Fracking

In this file photo, trucks line a Chevron fracking pad in Lost Hills during a hydraulic fracturing operation at the lease. These trucks brought sand used in the fracking process.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra led a coalition of state agencies Friday in suing the Trump administration over its recent review of fracking impacts in the Central Valley, essentially calling on the courts to block the Bureau of Land Management from resuming lease auctions of federal land for oil production primarily in Kern County.

The federal lawsuit, coming less than a week after an environmental group sued over the same BLM review, means a yearslong legal process that culminated in the release of an amended environmental review of fracking practices last year may have to begin anew. That has the potential to stall all new federal drilling leases in the state for years to come.

A BLM spokeswoman in California defended the agency's fracking review as having incorporated the best available information, including the state's own analysis.

Fracking injects sand, water and small amounts of sometimes toxic chemicals underground to release petroleum deposits.

Becerra has sued the Trump administration dozens of times over a variety of concerns. He alleged in a morning news conference that the federal government failed to consider the full health and environmental effects of the controversial oil field technique also known as hydraulic fracturing.

The BLM study's deficiencies, he alleged, jeopardize Central Valley residents' air and water quality and raises seismic risks. He also raised concerns that allowing fracking on 1.2 million acres of federal land in California threatens to worsen global climate change.

"We are suing the Trump administration once again for acting as if they are above the law," he said.

He added that much oil and gas production happens near some of the state's most vulnerable communities, which he said already struggle with poor air quality.

"Adding fracking to the equation would only make things worse,” he said.

Joining the attorney general as plaintiffs in the suit were Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been criticized locally for cracking down on oil production and planning to curtail in-state petroleum production, and the California Air Resources Board, the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the California Department of Water Resources.

Assemblyman Vince Fong, R-Bakersfield, issued a statement critical of Friday's lawsuit.

“Again, the Governor continues to take California in the wrong direction," Fong wrote. "Everyday Californians continue to be harmed by the lack of sensible and commonsense energy policies in Sacramento."

"It is unfortunate that there seems to be more focus on making political statements instead of helping Californians get affordable and reliable energy," he continued. "Producing energy in California by Californians would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, strengthen our economy, create jobs and better power our state.”

Also criticizing the state's action Friday was Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, who said cutting a source in-state oil production would increase the state's reliance on imports.

“The state’s decision to once again sue the Trump Administration — this time by refusing to accept the BLM’s science-based analysis — is another political stunt that will adversely impact the people who call California home," McCarthy said in an emailed statement.

On Tuesday, the Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit against the BLM that makes similar allegations that the agency's fracking review was inadequate.

The CBD was one of the original plaintiffs in the 2016 lawsuit that halted federal oil and gas leases in California regardless of whether the would-be oil field operator planned to frack the property.

Industry leaders have emphasized that although the BLM study covered federal property in many counties, fracking happens far more frequently in western Kern County than anywhere else in the state.

The BLM has said that oil drilling on federal land in California represents only about 8 percent of the state's total petroleum production. It says only about 1 in 5 oil wells on federal land in California is fracked.

The BLM's supplemental review, performed by court order and released last year, looked at fracking's potential effects on air and water, cultural resources, livestock grazing, wildlife, seismicity, and social and economic resources.

The agency said its findings relied on studies by the California Council on Science and Technology and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, as well as an environmental review by the Kern County Planning and Natural Resources Department.

John Cox can be reached at 661-395-7404. Follow him on Twitter: @TheThirdGraf. Sign up at Bakersfield.com for free newsletters about local business.

Recommended for you

(9) comments

Vavoom

what is left for us who live in california when the industry has made their money and raped the land to depletion? when we take from the earth, do we fill it/ replace it with something? we don't, thus the earth sinks and sinks. we can all learn from the states that have little or no environmental standards/protections... coal mine states, north dakota pipeline( oil leaking into land which impacts water supplies indian natives depend on), etc. Texas state is a good example, give it a few years and it will be in ruins... humans raping the land for $$$$

dabonem

If the oil industry was staffed by illegal immigrants, Newsome would never dare to shut it down because he is the vanguard of a hostile occupation government that doesn’t care about Californians. Newsome governs like he’s some kind of viceroy for a globalist regime. It takes one gallon of water to grow one almond and there are apparently no environmental concerns to be found there in a state with constant drought. This hypocrisy is how you know it has nothing to do with the environment. Newsome himself admits that his concerns are global rather than local so why is this person even governor of California when it’s very obvious he doesn’t give a hoot about any actual citizens of this state.

Masked 2020

carbon neutral...... cool... Tom Steyer for vice president in 2020

REMUDA

" . . . an environmental group . . . "? Oh my, are we in grave danger from 'environmental groups' over-populating the world with "stupids"?

” . . . it is difficult to argue with ‘the stupids’, since they tend to have so much more experience at being ‘the stupids’.”

As my Navy fighter pilot pals always said when on station in Japan, "Nevah Hatchi, Boy-San . . . !"

Lessee, if all us serious gas-drivers gave a buck, wonder how much we could raise on "GoFundMe" to get another suit in their faces? Couple Mil . . . ? That new recall petition is screaming through the malls, with more to come. There were 1000 folks at that meet, according to a Ventura property rights "group". Man up, the oil and state are OURS not theirs. Be careful, Sac or you will see more than you ever thought . . . and should anyway. No pain, no gain. BTW, what Newsom and this bunch are up to is AGAINST CALIFORNIA LAW AND CONSTITUTION! (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 6250-6270

Lilyrose

". Fracking injects sand, water and small amounts of sometimes toxic chemicals underground to release petroleum deposits."

Can that sentence be clarified ? Are toxins sometimes toxic ? Or sometimes they inject toxic chemicals ?

And could the major newspaper for Bakersfield ( hub of fracking for CA) give names and quantities of those chemicals being used in Kern county in the next "oil" article ?

Just a reader asking.

Gene Pool Chlorinator

Just an out-of-town reader asking, while continuing to besmirch our great city.

[tongue]

Lilyrose

Chlorinator:.

I bet the newspaper people won't respond.

Lady Elaine

Dear Lilyrose,

Sometimes, but not always, small amounts of chemicals that could be considered toxic must be added to frac fluids to make the fluids work properly. For instance, when an extremely high temperature condition is present at the depth of the frac, chemicals may be necessary to stabilize the fluids. Rest assured however, that these small amounts of chemicals are injected far below and away from fresh water and do not effect your drinking water at all. In 70 years of frac activity no drinking water has ever been affected in a California. And these are the Facts! Excellent question though!

Lilyrose

May I have the writer of article explain the sentence. And may the newspaper actually list the chemicals used with legal name and quantities.

No disrespect Elaine, but unless you are licensed I'm not sure what your "facts" are worth.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.