If this has already been posted, please let me know (and close). I searched several ways, and was really surprised to not find it yet.
The WSJ has published an article
that debunks the Gasland
documentary, and explains why fracking is not the evil that is claimed. My family is supported by the oil industry, but we aren't kool-aid drinkers.
We know that oil companies run amock, and firmly believe that responsibility is #1 and must usually be enforced (oil companies don't do the right
thing unless you make them!).
That said, here are the facts. I'm pointing out a few of the most important ones, but I really recommend you read the link for yourself.
Contaminated Drinking Water?
Methane in Drinking Water?
The problem with this argument is that the average shale formation is thousands of feet underground, while the average drinking well or aquifer is a
few hundred feet deep. Separating the two is solid rock. This geological reality explains why EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, a determined enemy of
fossil fuels, recently told Congress that there have been no "proven cases where the fracking process itself has affected water."
They failed to note that researchers sampled a mere 68 wells across Pennsylvania and New York—where more than 20,000 water wells are drilled
annually. They had no baseline data and thus no way of knowing if methane concentrations were high prior to drilling. They also acknowledged that
methane was detected in 85% of the wells they tested, regardless of drilling operations, and that they'd found no trace of fracking fluids in any
This is something we have seen OVER and OVER with environmentalists. They have NO scruples about lying, about not using the scientific method,
whatever it takes. There's a difference between responsible forward momentum and blind obstructionism.
Fracking & Cancer?
In Dish, Texas, where the mayor moved away and claimed the gas wells were releasing toxic benzene into the environment. Tests showed that the only
residents who had above-normal benzene were smokers (cigarettes contain benzene).
Environmentalists claim oil companies are exempt from the federal Safe Water Act. This is FALSE. See again my comments under "methane".
Environmentalists have NO problem lying whenever it suits them.
The question for the rest of us is whether we are serious about domestic energy production. All forms of energy have risks and environmental
costs, not least wind (noise and dead birds and bats) and solar (vast expanses of land). Yet renewables are nowhere close to supplying enough energy,
even with large subsidies, to maintain America's standard of living. The shale gas and oil boom is the result of U.S. business innovation and
risk-taking. If we let the fear of undocumented pollution kill this boom, we will deserve our fate as a second-class industrial power.
Is the environment an utmost priority? YES. Does drilling pose a risk to the environment? YES. So do many other things. Driving your car, buying
plastics, having children. If you really want to stop forward movement in drilling, you're going to have to get on board with serious population
control. Or decide which among us should stop having access to modern technology. Should we continue looking for alternatives to oil? DUH, OF COURSE!
Should we continue to watch oil companies like hawks and assume they're misbehaving until they prove otherwise? YES.
BUT... fracking in itself is no more a risk than everything else involved in drilling. Simple drilling mud is a bigger problem than fracking fluid. To
focus on fracking to the exclusion of everything else is really ignorant.
Until we find something better, which we need to do quickly, oil is what we've got. We must be responsible as we find a way forward - but not
And any good conspiracy theorist must realize that environmental groups are just as greedy & dishonest as your average oil company. Compare them to
your average church: it's real easy to rip people off when you have the appearance of right on your side. I've seen environmental groups cause
terrible damage to communities for NO good reason. They should be treated with suspicion, just as the oil companies should be. The best position is
somewhere in the middle of the two extreme viewpoints these two groups have.