Hilcorp Fracking Gazette article
Fracking in Colorado - springsgov.com
Interview with Governor Hickenlooper:
Some things to keep in mind (only mention them in your response if they enhance your argument/thesis):
What is the agenda of the writers/politicians/etc.?
What is the credibility of each person/article?
Who is the audience of each person/article?
Keep in mind that this is good practice for writing your research paper. I made sure to keep the articles and the video short, for your convenience, so, if you would like, you may go to other sites, and other sources of information, and put them on your blog to inform your classmates.
After reading the articles and watching Gov. Hickenlooper's video, I can say that I understand what fracking is quite a bit more. My basic understanding remaind as such because it's just not one of those topics that have been thrown in my face. I would not say I was ignorant to it, just not a throughly researched topic for me. The article, Hilcorp Fracking from the Gazette, brings to light when and who is planning on doing the fracking and where. The article tries to bring to light the dangers of fracking on the environment and how much fresh water is being used for the process. It was even hinting on possible sabatoge when the article mentions that the 3.15 million gallons of fresh water from the future site was drained and is still under investigation. The first thing that came to my mind was radical environmentalists or angry local residents.
ReplyDeleteThe slides from Springsgov.com I believe was the best informative article of the impact of fracking on all areas from soil contamination to the impact of the aftermath of mechanical failures. Looking at the slides, the enviromental impact looks significant. The slides show bald/scarred areas where the fracking took place. Will these areas ever see vegetation again? The amount of wells just in Weld County seems outrageous. One quote from the slides was from Phil Doe, "I'm simply amazed that we are using our most precious natural resource,(water) to mine for something far less valuable..." I had a few mixed feelings about that quote, albeit a great quote. Water is valuable, but isn't gas and oil valuable to us in today's world? On the same note though, water is significant to all sources of life and survival not only to humans, but to vegetation, wildlife, etc...
Gov. Hickenlooper's video came across more as a calming speech. He was supporting the use of facking and expressing that it has been around for 20+ years and that it is just something that has been done. He minimized the negative impact of fracking and focused on convincing the audience that it has a minimal impact on the environment. It was if he was trying to calm panic among citizens. He basically sugar coated fracking.
I think the audience focus was different for all the articles. The Gazette focused on the average newspaper reader, but probably would have only been significantly read by farmers or people in the area on impact. The Springsgov.com slides seemed to focus on a larger group from enviornmentalists to city council representatives. Gov. Hickenlooper spoke to all, but mostly to those who could be impacted by the facking.
I plan to do more reseach on this issue and will add comments on things I find.
Nickie,
DeleteYour post hits each point square on the head. I especially like the part about Gov. Hickenlooper and his agenda/avenue of approach. Along with you I also see the importance of gas and oil as well as the importance of the natural resources that fracking is harming. There seems to be a lot of energy being poured into one side of this argument, Even though I agree with this side of the argument, I am also interested to know the statistics in favor of fracking, or maybe the numbers that may show the productivity in becoming less dependent on foreign oil, as well as the stats in reference to the job market, and the impact that fracking at these wells has on the job market. I as well will be looking further into this to dig up more information. I enjoyed your overall assessment of these articles though.
Jared,
DeleteYes, I as well would like to see those numbers/statistics as well. There is so much more behind the scenes, that I knew someone in the market in order to pick their brain.
(Note: Video was not working when I viewed the page)
ReplyDeleteAfter reading both articles, it seems as if they're both informational but on different sides of the debate. Even that is hard to call as the first article doesn't necessarily make fracking out to be a good thing, but simply talks about what it is, and how it's done, and how it's going to continue. The second article relates more towards the side effects of fracking. Both use logic to draw you in, giving you information about the process, albeit different parts of the process.
Fracking, however, is a necessary evil of our oil and natural gas hungry society today, yet is quite possibly the most dangerous form of mining we have. In the second article, it talks about a man who's ground water was contaminated by this type of mining, as well as how the chemicals are not regulated in fracking. The second article also has an oil well saturation map, showing that a large portion of Colorado is covered in oil wells as of current. It uses pictures from some of these sites to show spills that have happened, or potential spills, that are unreported, and likely to be an environmental hazard.
The second article really did a lot to paint the oil companies using fracking as irresponsible. While it does seem like they could take more care, I'd hardly call them irresponsible. Still, even considering that natural gas and oil are more and more desirable by the day, more care is needed in the collection of this natural gas and oil. New techniques even. To paraphrase a quote, why use water to collect oil when we need the water more?
I agree with your point that I wouldn't necessarily call these companies irresponsible either, but there is no doubt that they will do whatever it takes to get the oil from the ground regardless of the environmental impact it makes. Now whether that is irresponsible or not, who is to judge. I like your idea about finding new techniques though because as you said fracking is a necessary evil in today's world. I just feel like the responsible thing for these companies to do would be to try and develop these new technologies before expanding and drilling new wells. But I guess in the same sense it's the responsibility of the government to pass those regulations and make those companies make those changes. It's hard to say who really is the irresponsible party here. I like your overall assessment of the videos and articles though.
DeleteThe agenda of the politicians is always the same, make money or make the people that give you money happy. I really feel like Governor Hickenlooper's agenda is no different. As far as the writer of the article I feel like he was just trying to present the information in a manner that would appeal to his audience. The slide show, or power point, I felt more had an agenda of attacking fracking, making it seem like it's something bad. I'm not going to discount that fracking is a great technological advancement that could lead to the United States becoming less dependent on foreign oil, but at what cost? I think Governor Hickenlooper highlights perfectly in his video when he says that fracking does need regulations and protections. The only problem is these regulations are already in place and contamination to ground water is still happening, along with other environmental problems. I think the slide show type thing highlights this best, although it's a little crude. Kind of hurts the credibility of a source when it looks like a high school student put together a slide show for your site. Of course the credibility of Governor Hickenlooper is next to nothing, as most politicians are. I feel like the article is the most creditable source, although I feel it doesn't really take a stance one way or the other. It really just presents facts and information about fracking. Overall I feel like all of the articles, videos, slide show were all geared toward a public audience that would be concerned with fracking in Colorado.
ReplyDeleteRobert,
DeleteYour view on the articles, slides, and video is very accurate. I do like your opening sentence. It was in your face, this is what it is, type sentence. To me the slides really tried to just focus of the bad of fracking. I believe it was their agenda. Fracking can be bad, just like off shore drilling, but there can be benefits as well which the slides seemed to ignore. I believe there could be safe ways to achieve energy, oil, etc...in a "safer" manner. Although regulations are in place, are they outdated, do they fit with todays issues? These are things I think about.
Yea I have a pretty skewed view on politicians I guess you could say. And I agree with you, I feel like there are safe ways for the US and the world to achieve energy independence, but who is to determine what "safe" really means? Look at the USDA, FDA, SEC, FCC, CDC, they are just some of the different bodies already in place that are supposed to determine what is considered safe or legal for the general public. Do you trust these groups? I'll say I don't, at least not most of the time. So I just worry that even if the update the regulations it's still not going to be enough.
DeleteI received different points from each section. Gov. Hickenlooper seems to use a more personal stand points to make his case. He speaks a lot about tradition and the process of fracking, but does not list very many points that are for or against the topic. Due to the lack of conviction from Gov. Hickenlooper, I did not find his section to be very credible.The Gazette and Springsgov.com articles are more informational and explain the cause and affect of fracking much better. Springsgov.com is more visual than the Gazette,it shows the harm that can and hes been caused by fracking. The gazette also explains the lack of regulations on the issue that have lead to some of the environmental damages. Fracking may prove to be beneficial as far and gas and oil production go, but there seems to be a disregard for the proper assessment on the overall affects of fracking. There also seems to be a blind eye turned in regards to the necessary rules and regulations that need to be implemented in order to make this as safe of a practice as possible. It doesn't matter how productive something is, if it is counter productive twice as much, then it is not serving a very good purpose
ReplyDeleteJared, I agree with you on nearly every point, but I don't agree with Hickenlooper having little credibility. Not taking a position doesn't necessarily reduce credibility. I still haven't seen the video due to whatever is preventing me from watching it, but still. If he presents good information, but doesn't take a side in the argument, or simply acts to inform, his credibility should be based on the information he presents, not his positions on the subject. If anything, his information may prove to be slightly more unbiased than the websites due to a lack of a position. Just food for thought.
DeleteRobert Shultz, I gues I never really thought of it in that sense. Gov Hickenlooper does present a decent amount of evidence in the video about the process of fracking, he doesn't seem to be too pro or against, and I have to agree with you, that doesn't necessarily make him any more or less credible.
DeleteKnowing next to nothing about fracking, I began my research with the video of Governor Hickenlooper. Gov. Hickenlooper present fracking as with a calm, matter of fact, demeanor. He even stated that the chance of pushing fracking water into ground water is, essentially, nothing. After reading the Gazette article and the study presented by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Committee, I am convinced that the benefits of fracking are far outweighed by the risks.
ReplyDeleteFracking appears to pose a grave danger, not only to our environment, but to our health as well. Page 24 of the study by the COGCC, shows that, since 2011, there have been at least 1000 incidents of spilling of produced water. Produced water is toxic, contaminated water produce in fracking. Of these 1000 spills, 42.7% resulted in ground water contamination. This produced water was shown to contain dozens of toxic chemicals. This directly disputes Governor Hickenlooper's claim that the risk is very minimal. In one spill was 210,000 gallons of toxic water into cottonwood creek. None of the spilled water was ever recovered. (COGCC report page 26)
There is also a considerable concern for the release of methane and hydrocarbon gases into the atmosphere. Individual evaporation pits evaporate 10's of 1000's of gallons of toxic water daily. This process transfers the chemicals from the water to the air (COGCC report, page 43) In January 13, 2011, the COGCC requested emergency funds for explosive levels of methane seeping into nearby homes from capped and abandoned oil and gas wells.(COGCC repot, page 46)
In addition to these risks, the loss of our natural resources is astronomical. We are losing 1000's of acres of vegetation or being destroyed. Also, fracking is using tons of water. Water is one of our most valuable resources. The Weld county fracking pad has 165 water tankers that had a total of 3.3 million gallons of municipal water. (COGCC report, page 11)
Again, I really believe that the damage to us ecologically and health wise makes fracking a bad option.
Gov. John Hicken’s audience in the video appears to be more targeted to the public that are concerned about Fracking in their neighborhood. Though the communication was informative, it was no comforting to the fact what Fracking is and some slight impacts that it can cause the environment. As the video explains Fracking in Colorado as an innovative technology and that Fracking has been done for a while now Gov. John Hicken's point didn’t seem to come across strong enough to persuade the viewers that Fracking is not a “terrible thing”.
ReplyDeleteThe article in the Gazette regarding Hilcorp Energy Co. was brief informative announcement of a Fracking project for the Colorado Springs community and explains a bit about fracking and when the project begin. Although this information is important to the community this would most likely be targeted to people more involved with this project and to give people a heads up of what going on.
The presentation of the Springsgov.com was informing and gave detail with images shown made Fracking more impactful to the point that I want to look into the topic more. Though the information given seemed more targeted to people that are making a decisions whether or not to allow Fracking, again it is important that information like this is in the public’s view to see what is happening in the community.
Overall both articles and the video were informative on Fracking although all three used different methods to interact there information to their audience, Gov. John Hicken with explanations and attempting to change minds about Fracking, the Gazette with brief information to the community and lastly the Springsgov.com presentation that tied facts and images to make the point that Fracking is not the way to go.