The Faults Behind Buffs Against Fracking

The purpose of this post is to point out the flaws in our rival group, Buff Against Fracking.

The biggest platform that the anti-fracking group has focused on are the environmental impacts that fracking has had. A recent article from that was posted on their Twitter page reported the closure of 37 oil wells in Oklahoma (CNN, September 3rd, 2016) due to seismic activity which the U.S. Geological Survey believes may be linked to recent fracking activity. Fracking is still a relatively new technological advancement that is going to have some costs associated with it. These costs can be reduced if funds are allocated to make the fracking process safer. Fracking requires more oversight, that much is clear, but what the anti-fracking group doesn’t take into account or address are the impacts that closing oil wells and drill sites (such as in Oklahoma as well as the recent ban on fracking in New York as mandated by Governor Andrew Cuomo) has on jobs. Hundreds of people have lost their jobs due to these closures, and the people responsible behind these closures have done nothing to help those who have lost their jobs because of it. Another benefit of fracking is cutting our reliance on foreign oil. Oil has become a costly commodity that is become harder and harder for Americans to purchase. Anti-fracking groups provide little evidence on what should be done in order to stop our foreign oil dependency, and provide no ideas or solutions to address this pressing issue.

A large issue facing the group, Buffs Against Fracking, is that they are playing off of people’s lack of knowledge when it comes to fracking. They claim that fracking and poverty are related and that the people who live in fracking communities have little access to information. Lucky for us they chose the wrong article to site in one of their sources. In their blog post from September 29th, they referenced the 2016 Gallup poll pointing out that Democrats are more likely to be against fracking. This is a given so they were clearly trying to just beef up their word count. They failed to continue reading the Gallup poll because we too looked at that survey and found some interesting bits that Buffs against Fracking seemed to have left out. When looking at that survey we found that 13% of people were undecided about fracking. Along with that, we found that while people might have an opinion on fracking itself, the general public really does not know much about the policies that go behind fracking. This is a sensitive time for both our group and the group against fracking because this is where actual information comes in. The Buffs against Fracking are railing into their supporters trying to get them on board with policy changes while very few of these people are educated in that subject. They claim for the flat out ban against fracking when they know that nearly half the population is for fracking or does not know enough about it. When they clamor to the uneducated about banning fracking they are failing to hit on their own point of educating the people first.

As I was exploring their Twitter page, blog, and reading any relevant articles that they posted on Twitter, these are some of the things that stuck out to me that the anti-fracking groups have yet to address:

• There still isn’t a lot of scientific evidence that proves fracking is bad for the environment and impacts health. This includes the increase of methane gas in the air as well as other pollutants. There also isn’t enough evidence to support the theory that fracking causes increased seismic activity
• Domestic fracking: those who live in communities oppose fracking in their community, but where do they stand on fracking that’s done in other states? Oppose? Support?
• Party Divisions: while fracking has begun to split parties (oppose vs. favor), for the most part, both parties tend to have their reservations about fracking. Support and opposition of fracking tends to shift quite often between both parties, and this is often fueled by any incidents that happen at fracking sites (blog post on Thursday, September 22nd, clearly states the Democrats still aren’t completely on board to ban fracking)
• There is also no mention of the impact that fracking has had on Native American Reservations. This surprised me, especially with all of the protests that have been going on to stop the Dakota Access Pipeline. Referencing these protests would have given the anti-fracking group a very real and human reason for why fracking should be banned

Letter to Congress

Proposed Bill: H.R. 4535: Keep It in the Ground Act of 2016

-Proposed by: Mr. Huffman (for himself, Mr. Ted Lieu of California, Mr. Honda, Ms. Lee, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Norton, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Ms. Edwards, Mr. Grayson, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Hastings, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Gutiérrez, Mr. McGovern, Mr. DeSaulnier, and Mr. Grijalva)

-Referred to: The Committee on Natural Resources

-Purpose: To prohibit drilling in the outer Continental Shelf, to prohibit coal leases on Federal land, and for other purposes.

-Section 5: Stopping new coal, oil, tar sands, fracked gas, and oil shale leases on federal land. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall not conduct any lease sale, enter into any new lease, reoffer for lease any land covered by an expiring lease, or renew, reinstate, or extend any nonproducing lease in existence on or before the date of enactment of this Act for onshore fossil fuels, including coal, oil, tar sands, oil shale, and gas on land subject to the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).

Dear Members of the Committee on Natural Resources,

A recently proposed bill, intended to pass in legislature has come to our attention, H.R. 4535 it prohibits drilling in the outer Continental Shelf along with the prohibition of coal leases on federal land. We of the Patriots 4 Fracking, an interest group that advocates for the practice of fracking, urge the members of this committee to reconsider their verdict on this issue. While we have come to understand that there are many safety precautions that need to be addressed in order to continue fracking, as well as fine-tune the ways to prevent fracking from damaging the environment entirely, we strongly believe that without this most recent venture, the American public will not be able to shake off the oil dependency we have developed from oil rich countries.

We believe that the key to promoting jobs in America is by endorsing the practice of fracking. Not only will it help struggling Americans get back on their feet, but it will also end our dependency on foreign oil. Fracking will allow the U.S. to become a leader in the production of natural gas and oil and cut gas and oil prices in half. We now live in a world that has become heavily dependent on oil and natural gas, and if we continue to rely on foreign exporters, the price of oil and gas will only go up. In addition, it is important to point out some of the shortages we may experience if we continue to rely on oil, especially oil in countries that have experienced or are now experiencing inner turmoil.

It has also recently come to our attention that the “Keep it in the Ground act of 2016”, otherwise known as “H.R. 4535”, does not take into account those states that rely heavily on the production of oil and natural gas through fracking. Our group operates out of Colorado, a state that has recently adopted fracking habits, and as a result, fracking has allowed the economy here to grow. This bill would thus pose an inconvenience to many of the people here who rely on fracking for their jobs as well as for their energy. This bill was proposed by a California representative, Jared Huffman, and while we respect Congressman Huffman as a representative in the state of California, fracking is not nearly as important to the economy in California as it is to us here in Colorado. We believe that the positive effects of fracking have greatly benefited our state. Since this act has been proposed, early this year in February, gas prices have gone up by nearly 70 cents across the state of Colorado. Not only that, but gas prices in California have also increased by about 50 cents.

We appreciate Congressman Huffman’s concern for the environment, but as citizens of Colorado, we do not want gas prices to increase any more than they really need to. We therefore ask that this committee rethink passing this bill, as it could potentially influence higher gas prices in the future.

While there are many concerns around the environmental aspect of this bill it is important to keep in mind that fracking is the result of reformed technology. Hydraulic fracturing or fracking is the result of a drill that can move vertically and horizontally. Before fracking drills were only able to move vertically, greatly reducing their productivity, fracking takes away the need for hundreds of drills with just one. These are important facts to look at because with proper management drilling could be more efficient than ever. Fracking’s largest problem is seen in how it must use slickwater to fracture rock and get to the source of oil, although if this is done correctly the rock will eventually reform itself and there will be no long term damage. “A federal study done in 2013 by the U.S. Department of Energy(DOE), found no evidence that chemicals from the fracking process had contaminated groundwater at one Pennsylvania drilling site.” With careful monitoring of the fracking process we could self sustain our oil dependency, loosen our reliance on imported oil while keeping the environment used safe.

References

GasBuddy.com, By. "Historical Price Charts." Historical Gas Price Charts. Accessed October 14, 2016. https://blog.gasbuddy.com/Retail_Price_Chart.aspx.

"Facts About Fracking." LiveScience. Accessed October 14, 2016. http://www.livescience.com/34464-what-is-fracking.html.

Who Could We Motivate?

It’s no coincidence that the greatest supporters for fracking tend to come from the Republican party. The Republican party has traditionally favored many methods that can help create jobs and wealth in the country, and fracking is just another way for the party to promote such a philosophy. Republican voters are thus the easiest to sway to the cause. In addition, according a Gallup poll from March 2015, adults aged 65 or older support fracking the most out of any other age demographic.

The hardest group to recruit to the cause are most democratic voters and groups promoting more environmental oversight and policies that ensure the protection of the earth. Many Americans between the ages of 18 to 29 oppose fracking and those who have reported having an active role in the environmental movement strongly oppose fracking (nearly 53%). Below is a table from the Gallup poll reporting on this issue:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/182075/americans-split-support-fracking-oil-natural-gas.aspx

Recently, many fracking activities have started taking place on Native American land which has prompted a number of protests. Of these protests, the one that has accrued the most media attention is the protest held by the Standing Rock Sioux in North Dakota who have been protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. This tribe has been joined by many other tribes to oppose the construction of a pipeline that would run from North Dakota all the way to Illinois. Along with active environmentalists, these groups will be the hardest to persuade to support fracking activities.

Furthermore, the Pew Research Center has conducted a number of different polls asking the American public about their opinion on fracking. Most Americans identifying as Republicans, again, support fracking. What’s interesting in this poll is that a number of Democrats and Independents supported fracking in March 2013, however, the number of Democrats and Independents has declined over the past couple of years, making it much harder to recruit them to support fracking.

http://www.pewresearch.org/key-data-points/environment-energy-2/

An interesting demographic that has not been tapped is the base that does not know enough about fracking to make an informed decision. Gallup’s Environment Survey in 2016 had 13% of people not knowing enough, or not having an opinion on fracking. While that does not seem like a large number, the balance between support and opposition for fracking has never been closer. Just last year, the support for fracking was split with the opposition to it 40-40. People not having a decision was slightly higher at 19%. This year, the balance slipped towards the opposition with 51% of people being opposed to it while only 36% people favored fracking. Why I bring up the 13% who did not have enough information to be for or against fracking is because of the opportunity.  A strong move for fracking companies would be to put the resources into educating the public. Not only would they have the opportunity to support local oil, but there would be a window for them to turn the American focus away from the Middle East and towards our own oil economy. Along with trying to sway the uninformed to vote for them, this positive movement could also bring support from the opposition back towards fracking.

-http://www.gallup.com/poll/190355/opposition-fracking-mounts.aspx

A tough demographic to chip away at are the people who support Alternative Energy Sources. Fracking falls under the category of Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas. There has been negative press around oil and gas companies due to recent mishaps such as the Shell Oil Spill. Americans also tend to have high hope for the future. Solar, wind, and hydro energy promises a cleaner fuel option. The technology has not arrived to make those forms of energy as productive as oil and gas but there have been major strides in the past years. The way to get into this demographic is by laying down the truth. From the Pew Survey mentioned earlier, people generally did not know much about the policies behind the energy supply. A lot actually turned their view around and supported more drilling in lands owned by the United States. People have these high hopes for clean energy for the future but tend to forget to ground themselves and look at the opportunities right in front of us.

-http://www.pewresearch.org/key-data-points/environment-energy-2/

One demographic that may not know they are being affected is landowners in fracking heavy states. According to the Rural Advancement Foundation International, over 59,000 acres of owned land are going to be targeted by fracking companies in upcoming months because of fracking companies predatory leasing rights cases. Fracking companies may use a tactic called compulsory pooling. “Compulsory pooling can result in the loss of your property rights and allow oil and gas companies to force the leasing of your property.” Many landowners do not consult lawyers when confronted by these fracking companies and in turn lose property rights and get taken advantage of. Property owners who are vulnerable to being affected this way  could be difficult for fracking companies to win over.

• http://rafiusa.org/issues/landowner-rights-and-fracking/

Another demographic that could be positively affected by fracking is small businesses in the towns where fracking companies reside. This is because new wells bring in a new influx of revenue and people who will work the drill. For small businesses this means that there will be more revenue circulating through the town which would help to support small businesses.

Who Supports Fracking?

Who Supports Fracking?

While the issue of fracking has become a huge debate between the Republican and Democratic parties, one mustn’t forget the other, albeit smaller, parties who have taken a stance on this issue. Rather than explore the usual arguments that Republicans and Democrats have been making, we decided to see what kind of stance the Libertarian party has formed on this issue. According to ISideWith, a polling site, around 65% of Libertarians support fracking. In Colorado, 56% of the public who identifies as Libertarian support fracking. According to this same site, Gary Johnson, the current Libertarian candidate, supports fracking, but believes there needs to be more oversight in fracking activity. Libertarians still remain a small party, and have only recently begun to generate interest in the public, but the amount that supports fracking is actually greater than the Republican party, which is the party that has historically favored this issue. In recent years, the Republican party has begun to split over the issue of fracking. According to a recent Gallup poll, the amount of Republicans that support fracking dropped from 66% to 55% within just one year. Fracking is seen by both parties to be an excellent way to end foreign dependence on oil, and Libertarians especially advocate this. Not only is it a means to finally be in control of the source of oil, but it will then generate businesses and increase revenue in the country. A significant portion of Libertarians do express concern in the environmental impact that fracking has on the environment and agree with Johnson that more oversight is needed. However, fracking could ultimately begin to solve the energy and climate crisis that the world is beginning to experience.

The Libertarian party would be the best party to support us because when looking at the changes in energy production on a global scale, fracking becomes a necessary next step. A majority of the Libertarian party are siding with fracking because it falls within such a grey area. Not enough research has been done to prove its true impact on the earth, yet it has the ability to diminish our foreign dependency on oil and create a self-sustaining means to accrue profit in our own country. Libertarians don’t agree with the difficulties that come with the two-party system; fracking would be limited to the point of inexistence with future Democrats, and Republicans are beginning to argue amongst themselves whether the practice is ethical or not. Libertarians have been focusing on the facts while the Democrats and Republicans are getting lost in the possibilities. For a smaller party, like the Libertarians, to take a strong position on fracking and show a well-thought out and informative plan of action would be an effective way of gaining support for the party.

SWOT Analysis

Strengths

Fracking has the potential to significantly lower the price of natural gas.  Using statistics on CBSnews I found that in June of 2008 gas was $4.10 a gallon.  It fell in August of 2008 to $3.74 a gallon.  At the time Marcellus Shale, which is a large Fracking Company, was producing around half a billion cubic feet of gas per day.  Today Marcellus Shale produces 16 billion cubic feet of gas per day.  They were able to tap into shale rock which we originally thought we wouldn’t be able to accomplish.  The point is that gas is now $1.92 a gallon in Colorado.  This is evidence to bolster the argument that Fracking can have a significant effect on gas prices.  Another strength of our argument is that producing natural gas domestically relieves our dependence on foreign countries.  According to the “Global Energy Statistical Yearbook” the United States passed Russia to become the world’s leader in Natural Gas production in 2013.  Fracking was starting to take hold in 2013 and certainly had an impact on us overtaking Russia.  Continued fracking will only help us maintain this position, thus helping to break the dependency we used to have on the Middle East and other countries.  

Weaknesses

According to Yale Climate Connections, it’s believed that the effects of fracking on air quality are not thoroughly understood. It’s assumed that the burning of natural gas is much safer for the environment than the burning of coal, which fracking helps minimize. There has been evidence given that supplements the idea that fracking can be harmful to the ozone layer, in ways we don't fully understand yet. Besides that they make the fact that natural gas is still not a clean renewable source of energy, it’s not truly cleaning the air, only relatively compared to coal. Fracking provides a cheap alternative for the uses of natural gasses and  this is seen as harmful to the cause of solar, wind and other truly renewable sources of energy. As long as people can keep getting oil for the right price, they’ll keep buying it. A study published by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences claims that fracking can contaminate drinking water, because methane leaks into it, thus making it flammable. This doesn’t mean your glass of water is going to all of the sudden light on fire, but it can result in destruction of wells (a well blowout) which can be very harmful to the environment..

Opportunities

The big opportunity in fracking is the money. The oil industry in just the United States is bringing in hundreds of billions of dollars each year. According to CNN Money the fracking industry now accounts for half of the United States production. This creates a wealth of benefits for the public. Being able to produce our own oil allows for the country to have more of a control over the gas prices. The reason a barrel of oil does not cost 100$ anymore? Fracking stepped up and saved the day. The industry is booming producing over 100 times more barrels of oil per year than in 2000, just inside the United States. When you produce your own oil you also have the added bonus of not having to import as much oil from other countries. The United States is in the top 5 countries in the word for producing oil, partially thanks to fracking. Another benefit to the public? Fracking has created over one million jobs in oil for American citizens. According to the  U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s 21st Century Energy Institute, that number will keep rising to a projected total of 3.5 million jobs by 2035.

http://www.energyxxi.org/us-chamber%E2%80%99s-fracking-job-boom-behind-numbers

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/24/investing/fracking-shale-oil-boom/

Threats

Some threats that our group faces are the variety of different anti-fracking coalitions that have organized to halt fracking activity. Many of these groups have been able to amass a variety of different followers who advocate for the ban of fracking. After browsing a few state-based anti-fracking Twitter groups, I found that they had fewer followers than those who organized on a nationwide level. With this in mind, having such a presence has enabled these nationwide groups to recruit people from all over the country to protest fracking activity, and it is precisely this kind of unity that poses a threat to fracking activity, potentially halting it altogether. Perhaps one of the greatest threats the fracking movement faces are the protests and demonstrations on fracking sites which cause any and all activity to halt. One of the more recent protests that have gained attention through the media involves the Dakota Access Pipeline. “The Huffington Post” recently wrote an article covering this protest: the Standing Rock Sioux tribe gathered to protest the construction of the Dakota pipeline, not only because such construction affects the environment, but the tribe has argued that the pipeline would disturb sacred land and burial grounds. In addition to these concerns, many anti-fracking activists say that construction of these pipelines and fracking sites are dangerous, both for the safety and health of the community. Protests and concerns such as these are apt to gain a lot of support from the anti-fracking movement, as well as concerned members of the public, which could potentially halt any bills or legislation on fracking. In addition to these issues, some research I conducted showed that there is a lot of media bias on fracking, causing a lot of partiality on the debate of this issue. Most liberal mainstream media (CNN, MSNBC) tend to frame fracking as bad for the environment and the health of the community, especially highlighting the costs and high risks whereas more conservative media (FOX news) claims there are no bad side effects to the environment due to fracking and argue that fracking will help the U.S. lessen its dependency on foreign oil. The effects that fracking has on health are often dismissed by conservative news media outlets, as they claim there is not enough scientific evidence to back up such assertions.

Where is the Anti-Fracking group vulnerable?

In the debate over fracking much of the opposition to fracking has been false stipulation from the other side. An example of this would be in the 2010 academy award nominated movie gasland one man held a flame up to his water and it caught fire. This was later proven to not be caused from natural gas drilling but rather the farmers own water supply. Incidents like this are where the anti fracking group will have trouble and be vulnerable because if they are basing their arguments for an environmentally harmful view of fracking off of stories like these then their credibility will need to be called into question. The science behind fracking being environmentally harmful is faulty. In an article by popular mechanics titled, “Is Fracking Safe? The 10 Most Controversial Claims About Natural Gas Drilling”, geologist Gary Lash of the state university of New York at Fredonia says that the intervening layers of rock have distinct mechanical properties that would prevent drilling fissures from expanding a mile or more towards the surface. According to this, basic geology would prevent natural gas from contaminating the above layers of the earth. Because of this we need to call into question the evidence that is gathered by the anti fracking group and how it was gathered.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/g161/top-10-myths-about-natural-gas-drilling-6386593/

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/239435-both-sides-of-natural-gas-manipulating-public-debate

Anti-Fracking Groups and Fracking Advocates

10 Groups for Fracking

1) American Clean Skies Foundation (@cleanskiesfdn)

2) Energy Citizens (@EnergyCitizens)

3) Shale Advocates (@ShaleAdvocates)

4) Energy Nation (@energynation)

5) Vote4Energy (@Vote4Energy)

6) Nevada Energy Forum (@NevEnergyForum)

7) Consumer Energy Alliance (@CEAorg)

8) Energy In Depth (@EnergyInDepth)

9) Americans For Prosperity (@AFPhq)

10) Energytomorrow (@energytomorrow)

10 Groups against Fracking

1) Thompson Divide Coalition (@ThompsonDivide)

2) Americans Against Fracking (@USagainstFRACK)

3) Beyond Natural Gas (@BeyondNatGas)

4) Californians Against Fracking (@caagainstfrack)

5) Let’s Ban Fracking Michigan (@LetsBanFracking)

6) Don’t Frack New York (@DontFrackNY)

7) No Frack Ohio (@NoFrackOhio)

8) Fractivist (@fractivist)

9) Protecting Our Waters (@POW_no_fracking)

10) Sane Energy Project (@SaneEnergy)


Energy Citizens-  Their last tweet came out an hour before I wrote this, which demonstrates that they are on top of their twitter account.  They also do a good job of making the issue of Fracking appeal to a larger audience.  They tie it into the possibility of rising food prices.  This would peak the interest of a reader that may not necessarily care about Fracking one way or the other.  They also do a good job of getting their tweets out to a larger audience by using popular hashtags.  One that I’m seeing them use is #BrokenRFS.  This group has few discernible weaknesses and quite a few strengths.
Shale advocates has a very good presence online. Their twitter and other social media accounts continually bring readers back to their website. The Shale Advocates have a very intuitive website that allows for readers to immediately sign up for newsletters or find news sources about fracking directly on their website. A big strength I see coming from them is their use of people. They have a series of videos that includes real people telling about their personal experience with fracking. These videos help people sympathize with fracking by showing that it does not just hurting people. They also have their facts about fracking front and center on their website to allow people to access data quickly.

Energy Nation looks to be a very prominent advocacy group for america's energy sector. There is a lot of positive information about the effects fracking is having on the economy and jobs all over both their twitter and their website. However, they also cover other forms of energy such as ethanol. Their website is clean and professional looking and makes it easy to get involved in the discussion surrounding fracking and other energy production in the united states. They have a clear mission statement of clean and homegrown energy on their website which itself makes a good case for fracking and how fracking can be done right.

Fractivist: Fractivist believes in raising awareness against the use of fossil fuels and fracking. They believe we have developed a dependency on oil generated by the gas industries across the world, and this has contributed to our growing problem of climate change. Fractivist aims to work through policy and legislation like C.E.A. although on a smaller scale. The people working for C.E.A. are made up of large organizations and various industries, while Fractivist is one guy trying to make a difference, and he can do this by contacting local government officials and getting his word out there to be directed by those who can make a difference.

Consumer Energy Alliance: is a nationwide group consisting of members with backgrounds ranging from academia, organized labor, agriculture, airlines, construction etc. Their goal is to bring these organizations together through a united voice on energy consumption. By working together C.E.A. employs strength through numbers, and make themselves heard through social media, legislation, workshops, and informing the public. Members of C.E.A. believe fracking is a right of the energy consumer, and supplies fair pricing and competition to a market which could otherwise easily be manipulated.

vote4energy

vote4energy has a strong message almost as soon as you enter their website. They seek to promote producing natural gas and petroleum products which they believe will contribute the U.S.’s economy and help provide jobs for Americans. In addition, they believe that, since the U.S. is currently one of the largest producers of natural gas, the U.S. should take the lead in producing and distributing natural gas. It is their opinion that the only way for this to happen is to bring awareness to voters who should thus demand that their political leaders take similar action in these issues. vote4energy seeks to provide clean power for the future. At first glance, vote4energy has an impressive and interactive website, with links to help its visitors discover more about its philosophy, as well as examine various polls throughout the country that address many different issues. They encourage people to become “energy voters” which would help pass laws and bills that would make it easier for companies to harvest natural gas and petroleum. Their twitter site has a decent amount of followers following this group, and their tweets are up to date, some within the hour. Some of their posts include charts and graphs highlighting consumption and the reduction of CO₂ emissions thanks to natural gas consumption.  

Positives of Fracking

Fracking has many positive aspects that are often over looked by the mainstream media.  Fracking's potential damage to the environment can be contained when companies Frack in an environmentally conscious manner.  Some positives of it are the fact that the Natural Gas we obtain from it could last a century.  The fuel is also produced domestically, which could lessen our reliance on foreign Countries.  These are just a few of many potential upsides associated with Fracking.