SW: - Chemical disclosure and health issues: - add section
←Older revision
Revision as of 15:27, 27 July 2012
(6 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 13:
Line 13:
==Revenues==
==Revenues==
-
In
February
2012, the
Pennsylvania House and Senate approved a compromise plan for a "local impact fee" on natural
gas
drillers, which Gov. Corbett is expected to sign. Corbett had refused to impose a "severance tax" on drillers, arguing that it would hinder the industry's presence in the
state
, so instead the "impact fee" was created. The compromise calls for a fee
that
would fluctuate with the price of
natural gas
and, starting in 2013, the rate of inflation. In the first year alone, Republicans say, the levy would raise $180 million from 3,850 wells. The bill sends 60 percent of proceeds to localities directly affected by drilling, to cover such items as road repair and increased public-safety costs. The other 40 percent goes to statewide projects
.<ref>Angela Couloumbis and Amy Worden, [http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/138983309.html?viewAll=y "Pa. House approves fee on Marcellus Shale gas"] Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau, Feb. 9, 2012.</ref>
+
In 2012,
Pennsylvania was
the
only major
gas
-producing
state that
does not tax
natural gas
production
.<ref>Angela Couloumbis and Amy Worden, [http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/138983309.html?viewAll=y "Pa. House approves fee on Marcellus Shale gas"] Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau, Feb. 9, 2012.</ref>
-
Pennsylvania had
been
the
only major gas-producing
state that
does not tax
natural gas
production
.<ref>Angela Couloumbis and Amy Worden, [http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/138983309.html?viewAll=y "Pa. House approves fee on Marcellus Shale gas"] Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau, Feb. 9, 2012.</ref>
+
In February 2012, the
Pennsylvania
House and Senate approved a compromise plan for a "local impact fee" on natural gas drillers, which Gov. Corbett is expected to sign. Corbett
had
refused to impose a "severance tax" on drillers, arguing that it would hinder the industry's presence in
the state
, so instead the "impact fee" was created. The compromise calls for a fee
that
would fluctuate with the price of
natural gas
and, starting in 2013, the rate of inflation. In the first year alone, Republicans say, the levy would raise $180 million from 3,850 wells. The bill sends 60 percent of proceeds to localities directly affected by drilling, to cover such items as road repair and increased public-safety costs. The other 40 percent goes to statewide projects
.<ref>Angela Couloumbis and Amy Worden, [http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/138983309.html?viewAll=y "Pa. House approves fee on Marcellus Shale gas"] Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau, Feb. 9, 2012.</ref>
Many Democrats and environmental groups have criticized the bill, saying it was crafted behind closed doors by Republicans. The bill requires that all types of oil and gas operations (except for natural gas processing plants)—unlike any other commercial or industrial business—be allowed in all zoning districts, and mandates a state ordinance that supersedes municipal ordinances.<ref>[http://www.nofrackohio.com/news/2012/2/9/pennsylvania-senate-and-house-vote-for-preemption-of-municip.html "PA Senate and House vote for preemption of municipal zoning," No Frack Ohio, February 9, 2012.</ref>
Many Democrats and environmental groups have criticized the bill, saying it was crafted behind closed doors by Republicans. The bill requires that all types of oil and gas operations (except for natural gas processing plants)—unlike any other commercial or industrial business—be allowed in all zoning districts, and mandates a state ordinance that supersedes municipal ordinances.<ref>[http://www.nofrackohio.com/news/2012/2/9/pennsylvania-senate-and-house-vote-for-preemption-of-municip.html "PA Senate and House vote for preemption of municipal zoning," No Frack Ohio, February 9, 2012.</ref>
===Taxes defeated in part by industry study===
===Taxes defeated in part by industry study===
-
Pennsylvania remains the largest U.S. state without a tax on natural gas production, due in part to a 2009 [[Pennsylvania State University]] study predicting drillers would shun Pennsylvania if new taxes were imposed; lawmakers cited it the following year when they rejected a 5 percent tax proposed by then-Governor [[Ed Rendell]]. The tax would have generated an estimated $100 million in its first year. It was later reported that the PSU study was sponsored by the industry-funded [[Marcellus Shale Coalition]], which provided a grant of about $100,000, and led by economist Dr. Tim Considine,
whom Bloomberg reported has a history
of
producing industry-friendly
research
on economic
and
energy issues
.
+
Pennsylvania remains the largest U.S. state without a tax on natural gas production, due in part to a 2009 [[Pennsylvania State University]] study predicting drillers would shun Pennsylvania if new taxes were imposed; lawmakers cited it the following year when they rejected a 5 percent tax proposed by then-Governor [[Ed Rendell]]. The tax would have generated an estimated $100 million in its first year. It was later reported that the PSU study was sponsored by the industry-funded [[Marcellus Shale Coalition]], which provided a grant of about $100,000, and led by economist Dr. Tim Considine,
the lead analyst for natural gas deregulation on the U.S. [[Congressional Budget Office]], according to his University
of
Wyoming profile. Considine has also conducted contract
research
for industry groups such as the [[American Petroleum Institute]]
and
the [[Wyoming Mining Association]]
.
The impact fee will bring in about $85 million in 2012 compared to $200 million under a 5 percent tax, assuming a gas price of $2.50 per thousand cubic feet, according to the non-partisan Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center. The fee will peak at about $200 million a year, while the tax could have reached $500 million in 2015 if gas prices rebound to $4.50.<ref>Jim Efstathiou Jr., [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/frackers-fund-university-research-that-proves-their-case.html "Frackers Fund University Research That Proves Their Case,"] Bloomberg, July 22, 2012.</ref>
The impact fee will bring in about $85 million in 2012 compared to $200 million under a 5 percent tax, assuming a gas price of $2.50 per thousand cubic feet, according to the non-partisan Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center. The fee will peak at about $200 million a year, while the tax could have reached $500 million in 2015 if gas prices rebound to $4.50.<ref>Jim Efstathiou Jr., [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/frackers-fund-university-research-that-proves-their-case.html "Frackers Fund University Research That Proves Their Case,"] Bloomberg, July 22, 2012.</ref>
Line 199:
Line 199:
Many Democrats and local communities have criticized the bill, saying it was crafted behind closed doors by Republicans with the gas industry. The bill requires that all types of oil and gas operations (except for natural gas processing plants)—unlike any other commercial or industrial business—be allowed in all zoning districts, even in residential neighborhoods, schools, and sensitive natural protection areas. The bill also mandates a state ordinance that supersedes all existing municipal ordinances and prevents municipalities from adopting any zoning provisions that are stricter than the mandated standards.<ref>[http://www.nofrackohio.com/news/2012/2/9/pennsylvania-senate-and-house-vote-for-preemption-of-municip.html "PA Senate and House vote for preemption of municipal zoning," No Frack Ohio, February 9, 2012.</ref>
Many Democrats and local communities have criticized the bill, saying it was crafted behind closed doors by Republicans with the gas industry. The bill requires that all types of oil and gas operations (except for natural gas processing plants)—unlike any other commercial or industrial business—be allowed in all zoning districts, even in residential neighborhoods, schools, and sensitive natural protection areas. The bill also mandates a state ordinance that supersedes all existing municipal ordinances and prevents municipalities from adopting any zoning provisions that are stricter than the mandated standards.<ref>[http://www.nofrackohio.com/news/2012/2/9/pennsylvania-senate-and-house-vote-for-preemption-of-municip.html "PA Senate and House vote for preemption of municipal zoning," No Frack Ohio, February 9, 2012.</ref>
-
Act 13 essentially disregards a [http://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-supreme-court/1144542.html 2009 decision] by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upholding municipal rights to write zoning laws that excluded oil and gas drilling if it did not fit the community’s “character” and “special nature.” Under the Act, municipalities can adopt some rules on how drilling is to be done, but they cannot say no to drilling. The law also tells municipalities that they must revise their local ordinances to allow drilling if they want to receive payment under the new per-well impact fee. The law also empowers the state’s Public Utilities Commission—a body of appointed officials—to overturn local zoning, and to determine if a community is eligible to share in impact fee revenues. If a gas company or any individual disagrees with a local law that affects drilling, the “aggrieved” party can go to the PUC and the board will be required to “determine whether [the local law] violates” the new state oil and gas law.<ref>Steven Rosenfeld, [http://www.alternet.org/fracking/154459/fracking_democracy%3A_why_pennsylvania%27s_act_13_may_be_the_nation%27s_worst_corporate_giveaway_ "Fracking Democracy: Why Pennsylvania's Act 13 May Be the Nation's Worst Corporate Giveaway,"] AlterNet, March 7, 2012.</ref>
+
====Impact fee====
+
Act 13 has an impact fee rather than taxes, due in part to a 2009 [[Pennsylvania State University]] study predicting drillers would shun Pennsylvania if new taxes were imposed; lawmakers cited it the following year when they rejected a 5 percent tax proposed by then-Governor [[Ed Rendell]]. It was later reported that the PSU study was sponsored by the industry-funded [[Marcellus Shale Coalition]], which provided a grant of about $100,000.
+
+
The impact fee will bring in about $85 million in 2012 compared to $200 million under a 5 percent tax, assuming a gas price of $2.50 per thousand cubic feet, according to the non-partisan Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center. The fee will peak at about $200 million a year, while the tax could have reached $500 million in 2015 if gas prices rebound to $4.50.<ref>Jim Efstathiou Jr., [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/frackers-fund-university-research-that-proves-their-case.html "Frackers Fund University Research That Proves Their Case,"] Bloomberg, July 22, 2012.</ref>
+
+
====Banning local zoning ordinances====
+
Act 13 essentially disregards a [http://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-supreme-court/1144542.html 2009 decision] by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upholding municipal rights to write zoning laws that excluded oil and gas drilling if it did not fit the community’s “character” and “special nature.” Under the Act, municipalities can adopt some rules on how drilling is to be done, but they cannot say no to drilling. The law also tells municipalities that they must revise their local ordinances to allow drilling if they want to receive payment under the new per-well impact fee. The law also empowers the state’s Public Utilities Commission—a body of appointed officials—to overturn local zoning, and to determine if a community is eligible to share in impact fee revenues. If a gas company or any individual disagrees with a local law that affects drilling, the “aggrieved” party can go to the PUC and the board will be required to “determine whether [the local law] violates” the new state oil and gas law.<ref>Steven Rosenfeld, [http://www.alternet.org/fracking/154459/fracking_democracy%3A_why_pennsylvania%27s_act_13_may_be_the_nation%27s_worst_corporate_giveaway_ "Fracking Democracy: Why Pennsylvania's Act 13 May Be the Nation's Worst Corporate Giveaway,"] AlterNet, March 7
, 2012.</ref>
+
+
It was later reported that this section of the Act was likely modeled after an [[ALEC]] bill titled, [http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3H4-Granting_the_Authority_of_Rural_Counties_to_Transition_to_Decentralized_Land_Use_Regulation_Exposed.pdf "An Act Granting the Authority of Rural Counties to Transition to Decentralized Land Use Regulation,"] passed by ALEC's Energy, Environment, and Agriculture Task Force at its Annual Meeting in 2010.<ref>Steve Horn, [http://www.desmogblog.com/exposed-pennsylvania-act-13-overturned-supreme-court-originally-alec-model-bill "Pennsylvania Act 13 Overturned by Supreme Court, Originally an ALEC Model Bill,"] DeSmog Blog, July 27, 2012.</ref>
+
+
====Chemical disclosure and medical censorship====
+
The Act also requires that companies provide to a state-maintained registry the names of chemicals and gases used in fracking. Physicians and others who work with citizen health issues may request specific information, but the company does not have to provide that information if it claims it is a trade secret or proprietary information, nor does it have to reveal how the chemicals and gases used in fracking interact with natural compounds. If a company does release information about what is used, health care professionals are bound by a non-disclosure agreement that forbids them from warning the community of potential water and air pollution, but also forbids them from telling their own patients what the physician believes may have led to their health problems.<ref>Walter Brasch, PhD, [http://themoderatevoice.com/141747/fracking-pennsylvania-gags-physicians/ "FRACKING: Pennsylvania Gags Physicians,"] The Moderate Voice, March 18, 2012.</ref>
+
+
A strict interpretation of the law would also forbid general practitioners and family practice physicians who sign the non-disclosure agreement and learn the contents of the “trade secrets” from notifying a specialist about the chemicals or compounds, thus delaying medical treatment.<ref>Walter Brasch, PhD, [http://themoderatevoice.com/141747/fracking-pennsylvania-gags-physicians/ "FRACKING: Pennsylvania Gags Physicians,"] The Moderate Voice, March 18, 2012.</ref>
+
+
On April 11, 2012, it was reported that the Pennsylvania Department of Health refused to give the Associated Press copies of its responses to people who claimed that drilling had affected their health. The AP also reported that Act 13 stripped $2 million annually from a statewide health registry that tracked respiratory problems, skin conditions, stomach ailments, and other illnesses potentially related to gas drilling.<ref>[http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/apbreak11/04-11-2012-gas-health "Doctors say drilling law hurts health,"] AP, April 11
, 2012.</ref>
-
The Act also requires that companies provide to a state-maintained registry the names of chemicals and gases used in fracking. Physicians and others who work with citizen health issues may request specific information, but the company does not have to provide that information if it claims it is a trade secret or proprietary information, nor does it have to reveal how the chemicals and gases used in fracking interact with natural compounds. If a company does release information about what is used, health care professionals are bound by a non-disclosure agreement that forbids them from warning the community of potential water and air pollution, but also forbids them from telling their own patients what the physician believes may have led to their health problems. A strict interpretation of the law would also forbid general practitioners and family practice physicians who sign the non-disclosure agreement and learn the contents of the “trade secrets” from notifying a specialist about the chemicals or compounds, thus delaying medical treatment.<ref>Walter Brasch, PhD, [http://themoderatevoice.com/141747/fracking-pennsylvania-gags-physicians/ "FRACKING: Pennsylvania Gags Physicians,"] The Moderate Voice, March 18, 2012.</ref> On April 11, 2012, it was reported that the Pennsylvania Department of Health refused to give the Associated Press copies of its responses to people who claimed that drilling had affected their health. The AP also reported that Act 13 stripped $2 million annually from a statewide health registry that tracked respiratory problems, skin conditions, stomach ailments and other illnesses potentially related to gas drilling.<ref>[http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/apbreak11/04-11-2012-gas-health "Doctors say drilling law hurts health,"] AP, April 11, 2012.</ref>
+
====Legal challenge====
-
+
The law was scheduled to take effect on April 14, 2012, but aggrieved municipalities said they will sue to challenge sections of the bill and try to keep it from taking effect.<ref>Steven Rosenfeld, [http://www.alternet.org/fracking/154459/fracking_democracy%3A_why_pennsylvania%27s_act_13_may_be_the_nation%27s_worst_corporate_giveaway_ "Fracking Democracy: Why Pennsylvania's Act 13 May Be the Nation's Worst Corporate Giveaway,"] AlterNet, March 7, 2012.</ref> Seven municipalities -- including the southwestern towns of Cecil, Peters, South Fayette, Mt. Pleasant and Robinson, plus two towns in Bucks County -- filed a lawsuit challenging the Act in March 2012, along with a Monroeville doctor and environmental activists from the Delaware Riverkeeper Network. A state appellate judge granted a 120-day injunction to prevent the zoning section of the law from going into effect in mid-April.<ref>Laura Olson, [http://shale.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/news/archives/24713-breaking-state-judges-throw-out-act-13-zoning-provisions- "State judges throw out Act 13 zoning provisions,"] Pipeline, July 26, 2012.</ref>
The law was scheduled to take effect on April 14, 2012, but aggrieved municipalities said they will sue to challenge sections of the bill and try to keep it from taking effect.<ref>Steven Rosenfeld, [http://www.alternet.org/fracking/154459/fracking_democracy%3A_why_pennsylvania%27s_act_13_may_be_the_nation%27s_worst_corporate_giveaway_ "Fracking Democracy: Why Pennsylvania's Act 13 May Be the Nation's Worst Corporate Giveaway,"] AlterNet, March 7, 2012.</ref> Seven municipalities -- including the southwestern towns of Cecil, Peters, South Fayette, Mt. Pleasant and Robinson, plus two towns in Bucks County -- filed a lawsuit challenging the Act in March 2012, along with a Monroeville doctor and environmental activists from the Delaware Riverkeeper Network. A state appellate judge granted a 120-day injunction to prevent the zoning section of the law from going into effect in mid-April.<ref>Laura Olson, [http://shale.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/news/archives/24713-breaking-state-judges-throw-out-act-13-zoning-provisions- "State judges throw out Act 13 zoning provisions,"] Pipeline, July 26, 2012.</ref>