit here today, less than 20 hours A.P. (After Pavillion), we simply don’t. What we do know, however, even at these early stages, is that several of the assertions put forth in EPA’s report yesterday don’t quite square with the facts as they actually exist on the ground out there. Because of that, a number of folks are starting to ask some pretty basic questions about what the agency found and how it went about finding it. Below, a few of the most obvious:…

Check-out EID’s six questions.

2 thoughts on “EID: Six Questions for EPA on Pavillion”

  1. Leave it to the states to regulate their industries. They have the people who are knowledgeable about the industry and the state and are in far better position to do what is right. EPA does not have scientists or engineers; just politicians and lawyers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.