Friday, February 17, 2012

Documentary Coming (Maybe): "FrackNation"

"FrackNation is the film that will tell the truth about fracking.

$150,000 is the absolute minimum we need to finish FrackNation - the more we get - the better the film will be. Also it is important to know if we don't reach the full amount of $150,000 within the 60 days, Kickstarter will return all pledged money to the backers and NOTHING will go to FrackNation. So please send what you can, help us reach the $150,000 target within the 60 days and become an Executive Producer of FrackNation the documentary.

People across the US told us that everything we had heard about fracking was wrong. They say that anti-fracking campaigns, one-sided media coverage and moratoriums and bans have damaged the lives of thousands of people who are now desperate to have their voices heard."

Note: They're halfway to their goal, with $73,500 raised so far, and 48 days to go.   

HT: Matt B.

17 Comments:

At 2/17/2012 4:34 PM, Blogger Colin said...

On a related note:

http://reason.com/blog/2012/02/17/fracking-doesnt-harm-drinking-water-stud

 
At 2/17/2012 4:38 PM, Blogger juandos said...

Maybe Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer could hit up the Sierra Club for some of that leftover Nat. gas money...

 
At 2/17/2012 5:51 PM, Blogger Che is dead said...

"The Honda Civic GX runs on compressed natural gas, spews hardly any emissions and can go 250 miles on a single tank of fuel." -- The Greenest Car You Never Heard Of, Discover

 
At 2/17/2012 7:31 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

You'd think if the Koch Bros. farted, more than $100k would end up with this FrackNation outfit.

 
At 2/17/2012 7:52 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Bitter irony for the Poles, who have been violated by their neighbors for centuries due to its geographic nature. Now they have so much shale gas that they can easily compete w Russia for deliveries to W Europe. Trumping Gazprom. Huge for them...and us.

 
At 2/18/2012 10:20 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

While there are no major environmental problems with fracking the real problem is the total cost. No matter how we look at it, most shale formations are not economic even if the fracking is done properly and efficiently.

 
At 2/18/2012 5:07 PM, Blogger Attila Girl said...

Yes, environmental protections are very strong in the U.S.

Which is why, of course, environmental extremists want as much of the world's energy production done in the Third World as possible, rather than here where it can be accomplished under strict environmental scrutiny.

Because when it's done badly, in Nigeria, we cannot see the suffering that is causes. Whereas when it's done well, in North America, we see that it's here... and can imagine that it's accomplishing all kinds of mischief that we like to dream about in hypochondriac fevers.

 
At 2/18/2012 5:21 PM, Blogger Brian Macker said...

Jon,

What an inane comment. Big government does not mean size you ignoramus. If it did then by definition no small country like Nigeria could have big government. However by the actual definition of big government Nigeria has had one for most of its history. Note: A tin pot dictator of a tiny country is an example of big government. Big vs. Small refers to the power of the government to infringe on the rights of the people, and how intrusive it is. The USSR was and example of that and had an extremely bad environmental record.

 
At 2/18/2012 5:35 PM, Blogger Jon said...

"Big government" is a generic phrase. I'm not intending to flesh it out in a great degree. As far as AEI is concerned government is too big when it inhibits corporate profits. Of course corporations need big government. What they want is big government that serves them, not the people. That's what you have in Nigeria. All of Africa is right wing economics, run by the IMF and World Bank for decades, which are bastions of austerity. Nigeria is perfectly big in that it crushes people, but perfectly small in that it has no ability to block corporations from wrecking the environment in pursuit of profits.

That's why under Republicans, who make no bones about the fact that they are their to further corporate interest, you get a lot of bashing of government but at the same time government growth. Government shrinks insofar as it helps people but grows insofar as it helps large corporations. That's the Republican agenda.

With regards to fracking what you had under Bush is the fracking industry was exempted from the Safe Water Drinking Act. Also EPA oversight of the chemicals being pumped into the ground was denied. Cheney and Bush got a shrinkage in government there. But of course the expansion of government in terms of blocking people's ability to freely buy drugs overseas, which are cheaper. There the government has to step in and grow. Block people's free actions. That also improves profits.

On Social Security, a program that is pretty much solvent and pays for itself, that has to be scaled back. That's big government that helps regular people. What Republicans want is big government that helps corporations only. Democrats do the same, but it's less blatant and they pretend to care about people.

 
At 2/18/2012 8:30 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

LOL! I can see it now. If the financial goal is reached with small donations, this could be a 30 minute movie, with 1 hr of credits listing all the executive producers.

 
At 2/18/2012 8:35 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Jon: "Big government" is a generic phrase. I'm not intending to flesh it out in a great degree...

blah blah blah

...What Republicans want is big government that helps corporations only. Democrats do the same, but it's less blatant and they pretend to care about people.
"

Oh Jon, what is all this whining? When will you write something meaningful, that others might enjoy discussing?

 
At 2/18/2012 10:29 PM, Blogger Hydra said...

Sounds like the old fractured fairy tales.

 
At 2/19/2012 7:37 AM, Blogger Robert said...

It a mistake to say that Nigeria's environmental problems are the result of lack of regulation. The people of the Delta only really benefit from the oil industry insofar as the oil companies help them directly by building news schools etc (the central government takes the revenues). So sabotaging the pipelines, and then suing the companies is a means of getting revenue into the region directly. But please don't describe that as unregulated operation.

 
At 2/19/2012 9:28 AM, Blogger Jon said...

That's a rather bizarre strategy, Robert. One that maybe a Shell lawyer could buy off on. A rebel group is going to sabotage a pipeline so they can sue via government and get money from Shell. This same government is making war on this rebel group. This same government is completely in bed with Shell, providing weaponry, assassinating critics and rebels, etc. This is a money making strategy in your world? The rebels are going to show up at a court and say "Yeah, that oil leaked and made us sick after we blew it up. Pay out."

Has this strategy ever worked? Did Shell pay out?

Here's a strategy that seems more plausible to me. Shell is in bed with the government and extracts oil at massive profit. They pay off the local junta much like what is done throughout the rest of the oil producing world. Give the dictator a good chunk, but overall pay almost nothing for the oil and make enormous profits. Extract the oil in ways that leaves total environmental devastation because it's more profitable and you pay the junta enough to afford weapons to oppress his own people if they object.

A rebel group sees Shell as the heart of the problem, so the only way to get rid of them is to make their presence unprofitable. Sabotage the pipelines. That makes some sense. The idea that rebel groups sabotage pipelines in order to get Shell to pay out in the form of lawsuits, which I assume never happens, seems absurd.

 
At 2/19/2012 1:46 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"As far as AEI is concerned government is too big when it inhibits corporate profits"...

Well doh!...

You mean companies should be in business for some other reasons jon?

What would those reasons be jon>?

To continue to finance run away government spending by complying with inane and excessive government regulations?

 
At 2/19/2012 3:31 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Jon: "Here's a strategy that seems more plausible to me. Shell is in bed with the government and extracts oil at massive profit. They pay off the local junta much like what is done throughout the rest of the oil producing world. Give the dictator a good chunk, but overall pay almost nothing for the oil and make enormous profits. Extract the oil in ways that leaves total environmental devastation because it's more profitable and you pay the junta enough to afford weapons to oppress his own people if they object."

Ah! More populist bullshit from Jon. What an imagination! This has all the necessary elements for a great action-adventure novel.

As usual, you have provided a simplistic scenario, consistent with your socialist worldview, without considering other major realities in Nigeria, which include political sabotage, and tapping of pipelines to steal oil.

You might be taken more seriously if you tried writing objectively.

 
At 2/27/2012 8:23 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Peter Schiff recently interviewed the guy making this Frack Nation film. He didn't have much to say, so I just assume this movie of his will suck. The only thing of substance he claimed was that the movie "Gasland" shows people lighting their faucet water on fire and that this is something that some have been able to do for years. Well obviously. But the question is were these faucets capable of igniting prior to the introduction of fracking in their area? The answer is no. The fact that it has happened before in some places is not proof that fracking didn't cause it here. There's good reason to think it did.

Actually, your claims are nonsense. Methane escapes through natural fractures and can be found in well water in areas where there is no fracking. Oil and gas companies do not want to waste millions only to lose hydrocarbons to natural pathways so they stay away from areas where such migration is possible. The movie Gassland is mostly about BS and fear.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home