image missing
HOME SN-BRIEFS SYSTEM
OVERVIEW
EFFECTIVE
MANAGEMENT
PROGRESS
PERFORMANCE
PROBLEMS
POSSIBILITIES
STATE
CAPITALS
FLOW
ACTIVITIES
FLOW
ACTORS
PETER
BURGESS
SiteNav SitNav (0) SitNav (1) SitNav (2) SitNav (3) SitNav (4) SitNav (5) SitNav (6) SitNav (7) SitNav (8)
Date: 2024-04-19 Page is: DBtxt001.php txt00005780

Energy
Energy money in politics

The case of fracking ... the money flowing into California politics

Burgess COMMENTARY

Peter Burgess

October 02, 2013 Fracking Jerry Brown The governor signed a bill that likely will expand fracking in California after taking $2.5 million in contributions from oil and natural gas interests. By Robert Gammon @RobertGammon mg_fullDisc_3552.jpg Occidental Petroleum, which has extensive holdings in the state, is Brown's largest industry donor. - WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Occidental Petroleum, which has extensive holdings in the state, is Brown's largest industry donor.

Before Jerry Brown signed legislation last month that promises to greatly expand fracking in California, the governor accepted at least $2.49 million in financial donations over the past several years from oil and natural gas interests, according to public records on file with the Secretary of State's Office and the California Fair Political Practices Commission. Of the total, $770,000 went to Brown's two Oakland charter schools — the Oakland School for the Arts and the Oakland Military Institute. The other $1.72 million went to his statewide political campaigns for attorney general and governor, along with his Proposition 30 ballot-measure campaign last year.

The governor signed Senate Bill 4 into law despite widespread opposition from the environmental community. The bill, which underwent major changes in the last week of this year's legislative session after intense lobbying from the oil and gas industry, requires state regulators to approve all fracking permit requests in California for the next two years — as long as oil and gas companies disclose to state officials what chemicals they're using during hydraulic fracturing.

Fracking, a controversial process that involves shooting massive amounts of water and toxic chemicals deep into the earth in order to release otherwise trapped oil and natural gas deposits, has been linked to groundwater and air pollution, and there's evidence that it causes earthquakes. But the oil and gas industry views California and its giant Monterey Shale deposit as the next big boon for domestic fossil fuels. The underground deposit is estimated to contain 15 billion barrels of extractable oil and natural gas.

Several environmental groups, including Sierra Club California, have called for a ban or a moratorium on fracking in the state. And SB 4 originally created a division in the environmental community — with several groups opposing it because they contended that it was too weak, while other groups backed it for fear that the state would end up with no regulations at all. However, some of these latter groups, including the Natural Resources Defense Council and the California League of Conservation Voters, withdrew their support for SB 4 after the oil and gas industry successfully pushed for last-minute changes to it.

SB 4 also originally sparked opposition from within the Brown administration not long after state Senator Fran Pavley, a Southern California Democrat, introduced it earlier this year. In May, the state Department of Finance issued an official opposition letter on SB 4, essentially contending that the legislation was too tough on oil and gas companies and that it threatened to stifle the economic boom that fracking may create in California. At the time, the bill proposed a moratorium on fracking while the state conducts a full environmental analysis of the oil and natural gas extraction method. 'This bill could result in significant negative impacts to California's economy,' Brown's Department of Finance argued back then. 'A moratorium would likely result in a significant loss of jobs and tax revenues.'

The oil and natural gas industry also adamantly opposed SB 4 throughout much of 2013. But after behind-the-scenes lobbying, Pavley agreed on September 6 to amend her legislation. Rather than imposing a temporary moratorium, SB 4 instead forces state regulators to approve all fracking requests. The bill also could undermine aspects of the California Environmental Quality Act.

After Pavley agreed to the changes, Brown quickly endorsed SB 4. In fact, his office took the unusual step of declaring that he intended to sign the legislation before it had passed both houses of the legislature. During his tenure as governor, Brown has rarely taken public stances on bills before they reach his desk.

Brown's press office did not respond by press time to a request for comment as to whether the financial donations from oil and gas interests influenced his administration's original opposition to the bill, or his decision to strongly endorse and then sign the revised bill into law.

David Turnbull, campaign director for Oil Change International, an environmental group that keeps close tabs on the political influence wielded by the oil and gas industry nationwide, said he was not surprised by the last-minute changes to SB 4 or by Brown's actions. 'The level of influence that the oil and gas industry has in Sacramento and around the state is very troubling,' he said.

Oil and gas companies also appear to be somewhat pleased with how SB 4 turned out. 'While SB 4's requirements went significantly farther than the petroleum industry felt was necessary, we now have an environmental platform on which California can look toward the opportunity to responsibly develop the enormous potential energy resource contained in the Monterey Shale formation,' Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president of the Western States Petroleum Association, an oil and gas industry group, boasted to Bay Nature magazine last week.

SB 4 also appears to be boosting oil and gas industry stocks, particularly for companies that donated heavily to Brown. Occidental Petroleum — which, along with its corporate executives, has donated at least $780,400 to Brown since 2006 and is his largest industry donor — has seen its stock jump since the governor signed SB 4 into law on September 20. Some industry analysts expect the Los Angeles-based company to be the single biggest beneficiary of fracking in California because of its extensive holdings in the state. On September 26, Wells Fargo upgraded Occidental's stock to its 'outperform' rating, meaning that the big bank expects the stock to soar in the coming months. After the rating upgrade, Occidental was trading at $94.46 per share by Monday, September 30, up from a low of $72.43 earlier this year, according to the New York Stock Exchange.

Occidental has been a trusty donor to Brown's statewide political campaigns in the past seven years, and to his Oakland charter schools. Last year, the company also contributed $500,000 to Brown's Prop 30 campaign, making it one of the ballot measure's biggest single donors. The large contribution was unusual because Prop 30, which included a tax hike on wealthy Californians, drew opposition from much of the state's business community.

Another Brown donor that stands to profit from SB 4 is Clean Energy Fuels of Southern California, which sells natural gas, promotes the use of natural gas-powered vehicles, and owns natural gas infrastructure. Since 2006, Clean Energy and its CEO, Andrew Littlefair, have donated at least $260,000 to Brown's political campaigns and his charter schools. Clean Energy spokesman Gary Foster said the contributions had nothing to do with the vast potential for hydraulic fracturing in California, although he acknowledged that the company supports fracking and that it could profit substantially from increased natural gas production in the state. 'We are supportive of the country continuing to develop its resources,' he said.

And there's evidence that Littlefair understands what SB 4 will do for his company. In the weeks before Pavley agreed to change her bill, when it looked as if SB 4 might actually result in some regulations on fracking in California, Littlefair was selling off stock in his own company, according to US Securities and Exchange filings. But then on September 12 — the day after both houses of the state legislature approved the oil- and gas-industry-friendly amendments to SB 4 — Littlefair began buying back the stock. In fact, he purchased $1.6 million worth of Clean Energy shares. Littlefair has personally donated $75,000 to Brown and his causes in recent years.

According to public records, other large donors to Brown that also will likely profit from SB 4 include oil companies Kern Oil and World Oil; Sempra Energy, which owns San Diego Gas & Electric Company and Southern California Gas Company; and Pacific Gas & Electric Company and Southern California Edison, the state's two major utilities. In recent years, PG&E, in particular, has pushed to expand natural gas exploration and production nationwide through fracking.


Comments
bribe /brīb/ verb verb: bribe; 3rd person present: bribes; past tense: bribed; past participle: bribed; gerund or present participle: bribing 1. persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement. 'an undercover agent bribed the judge into giving a lenient sentence' synonyms: buy off, pay off, suborn; More informalgrease someone's palm, fix, square 'he used his wealth to bribe officials' noun noun: bribe; plural noun: bribes 1. a sum of money or other inducement offered or given in this way. synonyms: inducement, incentive, payola; More informalpayoff, kickback, boodle, sweetener 'she accepted bribes' Governor Brown can call those so called contributions whatever he wants. It is still wrong. Once a criminal always a criminal, or politician. And we elected him again. Show how much we know. report like dislike Posted by Jerome Brown on 10/18/2013 at 10:34 PM The U.S. is spending a water budget without understanding how much water is available or what the use of water in energy production will mean for local communities, agriculture, or other commercial uses.' Americas Clean Energy Agenda. The Southwest is in the midst of a record drought, some 14 years in the making, which means the water supply for many Western states - California, Arizona, Utah, Nevada - is drying up. Last month the Bureau of Reclamation announced they're cutting the flow of water into Lake Mead, which has already lost 100 feet of water since the drought began. What happens if the Southwest drought does not end soon? Will we keep using 3 to 6 million gallons of Clean Water per Fracked well, to extract natural gas? The State of California has mandated that 33% of its Energy come from Renewable Energy by 2020. The state currently produces about 71% of the electricity it consumes, while it imports 8% from the Pacific Northwest and 21% from the Southwest. This is how we generate our electricity in 2011, natural gas was burned to make 45.3% of electrical power generated in-state. Nuclear power from Diablo Canyon in San Luis Obispo County accounted for 9.15%, large hydropower 18.3%, Renewable 16.6% and coal 1.6%. There is 9% missing from San Onofre and with the current South Western drought, how long before the 18.3% hydro will be effected? Another generator of power that jumps out is natural gas, 45.3%, that is a lot of Fracked Wells poisoning our ground water, 3 to 6 million gallons of water are used per well. If Fracking is safe why did Vice Pres Cheney lobby and win Executive, Congressional, and Judicial exemptions from: Clean Water Act. Safe Drinking Water. Act Clean Air Act. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Emergency Planning Community Right to Know Act. National Environmental Policy Act. 'Americans should not have to accept unsafe drinking water just because natural gas is cheaper than Coal. the Industry has used its political power to escape accountability, leaving the American people unprotected, and no Industry can claim to be part of the solution if it supports exemptions from the basic Laws designed to ensure that we have Clean Water and Clean Air' Natural Resources Defense Council. We have to change how we generate our electricity, with are current drought conditions and using our pure clean water for Fracking, there has to be a better way to generate electricity, and there is, a proven stimulating policy. The Feed in Tariff is a policy mechanism designed to accelerate investment in Renewable Energy, the California FiT allows eligible customers generators to enter into 10- 15- 20- year contracts with their utility company to sell the electricity produced by renewable energy, and guarantees that anyone who generates electricity from R E source, whether Homeowner, small business, or large utility, is able to sell that electricity. It is mandated by the State to produce 33% R E by 2020. FIT policies can be implemented to support all renewable technologies including: Wind Photovoltaics (PV) Solar thermal Geothermal Biogas Biomass Fuel cells Tidal and wave power. There is currently 3 utilities using a Commercial Feed in Tariff in California Counties, Los Angeles, Palo Alto, and Sacramento, are paying their businesses 17 cents per kilowatt hour for the Renewable Energy they generate. We can get our Law makers and Regulators to implement a Residential Feed in Tariff, to help us weather Global Warming, insulate our communities from grid failures, generate a fair revenue stream for the Homeowners and protect our Water. Why it is better to own your own Renewable Energy System. 'The benefits of owning a renewable energy system far outweigh the benefits of a lease or a power purchase agreement (PPA). Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, homeowners are eligible for a federal personal income tax credit up to 30% of the purchase cost of their renewable energy system, without a maximum limit.** Homeowners can utilize the incentive money in any way they choose. But homeowners that choose to lease their systems turn over their rebates and incentives to the third party lease or PPA companies associated with the solar systems installed on their homes.' 'The owner of a renewable energy system is also sheltered from rising electricity costs, which have historically increased on average of 3-5% each year. This presents homeowners with opportunities to save money each month on energy and also reduces their reliance on third-party utility companies. By purchasing a renewable energy system with cash or through a loan, a homeowner can completely pay off his or her system and then independently produce clean energy. By choosing a lease or a PPA option homeowners are essentially substituting their utility companies with third-party leasing companies. Additionally, homeowners will likely be required to purchase their systems, renew their leases, or have the systems removed from their roof and revert to paying utility rates once their leases have ended.' Charlie Angione. 'There’s absolutely no such thing as a $0 down solar lease or PPA and here’s why. A requirement of both of these financing programs is that you agree upfront to give the leasing or PPA company your 30% federal tax credit which is worth thousands of dollars as well as any other financial incentives. At $5.57 per Watt. a 6 kW solar system would yield a federal tax credit of $10,026! With a $0 down loan instead of a lease, you’ll get to keep the 30% federal tax credit as well as all other applicable financial incentives for yourself and you’ll own your solar system instead of renting it, for a much greater return on investment. And if you do decide to lease instead of own, good luck ever selling your home with a lease attached to it. What homebuyer will want to purchase your home and assume your remaining lease payments on a used solar system on your roof, when they can buy and own a brand new system for thousands less.' Ray Boggs. We also need to change a current law, California law does not allow Homeowners to oversize their Renewable Energy systems. Campaign to allow Californian residents to sell electricity obtained by renewable energy for a fair pro-business market price. Will you read, sign, and share this petition? http://signon.org/sign/let-california-home-owners report 7 likes, 2 dislikes like dislike Posted by Daniel Ferra on 10/02/2013 at 1:49 PM It looks like our 'Drill, Baby, Drill' governor is helping ignite the carbon bomb that will cook the planet. Jerry Brown's pursuit of oily campaign donations, his blockage of any bill that would restrict fracking, his failure to get DOGGR to monitor fracking, and his support of a weak-noodle SB4 tells it all. Brown doesn't care about the environment. He doesn't care if fracking destroys California's aquifers, he doesn't care about the health concerns of Californians, and he doesn't care what these fracking eye sores do to our property values. What he cares about is oily campaign donations. It looks like Jerry Brown's legacy will be the governor that led California into Climate Hell. report 13 likes, 3 dislikes like dislike Posted by James McFadden on 10/02/2013 at 12:51 PM Edwina please educate yourself on the problems with fracking! If nothing else look at the history of how it got so easily pushed through because the CEO of Halliburton had the bright idea that if he got into the Whitehouse he could remove all safety restrictions. It's not difficult to do a quick search of the ongoing disaster in Colorado after the floods and the 'new' earthquake zones created by this destructive practice. report 15 likes, 6 dislikes like dislike Posted by Eileen Rose on 10/02/2013 at 11:23 AM So what? There's nothing wrong here, though the story seems to try to create something that effect. Parties negotiate while legislation is going through its process. And legislators and public officials receive campaign contributions. We have a new bill which requires companies that perform hydraulic fracturing to report their activities and the chemicals they use to the State and to affected property owners. At the same time, new, badly needed jobs will be created in California helping people get on their feet, manage their debt, and feed their families. This is a non-story unless we're celebrating the fact that we now have rules for hydraulic fracturing in California. It's time.

The text being discussed is available at
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/fracking-jerry-brown/Content?oid=3726533
SITE COUNT<
Amazing and shiny stats
Blog Counters Reset to zero January 20, 2015
TrueValueMetrics (TVM) is an Open Source / Open Knowledge initiative. It has been funded by family and friends. TVM is a 'big idea' that has the potential to be a game changer. The goal is for it to remain an open access initiative.
WE WANT TO MAINTAIN AN OPEN KNOWLEDGE MODEL
A MODEST DONATION WILL HELP MAKE THAT HAPPEN
The information on this website may only be used for socio-enviro-economic performance analysis, education and limited low profit purposes
Copyright © 2005-2021 Peter Burgess. All rights reserved.