Should We Be A FrackNation?

In my last blog post, “To Frack or Not to Frack, That is the Question” I said that I know my views were a little one-sided about fracking and the consequences of it.  So naturally, the thing I did next was to watch a documentary in response to “Gasland.”  This one was called “FrackNation” (also available on Netflix, and Amazon Prime Instant Video) and it explores the other side of fracking story. 
From imbd.com a Hard Boiled Film synopsis, FrackNation is about:

 “Journalist Phelim McAleer faces bogus lawsuits, gun threats and intimidation questioning environmentalists and anti-fracking activists in his search for the truth.”

I know it’s a pretty lengthy synopsis (just kidding) but I’ll try to be more in depth about the explorations of this movie.  The journalist that is featured in this film, Phelim McAleer is from Ireland, and honestly his voice is one of the best things about this movie.  His biggest motive of this documentary was to uncover the other side of Gasland, seeing how much momentum that documentary has caused all over the world.  McAleer watched Gasland himself, then attended a press conference to ask Josh Fox (the director, and featured character) about the claims he made about water being flammable.  Fox declined to answer anything about it, eventually leading to say that what has caused flammable tap water in the first place was methane.  And there have been claims all the way back from 1930s that the flammable water in that area was in fact flammable—way before fracking had begun.  So McAleer had set off to find the truth about what Gasland had failed to mention.  

The big ideas that Gasland provided as negative consequences include: health issues, flammable water, unregulated fracking, and the long-term consequences of fracking.

McAleer starts with visiting a family that claims in Gasland that they have brown, murky water that has caused health issues.  He asks them if he can see the water that comes out from the tap for documentary reasons.  The man replies that it changes day to day, so he isn’t sure how it will be today.  Turns out the water from their faucet was entirely clear.  McAleer goes on to visit families that say the water in their area has always had the chance to be flammable because of methane—it’s a naturally occurring chemical that in high deposits can make water flammable.  Though the families had have wells for generations, dating back before fracking began, that could catch fire.  Instead the families created more wells, using the water coming from those because there is no harm.  The state of Pennsylvania has now had a ban on fracking since the release of Gasland, which has caused a huge impact on nearly 1100 landowners that have leased their land to gas companies.  Since the ban has halted fracking, these homeowners relied on the money from the lease to fund their farms—farms that have been in their families for generations—it was their livelihood.  And all of these 1100 homeowners were suffering from this anti-fracking movement, though one man living 400 yards away from his well never experienced anything negative.  

McAleer traveled across the ocean to uncover more truth about fracking.  Europe being a pretty much anti-fracking whole.  It was then uncovered that the majority of gas came from Russia.  Putin himself claimed all the same health risks that came from this energy source…and yet they are the only country to supply it.  The idea being that gas is the only thing that keeps Russia afloat economically, and if other countries in Europe started fracking themselves, the need would cease to exist. 

Later in the documentary, the ban that was implemented in Pennsylvania was tested by Environmental Protection Agency to see if the chemicals in the water was really causing problems, also the air quality causing health issues.  Turns out they found absolutely nothing that should cause concern.  After learning this, McAleer went back to the original family with the brown murky water, and tried to interview them.  He was standing on the street when the wife rolled up in her car, happy to see him.  He asked her if there was any truth to their water being safe.  This is when she got aggravated, showing him her permit to carry a gun, telling him that if she or her husband were put in his documentary they would sue.  She then called the cops when he asked her permission to test the water himself.  The cops let him go on the basis that he was doing nothing wrong.  He eventually got a video of this family and the EPA’s interaction over the water.  The EPA told the husband that their water was absolutely fine and clear of chemicals that could cause any sort of harm.  The husband begins to yell at the officials, while the wife leaves the room.  

The film ends with a terrible confrontation of McAleer and his “opponent” Fox.  McAleer tries to ask him questions at a museum where Fox is meeting for a press conference.  He tells his group to get rid of them, and one of his publicists ends up scratching one of the filmmakers.

I’m not going to lie, my eyes were opened.  And I cannot argue one way or another just because I’ve watched two documentaries.  It’s the beginning of my research, but it’s a fantastic example of exploring all sides of one idea.  But isn’t that the way with everything nowadays?  You cannot base your opinion off one documentary, one article, or one political candidate.  And that’s what happens because we are too lazy to focus enough attention to form our own opinion.  

In response to FrackNation, HBO—the producers of Gasland—has urged for a sequel of Gasland to explain these discrepancies.  I’m sure I’ll be finding time to find and watch the sequel.