In a telephone interview, Jessica Ernst says she’s “still getting used to” being compared to Erin Brockovich (the environmental activist made famous by Julia Robert’s film portrayal ten years ago). The comparison comes easy because the outspoken Ernst, a landowner in the town of Rosebud, Alberta, is one of the few Albertans who have publicly criticized hydraulic fracturing (called “fracking,” in the trade).
Fracking is a technology used by the oil and gas industry to access “unconventional” natural gas deposits trapped in shale, coalbed, and tight-sand formations – potentially at the expense of underground water supplies.
After her well water was contaminated by nearby fracking in 2006, Ernst decided to go public, showing visiting reporters how she could light her tap water on fire, and speaking out about Alberta land owners’ problems with the industry, especially Calgary-based EnCana. EnCana is Canada’s second biggest energy company (after Suncor) and is now also a major player in British Columbia, with hundreds of natural-gas wells in the province.
Ernst, a biologist and environmental consultant to the oil and gas industry, says EnCana “told us ‘we would never fracture near your water.’ But the company fracked into our aquifer in that same year [2004].” By 2005, she says, “My water began dramatically changing, going bad. I was getting horrible burns and rashes from taking a shower, and then my dogs refused to drink the water. That’s when I began to pay attention.” More than fifteen water-wells had gone bad in the little community.
Tests revealed high levels of ethane, methane, and benzene in Ernst’s water. “EnCana told us they use the same gelled [fracking] fluids as in the States.” Fracking has become a huge controversy in the US, with pending legislation that would impact its regulation.
Ernst says she heard from “at least fifty other landowners the first year” she went public, and she continues to get calls. Groundwater contamination from fracking “is pretty widespread” in Alberta, “but they’re trying to keep it hidden.” Canada has no national water standards and conducts little information gathering about groundwater.
Chromium-6 In The Water
Being an activist on behalf of her community is not the only connection Ernst has with Brockovich. Through expensive Freedom of Information requests, Ernst obtained post-fracking water well monitoring data that showed the Alberta Environment people had found hexavalent chromium in Rosebud’s well water. “The government hasn’t told this to people” in the hamlet, says Ernst.
Hexavalent chromium, otherwise known as chromium-6, is the extremely toxic substance Brockovich found in the drinking water in Hinkley, California, which led to a major class action lawsuit against Pacific Gas & Electric, which finally paid the plaintiffs more than $200 million (€146M) in 2006.
Ernst, who knows the industry well, says chromium-6 “is used in fracking and drilling.” In an odd coincidence, Erin Brockovich herself is currently involved in investigating a mile-long plume of chromium-6 contamination of drinking water – apparently caused by fracking and drilling – in Midland, Texas. In July 2009, Brockovich investigators told the press they have evidence that hydraulic fracturing specialist Schlumberger is to blame. In the continuing case, Brockovich is representing 40 householders whose water has been contaminated.
Trade Secrets
In 2006, when EnCana was fined $266,000 (€194,000) by the state of Colorado for “failure to protect water bearing formations,” a company spokesman complained to the press that environmentalists had been spreading “misinformation” about fracking and creating a climate of fear about hydraulic fracturing fluids.
The public however, has no way of knowing what’s in the fracking fluids because the chemicals used are considered a “trade secret” – or rather, many trade secrets.
Oil and gas companies like EnCana, Imperial Oil, Suncor, ConocoPhilips, ExxonMobil, etc., generally don’t do the hydraulic fracturing themselves, but instead hire specialty services to do it. Each of the big players in the multi-billion-dollar fracking industry – Halliburton, Calfrac Well Services, Schlumberger, BJ Services (all of which operate in Western Canada) – has its own recipe for fracking fluids, of which they are fiercely protective. The precise nature and concentrations of the chemicals in these “proprietary fluids” are not even fully known to government regulatory agencies.
By examining drillers’ patent applications and government worker health and safety records, some environmentalists and regulators in the US have been able to piece together a list of some of the fracking fluid ingredients. These include potentially toxic substances such as diesel fuel (which contains benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylene, and napththalene), 2-butoxyethanol, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, methanol, formaldehyde, ethylene, glycol, glycol ethers, hydrocholoric acid, and sodium hydroxide.
US Fracking Controversy
As a sign of just how controversial hydraulic fracturing has become in the US, Exxon Mobil Corp.’s US$29 billion (€21.5b) takeover of fracking specialist XTO Energy Inc. includes a clause stating that any changes to US law that make fracking “illegal or commercially impracticable” would allow the companies to terminate their deal without paying a $900 million (€666) breakup fee.
By 2007, there were 449,000 natural gas wells in 32 American states, an increase of more than 30 percent since 2000, with serious episodes of groundwater contamination near drilling sites documented in seven states.
Companion legislation (S.1215/H.R.2766) – the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act – is currently before Congress to require regulation of hydraulic fracturing under the federal US Safe Drinking Water Act, as well as disclosure of all chemicals used in fracking fluids. New York City Council, the mayor of New York, and a New York Times editorial have all called for a ban on hydraulic fracturing throughout the watershed from which the city obtains its drinking water. That watershed is part of the huge Marcellus shale area being staked out for natural gas drilling and fracking of tens of thousands of wells.
Drilling in Canada
Meanwhile, the BC government has been pushing drilling for unconventional sources of natural gas since at least 2005, offering $50,000 (€36,500) royalty credits for every well drilled before December 2008, and selling oil and gas “sub-surface rights” at a fever pitch.
Both BC and Saskatchewan have been courting the industry with lax or no environmental regulations and promises of low royalties charged to the companies. The Petroleum Services Association of Canada (PSAC) predicts a 10 percent increase in drilling in BC in 2010, mostly in the Montney shale field of northeastern BC and the Horn River Basin near Fort Nelson.
In 2006, researchers for West Coast Environmental Law published a report noting that the oil and gas industry had identified at least six areas of BC holding coalbed methane (CBM) natural gas potential: Peace country in the north east; Elk Valley in the southeast; Vancouver Island; the south central interior (around Merritt and Princeton); northwestern BC (around Telkwa and Iskut); and the Queen Charlotte Islands.
Nanaimo Daily News (Nov. 7, 2009) reported that Vancouver Island’s CBM gas deposits – stretching from Chemainus to Parksville, and in the Comox-Campbell River area – are currently not of interest to the industry. Nonetheless, a group called Citizens Concerned About Coalbed Methane-Vancouver Island, has for the past year been pushing for development under its action plan, “Building a Safe Future for CBM.”
In 2008, BC took in a record $2.4 billion (€1.75b) from these leases, which is now its biggest source of royalties’ income.
Fracking is also in high demand in the Bakken natural gas field in southern Saskatchewan, where 1,000 wells have been drilled and fracked over the past five years. PSAC is predicting 1,935 new wells will be drilled there in 2010, and 300 new wells in Manitoba. As a result, Alberta has just announced that it is removing environmental and regulatory “hurdles” in order to entice the natural-gas industry back.
Huge shale developments are also planned for Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. The Utica shale gas field in Quebec covers an area of 5,000sq.km (1,930sq.m) that runs along the St. Lawrence River from Montreal to Quebec City.
The industry is especially interested in the Utica shale because it is close to the New York City market, with export capacity available on TransCanada Corp.’s pipeline system. If the US curtails natural gas development in the Marcellus shale, the Utica could provide gas to the New York market.
Horizontal Drilling Added
The newest technology used by the industry increases the scope of fracking. By drilling horizontal wells, where the drill bit is steered along a horizontal trajectory, the well bore is exposed to as much of the shale gas reservoir as possible. Combined with hydraulic fracturing, the two technologies create many kilometres of contact area for natural gas to flow into a well, giving the operator a fast payback.
BC energy activist Arthur Caldicott, a frequent contributor to the Watershed Sentinel, explained by email: Fracking “is a nearly-continuous operation in shale gas production. Wells may be fracked up to seventeen times along their entire length.”
Now some geologists are saying that the use of horizontal drilling and fracking for shale production exhausts the well within a mere eight years, with a decline in output of 75 percent in the first year alone. Some are even calling the sector “a speculative bubble.”
In other words, the drilling and fracking endanger the groundwater and deplete rivers and lakes all for a quick payoff to the industry and the province, after which the taxpayer is left with the clean up.
A new report from BC Auditor-General John Doyle states that the BC oil and gas commission must “improve its oversight” of the industry in order to adequately manage the risks of contamination during drilling, production and final site restoration. The minimum cost to restore one well site is $100,000 (€74,000).
While natural gas is touted as a “clean energy” source, the method of extracting this fossil fuel is dirty indeed.
Joyce Nelson is a freelance writer/researcher and the author of five books. Frack Attack was previously published in the Watershed Sentinel, the independent voice for environmental news in British Columbia. Visit: http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/
Comments
Are these oil and gas executives crazy.
Yeah give everyone oil & gas at the expense of their lives.
What will all these chemicals do, that are piped into the earth, in time to come.
Well I guess maybe the whole planet will be set on fire by these greedy nuts
Can we never live with the earth instead of destroying it at every turn.
I guess the writing is on the wall cause our governments are not listening.
Go figure, 1+1=????????? not an oil & gas industry problem!
written by Bill , November 23, 2010
Dear Bill,
Job creation is necessary, economic unrest is tiresome, and we all want security, but the long-term implications of current practices (ie:Pumping undisclosed chemical ****tails into the earth, contaminating precious water resources, etc...) are unacceptable. There are no authorities on the subject, even a 60-70 year old practice is infantile compared to the drastic amount of immediate change it is capable of bringing about. These contaminated water sources are not contaminated for the mere duration of fracture exhalation, they are contaminated, for as long as we know. I am curious to find out more about the direct environmental implications of these contaminated areas, given the inter-connectedness of all ecosystems, these slight miscalculations most likely have larger areas of affect than we can even imagine, unfortunately.
Thank you for a very informative and intellectual assessment of this whole situation. I would like to add if I may. To Bill I understand your argument completely the frustration of unemployment is a harsh reality of a capitalist system. Unemployment will always be a part of a capitalist system for that is the way it is designed. However that does not justify saying that because unemployment is a reality we should not take opportunities to create new jobs. We must create new jobs that are responsible for more than just one generation. Our problem has always been that we cannot look into the future and see how our actions will affect the lives of our children and grandchildren. If we support industries that destroy the earth, which by the way is the only thing keeping us alive, than we do what every generation has done before. We hand our children and grandchildren an ever increasing mess. The mess right now is bad, oceans are being depleted, peak oil is not far off, air pollution is on the rise, and deforestation is destroying an essential natural resource. Oxygen. We have been told for too long that the environment is worth nothing unless it is developed. We need to reconstruct our view of ourselves, our environment and most importantly success. If success is defined as an increased ability to acquire and purchase more things than we live in excess. If excess is competing with finite resources, excess will win the race and our resources will be gone. The profit motive is motivate be constant expansion and explotation. We, unfortunately for all those greedy people out there(including me), live on a plant that is finite and has finite resources. We need to grow up stop bashing the hippies who just want us to realize that a life dedicated to excess will end up ruining your children’s and grandchildren’s future. We need to work together to create responsible jobs and we must act in a way that is responsible to one another. I want my kids and your kids to have a future, a bright future.
And to those who use the argument of employment and criticize governments for insuring the unemployed perhaps have a look at our tax subsidies to the oil and gas industry.
Over $2 billion of federal taxes to support carbon capture and storage. Why should the public fund the corporation's failure to deal with their pollution.
As cancer rates increase due to environmental causes and not genetics (only 7% of cancers are attributed to genetics), I wonder if those who criticize the content of this article one day will find themselves or the family members suffering from this horrible disease.
Creative ingenuity creates jobs, not destruction.
Next on the list is the coal fired power generation stations in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Those power stations in Alberta create more greenhouse gases that the Tar Sands.
You 3 are either simple, delusional or work in the oil and gas industry. Heather, if you're so good at Google, try spending a couple hours reading the mass of information on environmental damage by the oil and gas industry. Dave, if the basic ingredient in hydraulic fracturing fluid is bleach or vinegar, why will they not release their ingredients to the public? Get real you three. Can you not see what we are doing to the earth? Yes there are safe alternatives to everything, but it all comes down to greed and that's what the oil and gas industry is about.
Here in South Africa, plans have been announced to start fracking in an area called the Great Karoo - a semi-arid and underdeveloped but a very ecologically sensitive area. The poor people in the area don't realise the risk of destroying their ground water for generations in exchange for a few menial jobs today.
Let the pollies all have a big chunk of diseased steak, enjoy it, they may be away from the danger living in their precious metropolis but it's going to get them too. Big pharma will be happy more cancer drugs to produce and more money.
At the end of the day pollute enough and everyone will be disease ridden and eventually everyone will die. That's the big picture just keep going the way it is.
What is the answer to fracked land? I can't seem to find one. What's the answer to a polluted water table, it's coming out their wells/bores so it obviously is. How is a polluted aquifer fixed?
What about the venting into the air and then the gov keeps on this green mission is it just lip service. Drive my car less use energy efficient light bulbs all about me doing it right what about them. Pot calling the kettle black stuff.
I'm not a greenie hugger, just a person who uses plain common sense. We already have townships associated with mining products having 82% of all deaths being cancer related, go figure.
The price humanity will pay for progress or is it progression towards what? Fast forward 100 or 200yrs if everyone is dead then there will be no unemployment so who cares in the end.
I'm setting up a group on facebook to protest this. The more voices on this, the more people will find out about it, and hopefully we can sway the powers that be.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-the-Karoo-Campaign/163493047033757?sk=wall
JR Lenoir
For those of you who agree with it, do you not have children? Are you not worried about them and their future?
I as well just watched the movie "Gasland" and found it extremely disturbing. I understand that we are our own enemy as we require the natural gas but there has to be a better way. If all those chemicals are going into our water table we are poisoning ourselves and for what? I have been trying to think all day of what I can do to help. I feel so bad for those who are currently dealing with the gas water and I am also afraid as all water is connected which means it will eventually being flowing through our taps if it's not already. What can even be done to help? We obviously can't stop it but there has to be a safer way.
Actually, Dave raises two very important points in his post.
The first of which being that fluid systems used when pumping fracturing treatments are exactly those he mentioned and his examples of the various other products which utilize them should help to rationalize how "harmful" they are:
"To Heather, Bill and Dave,
You 3 are either simple, delusional or work in the oil and gas industry. Heather, if you're so good at Google, try spending a couple hours reading the mass of information on environmental damage by the oil and gas industry. Dave, if the basic ingredient in hydraulic fracturing fluid is bleach or vinegar, why will they not release their ingredients to the public? Get real you three. Can you not see what we are doing to the earth? Yes there are safe alternatives to everything, but it all comes down to greed and that's what the oil and gas industry is about."
- The fifth and sixth words of your statement effectively sum up the statement itself. Uninformed, ignorant, and a biased and meaningless lash-out towards an industry for whatever reason you clearly resent and yet no doubt use thousands of the products derived from it. As for the suggestion that companies release the ingredients to the public; they do! It is the ratios of which that is highly protected for good reason; does Coca Cola release its blending and manufacturing procedures? I also find it interesting that Dave highlighted several components that comprise a frac fluid system and yet you choose to only bring up bleach or vinegar? Your entire perspective is based on selective arguments which is precisely the reason that many environmentalists are labelled "hippies" and taken with little credability. Stop watching individual movies or releases and become more informed of the big picture, it will "help you sleep at night" (Skeptic, Nov 23 - "Simple")
Jackie, please don't do that to yourself. You are clearly frustrated and concerned about the potential contamination of our source water which is completely understandable. However you are basing these emotions upon the viewing of ONE, technically questionable production which is absolutely intended to draw out dramatic emtions (anyone who argues this is not the purpose of most media is absurd). :
"For those of you who agree with it, do you not have children? Are you not worried about them and their future?
I as well just watched the movie "Gasland" and found it extremely disturbing. I understand that we are our own enemy as we require the natural gas but there has to be a better way. If all those chemicals are going into our water table we are poisoning ourselves and for what? I have been trying to think all day of what I can do to help. I feel so bad for those who are currently dealing with the gas water and I am also afraid as all water is connected which means it will eventually being flowing through our taps if it's not already. What can even be done to help? We obviously can't stop it but there has to be a safer way."
Gasland was a disturbing production, it definitely raises the need for a more clear understanding and better education medium for the general public about the potential consequences of this industry. Jackie's statement emphasizes why Gasland was also a horrible porduction, it has introduced the notion that frac chemicals are highly toxic and on a daily and mass basis are pumped into the watertable. This is so painfully frustrating and inaccurate it leaves me dumbfounded. Typical frac depths are >5000ft below the surface whereas the watertable is crudely accepted to be hundreds of feet. The fractures created by hydraulic fracturing are nowhere near the magnitude that would penetrate upwards to the watertable!
A little research would allow you to see that organisms that exist in the watertable conditions create several by-products, one of which is methane gas (a very plausible explanation for the scary thought of tap-water on fire).
To answer your question Jackie, what you can do to help is educate yourself and not let biased and non-technical people misguide you.
Why don't I want Shell in the Karoo? it's really simple, I love the Karoo and, I love the landscapes, so unspoiled, vast and spectacular. Now why would I like to drive along these vast open stretches of land looking at drilling towers and pipelines, trucks and other pollution that usually comes with this kind of exploration, or "Shell" I rather say exploitation.
The next reason is that I believe economic growth and financial gains are only benefiting a few at the cost of the rest of us, but most importantly the environment. I just don't need to see another large corporate making even another killing at my expense.
And now we can finally get to the possibility of contamination of ground water!!!!
So as you can see this is about much more than a few misplaced concerns of whether this could be dangerous to underground water sources or not.
The future of a clean and healthy people, living in a clean and healthy environment is a move away from harvesting resources and minerals and consumption to the last possible cent we have to spend, and a breakaway from advancement through technology. There exist today a false sense of security that technology and clever people will save us from certain destruction.
The more advanced technology is becoming the more it relies on energy and resources and the more toxic it is becoming, how in hell do you think it will ever be able to produce a clean solution for anything.
The next step in human evolution is a move away from this self centered individual lifestyles we are living where more is always better, to seeking a more simple community based and supported lifestyle where we start to focus our attention at making life a happy event while doing simple things like growing organic foods on a collective level and by supporting each other in the community as we are getting to grips with the fact that we are dependent on each other for our survival.
We do not need cars, TVs, cell phones, iPods or microwaves, but we need food and water and clothing and shelter and most importantly we need acceptance and love from others. We also don't need IT, high rise buildings and an ever growing economy but we do need clean air, clean water and a clean environment to live in. Start to focus your energy at producing your most basic needs in life.
STOP BIG CORPORATE RAPING OF OUR BEING, AND EXISTENCE, AND ENVIRONMENT, and let us start to use our health and the blood bruising through our veins, supplying our mussels with oxygen as the most environmentally sound energy source on the planet.
Stop sitting in front of an IT computer all day and start doing things the manual way, at least it will also save you from having to go to the gim twice a day.
On going study is a good thing. If man was not so greedy this method could of been approached more slowly and safely, and risen to something so much more then what it is.
In the end its just a race to make that doller and now once perfectly good water is now being lit on fire.
wow.
I'd like to commend you on your push towards taking things back to the basics and emphasizing the simplicity and beauty in life. I myself enjoy the outdoors, wildlife, and making furniture (with hand tools btw). However I find it hypocritcal that you stated you don't want to see oil services in the Karoo because it makes it less enjoyable for you to drive through!I think it is easy sometimes to forget that the oil companies are making these massive profits because the demand for oil and gas in high; this is because we all need goods and services that result from the oil and gas industry. This is getting a little off topic though since the article (and my objection to it) is about big, bad fracturing. Again, I like that you are trying to encourage people to live simpler however it is foolish to think that crying wolf on the oil companies will make people give up the technology and luxuries they've come to depend on and enjoy.
You're right, on-going study is a good thing because the more we learn about this very valuable technology the more it will be improved as well as made public for everyone to become more aware of how these treatments actually work. You've commented on how common sense would suggest that after frac treatments the water catches on fire thus it must be those treatments that are responsible; fair enough. What is not clear is whether or not anyone reported let alone noticed if it was possible to light on fire before. I'm not entirely sure common sense can trump simple physics in this case; there is a LOT of rock between the wells and the aquifer and as we all know it doesn't break and move willingly. One possibility that I could see happening is there being a geological fault in the rock which creates a lesser stressed path for the fracture to extend for some distance. Stratigraphy would tell you that this would cease and any number of points.
I hope it can be understood that I continue to frequent this comments section because I really believe in this technology and it is my opinion that the oil and gas industry has failed greatly in educating the public in what we do. Of course you will hear and see the horror stories as modern media revolves around exploiting any number of things which evoke emotions. I simply want to help balance the arguments so people can make unbiased decisions of their own as opposed to having offensively biased, ignorant and misconstrued opinions like those presented in "Gasland" form those decisions for you.
Fracking is really so incredible scarey! How are movies such as Avatar so popular yet we allow that exact stuff to happen. The government in australia has given the mining company right to start Fracking in one of the most beautiful areas in the tweed valley in northern NSW, where many farms rely on the pristine underground water. Death and destruction will take place so we can give the earths gas to china? please tell me what is good about this?
When are we going to love our environment which is our home 24/7 more then out bank balances?
its so saddening
Personally, I need our resource extraction so that I can afford to raise my children...I am not going to sacrifice their childhood basic needs, entitlements, and few pleasures for a possible (not probable) pollution free future in Canada.
Can you say 'balance'? Get used to compromise...we cannot live now without compromise (say a documented responsible fracking process)...and we cannot have a safe environment in the future without compromise today (say; we still must frac the earth).
If you want a solution...follow the money...everything has a price. But be careful not to overvalue our tomorrow at the expense of today. I don't appreciate ill thought/comments that imply we should raise our children at poverty to give them a future.
Canada contains one of the largest, unpolluted natural resource in today's world. Please educate yourselves from an ecological perspective and then talk about the future of fracking and jobs.
Then choose - Clean Water (which is running out everywhere) or Money + Jobs for people (who themselves and their families, would eventually be affected healthwise from the pollution of the watertable caused by fracking.
You definitely have the Not In My Backyard approach to living. I must say, if the future is to be used as a storehouse for all the problems of today, then how would you say - the future generations of your children's grandchildren respond to your comment above. I hope you soon begin to understand that everything that is put towards the future as a problem to be solved WILL be INHERITED by future generations....
some cheap companies on the stock markets sitting on potentially billions of dollars worth of gas.
also they are working on getting the cement casing's problems fixed.
once they stop the casing's from leaking whilst under pressure it will be a win win for everyone so all i can say is- get on it before you miss out.
Most of the commentary here is from people who view themselves as intelligent and concerned, yet they have not bothered to do any of the math to find out what impact the elimination of fossil fuels would have, not on them, oh heavens no, but on the poorest among us.
You see my dear spoiled contented never done a thing worth while in your life but get in the way liberal friends, you only exist because of that black gooey stuff you love to hate. Your whole worthless existence is based on cheap CO2 producing stinky gooey environment fouling petroleum.
Or you could put things into a little perspective, one your tenured, nanny coddled professor at the indoctrination camp could never have, and realize it ain’t as bad as they say, the environment is way stronger and more adaptable than you are and in the end the only people that are being hurt are the ones freezing and starving because some idiot told you fossil fuels are bad.
Make no mistake people all institutions, private and public, need to be held accountable for their actions and any damage they do. But when you have a country like the US with the highest per capita lawyers than anywhere else in the universe isn’t it possible they have been playing on your sense of fairness just a wee bit too much? Don’t be such rubes and do a better job of fact checking and pretty soon you will discover what this old and tired former environmentalist found out decades ago. Its not corporate polluters we need to fear its lawyers.
Solutions eminating from such "concerned" "intellectual" critics are rooted in two premises
1.These "eureka" innovations usually need govt. grant (our money) or support as their REAL costs are higher or the inconvenience, impracticality or cumbersomeness prevent them from standing on their own merit. (High Speed Rails, Windmills, Ethanol subsidies)
2. The other "solutions" always involve using less. Consumption is wrong and should be limited and proponents attempt to mandate pesonal behavior to mirror this maxim whether it be new light bulbs or shower timers or air pressure in tires. In the end in many ways they are not so much concerned with creating a better mousetrap but making sure yours is the approved mousetrap of the day. Their disdain for the "ignorant masses" requires that they step in and limit consumption to "save the planet" instead of believing if the consumer saw the ROI they are smart enough to make wise choices.
Anyone who does not share these "higher insights" is regarded a hayseed. PHDs stated back when I was in school there would be an Ice Age and now its Global Warming...or rather should I say Climate Change as they desperately try to keep the straw man intact. in the presence of conflicting and absent data.. Even the jargon on the weather reports reflect the "real feel temperature"...during the summer. Yes I know... if I really understood Global Warming I would realize it actually causes the planet to become cooler. It is reminiscent of the DoubleSpeak of George Orwell's 1984. OXYMORONS. Yet strangely enough the answers from the so called hayseed crowd tend to produce common sense efficiencies and REAL TECHNOLOGY that people will willingly embrace like fracking and shale oil technologies.
We can however comfort ourselves with the knowledge that even when the crowd of syncophants assures the emperor how illustrious and splendid his new clothes are...the simple and common sensed person will point out the error by stating the obvious. "Pardon me you seem to be missing your clothes." Common sense where did it go. I shall now go back home to my carbon neutral yurt and keep my self warm by burning cowpies. I will be hungry tonight as the windmill I use to grind my meal stopped in the absence of wind. But I at least will be dry thanks to tchnology... luckily the waterproofing on my large tent is made from acrylics and hydrocarbon is much of my laptop I am writing on...but don't tell anyone.
They want to stop fracking for good, so please visit www.canadians.org for more details.
Frac fluids are "secret" toxic concoctions is more propaganda. Occupational Health and Safety laws state... "Workers have the right to know the hazards of chemicals they may be exposed to in the work-place"... Want to know what's in the "secret frac chemicals"? Ask for the MSDS. The frac company will happily provide it for you. In fact, they are required to BY LAW.
Why are farmers so stupid? They spray hundreds and thousands of gallons of toxic herbicides and pesticides (water mixed with chemicals) all over their land to control thistles but scream bloody murder when a different industry pushes frac fluid (water mixed with chemicals) into a hole 2 km deep.
It's pathetic the lies some will tell to advance an agenda and it's pathetic that seemingly rational adults will buy their nonsense.