Gasland, “Truthland,” and the CHPC Earth Care Team:

By Stephen Bartlett

The movie “Gasland” was shown at CHPC on Friday evening, August 30, to a rarified Labor Day weekend audience.  I wasn’t  able to make it at the last minute, after having agreed to write a review.  So in lieu of a proper review, and based on a survey of prevailing research on hydraulic fracturing, alias “fracking”, as well as reading through controversies swirling about the movie and the production of counter movies, such as “Truthland” (I smell a rat in that one.), as well as my own understanding of our current energy, climate and human civilization crises, I would like to offer some thoughts surrounding this issue. 

First thought:  we must proceed with caution when reading opinions about this volatile issue.  The profit motive for the energy corporations is so enormous, and the dependency of our society on fossil fuels so deep, that the debate is tainted by conflicts of interest at many levels, including the way mainstream media is controlled by corporations, as well as governmental agencies such as the EPA tainted by undue influence of corporate money in campaigns, revolving doors, etc… Knowing who is saying what and following the money are essential to discerning the truth.

On the other hand, purely emotional responses to the igniting of one’s water tap, a dramatic demonstration of something definitely wrong, could also be misleading, depending on the honesty of everyone involved.

Second thought:  debating whether natural gas may be a "solution" to the problem of the “far worse” coal and oil pollution may be the wrong question to ask.   The millions of dollars going into spinning that message also make me cringe.  Alternatively,  a question that might be worth asking is:  can the increased use of natural gas allow our society a temporary, less harmful transition from all forms of fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, OR NOT?  Related to that:  can we invest more time, money, etc… in energy conservation and reducing our carbon foot prints than in pursuing new fossil fuel use that is supposedly “better” for us, and runs all manner of risks to life and limb and our precious water supplies.  Tar sand production, for example, is without any doubt laying waste to vast areas of Canada and causing untold health issues and human suffering among the indigenous peoples living in that region.  The approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline would only add fuel to that evil fire!

Third thought:  Are humans justified in pulverizing rocks deep in the Earth on a massive scale through violent means including the injecting of diesel fuel and related contaminating chemicals, mixed in water, thereby releasing natural gas up to the surface (presumably up through pipes only), when it is the burning of fossil fuels that we know is tipping our planet’s climate over the brink of an abyss for our living systems?   Whether the fuel is natural gas, (which, yes, at least does not pollute with sulfur or cause acid rain), or it is coal which has such pollutants, or petroleum which also contains such pollutants in lesser amounts, all of them are contributing to global warming as surely as 1 + 1 = 2.   Any natural gas that leaks from fracking becomes a potent greenhouse gas 25 times more harmful than CO2.  Making a claim that natural gas is less polluting also begs the point.  We are still planning to continue burning coal and oil, in quantities to meet the growing world demand, as is China and other countries.  So this is not actually going to reduce the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere, at a time when we are challenged, morally and pragmatically required, I would argue,  to dramatically reduce such CO2 emissions. 

So regardless of whether the methane in someone’s tap was due to natural gas leaks caused by fracking, or this is because this house lies over a landfill producing methane or a manure slew brewing upstream, etc… I think for us the question is whether we are willing to tackle the most important question:  how are we as human society going to reduce our carbon footprints?  Are we willing to condition our bodies to withstanding hot summer temps at home with fans instead of AC, and cool homes and wood burning stoves in winter?  Are we willing to demand public policy changes to promote greater and faster conservation practices for all our major energy usages, and to find ways within our own community and congregation to further reduce our carbon footprints, to lead by example?   Can we get out of our heavy cars, SUVs and dramatically reduce our use of fossil fuels?   I see the beginnings of a barter economy among members of our congregation:  why just today I received at church hot peppers from a member and will repay in cucumbers delivered by bicycle.  One less trip to the supermarket.  The bonus if multiplied:  one less farmworker exploited in the agribusiness fields where such crops are grown and harvested!  Maybe, hopefully and by the Grace of God in our lives, one day that kind of revitalized local food economy multiplied across the U.S.  will add up to fewer immigrants forced to leave their countries due to agribusiness commodity dumping in their countries of origin, or one less military intervention launched at the behest of corporations perpetually thirsty for the minerals and fossil fuels that lie under their lands.