HBO Documentary - Gasland-Too big to fail, too small to matter

The Bush administration just keeps on giving!
Tailor made Legislation as a gift to Cheney and his natural gas/ energy cohorts
creates exemptions from safety standards! Tough luck, ' cause YOU are too small to matter!

Too small To Matter

" This new process opened up much of the US to drilling for natural gas. Every big oil and gas company in America was falling all over themselves to buy up the land rights for drilling. Chesapeake, Encana, Cabot, etc. saw big dollar signs. This is where the story gets interesting. George Bush signed a new energy bill into law in 2005. A loophole was inserted into the bill regarding fracking. The Bush/ Cheney Energy Bill exempted natural gas drilling from the Safe Drinking Water Act. It exempts companies from disclosing the chemicals used during hydraulic fracturing. Essentially, the provision took the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) off the job. It is now commonly referred to as the Halliburton Loophole."

These bastards deserve prison or worse for what they have done to America.

I don;t have to watch it to know what this means; that gas companies have been polluting our underground watersources without any rules whatsoever.

Aw, your drinking water got poisoned by our gas well? Tough sh*t!!!

This is pretty much a license to kill, slowly but surely.

A big ole finger to you both Bush/Cheney!!

I will watch it though........it will no doubt make my blood pressure go sky high.

Starred and flagged for being immensely important information.

[edit on 24-6-2010 by Asktheanimals]

reply to post by Asktheanimals


You got it.
Passed by the same totally corrupt Republican Party that inhabited The White House and Congress for six years!
The same criminals that whine about "America", the Free Market and patriotism. THe same guys that are still there in Congress asking you to vote for them!
Get it through your heads, "the Free Market" is Corporate Facism!
For once, stop complaining about Obama, just for this thread. THIS falls squarley on the Republican Party.

I totally watched this last night and can say I'm 100% disgusted.

Great documentary

I never knew our mid-west was this polluted by Halliburten and the likes, mostly within the last 10 years right?

Man when will we stop these corporations.

Thank good ol' Dick Cheney for this Bull shi*!!!!

Definitely suggest watching it. So many people, animals, and rivers are dying because of this.

WATCH IT!

Started strong and then went to the 2 party bashing/bickering. This goes beyond parties. Throw all the bums out n let's start over.

I saw Gasland the night it premiered on HBO, well worth the watch! Yes ur bloodpressure will be sky high and you'll be sickened. Ehh "water replacement"

This documentary is a must see. What they've done to people and to our land and water supply is just despicable.

What blew me away most is how wide an area of the country this covers and how the gas companies lie and lie and lie. They just don't care. They know no one is going to hold them accountable. Just like with the oil companies.

It wouldn't surprise me either if the increase in earthquakes north and east of the Mississippi wasn't related. Sounds like it could be if they're disturbing the shale layers. But what do I know.

And it proves again the old adage: If it seems to good to be true, it probably is.

[edit on 24-6-2010 by ~Lucidity]

I watched it last night too on HBO. I had no idea this was going on. I was shocked at the ruination of some of the most beautiful lands across our country by these bastards. The destruction of generations of some of the families of ranchers was heartwrenching to watch. Their land was worthless, families and animals poisoned.
They should be put in jail for this. I get madder and madder every day over all this, it makes me want to go back to burning sticks to heat with.

I saw this today....a moment of silence while I compose myself to type....EVERY AMERICAN needs to see this film!!
The last time I visited all those Western areas mentioned was over 10 years ago. It was not like that then!! I am sickened.

I can remember reading about the BLM areas in the news, and the discussion centered on the fight between the government and the environmentalists who said not to put roads into these areas. Rush Limbaugh's "environmental wackos" were portrayed as against ROADS, acting like "nazis" who didn't want anyone to have fun on BLM land. It never was the ROADS but the pollution! You breathe their air and drink their water, Mr. Limbaugh!!

First, we need to redefine ecoterrorism not as attacks in the name of saving the environment, but as attacks on the environment.

While America has come under attack (and surely these are acts of corporate ecoterrorism that destroy our "way of life") from the GOM oil leak, we must turn around and realize there has been another attack from the north, through the heart of America, through the very Red States who helped elect those who had a scorched earth policy. And Red or Blue, the ecoterrorists attacks continue on the Easter states.

Just as the Japanese planes attacked Pearl Harbor from two directions, so, too do these corporate ecoterrorists attack this country!

If we only focus on the GOM at the moment and do not make the connection with this other front on the war on the environment, the "small people" will lose forever the land our Forefathers gave us, if not their lives and livelihoods.

The "small people" are encouraged to fight each other about the religion of the founding fathers, their original intent, the flag, and the Constitution, but all too soon, the pollution will be too much for even the cloth flag and paper Constitution to filter, and then the land and way of life we sent our soldiers to die for, all will be lost.

The fight is against the polluters and corporatism, not each other. And any prayers to God should not be about a miracle to save us. No, we should all pray to God to give us the strength to fight.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
This is pretty much a license to kill, slowly but surely.

Yes. Years ago I heard the saying that every license issued to a nuclear power plant was a license to kill. Meaning that research had allowed for so many deaths per millions of people. So it is with all these wells.

Where do we get energy from then?

Yes. Years ago I heard the saying that every license issued to a nuclear power plant was a license to kill. Meaning that research had allowed for so many deaths per millions of people. So it is with all these wells.

Just because you heard it doesn't mean its true. Statistically Nuclear is the 2nd safest source of electricity, after hydro. For every license to build and operate a nuclear power plant, numerous lives, are then the energy will not come from more dangerous sources. Also I just want to point out that organizations that spread lies about the supposed 'dangers' of Nuclear power, such as Rocky Mountain Institute, Sierra Club, and Greenpeace - are the same people who encourage the use of Natural Gas and thus hydraulic fracturing.

[edit on 25/6/2010 by C0bzz]

I watched part of this documentary last night as well. Pretty horrible and unbelievable.

The part where the man took a cigarette lighter and lit the tap water coming out of the faucet was enough to make me never drink tap water again as long as I live.




"Its not supposed to do that..."




[edit on 25-6-2010 by BlackOps719]

Originally posted by C0bzz
Where do we get energy from then?
....
Statistically Nuclear is the 2nd safest source of electricity, after hydro.

First, the over riding question in the 21st century, now, may be where does the rest of the world get energy from?

China is ahead of the US in alternative/renewable research and application. China wants to even bring its technology to the US housing market. example India wants enough energy for its citizens, and they, too, are looking into 21st century technology.

Energy conservation is a way to use less energy from any source.

Freiburg, Germany

Are there natural resources involved in 21st century technology? Yes. Afghanistan's minerals, for example. And people have to decide if a military strategy is the best way to obtain them. And that involves lives, too, besides expenditures of money.

Second, yes, statistics calculate lives lost from direct usage of the energy source, hence the "license to kill", a fact. The question is, what tradeoff are citizens willing to accept? Lives were lost in the building of Hoover damn even, or can be lost in any construction, but the tradeoff was acceptable.

To be fair re nuclear power, there is also the question of storage, which many proponents I've talked to say that is a question for future generations.

The 21st century renewable/alternative technology is out there to be researched, developed, and applied. When even our military wants to green up, it's time to take note.

China is ahead of the US in alternative/renewable research and application.

I would agree that China is ahead of most of the world in terms of implementing renewables, however they are also way ahead of the world in building more fossil fuel facilities simply because no renewable source can at this moment in time come close to the economics and reliability of coal and gas plants, nor will they for the foreseeable future. The total contribution to new generation resources in China and India by coal, and natural gas far exceeds any contributions from wind and solar. Therefore it will be practically impossible for renewables to even reasonably dent fossil fuel generation in the foreseeable future. Every single report I have seen has shown that solar is well over twice the cost of fossil fuels, and wind somewhat more expensive than fossil fuels. Both are incredibly unreliable.

Additionally energy conservation can only slow or stop growth in developed nations; it's not going to close depreciated coal plants. Denmark is an example. They have tried using wind and conservation to lower energy use, but have the highest costs of electricity in Europe, and put out 650 grams of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour. Not one coal plant has been closed. France or the other hand has the lowest cost of electricity in Europe, and puts out 80 grams of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour because they closed there last coal plant a few years back. Their electricity use per capita is only marginally lower than France. I have also never seen a aluminium smelter run from wind turbines, or energy conservation closing a coal plant. Like France, both India and China are wanting to use 21st century technology. They have extremely ambitious GENIV nuclear programs. I'm not saying the energy conservation is useless but it's hardly going to do the majority of the work.

You also might want to check Natural Gas usage for countries you mentioned versus the policies they have.

Anti-Nuclear, pro renewable Germany:


And other "clean green" countries:

Anti-Nuclear, pro renewable Denmark:


Anti-Nuclear, pro renewable Austria:

Net generation down:


CO2 emissions way up:


Natural Gas import way up:


To balance out supply with demand when the wind is not blowing natural gas is required hence you see what is above. Even Environment Victoria environmental group here in Australia is essentially saying what you're saying, only they admit that renewables increase natural gas use.

So again if it's not Natural Gas what is it?

Romania that opened Nuclear plant in 1996:

Second, yes, statistics calculate lives lost from direct usage of the energy source, hence the "license to kill", a fact. The question is, what tradeoff are citizens willing to accept? Lives were lost in the building of Hoover damn even, or can be lost in any construction, but the tradeoff was acceptable.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Safe energy sources like Nuclear are hardly a license to kill if they safe lives by displacing massive amounts of coal, or natural gas. Statistically Nuclear is safer than wind also. No tradeoff is required since you don't need to go to Afghanistan to get the materials, you go to Australia. And with GENIV, the sea.

[edit on 25/6/2010 by C0bzz]

reply to post by C0bzz


Thank you, CObzz, for an informative reply!

I was thinking, would China even be at this point in their alternative energy R&D if it weren't for the income from their US exports? (Instead of us using fossil fuels to make our much loved plastic crap, we offshored that dirty work to China.) And will China have more influence in developing countries (like Africa) by offering them these energy alternatives? Life is not linearly simple.

Oh, here's the Sierra Club reply to their issue of support.

I guess even the issuance of drivers licenses would be a "license to kill" in a way. I'm pretty sure I personally won't kill someone with my car, but that's not the case with a nuclear power plant.

Even the space shuttle program came close to the risk assessment assigned to it. Again, statistically, there is a risk. We cannot believe that no deaths will occur because of a certain type of energy use. But, again, with nuclear, there is also the issue of storage.

I am old enough to remember when nuclear energy production was touted as unbelievably cheap. No mention to the public of safety or storage.

What is wrong is to portray the energy source as "clean", when no mention is made of how dirty is the process for extraction. How "clean" is natural gas, when the extraction involves chemicals in amounts and combinations not found in nature? Or the safety of an LNG terminal?

When Americans think of their cost of a unit of energy, they mean the $ amt on their bill. Americans are not used to thinking in terms of the added value cost of military deployments or of health, livelihood, way of live, or flaming tap water. The incentive to try a more "costly" alternative (whether through conserving or other energy source) is thus misleadingly diminished. IOW we don't hear the full story.

The GOM oil leak brings up both issues of best safe practices and value added costs. Was BP practicing best safe practices (as environmental groups advise)? No! Are Americans witnessing a much broader definition of the cost of a gallon of fuel? Yes!

Want to know who is the top customer of this CA manufacturer, Zero Motorcycles? Europeans.

Well, all I know is that my time on Earth is statistically decreasing in a bigger way each day, so the energy-environmental problems need to be addressed by the younger generations. It will be a different world 100 years from now, it must be if we all are to survive with decency and dignity.

Oh, I didn't directly answer this question. "So again if it's not Natural Gas what is it?" Ng should not be thought of as the "clean" source to solve the world's energy problems. It should be one source using best safe practices, with true costs factored in, but geographic regions need to develop renewables suitable to them. That plus universal housing and lifestyle alternatives need to be put into practice.

I live in a place right outside of harrisburg Pennsylvania called Lebanon, they want to build one of those plants right down the street from my house after the city council said they are allowed a permit magically taxes skyrocketed and we were forced to have to get city water and it is against the law to use our perfectly good wells for anything except well washing your car or watering your lawn. I wonder if what is discussed on Gasland has anything to do with this forced switch over to city water and sewer damn even the local politicians want to get in bed with them and are excited to be turned out like a $3 trick. My local community didnt want city water or this natural gas compound.

Until America get off it's gas and oil fix, expect more and more wells in places never drilled. This includes oil wells in deep water.

Don't blame Bush, blame all the bastards in DC. Obama has let this happen also.

reply to post by hinky


I agree I wonder how many gallons of gas that fox guy used on his cross country trip but then again there is the necessity but i think he should have critized the need for fuel as well

I watched this documentary and it would appear in some cases, not all, people got what they deserved. Their eyes lit up with dollar signs when the offers arrived at their doorsteps but none of that seems to be mentioned. I certainly do not condone what the gas companies have done, its terrible, but some of these imbeciles pissed and whined after the fact and more importantly after their wallets were inflated. Obviously some are victims in that the fracking process doesn't always stay confined to one area and could wreak havoc elsewhere.

brill