Home | About | Donate

The EPA’s Fracking Study, Explained


The EPA’s Fracking Study, Explained

Wenonah Hauter

Don’t be fooled. Headlines in the New York Times and other news media about the EPA’s long-awaited study on the impacts of fracking on drinking water are another tragic case of not looking beyond the timid agency’s spin. Despite the lack of new substantive data and the limited scope of the study, the EPA did find instances of water contamination and outlined the areas where this could happen in the fracking process.


You can explain the EPA’s fracking study in two words: Captive Agency


Get political appointees out of all governmental agencies NOW!


Now that is new, I like it and it sure couldn’t hoit. Can you imagine the Securities Exchange Commission run by a really good accountant instead of a Wall Street retread?


Well done, ctrl_z.

I have seen similar things in Australia. If decisions by government mining safety inspectors go against BHP or Rio Tinto, those companies go straight to the government ministers and give the safety inspectorate a kick in the bum. The so called “regulated” are in fact the ones who have gotten into a position to tell governments what to do.

The EPA is a captured agency, because the government itself has been captured. Or to express it another way, the democracy is broken.