From “Not Evil, Just Wrong”: Gasland director hides full facts
Written by Phelim McAleer
Josh Fox has made a documentary that makes some pretty alarming claims about gas drilling across the US. But as is often the case when these claims are examined they do not stand up to scrutiny.
Fox’ documentary Gasland, claims that fracking, a way of drilling for natural gas, has polluted water and endangered lives. One of the most alarming scenes is when he lights water that residents claim has been polluted by fracking. It is dramatic and at first glance seems like a slam dunk. I mean they can light their water – it is polluted and there is gas drilling nearby. It must be responsible.
But then a little digging reveals a few inconvenient facts. A 1976 study by the Colorado Division of Water found that this area was plagued with gas in the water problems back then. And it was naturally occurring.
As the report stated there was “troublesome amounts of methane” in the water decades before fracking began. It seems that in geographical areas gas has always been in the water.
But Josh Fox knew this and chose not to put it in Gasland.
I asked him about this omission at a recent screening at Northwestern University in Chicago.
He said he had not included these facts that questioned his alarmism because “they were not relevant.” He also dropped the bombshell that I had not been aware of that there were media reports of people lighting their water as far back as 1936. Again this was not included in Gasland because it was not relevant.
Perhaps Josh you should include all the evidence and let people figure out what is relevant and what is not.
==================================================================
Note from Anthony: The Gasland director apparently didn’t like this video being used to criticize him (which falls under fair use) and he has pulled it from YouTube claiming a copyright violation. Fortunately, there are other options besides YouTube to show Phelim McAleer’s video:
And as way of verification of the Gasland’s claim of fracking causing methane in groundwater was based on a fabricated claim or not, I went looking for the 1976 report that McAleer cited. I didn’t find it, but I did find another report from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) which was equally damning:
Source: http://search.datapages.com/data/doi/10.1306/03B5B46B-16D1-11D7-8645000102C1865D
Additionally, on May 13th, the New York Times reported:
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” got a clean bill of health this week in the first scientific look at the safety of the oil and production practice.
So in light of all this, perhaps this description of Gasland’s director Josh Fox’ situation would be apt:
Liar, liar, tap water on fire!
Lest anyone think that natural gas right at the surface is a problem unique to the United States, I offer this video of the “Door to Hell” in Turkmenistan.
Also, back in 2009, before the green movement went fracking crazy, Treehugger reported this story about methane in a lake that could be ignited in a matter of fact sort of way.
Why Yes, Methane Bubbling Up From a Frozen Lake Can Be Lit on Fire
Here’s the video:
No mention of fracking or drilling nearby.
Even research scientists get a kick out of naturally occurring biogenic methane:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It was common knowledge in the area that often water will ignite ….because of shallow coal seams with associated methane. Cabot’s mistake was that they did not test the surrounding water wells before they drilled their Marcellus wells, so that they had a baseline upon which to compare gas contents. Rather than fight, they agreeds to settle. Now oil companies are testing all water wells with 1/2 mile of any existing new wells so that the baseline will be established, they tey can compare before and after frac.
If you run across any videos you consider important please download and store. Videos are disappearing at the speed of light off the net especially you tube. 25+ channels have been deleted that I subscribed to for a long time.
So people, tap water has always been lighting up and they chose to publicise it now because they are Green Communists?
I we had gas in our water the water company would be charging more. A lot more.
I grew up in Ohio, and all the neighborhood boys knew where the natural gas seeps were. We would throw a match into one, and it would ignite and burn for several hours, sometimes for a few days. Methane has always been in the water in various places.
Frakking is done so far below the water table and below impervious rock and salt deposits that this just has to be another attempt to alarm the public with pseudo-science. I would like to see them go where frakking is taking place right now, and ignite their tap water. <—[there’s an empirical test for the hypothesis, no?]
Biogenic vs. thermogenic, and Fox himself admits it. Well, that alone pretty much proves that Fox’s claims are false. I hope the gas company sues the liar.
Since when were facts ever relevant in the AGW movement?
Those of us who lived in rural Alberta remember a similar phenomena…
http://environment.alberta.ca/02883.html
Methane gas occurs naturally in groundwater aquifers in most geological sedimentary basins worldwide, including here in Alberta. Methane gas exists in a dissolved state in groundwater underground and will “bubble out” when pumped to the surface. For those on private water well supplies, spurting taps is a common result of this phenomenon. Methane gas can pose an explosion or asphyxiation hazard if allowed to build up in a confined space, so well owners are strongly encouraged to vent their water supply systems when gas is present.
This indicator is an important way to determine if groundwater is being affected by coalbed methane and other oil and gas activity.
Coalbed methane (also known as CBM) is a relatively new natural gas energy source in Alberta. Albertans have expressed concerns that methane gas could migrate from CBM wells to nearby aquifers and water well supplies.
Alberta Environment oversees a network of over 250 groundwater monitoring wells spread across the province. A monitoring program was initiated in 2006 to better understand the quality of groundwater in Alberta. The monitoring wells are tested for a variety of water quality parameters, including methane gas. A total of 126 wells have been accessed for gas sampling to date. Wells will be sampled every few years to monitor long-term trends.
The overland drovers in Australia would water their cattle and horses at various bores across the inland cattle country then, if it was after nightfall, ignite the “water” so they had light to wash their clothing and perform other chores around the camp under the light of the burning gas.
A wet bag was then used to “switch” off the light so they could get to sleep. Dad often told of this when reminiscing about his days on the stock routes back in the 1920s and ’30s.
I anticipate an Academy Award….
How odd. If I found out there was methane in my tap water my first reaction would be to tear who ever runs the water treatment plant a new one. Wouldn’t even occur to me to get excited about where the methane was coming from until the question of how the **ll that get’s past safety and quality inspections was answered.
But since it sounds like this has been a known problem for a long time, perhaps someone decided methane in tap water isn’t a health hazard below certain levels? If so, one would think that the water treatment plant(s) in the area would have records of the testing they’ve done over the years which ought to include what goes into as well as what comes out of their plants. If they don’t have those records…well there ought to be a lot of trouble over that. If they do…. then comparing before frakking and after frakking ought to be frakking simple and the frakkers should stop pointing their frakking fingers and making frakking claims and just compare the frakking before with the frakking after to see what frakking actualy frakking does. Can it be any frakking simpler?
REPLY: This is well water, from onsite. – Anthony
Mr. Watts, this naturally burning gas pit is not in Uzbekistan, it’s in Turkmenistan, two and a half hours of driving into the desert from the capital, Ashkhabad. In the daytime, under strong sunlight, it doesn’t look that impressive, though it is very hot at the edge, and there is a danger of suffocation downwind from the pit.
REPLY: Thanks, my mistakestan. Uzbekistan was cited in the YouTube video description. Fixed – Anthony
Love the bit at the end of the cross examination by Phelim where Fox clearly knows the game is up, eyes move quickly left to right and back, a clear micro expression sign of the subjects guilt, the realisation that the game is up and in an interrogation setting the sign that the suspect is ready to spill the beans. Well done to Phelim McAleer, he is fast becoming the CAGW/greenshirt cults kryptonite.
From the same article you quote:
This is happening, and it is impossible to deny it. Have you watched “Gasland”? People who have never had problems with their wells are finding huge problems once fracking is started in their neighborhoods (often of their property because of split estates where they only own the surface rights, a huge problem here in the west). Natural gas drilling companies have settled by providing people affected by these problems with trucked in water supplies. There is ample evidence that the drilling/facking process is causing problems.
REPLY: See the first comment in this thread. Claims are one thing, baselines are another. Now that they know to establish baselines ahead of time, we’ll see if the issue is real or just overactive imaginations looking to score a tort. My take is this: if the problem was so real, so bad, why did Josh Fox have to resort to a lie of omission to make his movie prove the point he wanted? – Anthony
REPLY: This is well water, from onsite. – Anthony
Sorry, missed that. On the other hand… well water is supposed to be checked regularly too. Its been a very long time since people just drilled a well and drank whatever came out of it. In most jurisdictions there would be mandatory annual testing (if not more often) and anyone with a drinking water well on their property with any sense in their head would have it tested voluntarily from time to time. I’ll accept that perhaps some juridictions might not have mandatory testing, and I’ll even accept that not all people with a well on their property have enough common sense to have it tested. But ALL of them? SOMEONE must have done testing from time to time and the records ought to be available.
Not to mention that if MY well water could be lit on fire, the FIRST thing I’d be doing is finding out where to send the water to see what the frakk is in it.
SOMEONE must have done testing from time to time and the records ought to be available.>>>
Let me take that a step further. Most well water had a lot of minerals in it. Makes for bad tasting water, maybe even a smelly bath, and clothes don’t wash clean…so putting in water softeners, iron eaters, and other on site water treatment systems is a decent sized business opportunity anywhere that on site wells are common. And THOSE companies test before and after as a matter of course, they’d have no way of dedending themselves against false accusation if they didn’t. and I’d bet they keep those records for a very long time.
Maybe its just my childish humour but……
Anthony, would the homeowner have been alarmed if this this was a common occurrence prior to the fracking? And there is ample evidence in the area of the Marcellus shale which shows similar problems.
Also, didn’t you try to pull something like this for a youtube video which made you look bad?
davidmhopper
Where I am in the midwest US, methane is not part of the very long list of substances tested in water from a new well, or in follow up testing, or in private wells for that matter. Routine testing would not detect methane, it isn’t part of the routine series.
The Marcellus shale problems were also highlighted in Gasland.
It is also worth pointing out the problems with “coal bed methane” which is a popular source for natural gas here in eastern Montana. The water pollution, via the salty water which is an effulent from these wells is causing huge problems in the eastern part of my state, and this is not nearly as bad as the problems associated with fracking. Your assertion that fracking (as a complete process) got a clean bill of health is silly as shown in the quote I made above. There are real problems with the method, and the fact that the industry got a free pass on water quality requirements (exempted from the Safe Drinking Water Act in 2004) shows that the industry *knows* there are problems.
REPLY: It’s not my assertion, nor is it “silly”. It is the lead paragraph from the story in the NYT. Sorry if you don’t like it but it stands as is from the NYT article. Complain to them – Anthony
davidmhoffer says:
June 4, 2011 at 9:48 pm
I would imagine that the owners of the property also have records, since they paid for the well & testing.
Ahem….. what does this ‘methane water’ taste like????
On a more serious note, could the water supply pipe be routed to an open top tank that has a low pressure bladder sealed to it, say one that could expand to 300 cu ft at 0.5 psi pressure or so? Me thinks I could run my stove top or the water heater off of such a methane/natural gas source….. That should keep the taps from audible flatulence and every time I took a shower, washed clothes or the truck, or watered the garden, I’d be collecting more ‘natural gas’ for the breakfast bacon and eggs fry up! Now THAT would be sweet!
I’d need a float type shut off switch in the main water tank to shut off the pump in the well, when the low pressure main water tank was full. Not having to pump the main tank to 45 – 60 psi should make the expensive and harder to replace in-well pump last a lot longer. I’d need a second smaller above ground pump to take water from the low pressure tank and pump it to 45-60 psi for the house line pressure. The weight of the bladder would be designed to maintain about 0.5 psi pressure on the methane gas as it is withdrawn for cooking and the bladder collapses, eliminating any specialty pump there. Hmmmm…. I think this could work!
Poor sound but I get this to be Fox’s response;
“Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission ruled the gas biogenic rather than thermogenic…(aside on types of gas)….and Gasland was incorrect because we had misstated the facts that this biogenic gas was naturally occurring so that Mike Markham could light their water before the fracking but there was drilling going on in that area for 4 or 5 years and the report was that same year.”
I grew up in Southeast Pa and our home there had a well and where I live now in Maryland has a well and in both cases there is no law that well water gets tested every year. Matter of fact the original well where we now live dried up and a new one was drilled. Guess what the state of Maryland calls for? You test for yield and then disinfect the new well with Chlorine and that is it for testing as can be seen in the PDF linked here:
http://extension.umd.edu/publications/PDFs/HW3.pdf
Yes paying to have your water tested once a year should be on the homeowners to do list, however most well water is not discolored or smelly and unless that changes most homeowners will not pay the expense of a private test.
Slightly OT, but fracking caused earthquakes in Blackpool, England according to the BBC. Oh and fracking is accelerating climate change.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9501000/9501838.stm
A series of earthquakes near Blackpool have been blamed on the drilling of shale gas, which is also accused of polluting water supplies and accelerating climate change.
The BBC’s environment analyst Roger Harrabin reports.
Harrabin of course is a high priest in the AGW Cult.