Ryan Jacobs is a senior editorial fellow for Mother Jones in San Francisco. His work has also appeared in the Bay Citizen, Sierra magazine, the Point Reyes Light, The Chicago Reporter, and others. During his short reporting career, his coverage has ranged from the discovery of a potentially new species of phytoplankton to the scene of a quintuple homicide.
Bill Seitz, a Republican state senator from Ohio, recently told the Wall Street Journal that his state's renewable energy and energy efficiency standards are reminiscent of "Joseph Stalin's five-year plan."
Seitz, who is also on the board of the shadowy corporate-government allegiance known as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), made this charmingly ahistorical claim just a week after inviting the climate-change-denying Heartland Institute to testify against the standard before the Ohio Senate Public Utilities Committee. He has taken it upon himself to determine whether Ohio should amend or repeal its clean energy law, which requires utilities to institute energy efficiency measures and to draw at least 12.5 percent of energy from renewable sources by 2025.
The Ohio legislature approved its clean energy standard almost unanimously in 2008. Since then, wind and solar companies have created 8,000 new jobs, and efficiency programs have netted rate payers $1 billion in savings, according to the non-profit Union of Concerned Scientists and the Ohio Public Utilities Commission. But in late February, Seitz introduced legislation that aims to overhaul the law.
Seitz maintains that he has launched the review because the current policies were based on the assumption that wind and solar prices would go down faster than they have over the past five years. He says the state has already deployed the "low-hanging fruit" energy-saving measures, and utilities and their industrial customers are reticent to implement the more expensive technologies that might be necessary to reach the goals set in 2008. "Nobody is for more carbon emissions than you need to have, but at the same time the question is, well, what does it cost?" Seitz told Mother Jones in an interview.
The senator's record and alliances are probably some indication of the direction he'll take his review process. In 2011, Seitz cosponsored a bill to repeal the renewable energy requirement entirely. He also sits on the board of ALEC, a public policy group that brings together corporate interests and conservative lawmakers to push industry-friendly bills in state legislatures, and coauthored the group's model renewable energy standard repeal bill known as the "Electricity Freedom Act." Another ALEC member, the Ohio-based American Electric Power Company Inc. (which stands to lose money due to the law's efficiency standards), was the third largest donor to his 2012 campaign, according to campaign finance data. Other big utilities, including FirstEnergy Corp. and Duke Energy, have been consistent supporters of Seitz.
Renewable energy advocates are not optimistic about Seitz's "review" of the renewable energy standard. "For Senator Seitz to create an appearance of a fair process given his close alliance with ALEC and its powerful interests is disingenuous," said Steve Frenkel, the Midwestern director of the Union of Concerned Scientists. Seitz, on the other hand, doesn't think his campaign donations have any influence on his decision-making. "I'm term-limited. I could give a damn," he said, noting that he's "done" when his term ends in 2016.
Despite Seitz's allusions to Soviet centralized planning, recent polling shows that more than 65 percent of Ohio voters support the renewable energy benchmarks, and a majority of respondents said they would be willing to pay more for power from clean sources. "Ohioans know that their economy and their environment are benefiting from investing in clean energy technologies," Frenkel said. "And Senator Seitz is just out of step with the people of Ohio in recognizing the important clean energy transition that the state's already making."
Drillers inject high-pressure fluids into a hydraulic fracturing well, making slight fissures in the shale that release natural gas. The resulting briny wastewater flows back up to the surface, where it is transported by truck or pipeline to nearby injection wells. The liquid is then pumped down the injection wells to a layer of deep, porous rock, often sandstone. Once there, it can flow in every direction, including into and around faults. Added pressure and lubrication can cause normally stable faults to slip, unleashing earthquakes.
Wastewater left over from fracking wells eventually ends up deep underground, where it can cause earthquakes. Wikipedia
In November 2011, a destructive 5.7-magnitude earthquake rocked the grasslands outside the small town of Prague, Oklahoma. The shaking leveled 14 homes, shut down schools for repairs, and was felt across 17 states. It also troubled seismologists, who'd never expected an event so large to hit an area that was supposed to be seismically safe.
According to the results of a new study published online yesterday in the journal Geology, the temblor was potentially linked to the underground injection of wastewater from local oil operations. In fact, the fault that triggered the event ruptured just about 200 meters from active injection wells. Changes in water volumes deep underground may have reduced the stress on the rock, allowing the fault to slip.
The underground disposal of wastewater has skyrocketed due to the recent uptick in hydrofracking operations across the country. Other studies have linked wastewater injection wells to earthquakes in otherwise seismically quiet areas of Arkansas, Texas, Ohio, and Colorado. The Oklahoma quake, however, was the most powerful.
For the current issue of Mother Jones, contributing writer Michael Behar followed Katie Keranen, the lead author of the Geology study, into the fields of the Sooner State for an elegant look at the science behind the link between earthquakes and the oil and fracking industries. Behar also interviewed seismologists and government officials who are increasingly concerned that loose regulations on wastewater injection could cause the next big one in a region unprepared for seismic activity. And he details the shadowy ties between industry and science that may complicate meaningful regulatory change.
Frankenstein's Cat: Cuddling Up to Biotech's Brave New Beasts
By Emily Anthes
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN/FSG
Advances in biotech range from the frivolous GloFish—America's first neon-glowing pet—to goats genetically modified to produce a human enzyme that may ward off the global childhood scourge of diarrhea. In a fascinating romp through laboratories, barns, and pet stores, science journo Emily Anthes interviews the innovators pushing biological limits, and offers elegant explanations of neuroscience and genetics. But though she touches on ethical considerations, Anthes puts a bit too much faith in her subjects' ability to make the right calls.
On Monday, an American cybersecurity firm called Mandiant released a report accusing the Chinese government of systematically hacking into American computer networks and targeting state secrets, weapons programs, businesses, and even the nation's gas pipelines. The New York Times vetted the story and concluded that a growing body of evidence "leaves little doubt" that these attacks are originating from a secret Chinese army base. Adam Segal, senior fellow for China studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (an organization that, in the past, has also been targeted by hackers that appeared to be China-based), tells Mother Jones that this "raises the pressure on the increasing drum beat on the US to do something."
So just how freaked out do you need to be? Here's everything you need to know:
How do cyberattacks and cyberwarfare work? A cyberattack is what happens when a hacker penetrates computers or networks for the purpose of maliciously exploiting systems and information. This can lead to identity theft, viruses, theft of intellectual property, or full-on system infiltration (i.e., the hacker can watch your every move). Cyberwarfare is what happens when countries are the ones employing those hackers, often with the goal of stealing state secrets and/or causing damage.
The scheme that Chinese hackers employ to gain footholds on victims' computers is known in computer-speak as spear phishing, according to Mandiant, and it's a scam that's been around for years. The sabotage begins when a victim receives an innocuous work-related email about a meeting or a project from what appears to be a colleague's email address. If the target takes the bait, he or she will click on a hyperlink or download an attachment from the message. In some cases, suspicious recipients have responded to phishing emails with questions about the file's authenticity. The Chinese hackers have responded: "It's legit." When the target downloads the files, they'll be unwittingly installing remote-access software (sometimes referred to as a "backdoor") that allows the hacker to assume control of the victim's computer.
With a few lines of code, the hacker can install other backdoors and programs, upload and download files, capture screenshots of the user’s desktop, record keystrokes and passwords, and shut down the system. The sleuthing can last months or even years, and confidential and top-secret files can be easily transported from the network into the hacker's hands. Here's a video showing an attack in progress:
So what is this mysterious Unit 61398? Unit 61398 (or "61398部队" for the Mandarin speakers among you) is believed to be a top-secret unit of the Chinese government that "engages in harmful 'Computer Network Operations,'" according to the Mandiant report. It's located in a 12-story facility in Shanghai, and could have up to thousands of employees, most of whom are required to speak English, demonstrate computer security skills, and exhibit "team spirit." Richard Bejtlich, the chief security officer at Mandiant, tells Mother Jones that the unit built new headquarters in 2007. Mandiant claims to have known about the unit for seven years, but it's unclear exactly how long it has been around. D.B. Grady, a national security journalist and author, makes the case that "concerns over Unit 61398—a perfectly unnerving name—are no more worrisome than Chinese spies recruiting American agents to steal folders from locked filing cabinets." He adds, "If the US government were really alarmed, we would be threatening to go to war. Instead, we're threatening to give a lot of money to government contractors."
Nevertheless, here are some infographics showing just how effective Unit 61398 is at getting on your computer, and staying there:
Who is the Chinese government hacking?The short answer: Your business, your water supply, your defense, your newspapers, and probably more. The longer answer: Since 2006, China's espionage division has stolen data from at least 115 American businesses—and that's only the hacking that Mandiant directly observed. The company believes that number represents only a small fraction of the China's overall hacking activity. Not surprisingly, Chinese spies were most interested in hacking national-security-related industries such as aerospace, energy, scientific research and information technology. Here's a chart showing the most-targeted industries (it only includes attacks Mandiant witnessed, and includes some that occurred outside the United States):
Mandiant
But even if you work for an alfalfa farm in Wyoming, hacking could still affect you: According to the New York Times, the hackers are interested in US critical infrastructure—electric grids, oil pipelines and water systems—and are attempting to unlock US military secrets by targeting defense contractors and weapons program (more on that later). Chinese hackers are also taking on media giants that produce journalism critical of China: the Times' computers were compromised recently after a high-profile investigation revealed that members of Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao’s family had accumulated massive wealth from state contracts, and the Washington Post, Bloomberg News and the Wall Street Journal have also all been targeted. (Mother Jones liability note: China is great! 我们爱中国!)
Why is China hacking the United States?Segal, the Council on Foreign Relations expert, explains:
The Chinese want to move up the value chain. They want to move from "made in" to "innovated in China." So part of it is stealing industrial secrets and helping Chinese companies. There's [also] political and military espionage—having a better sense of what the US government and US opinion leaders and other people think about China and try to influence that, and wanting to steal US military secrets. It's also a kind of deterrent. [It] sends a message to the US that the US homeland is vulnerable and if there was going to be a regional conflict that escalated, the US should know that the Chinese have a way of reaching out and touching us.
Another explanation? Chinese hackers just really wanted to access their social-media accounts, many of which are blocked on the mainland. Mandiant was able to trace some of the hackers' identities because the "easiest way for them to log into Facebook and Twitter [was] directly from their attack infrastructure." And as our colleague Josh Harkinson noted, at least one hacker appears to be "a fan of American and British pop culture"—he used Harry Potter references for his passwords.
So…just how screwed are we? Both private US companies and government infrastructure are pretty bad at stopping hackers from beating down the door. Most private companies "aren't in a position to defend themselves, and if you devote any length of time to break into one of these guys, you're going to find a way in," says Mandiant's Bejtlich.
When it comes to government, the forecast isn't much better: President Obama says that the "cyberthreat is one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face as a nation." Between 2007 and 2009, the head of the Pentagon's Cyber Crime Center confirmed 102 instances in which hackers had infiltrated the networks of government agencies, military contractors, or other entities connected to the Department of Defense, according to a 2010 Forbes report. In 2007, the 10 largest defense contractors, including Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and Boeing, all suffered security breaches that traced back to China. CFR's Segal says that even though cyber attacks aren't new, "on the defense side, we haven't had too much success" defending against them.
But experts don't necessarily say that means the United States is screwed. Segal says that US-China relations would have to "already be very, very bad or very, very close to military conflict anyway for the Chinese to consider a cyberattack." He adds that "there is some vulnerability to the power grid and industrial sector, but it's not a major threat right now. The major threat is espionage and stealing secrets."
"The way cybersecurity works is the way security works in the real world," Bejtlich says. "It's based on fast detection and response. It's hard to stop someone from breaking into your house, but you can call the police and kick them out." He adds that "defense contractors also learn from their experiences, and the ones who are making the news more tend to do the best job of protecting information that I've seen."
Grady makes the case that many of the cybersecurity concerns are overblown, and are instead, simply a good way for the defense industry to squeeze more money out of taxpayers. "This isn't some kind of new horror. Cyberattacks will become worrisome when someone figures out how to use a copy of Linux to blow up something," he tells Mother Jones. "The motives of defense contractors are pretty obvious, aren't they?" he adds. "The war on terror is all but over, but cybersecurity could mean anything and everything. Where there's fear, there's a lot of money to be made."
What is the Obama administration doing? Last week, Obama issued an executive order on cybersecurity with the aim of protecting US critical infrastructure from hackers, despite pushback from conservatives and big business. The order requests that companies participate in a voluntary information-sharing program so the government can help them stop attacks. "It's not clear that the executive order is going to make it better," Segal says. According to Bejtlich, the administration "is doing as much as it can with the order, but now the focus needs to shift to the House and the Senate."
Who else is China attacking? Wait, are we attacking anyone? Check out this amazing chart by Foreign Affairs, showing the number of cyber attacks, and by whom, from 2001 to 2011 (click link for the full chart):
SC Magazine reports that hackers (of unconfirmed origin) are now using phishing emails that claim to include the Mandiant cybersecurity report, in order to gain access to victims. The phishing emails are reportedly targeting Japanese companies and Chinese journalists. Here's a screenshot of one of the fake emails, released by Symantec:
And here's a tweet from Malware Lab claiming that some of the victims may be Chinese journalists:
Beyond the blustering on Benghazi and the budget sequester, there are many serious issues facing the nation. Climate change, gun violence, immigration reform, drone warfare, human rights—Mother Jones is dedicated to serious investigative reporting on all of these. But we need your help. We're a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and our work is mostly funded by donations. Please donate 5 or 10 bucks to the Mother Jones Investigative Fund today to turbocharge our reporting and amplify our voice. Thanks!
