ICYMI: Toughest Questions on Veracity of GasLand Come from Daily Show’s Jon Stewart

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-21-2010/josh-fox

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (June 21, 2010)

Stewart: “The industry itself has put out, they put out, literally, to debunk your film, it’s from Energy In Depth – EnergyInDepth.org.  It says when you say there’s 596 chemicals, they say 12. … They say that fracturing was never under … [cut off by Fox].”

  • Report: “Although the hydraulic fracturing industry may have a number of compounds that can be used in a hydraulic fracturing fluid, any single fracturing job would only use a few of the available additives [not 596!]. For example, in [this exhibit], there are 12 additives used, covering the range of possible functions that could be built into a fracturing fluid.” (page 62, report from U.S. Dept. of Energy / Ground Water Protection Council)

Stewart: “They say they were never under those auspices.  They say in this document that they were never under the Safe Drinking Water Act – that they were always regulated by the states, and that the states have very strict regulations.”

  • Fmr. EPA administrator (and current White House advisor) Carol Browner: EPA does not regulate – and does not believe it is legally required to regulate – the hydraulic fracturing of methane gas production wells under its [Safe Drinking Water Act] UIC program.” (letter, May 5, 1995)

http://mediacenter.tveyes.com/MediaCenter/39625/486371.5222/CNN_06-18-2010_10.34.28.wmv

CNN: America’s Newsroom (June 18, 2010)

  • Energy In Depth: “Fundamentally, we’re talking about a process in hydraulic fracturing that’s been used now for 60 years. It’s been in commercial service for 60 years. It’s not new. It’s not unregulated. It’s not exotic…And as recently as a couple months ago, when the U.S. Senate Committee asked top administrators over at EPA if they could identify a single case of groundwater contamination associated with hydraulic fracturing, the answer was: Not one.”
  • EID: “The interesting thing is that the gentleman that was in the film —  in fact, being show right now with the flammable faucet — he’s from Colorado, and the regulators went out to that well, did their surveys of it, did their research, collected data and came forward with a conclusion that that natural gas was … naturally occurring. That report was widely known, and it was available before the movie came out. And I think if the director was looking to give an even-handed account of what was actually happening, the reality of the situation wasn’t reflected in that film.”
  • Cont’d: “Hydraulic fracturing has been aggressively regulated for years on the state level. It was never covered under the Safe Water Drinking Act — Josh was misstating the facts on that one as well.”

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/23979885/detail.html

WTAE-TV – Pittsburgh (June 21, 2010)

  • EID: “Chris Tucker … said ‘Gasland’ director Josh Fox ignored a scientific report that showed the gas in the water in the Colorado example was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with drilling. ‘The film director has that report. He had access to the report before he went there, but obviously that doesn’t make for as good a story, and so he decided to exclude that,’ Tucker said.”
  • Reporter links to EID’s materials: “An industry group called Energy In Depth gave Team 4 the following web links as a rebuttal to claims made in the ‘GasLand’ movie: Debunking GasLand // GasLand Debunked (PDF)”

Speak Your Mind

*