Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

'Gasland': The Battle Over Energy Extraction Moves Inland From the Gulf

1 year ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
While BP chief executive Tony Hayward turns his attention to yachting and other company officials take control of the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the company continues its quest for energy resources inland.

In fact, BP plans to start drilling again for natural gas in one Colorado county this fall.

But that method of drilling -- hydraulic fracturing is the technical term, "fracking" is the shorthand -- is getting plenty of attention this week with the release of the HBO documentary "Gasland," currently airing on On Demand. The film, which won the special jury prize for documentaries at the Sundance Film Festival, takes aim at fracking -- an increasingly controversial method of extracting natural gas in 34 states from the East Coast to the mountains in the West.

Fracking uses water, sand and chemicals --- many of which are banned by various federal laws -- pumped at high pressure into oil shale formations to crack the rock and release natural gas. Health groups and others claim the water contamination sickens livestock and people and hurts the air quality, not to mention the degradation to the scenery caused by drilling. Many believe fracking is causing chronic illness and cancer.

The energy industry disputes the documentary's representation of the fracking process, federal laws, state and federal regulations, and a range of other details.

One of "Gasland's" most amazing scenes is of a Fort Lupton, Colorado, woman striking a match and setting fire to the water coming from her kitchen faucet, where natural gas is clearly being released.

"It had some pretty alarming concerns," said Mike Eisenfel, state energy coordinator for the San Juan Citizens Alliance in Farmington, New Mexico. "When you talk to industry, they'll probably say those are extreme circumstances."

A Rifle, Colorado, man who contracted cancer after washing tanks emptied of fracking fluids may sue several companies over his illness.

Last summer, benzene levels in DISH, Texas, were 55 times higher than allowed by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Other chemicals exceeded legal limits, as well, with scientists and townspeople pointing at natural gas drilling.

Filmmaker Josh Fox points out his personal interest in the topic at the top of the film: He'd been offered $100,000 for natural gas drilling rights on his Pennsylvania land. He didn't accept the offer, but in this down economy, many of his neighbors did.

Drilling companies don't have to disclose what chemicals they use in fracking, in part because the 2005 energy bill prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating fracking -- a provision advocated by Vice President Dick Cheney. Some named the amendment after Halliburton, the huge energy company Cheney worked for before becoming vice president.

And the process doesn't always capture all of the natural gas; some of it seeps up through water faucets, as this trailer from "Gasland" shows:


But you don't need to spend 144 minutes in front of the TV to get a handle on the hazards of fracking. Just Google it.

A gas well blowout earlier this month in Pennsylvania required the evacuation of a portion of the Moshannon State Forest where the drill was located.

Eisenfeld says there's potential for other large-scale disasters.

"Given the very poor oversight by agencies like the BLM, there's all sorts of things that are possible and of concern," he said. "It's a very industrial process. There's a lot of chemicals, high pressures, in proximity to people's homes and schools."

At least 65 chemicals used in fracking in Colorado are listed as hazardous under federal law, according to a 2008 study by the Environmental Working Group. But they're allowed in natural gas drilling under the 2005 energy bill loophole.

The oil and gas industry is fighting back. Energy in Depth, an association of oil and gas contractors, counters some of the movie's claims. A New York Times review criticized the documentary for failing to provide more details about why views of oil industry executives and some government officials weren't included.

U.S. Rep. Dan Boren, an Oklahoma Democrat, also took aim at the film, saying: "I have not seen the movie in question but believe that it contains many inaccuracies. In Oklahoma, we have a proud heritage in the energy sector. We have seen the proper regulation of hydraulic fracturing at the state level."

"Gasland" shows Boren defending the industry during a committee hearing, saying there haven't been problems with fracking. At the same hearing, Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, asks why the industry objects to disclosing the chemicals they use. She doesn't get an answer.

DeGette, vice chairwoman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, is sponsoring legislation to require companies to reveal the chemicals they use in fracking natural gas, in an effort to protect drinking water.

Needless to say, she digs "Gasland," as evidenced through this statement:

"I am pleased that the film is bringing attention to hydraulic fracturing and I hope that it will give momentum to efforts to improve the safety of the process."

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

19 Comments

Filter by:
tndrdrgon

Thank you to the man who took the time to document the dangers of seeking natural gas. I really hope we can all learn from what has happened to the beautiful Gulf of Mexico and not allow that to happen to New York or any other part of our country.

June 25 2010 at 12:52 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
davidrdogbow

It's interesting to see people who have zero knowledge on the topic at hand whatsoever and pretty much zero knowledge on oil and gas in general, let alone the extensive and ridiculous regulatory bodies that oversee, overreach, and over-impose them.

It puts things in perspectives for sure... to see people making claims that have zero application to reality - talking about operations and acting like they know whats going on - when they can't even describe the basic concept at hand.

Makes it easy to see why so many politicians/governments get away with murder and theft from day to day - because the people take anything they hear at face value instead of doing the required background research to make sure they aren't being lied to.

Sad.

June 24 2010 at 7:27 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
wrayassoc

The issue here is not Bush or Obama. The issue is an American public that is willing to sacrifice the quality of life experience by others to preserve their own resources. It is the concept of “cheep” or “free” energy. That is the base issue here. The American seems willing to accept ANY adverse impact to someone else so long their individual perceived quality of life is maintained. The American public is placated by a political body which says it has passed “regulations” to “protect the public health, safety and, welfare only to not enforce those same regulations allowing the extensive destruction and damage to occur.
Industry experts will certainly deny any public harm or adverse environmental or social impacts. The experts will portray any objection as extreme or an isolated occurrence. They will justify their operations with simplistic answers saying “these impacts are minor, temporary and occurring in remote locations” and they have been reviewed by the appropriate governmental agency and have been issued their “permits”. These same type of experts guaranteed that a massive Oil spill in the Gulf could never occur. These same regulatory agencies, both federal and state, told us that these oil and gas wells are adequately regulated, monitored, inspected and pose no risk to the public health safety and welfare. Quite simply both the regulated industry and the regulatory agencies have clearly and continually demonstrated they will lie to the American Public with our own Congress and elected representatives supporting them.
We as a society seem to have accepted a belief that if “I cannot see it from my front porch” it is not a problem. We seem to believe that we are somehow entitled to destroy someone else to justify our own personal requirements for energy. When politicians passed around the Cheep& Free, Safe Energy Kool-Aid, we drank a belly full.

June 24 2010 at 9:10 AM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
Stevie

This show was riveting; not because it was a polished professional piece, but in spite of it.
Kudos to this young man for the guts and stamina to give us a glimpse of the tip of the iceberg.
Here's the part where we should all become outraged and inspired to act and save our country (for a change).
I love luxuries as much as the next guy but I could learn to cut back and make better choices.
Lets separate the politicians from the corporations so they can do the same.

How & Who do I contact?

My comments are not meant to bring about a debate on something we all know too little about.
This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed on many levels. I advocate these very serious "allegations" be addressed with the same urgency the government and politicians would demand for there own families. Every story has 2 sides lets hear both in layperson terms. In the mean time anyone with serious doubts may want to change their vacation plans this summer and maybe stop by some of those folks homes for "lemonade" or maybe drop a "fishin" line in. You can decide for yourself.

June 23 2010 at 11:40 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
winzme

The horrendous use of misleading articles in an effort to convert the citizenry to a particular point of view is manipulative and shows a general disregard of the people to make informed and intelligent decisions.

The state Department of Environmental Protection shut down the well and fined the company that was contaminating the drinking water, causing the water to start on fire in the faucet. The company was fined for its shoddy well construction as well as failing to alleviate the problem when previously identified.

Other government agencies do regulate fracking even if the EPA doesn't, not only other federal agencies but other state agencies as well.

The inference from the article that fracking avoids any regulation is either poorly written or the intention of the author.

The article is untrustworthy on this subject, which is a shame, because people do need information. But when articles go out of their way to twist the facts to meet the view of the author rather then provide facts that people can trust, it ruins the credibility of the whole article and the premise of the article.


I will also point out that several studies have contradicted the position taken by several groups regarding fracking.

Questions that come to mind, are the chemicals used in fracking in general use for other purposes?

How long has fracking been in use, domestically and world wide?

June 23 2010 at 5:13 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
mad4tdn

There's only one solution. We must stop all use of energy and go back to being cavemen ... except for our politicians. They will be exempt and the only ones who have cars. Please turn in your keys immediately! No more energy means no more planes, trains and autos. You can't have it both ways people!

June 23 2010 at 3:23 PM Report abuse +4 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to mad4tdn's comment
jancf

Or.....do what creative, intelligent people have always done and go forwards, not backwards. You may be happy to be stuck in the fossil fuel mindset, but others are leaping forward with research and development. Your argument about no more planes etc. is a good illustration...without vision and creativity, there would BE no cars and planes, but just horses. Time to catch up & unleash the incredible creative minds which are being squashed by policies designed to benefit entrenched oil interests only. At least subside them as much as oil is subsidized. Anything else is insanity.

June 27 2010 at 7:48 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
vivralafrance

WAKE UP AMERICA ! if much more happens I am going to believe the 2012 Mayan calander

June 23 2010 at 2:06 PM Report abuse -5 rate up rate down Reply
Sally

2005 energy bill prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating fracking -- a provision advocated by Vice President Dick Cheney. Some named the amendment after Halliburton, the huge energy company Cheney worked for before becoming vice president
I think we can understand how we got into the oil mess...The rules were relaxed. Inspectors paid off. With all the mess Obama inherited, these troubles were not forseen. Now they want to poison our lands. Very troubling.

June 23 2010 at 1:53 PM Report abuse -5 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Sally's comment
winzme

States still regulate, and do an effective job from what I can tell.

The article is misleading, to say the least.

On top of that, other agencies do regulate at the Federal level.

While I can understand that agencies should have information on the chemicals, I can also understand why that information should kept out of foia requests, not available to competitors, and secured to only those with a need to know. Further, the government should be liable in the case the information is ever leaked to the full extent of damages.

June 23 2010 at 5:17 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Michael

My area of Southeast Michigan has abundant ground water, and much natural gas. It is not uncommon for domestic water wells to entrain some methane. While not desirable, the phenomenon is not due to fracturing by evil corporations: it was evident generations ago.
People need to get a better grip on what man does vs what is the fact pattern independent of the puny activities of man.

June 22 2010 at 8:21 PM Report abuse +8 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Michael's comment
vivralafrance

the article is about Colorado not Michigan. Sad there is so little compassion. If your well was contaminated and there was a well drilled nearby and your water turned black soon after the drilling began, and your family became sick, I guess you would just say it is nature. As to "puny" activities of man, does that also include the "puny" little activity of BP in the Gulf ? WAKE UP !

June 23 2010 at 2:04 PM Report abuse -3 rate up rate down Reply
armenea

Windmills kill birds. Solar panels fry birds

June 22 2010 at 6:30 PM Report abuse +5 rate up rate down Reply
4 replies to armenea's comment

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>