Crystal Bowl and Chemical Soup
On a blog post on February 10, I mentioned my missing large crystal bowl. It was the most beautiful bowl in my possession, except that at the moment it was no longer in my possession, and I had not been able to find it. A week or so ago I spied it, stacked among the other large clear bowls in the kitchen cupboards at Cedar Crest. I have no idea where it spent the intervening months, but I know I had checked for it at the church before. I snatched it and brought it home, before it disappeared again. I'm very glad to have it back.
*********************
I've watched the documentary Gasland several times recently. It deals with the topic of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) for natural gas. Most of the hard facts below come from the movie, although I have seen references to the realities elsewhere also.
I did not know till I watched this movie that under the Bush-Cheney administration, the fracking industry was granted sweeping exemptions from the regulations present in the Clean Air and the Clean Water Act. The first of these Acts was passed during the Nixon presidency--in an era when Republican presidents could still be environmental presidents apparently. The 2005 exemption is sometimes referred to as the Halliburton Loophole or the Halliburton Exemption. I find this exemption completely unacceptable, as does one whistle blower who works for the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). In one particularly troublesome incident, the EPA found that indeed the chemicals used in fracking were extremely toxic, but they also found that no action was needed. As the whistle-blower summed it up, "Only in an Orwellian world does this make any sense."
In effect, this means that companies in the fracking industry can pollute with impunity, with no fear of consequences. People whose health has been compromised by ruination of their water supply and breathable air have no legal recourse except civil lawsuits. Law enforcement can't help because there are very few applicable laws to enforce. Legal settlements almost always include a non-disclosure clause, so that people who have been wronged are muzzled after the settlement.
Dick Cheney was president and CEO of Halliburton (a huge gas drilling business) before he became vice president. George Bush owned an oil company before he became president. His father was in the oil business also.
When Cheney became vice president, he convened an energy task force which held 40 meetings with people in the oil industry and one meeting with environmentalists. Five of the seven members of the task force were industry people who benefited personally from lenient laws for people in the fossil fuels industry. It was during this era that the "Halliburton Exemption" became law.
The fact that 600 different chemicals are used in fracking, with no disclosure required, is a travesty also. Many of the chemicals are extremely toxic, causing neurological damage and cancer. After the chemicals are mixed with water for fracking purposes, the water can never again become a safe part of the water cycle. Much of it remains underground, and the remainder is left in open-air pits to evaporate. The volatile compounds from the mixture escape into the air, where, beyond the negative health impacts that result, they pose a danger of explosions, in sufficient concentrations. The water mixture itself is sometimes saturated enough with flammable material that it can be made to burn, if touched with a lighter. Applying a torch to the surface of euphemistically-named "produced water" in a stock tank can almost instantly create wisps of something that looks like clear plastic--not surprising since many of the chemicals that are used in manufacturing plastic are also used in fracking.
Farmers who struggle to make a living are sometimes tempted by the huge sums of money that are offered by companies buying up mineral rights. The producer of the documentary, for example, was offered nearly $100,000.00 for mineral rights on the 20 acres of Delaware River bottom land he owns in Pennsylvania.
This is a worrisome prospect. Kansas sits on top of one of the underground shale formations that are coveted for development. I can only hope that landowners act wisely if they are ever approached by representatives from fracking companies. As an aside, wind generators as energy producers begin to look very benign when compared to fracking as an energy-producing strategy. Kansas has a great deal of wind energy potential also.
Another issue of concern with fracking is the apparent misuse of public lands. Public lands first were opened for drilling in 1988 under the Reagan administration, when the elder Bush was vice president. Very extensive fracking is happening on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) territory now, mostly in western states. The stated purpose for BLM areas is "to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations." For land with this stated purpose to be used to increase the wealth of privately owned businesses, while polluting indiscriminately, seems wrong.
The Gasland movie contains some bad language that comes from people who were interviewed, and the movie has detractors for other reasons. Although I regret the salty language and can't vouch for the veracity of every detail, I believe that, on the whole, the documentary reveals something we ought to know. I borrowed the DVD from the Hutch library.
*********************
I've watched the documentary Gasland several times recently. It deals with the topic of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) for natural gas. Most of the hard facts below come from the movie, although I have seen references to the realities elsewhere also.
I did not know till I watched this movie that under the Bush-Cheney administration, the fracking industry was granted sweeping exemptions from the regulations present in the Clean Air and the Clean Water Act. The first of these Acts was passed during the Nixon presidency--in an era when Republican presidents could still be environmental presidents apparently. The 2005 exemption is sometimes referred to as the Halliburton Loophole or the Halliburton Exemption. I find this exemption completely unacceptable, as does one whistle blower who works for the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). In one particularly troublesome incident, the EPA found that indeed the chemicals used in fracking were extremely toxic, but they also found that no action was needed. As the whistle-blower summed it up, "Only in an Orwellian world does this make any sense."
In effect, this means that companies in the fracking industry can pollute with impunity, with no fear of consequences. People whose health has been compromised by ruination of their water supply and breathable air have no legal recourse except civil lawsuits. Law enforcement can't help because there are very few applicable laws to enforce. Legal settlements almost always include a non-disclosure clause, so that people who have been wronged are muzzled after the settlement.
Dick Cheney was president and CEO of Halliburton (a huge gas drilling business) before he became vice president. George Bush owned an oil company before he became president. His father was in the oil business also.
When Cheney became vice president, he convened an energy task force which held 40 meetings with people in the oil industry and one meeting with environmentalists. Five of the seven members of the task force were industry people who benefited personally from lenient laws for people in the fossil fuels industry. It was during this era that the "Halliburton Exemption" became law.
The fact that 600 different chemicals are used in fracking, with no disclosure required, is a travesty also. Many of the chemicals are extremely toxic, causing neurological damage and cancer. After the chemicals are mixed with water for fracking purposes, the water can never again become a safe part of the water cycle. Much of it remains underground, and the remainder is left in open-air pits to evaporate. The volatile compounds from the mixture escape into the air, where, beyond the negative health impacts that result, they pose a danger of explosions, in sufficient concentrations. The water mixture itself is sometimes saturated enough with flammable material that it can be made to burn, if touched with a lighter. Applying a torch to the surface of euphemistically-named "produced water" in a stock tank can almost instantly create wisps of something that looks like clear plastic--not surprising since many of the chemicals that are used in manufacturing plastic are also used in fracking.
Farmers who struggle to make a living are sometimes tempted by the huge sums of money that are offered by companies buying up mineral rights. The producer of the documentary, for example, was offered nearly $100,000.00 for mineral rights on the 20 acres of Delaware River bottom land he owns in Pennsylvania.
This is a worrisome prospect. Kansas sits on top of one of the underground shale formations that are coveted for development. I can only hope that landowners act wisely if they are ever approached by representatives from fracking companies. As an aside, wind generators as energy producers begin to look very benign when compared to fracking as an energy-producing strategy. Kansas has a great deal of wind energy potential also.
Another issue of concern with fracking is the apparent misuse of public lands. Public lands first were opened for drilling in 1988 under the Reagan administration, when the elder Bush was vice president. Very extensive fracking is happening on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) territory now, mostly in western states. The stated purpose for BLM areas is "to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations." For land with this stated purpose to be used to increase the wealth of privately owned businesses, while polluting indiscriminately, seems wrong.
The Gasland movie contains some bad language that comes from people who were interviewed, and the movie has detractors for other reasons. Although I regret the salty language and can't vouch for the veracity of every detail, I believe that, on the whole, the documentary reveals something we ought to know. I borrowed the DVD from the Hutch library.
posted by Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige) at
6:06 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home