Another anti energy propaganda film at the Oscars

See Gasland: The Movie for more informationImage by ltmayers via Flickr
Mark Hemingway:

For anyone who cares about the environment and the economy over glamour and gossip, the biggest Oscar surprise of 2011 is that the film "Gasland" was nominated for best documentary.

While Hollywood is typically in the business of creating legends, one would expect films nominated for this particular Oscar to have some tangible relationship to the truth. You'd be very hard-pressed to say that about "Gasland."

The film explores the practice of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." This is a process in which a solution that is 99 percent water and sand -- along with tiny amounts of chemicals -- is pumped into rock strata deep underground at very high pressure to help extract natural gas.

According to Gasland, fracking pollutes groundwater with terrible consequences. But there's no credible evidence that this is happening. None.

Oil and natural gas engineers have used this process more than a million times in this country to harvest otherwise unreachable oil and natural gas deposits. A thorough EPA study has concluded fracking is safe.

And the head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Drinking Water Protection Division told Congress last year that there's not a single documented instance of fracking polluting groundwater.

Nonetheless, it's generally agreed that "Gasland" is a slick piece of agitprop. The film's pivotal scene involves a Colorado family turning on their water taps and so much gas comes out that they light them on fire.

However, the state of Colorado's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission issued a press release stating that they had investigated the flaming water taps of the landowners in 2008 and 2009 and concluded it was naturally occurring methane, unrelated to oil and gas drilling.

...
The anti energy left is desperate to come up with a way to stop the production of inexpensive natural gas, which, because of fracking, we now have an abundant supply of. This messes up their scheme to manipulate the price of energy driving up the price of conventional energy so that inefficient energy they call alternative energy, will look more competitive. They can't make an honest argument, so they resort to the kinds of dishonesty Hemingway discusses here.
Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more