A major flaw of this anti-fracking movie is the fact that the Global Energy guy (played by Matt Damon) has no argument whatsoever in favor of producing natural gas by means of fracking other than it brings money. Fracking has been successfully used for decades. There must be some environmental protections in place. Are there no arguments to be made that fracking can be done safely without harm to the environment?
I'm pretty sure they tried to make the argument that it can be done safely. It wasn't heavily featured. Certainly money is the main theme. But they also made the argument that the alternative is back to coal and oil.
I'm pretty sure they tried to make the argument that it can be done safely. It wasn't heavily featured.
That's right. Steve did say at the first meeting that it had been done for up to 5 decades safely, but it was never really followed up after that.
reply share
Sorry, there are no environmental protections in place. Fracking is an industry that has maintained the status quo for decades, and lobbyists have pressured politicians at the federal and state level to take no action. Only a few states have succeeded in banning fracking.
The choices that you present here for "regulating" fracking are quite binary: Allow it or ban it.
Are these the only two choices that you see? If there are other options, what are they?
by jwdog Fri Nov 15 2013 Sorry, there are no environmental protections in place. Fracking is an industry that has maintained the status quo for decades, and lobbyists have pressured politicians at the federal and state level to take no action. Only a few states have succeeded in banning fracking.
He did talk to the guy whose brother died in Afghanistan about dependence on Middle Eastern oil.
And he commented on the Athena truck being run on gas until his partner told him it was biofuel.
Petroleum is limited and depending on the middle east imports, therefore, are a couple of points in favor of fracking. The movie will only point to them as it is first and foremost a movie.
Cheney's 2005 energy task force created legislation (passed by congress) which removed those environmental protections. It also put the EPA in stand-down mode in their oversight of gas drilling, so honest data isn't being collected by them.
Providing such cover against future liabilities that may happen 10, 25 years down the road were what drove the gas drilling boom, and spawned the environmental activism on the opposite side. You don't honestly thing these activists are protesting wells drilled in the 1970s, do you?
Frac'ing has been going on for decades, and there hasn't been a single report of frac'ing fluid ever getting into a water well. Not a single one.
There are tons of regulations in place now for frac'ing, claiming there are none and frac'ing companies aren't required to report their fluid chemicals is such an overblown and false statement. Yes in the early 2000's companies were able to keep SOME chemicals private, because that is the product they are selling, we can get this well to produce more oil than any other frac'ing company. That has LONG SINCE BEEN ABOLISHED. Every single well frac'ed in the last couple years MUST report EVERY SINGLE CHEMICAL down to GALLON that was pumped down hole. Don't believe me? Go on the Colorado, Wyoming, or North Dakota Oil Commission website, look up a well, and look at the completions report. Everything is listed.
North Dakota by itself has now passed several OPEC countries in oil production. US Oil and gas production has been on a steady decline since the 1970's, and in the last few years has hit a massive upturn because of horizontal drilling in oil formations we previously thought were impossible to get production from. If we were to stop frac'ing because of these completely baseless arguments, domestic oil and gas production would drop to 0. This would have a massive impact on everyday life. Look at your heating bill last month. Add a 0 to the end of it, that is how much you will be paying. Instead of $150 a month, it will be $1500.
I encourage everyone to just go and learn some of the basic science behind drilling and oil production and you will realize how completely ridiculous these claims against frac'ing are. And no, these aren't "facts" that massive companies are lying about. Learn some basic principles that have been studied for hundreds of years in geology, statics, and material mechanics, and you will understand frac'ing.
Do you know who helped produce this film? Imagenation Abu Dhabi FZ - an Abu Dhabi company headed by Mohamed Al Mubarak, an oil Sheikh from Abu Dhabi.
Now ask yourself, why would anyone in Abu Dhabi be financing an anti-fracking film in the US? Fracking has greatly decreased independence on foreign petroleum reserves. For those of you who are too young to remember the Arab Oil Embargo in the 70s, independence from those guys is a huge argument in favor of fracking.
Frac'ing has been going on for decades, and there hasn't been a single report of frac'ing fluid ever getting into a water well. Not a single one.
This is pretty important and always overlooked. Nobody has actually proven fracking causes problems.
I think people are missing the point. Sooner (rather than later) we have to get away from -all- fossil fuels. Even if fracking is as safe as mother's milk, it's like trying to get off heroin with methadone. We're still pumping tons of C02 into the air. And that's gotta stop.
In fact the 'safer' fracking is, the worse it might be simply because it enables us to put off transitioning to truly clean fuels.
So yeah... there -is- no other pro argument for fracking besides a short-term paycheck. It simply can't be substituted for coal/oil for the long term.
You conservatives are all the same in regards to this movie. It's like you got them pit tension when Matt Damon's character discuss that the alternatives are coal which is dirty and oil which is also dirty and much comes from countries that are not friendly to the US.
In regards to the rest, NO, regulations for fracking are terrible and as the movie describe the chemicals used have not all been released to the public so that scientists can study it's affects.
Can fracking be done with no terrible environmental impact? Maybe, but right now the gas companies aren't very cooperative.
A professor of mine from grad school once worked for BP about 20 yrs ago. He said he has concerns with Fracking and thinks there is a possibility that in the future they will realize how harmful it is to the environment.