Andrea Derflinger, Rohan Bamania, Nathan Heyn, Alex Antezana, Quinn McConnell
Article 4: Exposing Fracking to Sunlight
Fracking processes utilize science to maximize yields from concentrated gas deposits housed in shale. By using pressurized water and a potent cocktail of potentially dangerous chemicals, the deposits can be broken up and the gas extracted. The movie and article that our group read did not go into great detail about how science has enabled fracking to do what it does. However, the article “Exposing Fracking to Sunlight” did state the opinion that science should be integrated into policy making. One thing that science could provide is more stringent legislation and oversight of fracking procedures. Tests could be made available that can monitor water quality and seismic activity around fracking wells so that any claims of community disruption from these events could easily be verified. By providing an opportunity for verification, practices that negatively disrupt the environment could also be curbed or prevented. By using scientific advisors, policy makers and the general public would be able to further understand the risks associated with fracking. The risks include not only environmental and cultural risks, but health risks as well. A “list of ingredients” detailing what exactly is contained in the fracking fluid is not required from the fracking companies. If scientific research is made publicly available in a format that most people would be able to understand, it is possible that any passive outlooks on fracking would be eliminated. With people able to make informed decisions after being exposed to scientific knowledge, communities would be able to decide for themselves whether or not they wanted to allow fracking to be introduced.
In a political sense, hydraulic fracturing is discussed a lot throughout the movie Gasland. The film shows viewers that even with unsafe practices, gas companies are not being punished by the government. This is first shown with the interview of Weston Wilson, an employee of the EPA. He talks about a letter he wrote to Congress after the EPA failed to act on contamination from hydraulic fracturing. This incident occurred in 2004 when there were reports of water contamination in Alabama due to hydraulic fracturing which the EPA chose to not pursue. Mr. Wilson’s letter was rejected by a panel that stated although hazardous materials were being injected underground, the EPA did not need to investigate. In his letter he also noted that the panel who rejected the investigation, had 5 of 7 members with conflicts-of-interests if the investigation were to be undergone. The EPA’s acknowledgement of the toxins and failure to take necessary steps to fix it shows how corrupt the fracking business has become. Even more so this is supported with the panel members that had conflicts-of-interests with the investigation, meaning they would most likely lose a lot of money. From what GasLand has shown me, the government and its various organizations are doing what they can to ensure fracking is given the green light so they benefit from the money. Another example of this in the movie would be the Energy Policy Act of 2005. With this act oil and gas drillers are allowed to inject known hazardous materials unchecked directly into or adjacent to underground drinking water supplies. This other example of how the government is safeguarding oil companies to continue drilling is completely corrupt. Now referring back to the article “Exposing Fracking to the Sunlight” where states lacked resources to enforce data collection has resulted in no policies being construed and also no information being accessible to the public. Without the public knowing the harms of fracking and no laws opposing hydraulic fracking, the government and gas companies are free to continue this harmful practice.
Watching Gasland has really given me a good insight about the world of fracking and how it affects people. Honestly, it is quite jarring to watch the some of the residents of Dimock, PA, Weld County, CO, state of Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico and Oklahoma having so much trouble with their lives. Having health problems, feeling of being deceived by the government, feeling of powerlessness and on top of that having explosive conditions inside of a house is not the kind of life these residents deserve. Their water wells have the ability to LITERALLY burst into flames. Their water supplies are contaminated with organic products which are used in the process of fracking. That’s utterly ridiculous. The fact that government trying to cover up these problems shows how much they do not care about the people who are affected by fracking.
People who are affected by fracking have lodged multiple complaints to the the oil companies only to be given a deaf ear to their plea. The pain and the suffering they receive every day is not worth the amount of oil they get from fracking. Everyone who is affected has the same story, same kind of worry and they felt as if they had to do something so that their children do not get affected by this. According to the article “Exposing Fracking to Sunlight”, it seems that public trust is a big issue for the government and the oil companies. It the lack of disclosing information about the methods of fracking and the problems of it that frustrates the people. Due to the monopoly between the oil companies and the government, the people truly feel powerless. But not all of the government is involved in this. There are some people in the government who do stand up in the fight against fracking, but are just shut down by the “higher-ups”. There are so many environmental activists who join forces in this fight. But even with the exposure that these people bring to the society, nothing changes...
The documentary is essentially showing the people the consequences of fracking. The objective is to send a message to the people. Making them aware of this unpleasant method of extracting oil, giving an insight on the atrocities that fracking brings on the people.
The general public has been majorly affected by the effects of hydraulic fracking, and in fact we would not know about the severe health effects if it were not for the general public figuring this out. In the movie Gasland, Josh Fox interviews multiple victims who have suffered from health issues after drinking water contaminated with natural gas in it. The general public found this out when they lit a match close to the tap water coming out of the faucet, and it would shoot up flames. This has caused the general public in these areas to have to buy water individually, or for companies in charge of fracking to bring them clean water. The companies are also not trustworthy to the public because they “severely limit regulation and disclosure, which has left citizens, communities, and policymakers without access to information on the full range of consequences of shale resource development in order to make fact-based decisions” (Exposing Fracking to Sunlight). Policymakers are left not being able to make policies regarding how fracking companies should do help those who have side effects due to fracking or are having to get new water, because they do not want to released what chemicals and who knows what could be found in the waste. All of the waste is evaporated into the air, or has been dumped into rivers causing an issue with species dying off. This also means the contaminated water is able to flow between rivers, large bodies of water and estuaries causing problems to the aquatic ecosystems. At the end of the film Gasland, Josh Fox videotapes a session going on at Congress, where one lady asks a man if he can identify what they use during the fracking process, the man reluctantly says what is in there but with no confidence that nothing bad is found. This is why these companies would rather people stay without saying anything about any of the effects fracking may have on them, and rather gives them free water. In the article “Exposing Fracking to Sunlight”, the author states that in order for science to be true it must “be accessible to the public and play an important role in informing decisions”. The companies know that what they are doing to the public and environment is wrong, but it is not considered a scientific technique because it is so dangerous to the natural world.
Individual members of communities where hydraulic fracking occurs are certainly being impacted by the negative consequences that come from this process. The main problem with hydraulic fracking is the impact that it has on drinking water. This problem, as portrayed in the Gasland documentary, mainly pertains to individuals living in rural areas and who get their water from a well. The process of hydraulic fracturing involves using close to 600 chemicals to aid in drilling deep into the earth to get to natural gas. These chemicals get into the underground water supply and contaminate water for the residents near these fracking sites. Drinking this water for prolonged periods of time can cause a range of effects from headaches to vomiting to cancer to brain damage which can ultimately lead to death. Gasland showed examples of people literally lighting the water coming out of their faucet on fire. That obviously can’t be good to drink. Even though the heads of the fracking companies claim that they have no effect on the community water supply, they would not drink a sample of local residents well water when offered. Not only does fracking pose a health risk to individuals, but it also acts as a financial detriment. Some of the people whose water was contaminated decided to put in filtration systems, which cost thousands of dollars. These filtration systems don’t even work to completely rid the water of toxic chemicals either. Also, I don’t know if anyone has tried to take one of these companies to court yet, but if they do that will obviously cost a lot of money. They will probably lose anyways because these fracking companies are worth millions to billions of dollars. Further, people will inevitably end up spending a lot of money on hospital and doctor bills for the health effects mentioned earlier. As shown, fracking definitely does have a huge effect on individuals, and none of them good. Although what I wrote about was only talking about the group of people who are near the drilling sites. As for the rest of America, fracking offers an abundant and efficient fuel source and is generally a good thing.
How fracking relates to our group members:
Andrea: Currently the issues of hydraulic fracking do not affect me. While viewing the movie, I did notice that the state of Virginia was not highlighted as one of the states where hydraulic fracturing was occurring. I actually was not aware of this topic until now but I definitely find it to be a very interesting topic. One of the things that does relate to me is the fact I do live near the Washington D.C. area. In the film, Josh Fox traveled to Washington D.C. to listen to officials discuss the issues of hydraulic fracking. I usually hear about most issues in nation when they go through Congress, and are further discussed on the news.
Rohan: Quite honestly I have not been properly informed about fracking, which is why I was appalled by the info I received while watching Gasland. It was quite disturbing and disrupted the lives of the people who were affected by it. Do we get more oil? Yes. But is the community being destroyed in the process? Yes. People’s lives are more important than a source of energy.
Quinn: I honestly didn’t even know what hydraulic fracking was until watching this documentary. It definitely made me realize that fracking has the potential for some terrible environmental effects but it also made me see that these effects are pretty localized. Only the people relatively close to the site are actually affected. In my opinion, fracking still seems like a good way of obtaining energy but there just needs to be some more regulation around it.
Alex: Having done a project on hydraulic fracturing my senior year of high school, I was already very aware of the problems that come with fracking. Although fracking does not affect my life like it does for families actually living near fracking sites, I still try to keep myself informed on the fight against fracking. Whether it be laws being proposed or organizations combating fracturing, anything to stop this practice is supported by me.
Nathan: I was aware of these issues after taking a previous ISAT class. I do not live in an area that is directly affected by fracking, but I was disturbed to see some of the negative impacts that fracking has had on some areas. On one hand, fracking reduces energy costs, but on the other hand, its unregulated proceedings appear to be disrupting some communities’ way of life.
Our group is interested in learning if Josh Fox has suffered any charges against filming on any of the sites, as well as if the area around his house has been destroyed to accommodate hydraulic fracking?
Has the fracking process changed since the movie was made based on a change of methods to extract natural gas?
Do those who have had health issues due to the effects of natural gas receive any type of monetary benefits in order to conceal any secrets on fracking?
Have there been any studies or conclusions as to the long-term and short-term health effects fracking can have on an individuals health?
Has the EPA made any laws against fracking in certain areas, where there may be natural gas present, but the area is preserved under laws, besides the one area mentioned in the movie?
