'Gasland' Documentary's Claims Called Into Question By Colorado Regulators

When the HBO documentary 'Gasland' debuted in the summer of 2010, it brought widespread attention to the natural gas extraction method known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Through often-disturbing images of flammable faucets and brackish water, 'Gasland' paints a dire picture of a process that creates--in director Josh Fox's words--an "enormous problem of water contamination, air pollution and people getting sick."

Now, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is refuting some of the claims in the movie. The Durango Herald quoted Debbie Baldwin, an environmental manager for the oil and gas commission, as saying "[w]e certainly can't say that oil and gas operations never impact groundwater because, in fact, it does happen. But some of the information about the state of Colorado was incorrect in that film."

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission director Dave Neslin was among the numerous officials who Fox claimed turned down interview requests for the documentary.

Not surprisingly, a representative from the oil and gas industry took criticisms a step further, arguing to the Herald that the movie is costing Colorado taxpayers dollars by increasing the number of requests for water-well monitoring by area residents, thus distracting regulators from more important tasks.

WATCH:

Comments

[Dier me]

08:20 PM on 02/12/2011

What I find disturbing, other than that this article was very uninformative, is that the reason I searched for this article was because I saw an ad by ANGA (America's Natural Gas Alliance) on HPs front page essentially citing this article as evidence in the war to discredit the documentary.

[LittleMittens]

10:24 AM on 01/27/2011

Fracking destroys the ground water and toxifies the region. So now we will be at the mercy of purchasing and importing clean water from othe countries...

[Chris Salmon]

10:36 AM on 02/05/2011

Wild accusatory claims with no effort to back them up with any evidence. Standard HuffPo comment.

[LittleMittens]

10:22 AM on 01/27/2011

Natural gas, oil, coal, are all energies of the 20th century and all are dying industries. To those of us who are young, all of those industries will be GONE in the next 50 years. Sinking another penny into a dying industry anchors us to the past and condemns our future. So we need to develop new and renewable energies NOW, and not wait till the old guards bones are dust...

[Chris Salmon]

10:42 AM on 02/05/2011

There is not a way to switch to "renewable" energy NOW. If there is, can we see it? What are your ideas for doing this? The latest and most optimistic studies I've seen on switching energy sources are showing 30-40 years before a complete switch can be made. In the meantime, people need energy ("NOW" as you might say).
I'm completely not against "renewable" energy, having built my first solar collector over 30 years ago and having been recently involved in a wind energy project, but we DO have to be realistic and try to cause the least suffering possible to the people, don't we?
(by the way I put quotes around "renewable" because the fact is, these sources also don't last and also must be continually replaced and maintained. Sun and wind last, but the equipment that exploits them to extract energy for human use doesn't.)

[Chris Salmon]

10:47 AM on 02/05/2011

Here is the most recent study I'm aware of on switching to all wind, water, and solar energy:

"Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I"
http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/JDEnPolicyPt1.pdf

"Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II"
http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/DJEnPolicyPt2.pdf

[Mike Johnston]

09:04 PM on 01/26/2011

The NEW trailer for the updated, extended HAYNESVILLE film (seen on CNBC) about the effects of the natural gas boom on the people of Haynesville La. and the role of natural gas in America's energy future launches on MONDAY! New DVD, new screening dates, new energy! Come check us out on our facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/haynesvillemovie

[LMPE]

08:31 PM on 01/23/2011

If these people refused an interview, it puts their claims in questions.

[zg]

05:07 PM on 01/23/2011

Get the frac'ing out of Colorado now!!!

[southingtonian]

05:40 AM on 01/23/2011

So, clean water for the little guy is not a primary concern for the regulators, even a 'less important' concern. Obviously these spokesmen's familied do not live nearby.

[wslope]

04:18 PM on 01/21/2011

Another "fact" for this insidious industry.
On the western slope of Colorado we have a glut of gas from recent activity.
The price of gas here has increased significantly!
So much for supply and demand!

[Chris Salmon]

10:18 AM on 01/31/2011

you're confusing natural gas with gasoline.

[Elias Maxwell]

01:44 PM on 01/21/2011

The gas industry will tell regulators whatever they think the regulators want to hear. How do I know? I am one of them and that is what they do when they (their lawyers) appear before the commission I am a part of.

The facts stated in "Gasland" are beyond anecdotal. I have seen what "fracing" does to wells. BP owns several former residential properties along the Fruitland outcrop where fracing and excessive dewatering of gas wells caused massive migration of gas into the aquifers feeding the water wells in the vicinity making the homes unsafe for habitation. Gas seeps continue to be a concern in the Pine and Animas River basins in SW Colorado.

[Chris Salmon]

02:13 PM on 01/21/2011

Elias, you should make it clear that you are NOT with the COGCC, and that you are talking about coal bed methane and not natural gas from shales. And that you are talking about La Plata County, Colorado where much of the area is underlain by naturally methane-bearing coal beds that intersect aquifers or are themselves used as aquifers. Also that the gas in these aquifers is largely biogenic - as the COGCC states in their 2000 report:

"Both existing and new water wells in these areas have a high likelihood of containing methane because biological processes are still generating it."

Also aren't you part of the San Juan Citizens Alliance, part of the "No Dirty Oil and Gas" campaign to end all oil and gas drilling?

In fairness and the interest of full disclosure, I am a geologist and I grew up in the oil business as my father is a petroleum engineer. I have also worked as a geophysicist processing seismic data and as an environmental geologist, doing water quality compliance and modeling work around refineries in the Houston area.

[invient]

01:04 PM on 01/21/2011

The industry is worried about it, and yes his argument that more regulations cost tax payer dollars is valid, but inadvertently so do people having massive medical debt due to sicknesses caused by their exposure to those chemicals which eventually is picked up by the tax payer at a higher cost than the regulatory tests needed to protect them....... If one american can make a valid claim that they are sick and or dieing from these chemicals, then these companies deserve to be sued into oblivion, their board imprisoned for life, and their stock holders a large fine for each share they own.... the risks taken for this industry must be covered by someone, and I propose those people who try to externalize the costs to maximize the profits.

[i the ys]

10:44 PM on 01/22/2011

Fanned. You speak (write) like a grown up. Good for all of us.

Gas and Oil we can live without but WATER is our life blood without which we die is a matter of days.

[Chris Salmon]

12:59 PM on 01/21/2011

@blood1 - you purposely misstated what the Colorado environmental regulator said. She absolutely did NOT state that hydraulic fracturing was a problem. She stated that oil and gas operations did sometimes impact groundwater, just as any industrial activity or construction sometimes does. Does that mean that mankind should never do anything which might impact groundwater? I certainly hope that no sane person would think so. Our people have needs, needs for housing, heat, transportation, food, etc., etc., and almost any effort to meet any of those needs can impact groundwater.

This article leaves out a lot of information, the COGCC (a state of Colorado regulatory agency, not an industry group) actually came out with a whole document debunking Gasland :

http://cogcc.state.co.us/library/GASLAND%20DOC.pdf

[bcstractor]

01:14 PM on 01/21/2011

That's right people's "needs" trump people's lives. The gas companies will not reveal the contents, they dump the water containing these chemicals in illegal evaporation ponds, they drill next to people's wells all for the sake of saving a few bucks.

As it is Colorado's gas goes elsewhere. We are depleting our own resources and destroying the groundwater at the same time. We aren't exactly overflowing with water either.

We need proper containment measures in pace, disclosure of the chemicals and work to conserve our energy use.

[Chris Salmon]

01:31 PM on 01/21/2011

"The gas companies will not reveal the contents" -

http://marcellusdrilling.com/2010/06/list-of-78-chemicals-used-in-hydraulic-fracturing-fluid-in-pennsylvania/

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/oilgas/new_forms/marcellus/Reports/Frac%20list%206-30-2010.pdf
^^^------------------- this list actually contains all the chemicals that might be used in the entire drilling process, including those that may be used in hydraulic fracturing

Colorado OGCC Rule 205 requires operators to have a chemical inventory on hand:

http://cogcc.state.co.us/Announcements/Rule205.pdf

"they dump the water containing these chemicals in illegal evaporatio­n ponds"

Colorado OGCC Rules 903 , 904 , and 906 impose enhanced requirements for pit permitting, lining, monitoring, and secondary containment to ensure that pit fluids, including hydraulic fracturing flowback, do not leak.

http://cogcc.state.co.us/Announcements/Rule903.pdf
http://cogcc.state.co.us/Announcements/Rule904.pdf
http://cogcc.state.co.us/Announcements/Rule906.pdf

"they drill next to people's wells all for the sake of saving a few bucks"

I have no idea what this is about. Drilling in close proximity to water wells costs MORE, not less??

"As it is Colorado's gas goes elsewhere. We are depleting our own resources and destroying the groundwate­r at the same time. We aren't exactly overflowin­g with water either."

I believe you seem to be advocating a gas pipeline going from the Western Slope gas fields to the Front Range here - is that right? That'll cause a howl!

[Olderandwiser55]

02:07 PM on 01/24/2011

I'll bet they "debunked" it....the commissioners are suspicious-mostly with energy industry ties.

"We fear that landowners and the environment will again get the short end
of the stick," said Janey Hines, a member of the Grand Valley Citizens
Alliance. "We¹re extremely concerned that DNR drafted these bills behind
closed doors with the oil and gas industry," she said.

In another article "Wendy Wiedenbeck acknowledges that Luzerne County residents might be troubled by the fact that EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. paid $1.5 million in fines over the past four years." Residents are troubled...yet our own COGCC director' Dave Neslin, executive director of the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission, said commission staff views EnCana as “a responsible operator.” '

http://pagasdrilling.com/tag/dave-neslin/

These people will leave us with a desert in Colorado. It's greed. They don't care about the water.

[Chris Salmon]

12:17 PM on 01/21/2011

I think it's important to note that Josh Fox and others leading the hysteria aren't really against hydraulic fracturing. They're against ANY drilling for ANY reason. In numerous interviews Mr. Fox has made it clear that he is against any and all exploration of the Earth's interior for natural resources and against all hydrocarbons. He claims that we can switch immediately to what he calls "renewable energy" but is really just windmills and solar panels. However he never shows us how that is to be accomplished, or shows any numbers on cost, technology, land usage, or anything proving this assertion is realistic in providing power for US citizens.

[invient]

12:58 PM on 01/21/2011

The main issue with renewable like solar and wind is that they are only producing power some of the time (when there is wind, and when the sun is out)... there are advances in biofuels, and also a new paper came out just recently describing a cheap method to produce syngas from a solar collector and an abundant metal shaped in a helix pattern... the tech is only 1% efficient right now, but they claim they will be able to make it 15%... so those are two options that could cover night-time and no wind situations...

There are also many advancements in solar tech some claiming 75% effeciency through using the caustic behavior of light, but none are in mass manufacturing phase (or can not be).... there are also other tech based off of LENR-CANR reactions which are not understood and warrant research (to do one project building a LENR-CANR device costs anywhere between 25-50 million as opposed to the ITER reactor which is in the billions). Some Japanese and EU scientists have reported continual power generation for over 3 months, and the palladium catalyst they use transforms into other elements through a process they believe to be similar to fusion eventually leading to it loosing its ability to produce power.

[Chris Salmon]

01:35 PM on 01/21/2011

I'm all for it! At least you're making some effort to actually answer the problems of our nation's energy needs. A lot of the "against everything" types just parrot "drilling bad" with no consideration of the need to provide realistic alternatives. Natural gas emits almost 30 percent less carbon dioxide than oil, and just under 45 percent less carbon dioxide than coal. Since most electricity in the country is generated using coal, you'd think that would be a good thing.

[wslope]

12:13 PM on 01/21/2011

Industry still attacking GasLand is proof of their concern. Far more "facts" have surfaced since Mr. Fox's documentary was released, and the picture is not a pretty one.

[blood1]

12:00 PM on 01/21/2011

Spokesman comment: fracking does impact that groundwater but not always in the way depicted in the film. So, contamination groundwater by Oil and Gas does occur BUT not in the way you think! And of course, the Oil and Gas company won't tell anyone what they know.

Are they banking on the idea of "ignorance is bliss" and the supposed unintended consequences of their actions won't be known until after all the current big-wigs are long retired and those in charge when the problems arise won't be held accountable, as they will blame the predecessor and legislator's who turned a blind eye to the problems in lieu of $$$$?

Haven't we seen this movie before?