Fracking Cram Course –
For many of those newly concerned about fracking the amount of information is overwhelming. Hundreds of very good sources exist, and there are hundreds more that are just shrill opinion or propaganda. It’s a chore to sort through it all. I’ve been focused on this for three weeks pretty much full time, and I still find surprising new information.
One of my recent finds is this report by Food and Water Watch, a credible source. The report offers a comprehensive overview and an impressive listing of end notes (320 of them) so scholars and skeptics can check sources.
Another survey article appeared in Law Street and lists source websites the author used while attempting to write a balanced pro and con review of fracking.
Yesterday (July 20th) I updated the homepage of this site by adding a summary of the fracking issues of specific concern to our area of Bucks County. Although the content is not new, it was scattered in various posts and links on the site and wasn’t a quick read. Page one gives a quick overview and the “read more” drills down for more detail. (pun intended.) It’s a work in process and I will be adding illustrations and links to enrich what’s presented there.
The video portfolio on this site has excellent animated graphics to help you understand and the fracking tour presents actual photographs of all stages of the process so you see the impact on the land and the community.
Thanks to all those who have been emailing links and articles. I now know more than I ever wanted to. But don’t stop. It all gets noted and saved.
Side Bar – Anonymous Propaganda vs. Responsible Opinion
I have spent some time reading pro fracking information to see what I might be missing. There is a lot of very well designed material that’s clearly the product of a professional ad agency. It stands in sharp contrast to the scientific and news sources. Few items have a named author or actually cite sources. They seek to convince the way advertising does with crafted language and phrasing that glosses over the inconvenient facts.
By contrast, the science discusses the limits and uncertainties. It cites sources and explains how the authors arrived at their findings, and the articles appear in journals and publications that are reviewed by informed peers.
The advocacy literature unabashedly presents a viewpoint and often uses language that characterizes the drillers and the energy industry negatively. But the big difference between the ad copy and these activist articles is that the authors put their personal and/or orginazitions’ names on the product. Most quote authorities by name and cite print sources. Although they are making a case, there is no pretense otherwise.