Finding Common Ground on Fracking

By Benjamin Delshad

Hydraulic fracturing is a process that taps into the Earth’s supply of oil and natural gasses by drilling down a mile into the surface, after the drill has reached those depths it slowly turns horizontal. This method allows a single location to be drilled into a numerous amount of times. After the well is drilled small perforations are made along the hole at which point they are filled with fracking fluid, which acts as an additive and causes disruptions in the sand and soil that releases natural gases. The reason that Fracking is such a hot topic right now is because it has been recently discovered that America sits on an abundance of shale rock formations. Shale rock formations are the ideal places to do Fracking. We have discovered that we can truly tap into a natural gas resource on our own soil which will not only be beneficial to our own nation’s economy it will also decrease our dependence on the middle east for oil. The conflict is that it is detrimental to the environment and those living in close vicinity of these Fracking sites, which include people from many states. The east coast sits on the Marcellus shale, which is one of the largest shale sites in the United States.

There are many beliefs and views on Fracking, some believe that it is a dangerous process that disrupts the land, has negative and dangerous effects to the people living near these Fracking locations. Fracking companies argue that it is a safe process and that it is the single reason America is going through an energy revolution right now. To develop an opinion on Fracking it is necessary to learn the background information, and to do so I needed to do research on Fracking. Luckily for me there is not a scarcity when it comes to material on Fracking.

There are many groups that are anti-Fracking so I thought it would be interesting to look at the other side of the spectrum. Fracking is a multibillion-dollar industry and can lead to some positive changes for our nation. In a Forbes article written in 2012 by Robert Lenzner he writes that the most valuable thing we may obtain from Fracking will be an independence in the field of energy creation, which will limit our dependence on the Middle East. “I’d maybe say that we have an historic opportunity to rejuvenate the American economy and restore American manufacturing competitiveness because we now have long-term, secure, stable supplies of natural gas,” said Rex Tillerson, CEO and Chairman of Exxon. The economic rejuvenation that is believed to come from the Fracking industry will create thousands of jobs for Americans and cause an economic revolution. Fracking offers an end to the dependence we have with Saudi Arabia as well as an end to the oil crisis, which has had not only negative economic effects on our nation but political as well.

There is a dark side to Fracking that can be seen in Josh Fox’s documentary Gasland, which takes the viewer on a portrayal of the Fracking industry that seems to be covered up. Josh Fox takes the viewer on a firsthand look at the believed negative effects of fracking and pollution it causes to ground water. He goes basically door-to door, visiting families living near the Fracking wells and interviews them to see how they have been effected by the Fracking. In the cases we see extreme water pollution, families that have been forced to stop using their ground water and forced to find other means of water. In some of the extreme cases the water is so polluted that when a lighter is put near the faucet a flame is set off as if the water was gasoline. Fox takes his investigation a little further by interviewing the EPA whistle blower on the dangers of Fracking, Weston Wilson. In the interview Wilson says that the EPA buckled under industry pressure and stopped tests on fracking. We are turning our back to a serious problem or in his words “asleep at the wheel.” The people making these claims about their water contamination should not be the ones having to prove themselves. 

In the process of fracking there is usage of “Fracking Fluids” which consists of almost 600 chemicals. Two examples are Ethyl benzene and Glycol Ethers. Ethyl Benzene, is a known carcinogen that is also a flammable gas that is known to have links to respiratory illness, neurological effects, cancer, and a long list of other effects on the human body. Glycol Ethers are known to have links to testicular toxicity, malfunction of the embryo, bone marrow depression, and hemolysis. 

Our nation seems to be at a standstill if we should continue to Frack or if it is something we stop to keep our water and people safe. For the amount of people there are for banning fracking there are just as many that are all for it, whether there motive be jobs or lower gas prices none the less they are out there. In a recent study done on Fracking reported by Josh Folks in 2014, journalist for the American Thinker. The National Academy of Sciences ruled that Fracking is safe. They made this strong statement in the opening paragraph, “According to a new study published by the National Academy of Sciences, fracking is safe.  End of discussion.” According to the Dangers of Fracking Movement “there have been over 1,000 documented cases of water contamination next to areas of gas drilling as well as cases of sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water.” The members of the Dangers of Fracking Movement also admit that Fracking does produces up to 300,000 barrels of natural gas a day, but at the price of Environmental and health hazards. 

The main question I find myself asking after hearing and reading all of this information is, can we Hydraulically Frack safety? According to many it can be done safely but the problems we have seen are happening because it has not been safely practiced. I find this to be a good explanation, and if it is true then why we not take would advantage of the economic growth it can offer our nation. According to David Biello, associate editor at Scientific American, Fracking can be done safely and some of the science against fracking is not all true.  

Recently the Obama Administration has put more strict regulations on the Fracking industry. The main focus of these goals is to make Fracking a safer process and to limit the effects it has on water pollution. This in theory sounds great. If you eliminate the environmental hazards and pollution to the water Fracking causes all that is left is the positive Economic growth it will bring to our nation. I think that Obama is making steps in the right direction and with these new regulations we will be on track to get Fracking to better environmental standards. Eliminating the negative environmental effects of Fracking is something that will not be as easy, since Fracking is essentially drilling into the Earth’s shale rock formations it does disrupt the Earth but it may be a necessary sacrifice that will be needed to be made to get the natural gas resources. Obama’s regulations did not put the Anti-Fracking Activists at ease, they are up in arms and the only solution they think will solve Fracking is to ban it all together.

Coming to a middle ground on Fracking is something that is going to need to happen in the coming years so we can make a decision to break away from the dependence we have on the Middle East or ban Fracking and stop the environmental issues it is causing. At the end of the day Fracking does create 300,000 barrels of natural gases a day which is having a positive impact on our nation’s economy but on the other hand it is evident that it is having detrimental effects to the environment and the people. There are three viable options I see as a solution to the Fracking issue. One, we allow it because of economic growth that is associated with the industry. Two, we ban the act of Fracking entirely to keep our environment and population safe from its contamination. Finally, like the Obama administration is currently trying to do, implement more strict regulations on the Fracking industry to make it a completely safe process. 

Benjamin Delshad -- Blog 5: Animals

By Benjamin Delshad

The mistreatment of animals is a social issue that does not get the attention it deserves. Animals are such a key element of our lives. They are being mistreated, abused, and exploited, they cant speak on their own behalf so it is our job to do it for them. Many of us my self included may not think that we are contributing to the problem but the fact of the matter is that we are. We may not be the ones who are physically mistreating or abusing these animals but the way we live our day-to-day lives ignoring what is happening is contribution enough, which ends now. Through the readings from this week and the documentaries, we have seen and read many different things that are happening with animals and have heard many different viewpoints.

Ric O’Bary is a dolphin expert who was most well known for his efforts in the 1960’s where he captured and trained dolphins for the hit television series Flipper. O’Bary made a radical change and became an activist for keeping dolphins out of captivity after seeing first hand the conditions the dolphins were kept in and how they were effected emotionally from being taken out of the wild. In the documentary The Cove Ric O Bary and his team bring the story of the incredible mistreatment of dolphins in Taiji Japan to light. The documentary depicts the extreme brutal slaughtering of dolphins in Japan. The viewer is taken on an espionage portrayal of the secret fishing of these dolphins. The fishermen who are trapping and slaughtering these dolphins are extremely angry to see people taking pictures or taking videos because what they are doing is wrong. These Fishermen trap these dolphins in a cove and brutally slaughter them on a massive scale, it is an annual occurrence and over 2,000 dolphins are killed in the slaughter. The documentary is very moving and the gruesome footage is what makes the message so very strong. There is a scene where dolphins are being slaughtered and the underwater camera records the sounds of the dolphins, it is piercing and you can truly hear the pain in the dolphins’ cries. 

Dolphins are believed to be the second most intelligent mammals next to humans. Studies have shown that they have abilities to feel emotion, interact with humans, and have even shown signs of communication. So what makes the slaughter of these dolphins even more tragic is that they are fully aware of what’s happening when this terrible act is occurring.

In the documentary How I became an Elephant, we are taken on a similar ride, where we see the mistreatment and exploitation of Elephants. Elephants like dolphins are extremely smart animals and because we have realized their intelligence we are using them in circuses similar to how we use dolphins in places like Sea World. These animals have become dollar signs and are worked and abused until they are no longer useful then thrown to the waste side. Elephants are incredibly majestic animals and have clear emotions. In the wild they have strong family ties and are extremely productive creatures walking in some cases up to 50 miles a day. When they are kept in semi truck trailers and used as circus animals they become stir crazy and depressed. The story of Tyke is an example of what can happen when an elephant is kept in captivity and abused. Tyke was a circus performing elephant that was abused for years; eventually she couldn’t take it anymore and attacked her trainer. Now some people say that this happened because she was a violent elephant, what do you expect to happen when you abuse something that weighs a few tons? It is ignorant and just plain stupid to think that elephants should be trained and used in a circus. It is a travesty to keep these animals in cages. The elephant population is diminishing rapidly and humans are the sole reason for that, it would be a terrible loss if elephants went extinct and it is on us to make sure that doesn’t happen.

In the reading “Am I Blue?” by Alice Walker we read a story of a horse that is in a field alone and is so bored that when she looks into the horse’s eyes she sees sadness. We all have an emotional connection to animals and when you look into their eyes their emotions are present. Alice Walkin writes about the exploitation of other animals, Cows being kept in tiny cages and milked then slaughtered so we can drink milk and eat hamburgers. Chickens being cooped up then killed so we can have eggs and eat wings. There’s a passage in Am I Blue by Alice Walkin that explains we eat hamburgers that are advertised with images of bulls who look to be commanding there fait. That is one very ironic point.

We have a true deep down connection with animals that goes all the way back to ancient times, we have evolved passed them and have forgotten that they have emotions. We look at them and see a less intelligent species, which may be true but that doesn’t mean that they should be slaughtered for a profit. We have lost sight of our connection to animals and we use them then kill them, and its beyond wrong. In the reading dwelling defy the wolf we read about the connection of man to the wolf and how it predates to native times. The Anishnabe people believe that we are decedents of the wolf, which is why when we hear a wolf’s howl we feel something.

Through the films and readings we have seen that animals are being exploited and abused but it is much more then just dolphins and elephants it is in every species we have neglected animals as a whole and determined that their place on earth is not as important so there for who cares. Dogs that are being mistreated is another incredibly undermined issue breeders breeding them in terrible conditions and selling them for a profit. Dogs being abused by their owners it’s a truly terrible truth. In some cases people are selling puppies in Wal Mart parking lots which I have seen first hand in North Carolina. People go up to these people and are blinded by the cuteness of the puppies to see the bigger picture, an unlicensed undocumented person selling puppies with no medical records or shots.

It is clear that animals are being mistreated, abused, and exploited. The most important thing is now that the problem is beginning to get the attention it deserves what are we going to do to fix it?

Steps in the right direction

By Benjamin Delshad

The amount of resources we as humans use is nothing less then ridiculous. We have seen and read many works in class this week that show that depict the insane amount that we as a society consume. The similar theme between them is that we consume too much and there are ways to prevent it if we put forth the necessary effort to do so.

In no impact man Colin Beaven makes a noble sacrifice by dedicating a year of his and his families life to making no impact on the environment. Colin's experiment may be considered drastic by most but it does a great job in showing us that a vast reason why we don’t change our consumer habits has largely to do with social pressure. In the documentary he gains media attention early on and with best intentions he makes an effort to get his message out. He is quickly cast as an extremist and is given negative feedback from both every day people as well as environmentalist. One thing he is criticized for is that he gives up using toilet paper and a refrigerator. The social pressure he receives from not using toilet paper (switching to other methods of reusable cloth which creates no waste and is just as hygienic) is what people focus on and is what labels him as an extremist. He truly had good intentions and this social pressure makes him rethink his ideals. Overall he overcomes the social pressure and from what I saw succeeds in his experiment.

In Annie Leonard’s Story of Stuff we are taken along the materials economy and shown the environmental effects that go towards getting us the products that we consume. Through this process we learn that Americans are buying more every year, we have become a nation of consumers. According to the Story of Stuff we actually consume 50% more then we did 50 years ago.

The part that is the most alarming is that the things that we are consuming and buying we don’t need. The media has manipulated us to think that what we have is no longer good enough, when in fact the things we have are perfectly okay but social pressure is leading us to believe that it is old and out dated. This process is known as perceived obsolescence. On the other end of the spectrum planned obsolescence is taking place. According to The Story of Stuff: planned obsolescence is when the things being produced are made to fail after a certain amount of time so that we are forced to go out and buy another one. Planned obsolescence also refers to things made to be disposable when there is no need for them to be disposable some examples are cell phones, barbeques, CD and DVD’s. The idea behind this is that it keeps us consuming which in turn helps the economy. When President George W. Bush first addressed the nation after 9/11 he said go out and shop. Why would he do this? Because we are a nation of consumers and our economies backbone is supported by if we are buying or not.

In No impact Man we see that some things that we use and throw away truly can be reused or just no used at all. Colin shops at a farmers market and uses no grocery bags; he also doesn’t buy anything that is pre packaged in plastic. It is not impossible to do this, we as a society collectively could in theory cut out all plastic packaged items and not use grocery bags, its just the willingness of people to change that is hindering this step forward. The impact of plastic bags is immense, they don’t biodegraded, they simply break down into smaller and smaller pieces which in turn end up in oceans harming wild life and in some cases get re ingested by humans.

When we flick on a light switch or turn on our laptop we really don’t think of where that power came from. About 50% of Americas power and energy supply is coal generated. Mining coal is not an easy task as we can see in 30 days: Working in a Coal Mine with Morgan Spurlock. Coal mining is hard work, dangerous, and on top of that bad for the environment. In the film it depicts the hardships that the men entering the coal mine everyday face, from possible explosions to chronic lung issues. In the documentary the family that Morgan stays with for the 30 day period has a long line of coal miners many of which have health conditions from working in the mines. Some versions of coal mining involve s blowing chunks of the mounting off using dynamite and other explosives, which obviously has a huge impact on the land. What does this have to do with living sustainably? Its all really connected when it comes down to it, when you leave a light on in your house your wasting energy that could have went to something better like powering lights for a hospital. When you leave that light on you don’t think about it but someone shoveled for that coal you are wasting and that waste could have been avoided.

We don’t all need to become no impact man but if we take some things away and practice that theory in our own way we could make a difference. Some things we will not be able to avoid like using a refrigerator or lights but things as simple as not using plastic bags or buying something that is disposable that doesn’t have to be are things we could do easily that would be a step in the right direction.

Benjamin Delshad -- Blog 3: Fracking and Environmental Justice

By Benjamin Delshad 

Over the course of United States history, I’ve noticed a pattern of the government putting the economy in front of the environment. Our economy is the most important thing to our government, and this issue of skewed priorities has lead to social and environmental issues to be tossed to the wayside.  Famous ecologist and author of Silent Spring Rachel Carson write about the contamination of crops and people through the high volume and usage of pesticides in the 1960’s. Rachel Carson dealt with red tape put up by the government and had to sift her way through the bureaucratic nonsense to get the facts, that pesticides were having terrible effects on people. In current day we are dealing with Hydraulic Fracturing or “Fracking.” Once again like the usage of pesticides fracking is having extreme effects on the health of its surrounding population, and again it is being covered up continuing the perpetuating cycle of putting the money before everything. 

Fracking is the process of extracting natural gasses out of the ground, which sounds like something that can have benefits but the effects it have far out way the benefits. Sandra Steingraber describes the process of fracking in the article  The Fracking of Rachel Carson, she explains that it uses drills and millions of gallons of water to create a mile long tunnel that causes fractures in the earth which release natural gasses that are concentrated and transported via pipelines. 

We can see through the documentary Gasland that Fracking is having profound effects on the people who live in the surrounding towns of the Fracking sights. The effects are believed to be coming from the natural gas that is entering the water source, which these people are drinking.  The companies doing the fracking are claiming that they are not the reason that the water is contaminated.

In 1972 president Richard Nixon passed the Clean Water Act, a way of starting an environmentally continues nation which basically states that anything that will disrupt the water in our nation in a negative way is unlawful. But in 2005 when president George W Bush signed the Energy bill their where clauses that EXEMPTED Fracking from numerous environmental acts the Clean Water Act being one along with the Clean Air Acts. Why would he do that you may ask? Well Dick Cheney President Gorge Bush’s vice president was the Chairman and CEO of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000. Halliburton is one of the worlds largest oil field services companies and one of the largest companies Fracking in the United States. Recently Halliburton bought out Baker Hughes, a competing Fracking company and in an article by the NASDAQ they claim that by doing so Halliburton is aiming to dominate the Fracking industry in the United States. 

In the documentary Gasland Josh Fox takes us around the country to see what fracking has been doing to the people who live near these fracking sights. He interviews the families who have made complaints as well as their neighbors, some of which are not willing to speak to him, possibly because they took payouts from Fracking companies to stay quiet. What he finds is incredible. Families that have water sources that are so contaminated with natural gases that they can literally light the water coming out of there faucets on FIRE! Think about that…. 

In the process of fracking there is usage of “Fracking Fluids” which consists of almost 600 chemicals that to say the least should not be in your water. Two issues in the documentary are ETHYLBENZENE, which is a known carcinogen. It is a flammable gas that is known to have links to respiratory illness, neurological effects, cancer, and a long list of other effects on the human body. Another known chemical GLYCOL ETHERS  which is also a chemical used in Fracking fluid, which is known to have links to testicular toxicity, malfunction of the embryo, bone marrow depression, and hemolysis. 

The people affected by the water contamination have been victim to serious health issues from the drinking of the water. In Gasland the families that Josh Fox interviews have had illness, headaches, and many other medical issues. Josh Fox skips all the red tape and goes directly to the people who are being affected. This gives Josh the first hand experience and view of those directly effected by the Fracking. They discuss that they have faced many health issues since the Fracking near them started and that the Fracking companies have given them the cold shoulder when they brought concern to them about the water issues they are having in their homes. The water is coming out brown and with a smell of turpentine but when they get the water tested they are told its fine, go ahead drink it. This raises the question; do the Fracking companies have part in testing the water? 

Weston Wilson (EPA whistle blower) says that the EPA buckled under industry pressure and stopped tests on fracking. We are turning our back to a serious problem or in his words “asleep at the wheel.” The people making these claims about their water contamination should not be the ones having to prove themselves. The Fracking companies should be the ones to prove that they aren’t contaminating the water, air, and soil. Why are they not doing so? Because they cant prove it. It should be up to the people being affected to prove that it’s destroying the environment and hurting people. 

Sandra Steingraber is an environmentalist and author living in New York whose main focus is on Fracking in New York. She has been victim to the water contamination from a near by Fracking well and has been inflicted with bladder cancer. To me she is like a modern day Rachel Carson fighting against a corrupt business that is destroying the environment and its inhabitants. She has even gone as far as standing in front of the Fracking companies trucks in human chains to stop them from being able to work. She was arrested for these acts.

Dear Governor Cuomo is a documentary that shows how truly against Fracking the state of New York is by showing activists and celebrities who support the cause. The message is clear “Ban Fracking Now!”. Governor Cuomo was about to make the decision to allow Fracking or to ban it, the speakers in this documentary shows the support that is behind banning Fracking. Famous people like Mark Rufalo, Natalie Murchant, and others state their stance and it shows rallies all over New York. 

I think their needs to be more people like Steingraber and Rachel Carson and if we keep turning a blind eye to issues like this for a quick buck we, as a society will fail. If we continue to sit idly by while our own government puts toxic waste into our water and other resources before we know it we will be doomed. Water is an essential part of life, and to take away clean water you are basically giving the people you are affecting a death sentence, these are American citizens whose rights are being exploited and taken advantage of. No matter what way you look at it what is being done to them is wrong and needs to be made right.   

Benjamin Delshad -- Blog 1: Climate Change

By Benjamin Delshad

When going into depth on topics as complex as climate change, the most important thing becomes scientific facts to back up opinion and prediction. In the material covered this week in class we took a look at two documentaries that showed two very different aspects of similar problems. In Earth 2100 we as the viewer are taken along on an emotional rollercoaster as we follow a girl growing up in the mid 2000’s, where she faces extreme environmental dismay, which leads to social breakdowns. In the documentary Everything’s Cool we see a tragic case of scenarios with a sarcastic view of “everything’s cool” which reflects how we as a current society face environmental issues.

Both films attempt to evoke different emotion from the viewer, Earth 2100 attempts to scare the viewer with a sad story that shows a worst case scenario of a environmental breakdown where cities are flooded, water is scarce, and life as we know it changes completely. The way in which the story is told with the sketch like figures as you follow a girl’s life through the years and watch the world break down around her and the effects it has on society and man kind as a hole was effective in scaring the viewer. The story eventually leads to New York City where we have developed a utopic society that s extremely environmentally conscious and sustainable. But eventually it is all ruined with a great flood and the failure of a manmade wall designed to stop that very problem. It may not be completely realistic but it is not all science fiction it really hits home when you realize that there is actual science that things like this could happen.

Everything’s cool almost makes the viewer realize how serious of an issue global warming is by showing how little the public actually knows about it. But uses the tool of sarcasm to make a point that we view it as something that will never happen. Everyone thinks they are invincible until they get hurt, kind of a mentality.

In Bill McKibben’s Rolling Stone article, “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math,” we read that at a conference about climate change president Barrack Obama along with the administration develop the “Copenhagen accord” in a attempt to save face for the neglect they have shown toward the situation. Click here to view article . A passage from the article sates, “The accord did contain one important number, however. In Paragraph 1, it formally recognized "the scientific” view that the increase in global temperature should be below two degrees Celsius." And in the very next paragraph, it declared that "we agree that deep cuts in global emissions are required... so as to hold the increase in global temperature below two degrees Celsius.” 

This direct quote from the article shows that there are steps to make a positive effect on the currently bad situation but if you look at this at a pragmatic standpoint making a statement such as this is meaningless unless you make serious changes to ensure you stay under the threshold of 2 degrees Celsius. In that same article it states “So far, we've raised the average temperature of the planet just under 0.8 degrees Celsius, and that has caused far more damage than most scientists expected.” So is the staying under 2 degrees Celsius really going to help?

I find it fascinating that you global warming/ climate change has believers and deniers. I feel as though it should be a proven fact or proven myth. I did some research to find that not only is it an argued fact but that large government agencies disagree on the ideologies of global warming.  It seems like a common knowledge by now that the ice caps are melting. We are constantly seeing in the media that iconic picture of a polar bear on a tiny floating piece of ice. How is it then that in a NASA’s recent data that they claim that the ice caps have actually increased substantially in size?  A direct quote from an article called “Weakening the global warming argument is data showing that the North Polar ice cap is increasing in size.” Recent satellite images from NASA actually reflect an increase of 43% to 63%.” Click here to view link 

I have a hard time viewing all these different views on these problems and deciding which ones are true, usually the articles are written or reviewed by Ph.D’s and academics so who do you believe? In some findings they explain that the other side has been bough ten by the politics and is making these statements for monetary gain. Politics does play a huge role in these issues in actuality we do spend billions of dollars every year that go to global warming research, but on the other hand it if we can stop or make positive changes then that money will have been well spent. Politics and economics aside when it comes right down to the core of all of these issues they will effect everyone we all breathe the same air, drink the same water, so when the air is polluted and the water is running scarce politics and economics will not matter as much. We need to start taking steps now to prevent the things to come and if we keep the “everything’s cool” attitude we will be the ones who suffer.