Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Mr. President, Please Stop Hydraulic Fracturing, Your Base Has Spoken

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation and its coalition of 20 environmental groups has taken it upon themselves to petition the Federal Government for redress of grievances. In a petition filed on April 4th the group has asked the White House for a "scientific analysis of fracking's impact on the Chesapeake Bay.

Laurel Peltier, a freelance environmental writer for Baltimore's Examiner.com highlights the "controversy" and petition in a recent column. For what it's worth she does note some potential highlights of hydraulic fracturing, but her recitation of the downside must be rebutted. So lets get started.....
Fracking is the only U.S. industry that isn’t regulated. Fracking uses highly toxic chemicals. Fracking drills through water tables and aquifers and is being blamed for thousands of water and health issues.
This is perhaps the most common complaint that I have encountered in my research and it is an outright lie and Mrs. Peltier knows it. In fact, she offers the evidence to rebut that statement in her own article, and I quote. " States regulate fracking, not the EPA or federal government." Got that, States Regulate Fracking. This is why town board and planning board meetings throughout upstate New York are filled to overflowing the environmental activists seeking to change or bolster local land use laws to prohibit drilling and state legislatures are being pressured to pass a moratorium, or better yet, a ban on the industry.

OK, moving on. Stating as fact that "fracking uses highly toxic chemicals is speculative, at best. Fracking fluid is proprietary. No one really know what is in there. Now this may be an issue for openness and transparency, but implying that this fluid is ready to kill people is a little over the top.
What some see as an home-grown and clean answer to energy dependence, others view as a water-polluting drilling method that hurts the land, water, people and animals and could possibly harm the Chesapeake Bay.
I would offer a recent detailed rebuttal produced by the invaluable Energy In Depth website. Their work is exhaustive.

Next, she moves to Gasland. I have already highlighted the hypocrisy of its producer here, and the documentary itself is mostly propaganda that Michael Moore would be proud of. If fact, there are many websites out there dedicated to disproving this film. Energy in Depth has an extensive debunking that goes on and on. The American Natural Gas Alliance has a rebuttal video that might be worth your time.

Interestingly, the most inflammatory claims in the film (ie flaming faucets) have been effectively debunked by numerous sources.

There is so much information out there if it is sought out. As Agent Mulder would say, "The truth is out there", you only need to seek it out.

Please bookmark!

1 comment:

  1. I remember Nat'l Geographic showing pictures of somewhere in the US that they had to light their faucets of gas before they could use the water- or something.
    Back in the `70's before I got to High school.
    They were talking about it as a benefit , because it showed how much petroleum was naturally in the ground- or something.

    Yes, go PC! We can turn a positive into a scare in one generation.
    Go big MSM!!!