Fracking at the polls: A guide to the 2012 candidates
Pipeline | Feb. 14, 2012
By Amy Friedenberger
The candidates vying for the Republican nomination may disagree on many things, but they all agree that it's high time to focus on allowing the natural gas industry to flourish or risk losing out on valuable revenue. And even Mr. Obama is on board.
They've casually mentioned natural gas exploration during speeches or argued in heated debates about it for months—and for many, it goes back to years before the 2012 race even started.
Here are the candidates' stances on natural gas drilling—a topic that is especially important to battleground states like Pennsylvania and Ohio—over the years.
Mitt Romney
In the former Massachusetts Governor's 2010 book "No Apology: The Case for American Greatness," Mr. Romney said the U.S. needs to break from its "oil gluttony" and invest in nuclear plants, offshore and onshore wells, and natural gas drilling.
In his chapter dedicted to energy, he writes:
Natural gas is an energy source everyone can love. It is abundant domestically, it can substitute for oil in a number of applications, and it emits very little greenhouse gas. Recently developed horizontal-drilling technology has transformed the natural gas industry by mutliplying the amount of gas that can be extracted from old and new wells. Shale gas that is abundant in North America is less costly to produce than oil, coal, and most other forms of energy. As vast new reserves are being opened, natural gas has suddenly become the most promising immediate oil substitute, as well as a much larger contributor to our overall energy requirements. America should be building pipelines as quickly as possible.
Jump to October 2011, when Mr. Romney wrote an editorial for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, in which he said Pennsylvania and its neighboring states need to tap its Marcellus Shale reserve to supply clean and inexpensive energy for the country and boost employment.
During a Sept. 7, 2011 debate, Mr. Romney said Mr. Obama was "strangling" the economy by preventing the expansion of Marcellus Shale drilling and other non-green energy alternatives, marking the first time the mighty Marcellus got a debate shout-out. On a Fox News interview about three months later, Mr. Romney said the Environmental Protection Agency has become politicized and aligns itself with Mr. Obama and his vision of green energy, and that he would not allow the EPA to manage hydraulic fracturing in the states.
Rick Santorum
The Pennsylvania Senator often uses his ties to the state home to the Marcellus Shale drilling boom to court voters.
In an February 2011 video of Mr. Santorum in Iowa -- speaking four months before he announced his candidacy -- he told the audience that Marcellus Shale drilling decreased unemployment in Pennsylvania, and an expansion of drilling will provide more jobs across the country as long as the government cuts back on regulations.
In an interview with Des Moines Register editors in August 2011, Mr. Santorum said the restrictions to areas for drilling have inhibited energy production.
"We're drilling oil and gas wells in people's backyards in Pennsylvania around children and all these things and that's OK, but we can't where there's a caribou that walks by there every other year?" Mr. Santorum said.
At the October 11, 2011 debate in New Hampshire, questions about job creation led candidates to offer suggestions that focused on energy. Mr. Santorum took the opportunity to one-up competitor Rick Perry of Texas, where drilling has occurred for decades.
"We need a bold energy plan—I've put one out there—to drill. Pennsylvania—I don't want to brag, Governor, but Pennsylvania is the gas capital of the world right now, not Texas," Mr. Santorum said.
More recently, in a campaign stop in Oklahoma City, Mr. Santorum said environmentalists have generated a fear around hydraulic fracturing that has prevented the industry to expand.
According to The Oklahoman:
Santorum said environmental concerns are unfounded about the method of water, sand and some chemical additives being pumped into the well at high pressure to free gas from the rock.
He said hydraulic fracuturing is "the new boogeyman" meant to alarm the public.
Right before Super Tuesday, the day the largest number of states hold their primaries, Mr. Santorum slammed the Obama administration for pursuing energy policies that can prevent the bolstering of natural gas drilling.
At his speech on Feb. 21 he said, "It's important to understand that this area of the country has suffered dramatically, [because of the] devastation of radical energy policies," he said.
During his concession speech on Feb. 28, after Mr. Romney won both Michigan and Arizona, Mr. Santorum held up a piece of shale rock [VIDEO] then focused his specch on criticizing Mr. Obama for her energy policies.
"Yeah, this is oil," Mr. Santorum said, tapping the shale rock on the podium's surface. "Oil, out of rock. Shale, it leaches oil. In fact, the highest quality oil in the world: light, sweet, crude. It can produce thousands and thousands of jobs up in Northwest, North Dakota
Newt Gingrich
The former House speaker's stance on energy has bounced around several times. Prior to 2008, he was a proponent of searching for green alternatives -- an approach that even had him sit down with former Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a commercial warning of the negative effects of global warming.
His views have since changed.
In a book titled "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less," published a few months after the May 2008 commercial, he pushed for lifting any bans on offshore and onshore drilling, including the natural gas industry. He wrote that the country needs to invest in new technologies to "find alternatives to oil by investing in new technologies to produce safe, clean, reliable, efficient, and inexpensive fuels here at home. This requires a Manhattan Project approach."
That aggressive drilling stance appeared in his 2011 address at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
His speech called for the abolishment of the EPA and aggressive approach for natural gas:
We should also stop the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to cripple the development of gas found in shale. We now have technology that let’s us go down as far as eight thousand feet, reach out as far as four miles horizontally. We can now produce commercially available natural gas from shale. We have an 1100-year supply. And the answer is, “But you don’t know what’s happening 8,000 feet down.” And therefore your EPA is going to protect you from the possibility that 378 years from now something bad will happen. Well, let me tell you something bad is happening this morning with all the people who can’t find a job because the government is killing their industry keeping the cost of energy high.
Research hasn't been finalized as to how much of a supply the natural gas from the shale supply, but 1,100 years is considered an overestimate. Even 100 years, which Mr. Obama announced at the State of the Union, is considered a generous number according to environmental agencies.
On Feb. 16, Mr. Gingrich revived his coined phrase "Drill here, drill now, pay less" for his platform of $2.50-a-gallon gas with a new advertisement (to the right) to go with a Facebook petition calling for Americans to demand that Mr. Obama to take significant steps to start pursuing immediate energy resources in the U.S. to gasoline and energy prices.
The petition says,
We the undersigned petition President Obama to act immediately to lower gasoline, diesel, and other energy prices and reduce our dependence on overseas energy sources from unstable countries by enacting Newt Gingrich’s plan to lower gas prices to $2.50 per gallon, including the immediate authorization of the Keystone XL pipeline and aggressive development of more North American oil and natural gas.
Barack Obama
President Obama campaigned and continues to push for renewable energy as the alternative to oil. But during the State of the Union address, Mr. Obama gave his endorsement of natural gas drilling [VIDEO]. The move is one that attempts to woo battleground states such as Pennsylvania with the promise of jobs and energy independence:
The development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don't have to choose between our environment and our economy. And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of thirty years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock— reminding us that government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground.
But Mr. Obama's engagement to natural gas drilling didn't last too long. Mr. Obama made an appearance at Nashua Community College in New Hampshire on March 1 to continue his push for a renewed investment in alternative energy and call for the end to $4 billion of subsidies for oil and gas companies:
Now, I know this is hard to believe, but some politicians are seeing higher gas prices as a political opportunity. You’re shocked, aren’t you? And right in the middle of an election year. Who would’ve thought? Recently, the lead of one news story said, “Gasoline prices are on the rise, and Republicans are licking their chops.” Licking their chops. I’ll tell you – only in politics do people respond to bad news with such enthusiasm. And you can bet we’ll be hearing more about those magic, three-point plans for $2 gas. Just like we heard about in the last election. Just like we’ve heard about for thirty years. You know the plans I’m talking about: Step one is drill, step two is drill, and step three is keep drilling.
Republicans, including presidential opponent Mr. Romney, said Mr. Obama was out of touch and that places like North Dakota have benefited from natural gas exploration.
By Amy Friedenberger
The candidates vying for the Republican nomination may disagree on many things, but they all agree that it's high time to focus on allowing the natural gas industry to flourish or risk losing out on valuable revenue. And even Mr. Obama is on board.
They've casually mentioned natural gas exploration during speeches or argued in heated debates about it for months—and for many, it goes back to years before the 2012 race even started.
Here are the candidates' stances on natural gas drilling—a topic that is especially important to battleground states like Pennsylvania and Ohio—over the years.
Mitt Romney
In the former Massachusetts Governor's 2010 book "No Apology: The Case for American Greatness," Mr. Romney said the U.S. needs to break from its "oil gluttony" and invest in nuclear plants, offshore and onshore wells, and natural gas drilling.
In his chapter dedicted to energy, he writes:
Natural gas is an energy source everyone can love. It is abundant domestically, it can substitute for oil in a number of applications, and it emits very little greenhouse gas. Recently developed horizontal-drilling technology has transformed the natural gas industry by mutliplying the amount of gas that can be extracted from old and new wells. Shale gas that is abundant in North America is less costly to produce than oil, coal, and most other forms of energy. As vast new reserves are being opened, natural gas has suddenly become the most promising immediate oil substitute, as well as a much larger contributor to our overall energy requirements. America should be building pipelines as quickly as possible.
Jump to October 2011, when Mr. Romney wrote an editorial for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, in which he said Pennsylvania and its neighboring states need to tap its Marcellus Shale reserve to supply clean and inexpensive energy for the country and boost employment.
During a Sept. 7, 2011 debate, Mr. Romney said Mr. Obama was "strangling" the economy by preventing the expansion of Marcellus Shale drilling and other non-green energy alternatives, marking the first time the mighty Marcellus got a debate shout-out. On a Fox News interview about three months later, Mr. Romney said the Environmental Protection Agency has become politicized and aligns itself with Mr. Obama and his vision of green energy, and that he would not allow the EPA to manage hydraulic fracturing in the states.
Rick Santorum
The Pennsylvania Senator often uses his ties to the state home to the Marcellus Shale drilling boom to court voters.
In an February 2011 video of Mr. Santorum in Iowa -- speaking four months before he announced his candidacy -- he told the audience that Marcellus Shale drilling decreased unemployment in Pennsylvania, and an expansion of drilling will provide more jobs across the country as long as the government cuts back on regulations.
In an interview with Des Moines Register editors in August 2011, Mr. Santorum said the restrictions to areas for drilling have inhibited energy production.
"We're drilling oil and gas wells in people's backyards in Pennsylvania around children and all these things and that's OK, but we can't where there's a caribou that walks by there every other year?" Mr. Santorum said.
At the October 11, 2011 debate in New Hampshire, questions about job creation led candidates to offer suggestions that focused on energy. Mr. Santorum took the opportunity to one-up competitor Rick Perry of Texas, where drilling has occurred for decades.
"We need a bold energy plan—I've put one out there—to drill. Pennsylvania—I don't want to brag, Governor, but Pennsylvania is the gas capital of the world right now, not Texas," Mr. Santorum said.
More recently, in a campaign stop in Oklahoma City, Mr. Santorum said environmentalists have generated a fear around hydraulic fracturing that has prevented the industry to expand.
According to The Oklahoman:
Santorum said environmental concerns are unfounded about the method of water, sand and some chemical additives being pumped into the well at high pressure to free gas from the rock.
He said hydraulic fracuturing is "the new boogeyman" meant to alarm the public.
Right before Super Tuesday, the day the largest number of states hold their primaries, Mr. Santorum slammed the Obama administration for pursuing energy policies that can prevent the bolstering of natural gas drilling.
At his speech on Feb. 21 he said, "It's important to understand that this area of the country has suffered dramatically, [because of the] devastation of radical energy policies," he said.
During his concession speech on Feb. 28, after Mr. Romney won both Michigan and Arizona, Mr. Santorum held up a piece of shale rock [VIDEO] then focused his specch on criticizing Mr. Obama for her energy policies.
"Yeah, this is oil," Mr. Santorum said, tapping the shale rock on the podium's surface. "Oil, out of rock. Shale, it leaches oil. In fact, the highest quality oil in the world: light, sweet, crude. It can produce thousands and thousands of jobs up in Northwest, North Dakota
Newt Gingrich
The former House speaker's stance on energy has bounced around several times. Prior to 2008, he was a proponent of searching for green alternatives -- an approach that even had him sit down with former Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a commercial warning of the negative effects of global warming.
His views have since changed.
In a book titled "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less," published a few months after the May 2008 commercial, he pushed for lifting any bans on offshore and onshore drilling, including the natural gas industry. He wrote that the country needs to invest in new technologies to "find alternatives to oil by investing in new technologies to produce safe, clean, reliable, efficient, and inexpensive fuels here at home. This requires a Manhattan Project approach."
That aggressive drilling stance appeared in his 2011 address at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
His speech called for the abolishment of the EPA and aggressive approach for natural gas:
We should also stop the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to cripple the development of gas found in shale. We now have technology that let’s us go down as far as eight thousand feet, reach out as far as four miles horizontally. We can now produce commercially available natural gas from shale. We have an 1100-year supply. And the answer is, “But you don’t know what’s happening 8,000 feet down.” And therefore your EPA is going to protect you from the possibility that 378 years from now something bad will happen. Well, let me tell you something bad is happening this morning with all the people who can’t find a job because the government is killing their industry keeping the cost of energy high.
Research hasn't been finalized as to how much of a supply the natural gas from the shale supply, but 1,100 years is considered an overestimate. Even 100 years, which Mr. Obama announced at the State of the Union, is considered a generous number according to environmental agencies.
On Feb. 16, Mr. Gingrich revived his coined phrase "Drill here, drill now, pay less" for his platform of $2.50-a-gallon gas with a new advertisement (to the right) to go with a Facebook petition calling for Americans to demand that Mr. Obama to take significant steps to start pursuing immediate energy resources in the U.S. to gasoline and energy prices.
The petition says,
We the undersigned petition President Obama to act immediately to lower gasoline, diesel, and other energy prices and reduce our dependence on overseas energy sources from unstable countries by enacting Newt Gingrich’s plan to lower gas prices to $2.50 per gallon, including the immediate authorization of the Keystone XL pipeline and aggressive development of more North American oil and natural gas.
Barack Obama
President Obama campaigned and continues to push for renewable energy as the alternative to oil. But during the State of the Union address, Mr. Obama gave his endorsement of natural gas drilling [VIDEO]. The move is one that attempts to woo battleground states such as Pennsylvania with the promise of jobs and energy independence:
The development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don't have to choose between our environment and our economy. And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of thirty years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock— reminding us that government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground.
But Mr. Obama's engagement to natural gas drilling didn't last too long. Mr. Obama made an appearance at Nashua Community College in New Hampshire on March 1 to continue his push for a renewed investment in alternative energy and call for the end to $4 billion of subsidies for oil and gas companies:
Now, I know this is hard to believe, but some politicians are seeing higher gas prices as a political opportunity. You’re shocked, aren’t you? And right in the middle of an election year. Who would’ve thought? Recently, the lead of one news story said, “Gasoline prices are on the rise, and Republicans are licking their chops.” Licking their chops. I’ll tell you – only in politics do people respond to bad news with such enthusiasm. And you can bet we’ll be hearing more about those magic, three-point plans for $2 gas. Just like we heard about in the last election. Just like we’ve heard about for thirty years. You know the plans I’m talking about: Step one is drill, step two is drill, and step three is keep drilling.
Republicans, including presidential opponent Mr. Romney, said Mr. Obama was out of touch and that places like North Dakota have benefited from natural gas exploration.
