The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 28    Average: 2.9/5]
27 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 5968
Rating: 2.9
Category: Science
Date: 04/16/12 06:00 AM

27 Responses to Gasland Director Hides Full Facts

  1. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3279 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 5:54 am
    Link: Gasland Director Hides Full Facts - A response to the Fracking Hell video on here earlier. Seems the water-on-fire stunt predates the fracking.
  2. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 6:28 am
    All I`m getting out of this is that there were incidents of gas in water lines prior to fracking, which isn`t news. I fail to see why the maker of this video thinks this is a "gotcha" moment.

    I think the director`s point is valid: gas in water not caused by fracking isn`t relevant to a movie about fracking.
  3. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 6:29 am
    It`s not the methane that would concern me. It`s all the chemical crap they inject into the ground during the fracking.
  4. Profile photo of sosueme1966
    sosueme1966 Male 40-49
    439 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 6:36 am
    Frack now. Drill now. Stop endless war. Efficient wind and solar energy is 30 years away, trust me, I`m in the industry. We need to utilize the natural resources we are standing on top of before our need to spend trillions and kill millions to stabilize the Middle East destroys our country.
  5. Profile photo of Arcval
    Arcval Male 18-29
    304 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 6:39 am
    But it is relevant.
  6. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 7:30 am
    I think the director`s point is valid: gas in water not caused by fracking isn`t relevant to a movie about fracking.
    Yes, but in the movie about fracking (as far as I understand - I haven`t seen it) they make a big deal about the people setting their water on fire and say (or at least imply) it`s because of the fracking, when it actually happened before the fracking began.


    Also can I just say thanks to the geologist who came up with calling this process "fracking", it`s a great word.
  7. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    598 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 7:38 am
    >>> I think the director`s point is valid: gas in water not caused by fracking isn`t relevant to a movie about fracking.<<<

    Except that you are jumping to the conclusion that the gas in that water was caused by fracking.

    What if I made a video on how jet planes are causing the tides. I could show lots of examples of how there are tides and planes flying over. To keep from confusing the audience, and because it just is not relevant, I will not make any mention of the moon.

  8. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3279 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 8:03 am
    almightybob1 hit the nail on the head.

    The particular segment that this video shows is all about how fracking "caused" the water to be able to be lit on fire. And if I recall correctly, the director of Gasland directly states that "fact".

    I`m not 100% behind the fracking process, but I think it could lead to good, but it needs to be heavily watched and regulated better.
    One point that Gasland makes, that I totally agree with, is the companies who frack, the liquid the inject into the ground is covered under the same thing that Coca-Cola is protected under, and that is "secret ingredients", and that needs to be stopped.
  9. Profile photo of antagonizer
    antagonizer Male 18-29
    508 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 8:12 am
    Anyone who tries to argue that fracking is safe, and the by-products aren`t harmful are a bunch of fracking idiots.
  10. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 8:32 am
    Sosueme1966: "Frack now. Drill now. Stop endless war. Efficient wind and solar energy is 30 years away, trust me, I`m in the industry. We need to utilize the natural resources we are standing on top of before our need to spend trillions and kill millions to stabilize the Middle East destroys our country."

    Ok...since you`re in "the industry", tell us all about the chemicals they`re injecting in our groundwater, and what the plans are 30 years from now.
  11. Profile photo of onoffonoffon
    onoffonoffon Male 30-39
    2379 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 9:02 am
    It was Kony that put the gas in the water.
  12. Profile photo of alpensepp
    alpensepp Male 70 & Over
    1364 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 9:06 am
    the beauty(?) about the yt age is that everybody can be his own little michael moore and spread his self importance on the web.
  13. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 9:41 am
    jtrebowski: The chemicals being used in fracking are not being injected into the groundwater, They are being injected over a mile below the surface.

    The groundwater table is not far from the surface, 400 or so feet or less, in most all cases. The oil shale that`s being fracked is below a capstone, impermeable rock, deep beneath the earth.



    The fracking zone never comes close to the water table because layers of solid rock above the oil shale prevent that from happening.
  14. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 9:56 am
    Is he trying to imply that because certain people had methane in their water before fracking started, therefore fracking definitely does not cause methane contamination into groundwater?
  15. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 10:07 am
    It`s not "relevant?" lolz! What a bare-faced liar!

    I expect the usual suspects to `defend` the self-titled `documentary` eh? Kool-aid never catches on fire...
  16. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 10:12 am
    Outstanding example @dang007! I tried in vain to think one up, but yours is brilliant!

    @Fools: you have it backwards: the `docco` says it`s caused BY fracking, but it was happening long BEFORE fracking started, ok? Something the guy `excluded` from the docco.

    iirc: this sort of `water on fire` has happened in places with intensive coal mining too, in isolated areas of course.
  17. Profile photo of Amurika
    Amurika Male 30-39
    282 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 2:40 pm
    everybody is a scientist on the internets! ;-/

    LOL
  18. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 6:24 pm
    meh.....
  19. Profile photo of TadnJess
    TadnJess Male 30-39
    147 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 6:26 pm
    I believe in a laboratory setting CrakrJak`s picture IS how its supposed to work. The real issues come in when that top layer becomes contaminated by an accident (spill, truck tanker failure, etc.) at the production well. I`m sure `they` will have a million reasons why the accident happened, but the aquifer will still be destroyed, forever. So, one has to seriously consider if it is worth it. In my humble opinion, we need to take a real good look at what is happening to the state of Penn. and the real impact it is having there before letting everyone go nuts with putting wells everywhere.
  20. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 7:05 pm
    TadnJess: I lived near oil refineries most of my life, and yes we had a few instances of gasoline in the water table. After that was discovered recovery wells were installed, to recover the gas, monitoring equipment was installed and the leaking pipes removed and/or repaired. The city replaced their leaking water lines as well.

    All those pipes were less than 50 feet underground, The fracking pipes are over a mile deep.

    The EPA takes spills and pollution very seriously, companies have to install monitoring wells around any wellhead thy drill.

    Groundwater wells around the Appalachians are known for encountering coal gas, in many cases it`s intermittent contamination that changes with the amount of water in the aquifer at the time.
  21. Profile photo of ledzeppeloyd
    ledzeppeloyd Male 18-29
    2385 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 7:13 pm
    yes methane naturally comes up from the ground which can cause water to be lit on fire, however that does NOT discredit this movie about how they drat the environment around the fracking sights
  22. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3279 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 7:35 pm
    You`re half right, ledzeppeloyd.

    Fracking can be harmful to the environment, when caution is not properly upheld.

    However it does discredit the documentary when the doc. says that the water can be lit on fire BECAUSE of the fracking, when in fact the water was able to be lit on fire since 1976 because of the methane and NOT the fracking.
  23. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 9:59 pm
    Oh noes! A liberal environmentalist actually LYING! That`s gotta be like...what...about the 587,384th time that`s happened this week?
  24. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 10:26 pm
    @OldOllie: Shame on you for exaggerating! It`s the 587,384th time this YEAR!
    Not even close to the record set in 2007, eh?
  25. Profile photo of lucidexistan
    lucidexistan Male 30-39
    59 posts
    April 16, 2012 at 11:03 pm
    I`ve been living out on the blackfoot reservation near Glacier National park where a lot of Fracking has been going on. There`s been an explosion of cancer cases in the area, the locals believe it`s from fracking. I`ve noticed it`s hard to meet someone over 45 in the area that hasn`t been diagnosed with some kind of cancer.
  26. Profile photo of Groogle
    Groogle Male 30-39
    2172 posts
    April 17, 2012 at 2:42 am
    They could light the water from their tap on fire but only under some very rare occurences, like most of the time, the flame of their lighter would just go a little brighter if they didn`t wet the tip of it before it does... actually nothing to do with what you actually see in Gasland... which is fire from their tap water at 100% occurences. In other words, all the freaking time. Like non-stop undrinkable methane polluted water.

    There was like 1/100000000 particle of dangerous chemical per droplet of water beofre.

    Now it has like 99/100 particle of dangerous chemical per droplet of water.
  27. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    April 17, 2012 at 5:06 am
    Is he trying to imply that because certain people had methane in their water before fracking started, therefore fracking definitely does not cause methane contamination into groundwater?

    No. He`s asking why the documentary made no mention of the fact that these people could set their water on fire before fracking started. By leaving that out, the documentary leads the viewer to the conclusion (explicit or implicit) that fracking caused them to be able to set their water on fire.
    It`s irresponsible journalism.

    yes methane naturally comes up from the ground which can cause water to be lit on fire, however that does NOT discredit this movie about how they drat the environment around the fracking sights
    It doesn`t completely discredit it, but it certainly raises concern over the director`s journalistic practice and integrity. He was clearly aware of the previous reports.

Leave a Reply