Five

Bobby Schneider Oil Politics Kim Fortun Film Annotation #5: Gasland   For years, oil has supplied the world with the majority of its energy needs. However, as oil reserves deplete and production of the black gold decreases, a new source of energy will have to pick up where oil leaves off. Arguments for an array of new resources have bubbled to the surface, some even bubbling literally. One of the biggest players in this energy competition is natural gas which, while providing a cleaner and more efficient energy supply, can also contaminate water by either leaking into wells or bubbling up from beneath stream beds. In a 2010 documentary film directed by Josh Fox, entitled __Gasland__, the narrator, also Josh Fox, explains how natural gas has more than just the power of energy; it has the power of destruction as well. Throughout this film, Fox presents the various issues and health concerns that accompany natural gas drilling in an effort to prove to the country that this is by no means a safe solution to our energy problem.   Much like businesses and organizations, the natural resource industries also have stakeholders relying in one way or another on their use. Some major stakeholders in the natural gas industry are the companies which invest their time and money into building drilling wells and distribution pipelines. Multiple other companies sell natural gas powered appliances, such as hot water heaters, dryers, refrigerators, and lighting, and even automobile companies, including Honda and Toyota, are making an effort in developing natural gas powered vehicles. The American government could also be considered a stakeholder in the business because extracting natural gas from beneath American soil will help to reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil and create federal revenue. The biggest social actor involved with natural gas and its usage is of course mankind, for numerous reasons. Since people need heat, warm water, lighting, and car fuel on what is close to a daily basis, all of which natural gas can provide quite cheaply, it makes sense that the human race would be a strong advocate for the production of this resource.   Although the main focus of this documentary is to reveal the problematic consequences of natural gas, one can make inferences regarding the matrix of factors that contribute to our dependence on this particular source of energy. As mentioned, the stakeholder and social actors are those who would lead the fight for this resource. Being a “virtual [and domestic] ocean of natural gas,” America is already providing some of its people with this form of energy and has the potential to provide power to everyone from coast to coast, thus reducing the need for foreign oil. With a dependence on natural gas, resource wars, such as the Iraq War, will not be a reoccurring pattern of behavior in the future. Since natural gas, for the most part, is cheaper, cleaner when burned, and releases fewer emissions than oil, the thought of a dependence on this material does not seem half bad. Furthermore, some may think that the way in which the government goes about gaining the land to drill on does not seem so bad either. Although the federal government does have the power of eminent domain, in general the government will pay off, or compensate, the current owners of the land in order to acquire the space for drilling. In the film, Fox states that he was offered $100,000 for his property because it is located on the Marcellus Shale, commonly referred to as the “Saudi Arabia” of natural gas in the United States. Receiving that amount of money may seem fair to some people, but it is what happens once the government takes that land over that causes the trouble.   The majority of this film, as previously mentioned, conveys the matrix of problems that are associated with a dependence on natural gas. Despite the fact that Josh Fox opened the film with the phrase “I’m not a pessimist,” when circumstances become as disturbing as they do throughout this documentary, it becomes difficult for a person to not think pessimistically. While there are a multitude of problems and side effects caused by natural gas drilling, the source of all evil derives from the technique used to extract the natural gas, an “environmentally risky” process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. After the enactment of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, gas and oil companies were exempt from the Clean Water, Clean Air, and Safe Drinking Water Acts. As a result, these companies were not required to state the chemicals used in their fracking mixtures, which range from “the unpronounceable, to the unknown, to the too well known.” The hydraulic fracturing process requires nearly 1.7 million gallons of water and tons of other chemicals, including glycol ethers, toluene, hydrocarbons, and benzene (a known carcinogen) in order to initially frack a well. The high pressure created from the injection of this mixture causes the shale to crack, thus allowing the gases out. However, the cracks produced in the shale can extend all the way up to stream beds or break open drinking water wells, thus allowing the chemicals and high levels of other elements such as barium, strontium, and iron, to enter these waterways. People who drink from these contaminated water sources can, and have, developed a wide variety of illnesses such as constant headaches and nausea, dizziness, loss of taste and smell, child asthma, testicular toxicity, bone marrow and brain damage, embryo deformities, cancer, and in the most drastic scenarios, death. One person explained how a family member became a “walking nightmare of a mess, physically” as the result of natural gas intake. Produced water, the waste product of fracturing that also contains these pollutants and toxins, is dumped in nearby land pits or in streams that make their way to farms, towns, and cities. Also, if chemicals evaporate from these pits, acid rain can form, causing even more widespread damages. When animals take in these chemicals, such as cows, the meat supply then also becomes infected and some house pets have become ill and suffered hair loss. One woman shared her story about how natural gas bubbling into a local stream killed all the fish, frogs, birds, and other wildlife. As it turns out, her father used to always drink from that stream as well until he died of pancreatic cancer a few years later. Natural gas company workers argue that these health problems could have derived from a variety of other factors and that the water is perfectly fine, yet when asked to drink this water, the employees refused. . . slightly suspicious, no? In many cases, this supposedly safe drinking water coming out of house faucets contained so many chemicals that the water was actually flammable. Others who had shut their wells off were uneasy about turning them back on with the fear that allowing gas into their homes could lead to an explosion. All in all, this “fundamentally unsafe” industry has left the American people fearing for their safety and “terrified” for their lives, which is simply unfair.   After seeing the array of problems that natural gas causes, it is clear that this source of energy does and will continue to do far more harm than good. Although this film does not describe a world without the use of natural gas, a particular image is shown at the end of the film and sometimes, as the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. This image is nothing more than a display of Mother Nature at her finest: a forest. Seeing trees and green plants, to me, is the ultimate life without natural gas development, not to mention a life without any human development or interference whatsoever. The silence, tranquility, and simplicity that this forest represents can also symbolize the calm and peaceful simplicity that, deep down, rests within the human mind as well. Towards the end of the film Fox states, “My backyard wasn’t my backyard anymore. It belonged to everyone else too.” This statement leaves viewers questioning how safe their property actually is and forces them to realize how easily it can be taken away. Will the mess seen in this documentary spread to our own backyards too? Are we the next victims? Without a shift away from natural gas it is very possible that everyone in America will, in due time, fall victim to its unpleasant consequences and have no choice but to live with its long-lasting impacts.   This film, being full of incredible facts and details, as well as numerous personal stories and experiences, was very interesting to me. Without a doubt, the most compelling aspect was the argument being made by everyday Americans that natural gas was destroying their lives. The evidence presented throughout the duration of this film could not lead a person to any other conclusion. After seeing how dirty and flammable the water became, as well as the numerous diseases and illnesses victims contracted, I agreed with those people in the belief that natural gas is the wrong energy source to be targeting. As a side note: while flammable water may not exactly be the safest of things and should definitely raise eyebrows, let’s face it. . . it was pretty cool to watch! The story of a distant well exploding on a family’s property further persuaded me that natural gas was not the right source of energy. The family never saw the incident coming because it occurred in the early hours of the morning and they said that they could not stand outside because they could feel the heat from their porch. While everyone was, luckily, safe in the house, imagine how different this story could have ended had the explosion happened during the day and a family member was standing out in the fields closer to that well. These events undeniably prove that natural gas is far too risky and should remain where it belongs, buried beneath the Earth. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> As captivating as the film was, there were still a few scenes that were simply difficult, disturbing, and borderline sickening to watch. I feel that the least compelling aspect of this film would of course be the extremely poor argument that the natural gas industry tried to make in favor of drilling development. Telling people that their water is safe to drink when it looks like mud and is catching on fire is by no means humane, intelligent, or believable. In all honesty, how dumb do these companies think people are? We might not all be brain surgeons, but come on, we know when water is unsanitary and deadly. It is obvious by the workers’ refusal to drink the water, as well as the companies’ unwillingness to reveal what chemicals are used in their fracking mixtures, that corruption is occurring, unfortunately at the expense of the American people. As one man in the film said, because government favors the natural gas industry and wants to protect it, “the whole concept of democracy and looking out for the little guy does not exist here.” If the government has to lie about the safety of an energy resource, then there is no way that the resource should even be considered for use. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> Since the documentary heavily focused on the destructive power of natural gas, there was no major corrective action discussed. Luckily, after viewing this film, one can develop his or her own opinions as to what must be done. When looking at the big picture, there are two basic courses of action which can be taken: either reform the natural gas industry or destroy it. If the natural gas industry stays in business then the most important step which must be taken is for the government to end favoritism of big business and actually work to enforce more strict regulations and safety guidelines. As previously stated, the government’s democratic purpose is to listen to the people, enforce the laws of this nation, and protect citizens. If natural gas wants to become a bigger part of the American lifestyle, then the industry must abide by all U.S. laws, including the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Acts. Furthermore, the fracking process will need to be redesigned in order to prevent severe fractures from reaching streambeds and breaking water wells used for drinking. In addition, a new fracking mixture must be created that does not contain such harmful chemicals. This way, if for some reason there should be an incident in the future, at least the water will still be safe rather than undrinkable. While natural gas is more cheap and eco-friendly, at least when being burned, unless these changes can be made within the industry in a timely manner, it is probably best to make natural gas a thing of the past. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> After seeing this movie, I was left with an interest to further investigate how much natural gas is actually in America, as well as the rest of the world, and to research the environmental effects that fracking can physically have on nearby regions. A section of the NaturalGas.org website, referred to as “Resources,” discusses the amount of natural gas found throughout the world and more specifically, within the United States. Much like oil, natural gas is “. . . a non-renewable source, the formation of which takes thousands and possibly millions of years” (page 1). However, at present there is expected to be about 2,587 trillion cubic feet of the resource available, at least accounting for the “undiscovered, unproved, and unconventional natural gas” supplies (page 1). Referring to only the traditional natural gas sources (onshore, offshore, and Alaska), the expected recoverable amount for 2007 was at 1,451 trillion cubic feet, though with new technological capabilities this number is expected to climb closer to almost 1,900 trillion cubic feet with the next two decades (page 2). According to the Potential Gas Committee, with Americans using approximately 22 trillion cubic feet of the gas per year, assuming the demand would not increase (though we all know it probably will), there is roughly a one century supply of natural gas left in this nation (page 2). While the Gulf region has been known to hold a vast amount of natural gas basins, states such as Pennsylvania, New York, and Arkansas have begun shale production as well, thus spreading the natural gas industry nationwide. However, in comparison to the rest of the world, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) has claimed that the U.S. holds only about three percent of the globe’s supply, while the Middle East, Europe, and Asia have control of the majority of the resource as of 2009 (page 3, 4). This information was especially interesting to me because from what I understood, one of the main reasons that America was expanding natural gas was to avoid foreign dependency on energy. Unfortunately, with the Middle East owning most of the natural gas, it would only be a matter of time before the United States fell victim to the power of these hostile countries once again. With this information being known in advance, is natural gas even worth it anymore? <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> Rod Walton wrote an article for Tulsa World, called “Earthquakes rattle state energy industry,” in which he describes how the natural gas industry could be leading to an unbelievably high increase in earthquakes. Both in the business world and the scientific world, heavy dispute has been occurring as to why areas near the Fayetteville Shale, such as Greenbrier, Arkansas, are experiencing such severe and consistent earthquake tremors lately, including a series of seismic activity known as the Guy Swarm which contained a 4.7 quake in February of 2011 (page 1). Although injection wells in the Rocky Mountain Arsenal region were confirmed to be related to earthquakes, not all cases are as easily discernable, especially because Greenbrier is located in a region where tremors can occur naturally (page 1). Despite companies arguing that their activity is not linked to earthquakes, in order to thoroughly exam the situation, local companies, including Clarita and Chesapeake, closed their injection wells for a few weeks. Even after these wells were temporarily shut down, the quakes continued at a rate of roughly one dozen daily (page 1). Considering there is proof favoring both sides of the argument (that there is a correlation between the well injections and quakes // and //that quakes occur naturally in these locations), this particular debate is a strong one. Sooner or later, according to an Oklahoma Geological Survey seismologist named Austin Holland, “time and science will prove or disprove the earthquake-injection well link in that part of the Fayetteville Shale” (page 2). The unfortunate fear for many is that “. . . science will come out in the industry’s favor,” similar to how the EPA seemed to always, corruptly and unfairly, favor big oil companies (page 2). <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> It is common knowledge that “you need water for life” and drinkable water comes from natural, uncontaminated springs. To invade these nearly pristine environments that took Mother Nature years to create and destroy them in a matter of days or weeks with machinery, poisons, and human carelessness is simply wrong. Josh Fox at one point said “I wanted to get out of Gasland as soon as I could, but there was nowhere to go” because the natural gas industry is turning America into an uncontrollable waste site. For people who live in unpopulated regions, such as the woods or on farms, their opinion on the natural gas dilemma comes down to what they hope to see when they wake up in the morning: green trees and mountains, or a field of gas wells surrounded by a hazy cloud of toxic fumes. The United States, as Fox said, is “your land, my land,” and, if nothing is done to prevent future natural gas development, it will permanently become nothing more than a “. . . Gasland.” <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">Works Cited <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Fox, Josh. __Gasland__. Perf. Josh Fox, Dick Cheney (archive footage), and Pete Seeger (archive <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> footage). HBO Documentary Films and International WOW Company, 2010. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Walton, Rod. “Earthquakes rattle state energy industry.” __Tulsa World__. 15 March, 2011. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> < [|http://www.tulsaworld.com/site/printerfriendlystory.aspx?articleid=20110315_49_E1] <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"> [| _CUTLIN455093]  <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">>. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">“Resources.” __Naturalgas.org__. Last Modified 2010. <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> < <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">[] <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">>.