TribLIVE

| Opinion/The Review


 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Anti-fracking scandal: More junk 'science'

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or cmcnickle@tribweb.com).

Daily Photo Galleries

Sunday, Dec. 1, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
 

Having let environmental extremism trump its own rules about relying on genuine science, the Obama administration's National Park Service has withdrawn an anti-hydraulic-fracturing document that cited a New York Times op-ed as scientific evidence.

The park service document, a public comment on a proposal to allow fracking on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) property, expressed concern about “the possible spill-over effect onto national park lands, which are often near or even surrounded by BLM property,” particularly harm to air quality, The Washington Times reports.

Among supporting “evidence” the park service cited was a July 29 New York Times op-ed in which Anthony R. Ingraffea — whose work has been challenged by fellow researchers and rejected by the Department of Energy — said fracking causes leaks of methane, a greenhouse gas.

Writing with egg on his face to U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, who chairs a House subcommittee on public lands and environmental regulation, park service Director Jonathan B. Jarvis said the document shouldn't have been submitted, he didn't review it first and it should have cited peer-reviewed studies, not that op-ed. Mr. Bishop said it “illustrates a shared agenda between the administration and anti-energy special interest groups.”

That “shared agenda,” long obvious to those not blinded by ideological zeal, is confirmed by this National Park Service gaffe, which makes clearer than ever what truly drives this White House's approach to energy and environmental policy.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.

 

 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Editorials

  1. The Box
  2. Myopic automakers should embrace today’s high-tech gearheads, not attempt to stifle their innovations
  3. Sunday pops
  4. Obama’s problem: He denies reality
  5. Armstrong County Laurels & Lances
  6. Messrs. Tremba, Haggerty & Molinaro: Connellsville mourns
  7. U.N. Watch: End this ‘relief’
  8. Saturday essay: Cruel civilities
  9. Not even a ‘trickle’ of sound economics
  10. The minimum wage: Theaters at stake
  11. Massacre at Fort Hood: Vindication at last