Front Page  »  

Santa Barbara County anti-fracking activists wildly outspent

September 23, 2014

frackingThe proponents of a ballot measure calling for a ban on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in Santa Barbara County are being outspent on the campaign trail by a ratio of more than 20 to 1. [KEYT]

If passed, Measure P would prohibit high intensity oil and gas production in unincorporated Santa Barbara County. Such practices, which include fracking, typically involve injecting steam into oil wells.

No fracking has been reported to be occurring in Santa Barbara County, but opponents of the measure have raised nearly $2 million fighting it. In the latest campaign finance report, the No on P campaign has raised $1,950,000, while the Yes on P campaign has brought in a meager $95,000.

The opponents of the ballot measure say their funds come largely from county taxpayers, landowners and the oil and gas industry. Supporters of the initiative say they receive small, individual donations.


Loading...
Subjects:             
Related:


36 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

More fracking, more off-shore drilling, I don’t care. Get more of our oil and get it now! Get out of the oil bed we are in with the Arabs and bring gas prices down and watch the economy boom!


0

Kind of hard for oilies to support oil production when the CEO of Exxon, Rex Tillson, joins a citizens group to ban fracking.


—————————————-

“EXXON MOBILE CEO: NO FRACKING NEAR MY BACKYARD”

(http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/02/22/exxon-mobil-tillerson-ceo-fracking/5726603/)


While fracking — hydraulic fracturing of rock to release pockets of oil — has raised complaints from environmentalists around the country, Chairman and CEO Rex Tillerson’s opposition to a project in his own neighborhood is interesting, given how deeply Exxon Mobil is involved in the process.


Tillerson appeared at a Town Council meeting in Bartonville, Tex., the wealthy enclave near his Dallas home last November to join in the protest over the water tower, The Wall Street Journal reports….”(ARTICLE CONTINUES)


——————————————


0

An article confirming water pollution from drilling


———————————————————–


“FOUR STATES CONFIRM WATER POLLUTION FROM DRILLING

(http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/01/05/some-states-confirm-water-pollution-from-drilling/4328859/)


1/5/2014


ASSOCIATED PRESS REVIEW OF COMPLAINTS CASTS DOUBT ON INDUSTRY VIEW THAT IT RARELY HAPPENS.


PITTSBURGH (AP) — In at least four states that have nurtured the nation’s energy boom, hundreds of complaints have been made about well-water contamination from oil or gas drilling, and pollution was confirmed in a number of them, according to a review that casts doubt on industry suggestions that such problems rarely happen….”(ARTICLE CONTINUES).


———————————————————–

————————————————————


0

Not so popular a measure when all the public service folks are tied into the revenue generated by local oil, but why in the world would you not exploit a resource that EVERYONE needs. Even you electric car freaks have to tap into power produced by fossil fuel.


0

Because exploiting the resource has been linked with causing earthquakes, contaminating drinking water aquifers, birth defects in babies, methane fires coming out of household faucets, respiratory problems, and skin problems, as well as many other problems.


————————


Birth Defects:


Source: New Republic, February 5, 2014

“EVIDENCE IS MOUNTING THAT FRACKING CAUSES BIRTH DEFECTSE”

(http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116490/colorado-fracking-study-evidence-it-causes-birth-defects-mounting)


———————-


Contamination of drinking water aquifers:


Source: “WATER ISSUES SECONDARY TO HEAVY OIL PRODUCTION”

(http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Argonne-water-for-heavy-oil.pdf)


BY: U.S. Department of Energy


———————-


Source: “SCIENTIFIC STUDY LINKS FLAMMABLE DRINKING WATER TO FRACKING” (

(http://www.propublica.org/article/scientific-study-links-flammable-drinking-water-to-fracking)


———————————————–


Cause of earthquakes:


Source: “HOW OIL AND GAS DISPOLSAL WELLS CAN CAUSE EARTHQUAKES”

(http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/tag/earthquake/


——————————————–


Lung and skin problems:


Source: “LIVING NEAR A FRACKING SITE DOUBLES THE RISK OF DEVELOPING LUNG AND SKIN CONDITIONS”

(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2752192/Fracking-sites-DOUBLE-chance-developing-lung-skin-conditions-claims-study.html#ixzz3EBuCGWeU)


——————————————


0

Fracking has helped us to produce record levels of Natural Gas (NG), which in turn has helped us to reduce CO2 production by 20 percent! Amazing! So if one really believes in man-made Global Warming, one should be for more nuclear power plants and fracking. Sorry, solar still is a small producer, and too expensive.


0

Source for your claims, please?


0

The logic of some of the comments above are absurd.


A group of multiple CA oil companies are spending money to fight enviros’ reckless measure to ban not only fracking (not used in Santa Barbara County), but cyclic steaming (used in Santa Barbara County for several decades), and the energy companies are the bad guys?! They’re fighting for their livelihoods and the jobs of hundreds.


Had the enviros created a measure only to ban fracking, you’d likely not even hear a whimper from the local energy companies.


And by the way- the group behind the measure, are not grassroots nobodies. Their leader, Katie Davis, is the former VP of Marketing for Citrix and was personally trained by Al Gore and his Climate Reality Project. Al Gore’s employer Kleiner Perkins (multiple Silicon Valley billionaires) also invest heavily in Citrix. You can do the math on that.


Furthermore, the “Yes on P” campaign manager, David Atkins, has hinted on social media that their campaign is in contact with billionaire Tom Steyer.


Another billionaire, Eric Schmidt (Chairman of Google and protege of Kleiner Perkins) is using his foundation, The 11th Hour Project (which funded Al Gore’s movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’) to create a website called CAFrackFacts.org to target local oil companies in Santa Barbara County who are NOT FRACKING. Eric Schmidt also lives in Santa Barbara.


The fact that they used a law firm with ties to Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project via the firms’ founder Marc Mihaley is very significant, Mary. Especially since Al Gore has a $10 Million home in Santa Barbara.


0

Sorry. Red Herring illogical reasoning won’t fly here.


I bet the oily gas industry would have just loved it if the Prop P folks had NOT gone to the California Mecca of environmental law firms for legal counsel, the Bag area. To bad for you they did the right thing and sought legal counsel from among the best in California.


But since you are so concerned about lawyers, please provide the names of the multitude of attorneys serving the oil and gas industry.


Good for the Prop 8 folks that they were wise in selecting legal counsel. You can tell they were wise because so ma y gas and oil flacks turn up anytime a news publication publishes about Prop 8.


0

LOL! But that is the ONLY “logic” used by the “man-caused climate change” alarmists.


0

I think you should look up “logic” and “logical arguments.”


0

You said it. Red herring indeed. There is no fracking, yet you don’t just ban fracking…you get everyone jazzed up about fracking the past several years with Netflix documentaries and the first chance you get you put a measure on the ballot that is a bait-and-switch well beyond fracking.


Every article to post about fracking in Pennsylvania or Texas is a red herring. Does that register? Do you understand that the geologic formations of Central Coast CA are not right for fracking, hence why its not used and why steam is? Do you know what diatomite is versus shale? That CA is basically naturally fracked?


You clearly don’t, that’s why your only defense is an offense of tales of random civil lawsuit matters from distant locations.


The choice of lawfirm is significant not because they got some high-powered lawyers to knowingly put an unconstitutional law together- but because it was a lawfirm handed to them on a silver platter by their billionaire benefactors. And no, its not horrible to have billionaire benefactors- just stop propagandizing the media with your “grassroots” claims…this has been planned for years in the push for a $40 trillion carbon exchange market. Let’s put all the chips on the table and go head-to-head and stop pretending that a small local oil company like SME, perhaps with more resources than your average individual, is on par with Exxon, but the Water Guardians with billionaire greentech benefactors, globally funded NGOs, high-powered lawyers, and former Vice Presidential training are your typical yurt inhabiting, Teva sandal wearing enviros who bit off more than they could chew.


You want to ban the production and use of oil outright. Admit it. Get it off your chest…it will feel better.


0

Post your sources for your claims and I will take it more seriously. Otherwise you are just another oily gas bag spouting nonsense.


In addition, you really should look up logical arguments and logical fallacies. Maybe it will help you stop making a fool of yourself.


0

Mary Mary quite contrary…frack that well, we need the oil baby….drill baby drill.


0

The anti-fracking fanatics are getting wildly outspent because of their wildly uninformed and lack of common sense gets in the way of logical thinking. How can anyone back these lunatic fringes? They can’t.


If the anti-fracking folks were to come up with sensible arguments, they might win some hearts and minds – but then that would make sense – anti-fracking groups lack common sense.


0

Be prepared for an avalanche of URLs about the deadly impact of fracking in communities across the nation.


There is a reason that the CEO of Exxon filed suit to stop production of a fracking well that, ironically, was erected in the property right next to Mr. Exxon’s beautiful estate.


All I can say to mr. Exxon is to quote Frank Zappa: “Do you love it, do you hate it? There it is, the way you made it.”


0

Oh Mary for gods sake…give it a break!


0

Sensible arguments?


You first. See if you can string three sentences together without using logical fallacies (red herrings, ad hominem attacks, etc.), and include sources for your claims.


0

When lots of money is put to use against a given ballot measure, means it’s generally wise to vote for it. Look at the opponents TV ads, full with claims of imminent doom, job losses, cuts to schools, “End-of-the-known world” scare tactics, tells me where this is coming from.


It’s greed over the public good, water right, common sense. If one is worried over rising gasoline prices, stop driving gas-guzzling trucks, SUV’s, making unnecessary trips.


Using emotional blackmail on push button issues won’t fool the public. This is about protecting near depleted ground water levels, pollution by fracking interest who have a bad record throughout the country. “YES” on Measure P !


0

I consult to the Oil and Gas industry in Santa Barbara County so I have a vested interest in this measure. One thing that stands out is why did the supporters of Measure P include Steaming in their measure? Why not just Fracking? Steaming has been done in Santa Barbara County for decades with no proven case of pollution of the aquifers above them. And, Measure P allows existing Steaming operations to continue. If Steaming is bad, why let existing operations continue? Yes, the Oil and Gas industry is spending a lot of money to get their message out because they have a lot to lose if this legislation passes. I have a lot to lose (my job) if this passes. It’s a poorly thought out measure that appeals to emotions instead of logic and science. But, hey, it works (or so the law firm in the Bay area that wrote Measure P hopes).


0

Likely the law firm in S.F. doesn’t care one way or the other, they already got their payment.


0

San Francisco is the repository for the majority of top environmental attorneys.


Measure P will have likely stripped the resources of those supporting it, so the Measure P backers won’t have a second chance at this. So it makes sense for them to do it right the first time.


You will note that this consultant didn’t bother to state where the O&G industry gets its representation.


I will say that, from attending antifracking government hearings in Santa Maria, the hearing room is always packed with suited-up representatives of the O&G industry who produce an avalanche of BS at the podium.


0

“If terrorists poisoned the water you would be outraged. Stop fracking.”


–T-shirt at an anti-fracking rally


_________________________________________________


You support the O&G industry’s lavish spending to fight Measure P, but you criticize the fractivists for seeking legal representation from the area in California which has the most of the most-experienced and successful specialty attorneys.


While I am sure you, being a consultant to the O&G industry in SB County, would prefer the supporters of Measure P in SB County to have simply prepared their case by researching via the internet, the fact is they knew they would be ridiculously out-spent by the O&G industry and also knew the first attempt at citizens passing such a measure would likely be the only attempt….at least for years.


By the way, where is the O&G industry getting its legal representation?


0

Mary,


You didn’t answer my question. Why is Steaming in Measure P?


0

I support my claims with sources. You, an oil and gas industry huckster, do not, nor do most of the fracking advocates.


I provide sources. You might try it some time. It might make you look like something more than an empty paper bag full of hot air.


http://calcoastnews.com/2014/09/santa-barbara-county-anti-fracking-activists-wildly-outspent/comment-page-1/#comment-125364


0

Mary,


You are still dodging his question about “Steaming.” If I lived in SB County, I would vote against allowing fracking — but not with this measure because it also bans steaming which has an established history free of significant problems.


0
1 2