Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:18:07 -0400
From: Tom Glendinning”
Subject: Another ‘fracking’ comment
The discussion about gas drilling is basically good for information gathering, if, and only if, the comments are made based on sound evidence. This discussion in Chatham has surpassed the its usefulness. The BOC has no sway whatsoever in the regulation of or enforcement of the practice. Any further comments at BOC meetings are simply an exercise in futility and ego feeding, or the need to be in the spotlight.
The NC legislature will make determinations on gas drilling in the state since it was outlawed by previous legislation, under coal mining. Coal mining has produced water quality problems and releases of methane gas to local environments in several states. In fact, the Pennsylvania example of burning water was the result of such a problem and ignoring state warnings not to drill in that rock formation.
These emotionally inspiring examples are fine for unfair justification of a poor argument. They are, however, falsely founded on fact, making “Gasland” a fraud for true information on gas drilling. But the witnesses against ‘fracking’ want something other than factual evidence. They want another fight, no matter what the topic or venue. So no evidence or argument contrary to their belief will suffice. Theirs is a holy war, so full of holes it could not stand up to scrutiny but fought with the conviction that it is right.
There are risks in everything on earth. Driving a car will expose one to death by vehicle. Walking in the woods could lead to being eaten by a bear. Breathing fall air could expose one to pneumonia. Etc., etc., etc. The small concentrations of bad chemicals in ‘fracking fluid’ are within the limits of EPA drinking water standards for one mixture used. Other “pollutants” are used in everyday products consumed by the American public. So why are we not banning cosmetics, automobile antifreeze, cooking products, and so on? These product contain the same chemicals used in the drilling fluid. In fact, using the same logic, we ought to ban automobiles because we want to ban gas drilling for using a chemical (at .001% concentration) that is carcinogenic if it is in our drinking water. Laws and regulations need to be fairly and evenly prosecuted over the land, not unfairly imposed on one practice or company.
This fluid will not be drunk. It will be treated by methods known to render the small amounts of pollutants ineffectual. Besides, more of the same pollutants already exist in our environment and public drinking water systems. Where is the outcry about them? The endless protests at board meetings? The bottomless posts on the Chatlist?
Tom Glendinning