START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

This Is What FRACKING Really Looks Like - Photos


Environment  (tags: animals, climate-change, conservation, CO2emissions, ecosystems, endangered, energy, globalwarming, greenhousegases, habitatdestruction, healthconditions, politics, pollution, Sustainabililty )

Kit
- 266 days ago - slate.com
Photographer Nina Berman had just started focusing on climate and environmental issues when she read an article about fracking and its connection to the possible contamination of New York City's drinking water



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Kit B. (277)
Thursday July 25, 2013, 8:46 pm


Photographer Nina Berman had just started focusing on climate and environmental issues when she read an article about fracking and its connection to the possible contamination of New York City’s drinking water. Berman resides in New York and knew very little about how the controversial process of drilling for natural gas via hydraulic fracturing worked and decided to head to Pennsylvania for Gov. Thomas Corbett’s inauguration in 2011.

“I knew there would be demonstrators (opposed to his support of natural gas drilling), and I wanted to learn what they were screaming about,” Berman said. After researching the issues, she then had to figure out how to document them in a visual way.

“It’s a very hard subject to photograph,” Berman explained. “You see a drill, and you don’t know what that means, and then it disappears. What does that mean? It took me a while to figure out how to approach it.”

To do that, she spent time in part of Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale region, a hotbed of fracking controversy, producing a series titled “Fractured: The Shale Play.” Berman began calling activists, hoping to get a sense of the communities and knowing the people who feel they have been violated are those “interested in having their story told.”

“What struck me very personally as an outsider was how any kind of industrial activity feels like an enormous intrusion, almost like a creature from outer space; these drills at night are almost supernatural,” Berman said. “I looked for points where the industrial activity impacted these quiet rural landscapes, and I found at night was when things came alive, so I combined those pictures with more conventional documentary [style of ]subject-driven photography about people who were having serious health impacts.”

Fracking’s health impact, specifically its impact on water, is one of many controversies surrounding the process of drilling into rock in order to release gas. While some argue it is an alternative to dependence on oil, the methods of drilling involving water, sand, and chemicals to break up the rock has also been argued as the culprit for contaminated water.

“Those of us who are used to clean water have no concept of what that feels like when your water coming from your well on your land is destroyed and you can’t do anything about it,” Berman said.

Part of the way Berman is sharing her experience is through the “Marcellus Shale Documentary Project.” Started in November 2011, Berman and five other photographers documented how communities in the Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale region have been affected by natural gas drilling.

With a nod to the Farm Security Administration’s program assigning photographers to document communities during the Great Depression or the Documerica project during the 1970s that looked at how environmental concerns were impacting Americans, the “Marcellus Shale Documentary Project” focused on the impact of fracking on the lives of Pennsylvanians. The exhibition is currently on view at the Center for Photography at Woodstock in New York through Aug. 18.

Berman said for now she has done as much as possible in Pennsylvania but would be interested in documenting areas around the country that have also been affected by fracking. Until then, she has been exhibiting and touring with the “Marcellus Shale Documentary Project” and feels the impact has been positive.

“That is how I like to work in many ways, to be a part of bigger things,” she said.
******

A photographic journal at Visit Site - Please see the pictures.
****

By: By David Rosenberg | Pictures by Nina Berman | Slate |



 

Past Member (0)
Thursday July 25, 2013, 10:15 pm
Bloody hell
 

Monica D. (580)
Thursday July 25, 2013, 11:22 pm
The world needs to switch to appropriate renewable energy.
 

NO MORE FWD to Ana Marija R (220)
Friday July 26, 2013, 1:57 am
speechless...:(
noted with thanks
 

Val R. (208)
Friday July 26, 2013, 7:28 am
Great photos - but they never stop! Sad.
 

JL A. (269)
Friday July 26, 2013, 7:32 am
Beautifully impacting. She has a remarkable eye and is doing a public service.
 

Kit B. (277)
Friday July 26, 2013, 7:35 am

I agree J L Nina Berman does have a good eye and has managed to tell a story with few words.
 

Tamara Noforwardsplz (185)
Friday July 26, 2013, 7:47 am
I agree. Her photography paints a very stark reality with glaring clarity. It is beyond me as to how anyone can deny that fracking is just plain bad in every possible way. Unless, of course, you are profiting from it, that is where the denial really comes in handy. I really feel for all of those folks whose lives have been so torn apart by this disaster of epic proportions. Thanks Kit.
 

Veselin Varbanov (23)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:06 am
Is she lighting the water from the sink ? OMG !
 

Kit B. (277)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:11 am

Yes, Drilling sites can leak, the gas then can leach into the drinking water in enough concentration to that it can be lighted by the addition of fire. Nice fresh gas for drinking water.
 

Ali Gore (11)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:35 am
The more I see and hear about fracking the more it scares me.
 

Michael Kirkby (80)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:35 am
The EPA is unable to determine the cause? I guess that's because like the FDA and USDA they have to some extent been bought and compromised. If you know the science behind fracking and it's not that difficult because anyone with a brain can see that it's the drilling and the leakage that's causing it.
When you put hundreds of millions of gallons of contaminated water, sand and 600 chemicals into the earth it is a natural process for them to combine under great stress and heat within the earth. That results in a crystallization into a gaseous state and we all know that gas like water will seek out the easiest route to the surface possible. Whether it be natural geo fissures within the earth or fissure that are a result of the fracking process; the Natural Gas companies are responsible. Explain to me why the methane levels in the surrounding environments of drilling sites increases 6 - 17% over and above natural levels. Methane is certainly found in nature but not at those levels or at the contamination rate of the surrounding aquifers and water systems.
Pay up Big Energy.
Is it not also interesting that although there are large pockets of natural gas within the southern Penn state counties the Natural Gas industry doesn't drill there? That's because people like Corbett and the rest of the rich folks living there have a standing agreement with the drilling companies not to harvest there. After all we wouldn't want to inconvenience these folks who have the interest of the state at heart now would we?
It will be the same in NY or any other state. Natural gas sites yield 90% of the total yield in the first 2 - 2 1/2 years. Anything after that is just pure myopic arrogance. Then of course there is the cleanup or the lack thereof of all the problems created by this nefarious process or any semblance of responsibility for the problems caused. National security and US energy freedom my ass. Japan is the largest consumer of natural gas so guess where the majority of it will end up?
BTW most of the land in Pennsylvania is owned by a small percentage of people and they think Fracking is good. Primarily, most of those who agreed with fracking haven't seen the economic benefits that were promised materialize. Pennsylvania should be declared a national disaster. Let's see how their kids feel when the contamination spreads to the southern counties in a few years. Everything is as they say - connected. The invoice will be delivered shortly.
 

Michael Kirkby (80)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:39 am
The EPA is unable to determine the cause? I guess that's because like the FDA and USDA they have to some extent been bought and compromised. If you know the science behind fracking and it's not that difficult because anyone with a brain can see that it's the drilling and the leakage that's causing it.
When you put hundreds of millions of gallons of contaminated water, sand and 600 chemicals into the earth it is a natural process for them to combine under great stress and heat within the earth. That results in a crystallization into a gaseous state and we all know that gas like water will seek out the easiest route to the surface possible. Whether it be natural geo fissures within the earth or fissure that are a result of the fracking process; the Natural Gas companies are responsible. Explain to me why the methane levels in the surrounding environments of drilling sites increases 6 - 17% over and above natural levels. Methane is certainly found in nature but not at those levels or at the contamination rate of the surrounding aquifers and water systems.
Pay up Big Energy.
Is it not also interesting that although there are large pockets of natural gas within the southern Penn state counties the Natural Gas industry doesn't drill there? That's because people like Corbett and the rest of the rich folks living there have a standing agreement with the drilling companies not to harvest there. After all we wouldn't want to inconvenience these folks who have the interest of the state at heart now would we?
It will be the same in NY or any other state. Natural gas sites yield 90% of the total yield in the first 2 - 2 1/2 years. Anything after that is just pure myopic arrogance. Then of course there is the cleanup or the lack thereof of all the problems created by this nefarious process or any semblance of responsibility for the problems caused. National security and US energy freedom my ass. Japan is the largest consumer of natural gas so guess where the majority of it will end up?
BTW most of the land in Pennsylvania is owned by a small percentage of people and they think Fracking is good. Primarily, most of those who agreed with fracking haven't seen the economic benefits that were promised materialize. Pennsylvania should be declared a national disaster. Let's see how their kids feel when the contamination spreads to the southern counties in a few years. Everything is as they say - connected. The invoice will be delivered shortly.
 

Michael Kirkby (80)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:40 am
Another part of the problem in Pennsylvania is that most wells are shallow depth wells and are much more prone to contamination by gaseous substances such as methane and all the rest of the chemical soup they're putting into the earth at 7K'.
 

Michael Kirkby (80)
Friday July 26, 2013, 8:40 am
Sorry about the repetition. My computer is acting up today.
 

Nicole W. (619)
Friday July 26, 2013, 9:20 am
incredibly sad
 

Dave C. (204)
Friday July 26, 2013, 11:03 am
yuck
 

Dorothy N. (63)
Friday July 26, 2013, 12:46 pm
Thanks, Kit, for yet again bringing an article of importance to our attention - an excellent presentation of what the more immediate human/domestic effects are of the environmental effects of fracking.

The root of the problem, as we know, lies here:


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/25/1226490/-Appropriations-subcommittee-whacks-EPA-budget-below-1978-levels

Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM PDT
Appropriations subcommittee whacks EPA budget below 1978 levels

by Meteor Blades


Determined to smash the Environmental Protection Agency any way they can, Republicans on the Appropriations Interior and Environment subcommittee voted along party lines Tuesday to chop $2.9 billion off the agency's 2014 budget, leaving it with $5.5 billion next year. The 35 percent cut in H.R. 1582 would leave spending for EPA at what it was more than 35 years ago. The spending bill introduced by subcommittee chairman Mike Simpson of Idaho also includes a big tub of restrictions on climate change initiatives by the agency. President Obama has vowed to veto the bill if it arrives on his desk in its current form. Simpson stated in a press release:

“This Administration's appetite for new regulations and disregard for the will of Congress have left us with little choice but to block his climate change agenda in this bill. The actions we've taken to address the EPA’s overreach and reduce its budget not only help us meet the tight spending constraints under which we're operating, they help our struggling economy and encourage job creators to invest and expand.”

The subcommittee's ranking Democrat, Jim Moran of Virginia, walked out of the mark-up session, calling the cuts a "disgrace" and saying they should be an embarrassment to the subcommittee, the full committee and to Congress as a whole.” He added that the bill would cut the budget for EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's own office by 20 percent. The subcommittee's mark-up is only the first step in a proposal that is likely to change significantly as it works its way through the full Appropriations Committee, which is slated to discuss the bill next week, as well as the full House and the Senate.
Simpson and other Republicans argued that the real issue behind these cuts is government spending in general, or overspending as they call it. Blame was put on the Obama administration for not meeting Republican objections to spending in social programs, including Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, food stamps and others. Gutting New Deal and Great Society programs has been one of the party's key objectives for decades.
But the Republicans' budgetary assault on the EPA is not mere theater or an attempt to gain leverage. They really mean it.

Appropriations ranking member Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) noted that the GOP plan would give the EPA the same funding levels it saw during the Reagan administration and said clean water and safe drinking water revolving loan funds would be cut by 83 percent and 61 percent, respectively. “Unfortunately, this bill’s disastrous levels and atrocious riders exemplify that the road to redemption is long for this committee,” Lowey said.

Once, what seems a zillion years ago, there were Republicans who supported clean air and clean water.


And - although nothing's being officially done to stop fracking at a federal level, apparently due in great part to Bush-Admin 'adjustments' enabling increased Republican/corporate control over public policy - shows also here, where a rare action is brought against a corporate offender engaging in a routine cover-up to help protect another corporate offender:




http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/26/1226747/-Whoop-de-do-Halliburton-to-pay-fine-for-destroying-evidence-that-is-0-03-of-2nd-quarter-profits

Fri Jul 26, 2013 at 09:44 AM PDT
Whoop-de-do. Halliburton to pay fine for destroying evidence that is 0.03% of 2nd quarter profits

by Meteor Blades


Proving that even the largest corporations can't escape the long arm of the law, Halliburton is pleading guilty to a single misdemeanor charge of destroying evidence in the blowout of the Macondo deepwater oil well that spilled more than five million barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. ...

... The amount of that fine? $200,000. In the second quarter of 2013, the oilfield products and services giant, the world's largest supplier of hydraulic fracking services, earned profits of $679 million. Conditions of Halliburton's probation were not announced. Steve Mufson reports:

[H]alliburton said that on two occasions during the oil spill, it directed employees to destroy or “get rid of” simulations that would have helped clarify how to assign blame for the blowout—and possibly focused more attention on Halliburton’s role. [...] The admission is likely to complicate Halliburton’s efforts to avoid damage payments in civil suits linked to the Deepwater Horizon spill. During the first quarter of this year, the company took a $637 million charge against earnings to increase to about $1.3 billion a reserve set aside for possible Macondo settlement costs. ...

... n a civil trial earlier this year, the senior company executive overseeing the cementing operations on the well admitted that because of the well's design “the cement placement was going to be a job that would have a low probability of success.” A Halliburton laboratory manager admitted that, under instructions from a colleague, he took the "unusual" step of not preparing a worksheet on his testing of cement samples. He also destroyed his notes. The cement proved in later tests to be unstable.
The plea agreement may ultimately be bad news for Halliburton, forcing it to pay more for damages caused by the disaster while reducing how much BP pays. In November, BP accepted penalties of $4.5 billion and pleaded guilty to 14 criminal charges related to the explosion that destroyed the drilling rig, including 11 charges of manslaughter for the workers who were killed. As of February, BP had paid $42.2 billion in criminal and civil settlements and payments to a trust fund.
The New York Times reports that Halliburton has suffered "enormous damage" to its reputation because of its connection to the Macondo blowout. But you would think that, plus little things like its dealings with an embargoed Iran and sloppy work of one of its subsidiaries in Iraq that caused a Green Beret to be electrocuted would do more than damage its reputation. But shares of Halliburton by midday Friday were up nearly 4 percent, or $1.68, to $46.02. The stock has doubled since its 2010 low.

From the (telling and illustrative) comments::



... SWEET!!! (0+ / 0-)
So let me get this straight: Whereas corporations are people as I am a person too, And I am entitled to equal protection under law,
I can commit accidental homicide resulting in the deaths of 12 people, environmental damage for decades, and all I have to do is cough up .03% of what I made last quarter and come back to my lovely home and sleep in my own bed? SIGN ME UP!!!
/ snark in case it wasn't obvious

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." - Stephen Colbert

by Rob Dapore on Fri Jul 26, 2013 at 11:01:04 AM PDT

* [new] So if a person was making 50k a year (0+ / 0-)
and they got fined the same % ?
"0.03% of 2nd quarter profits"
50k / 4 = $12,000
.03 % of 12,000 = $ 3.60
I must be getting the math wrong .

The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. David Morrison

by indycam on Fri Jul 26, 2013 at 11:03:59 AM PDT

* [new] $200K for 600K sq miles of ocean environment (0+ / 0-)
So $3 per sq mile of destroyed ocean habitat.
Oh wait, how much were the bribes paid to our betraying politicians. That has to be figured in as a cost.

No longer Hoping for Change. Now Praying for a Miracle.

by CitizenOfEarth on Fri Jul 26, 2013 at 11:05:46 AM PDT

* [new] just another minor business expense (0+ / 0-)
as are most fines paid by fossil fuels corporations.

The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers
by Laurence Lewis on Fri Jul 26, 2013 at 11:07:27 AM PDT ...




Darn those.'burdensome regulations' that gave some inadequate degree of protection to workers, consumers, breathers, and environmental life on the planet, that the noble Republicans wish to dispose of in order to protect poor, helpless industry so that they may more rapidly establish a global wasteland entirely owned by them...
 

Aud nordby (697)
Friday July 26, 2013, 1:21 pm
N&S
 

Shanti S. (0)
Friday July 26, 2013, 1:43 pm
Thank you.
 

Elisa F. (228)
Friday July 26, 2013, 1:50 pm
Noted & Signed. Spam flagged. Thanks, Kit.
 

Lisa Zilli (15)
Friday July 26, 2013, 3:01 pm
Yuck.
 

Rose NoFWDSPLZ (264)
Friday July 26, 2013, 4:21 pm
NO FRACKING
 

Jennifer C. (172)
Friday July 26, 2013, 4:22 pm
Noted.
 

SJ J. (113)
Friday July 26, 2013, 4:26 pm
Noted, thanks Kit.
 

ER C. (65)
Friday July 26, 2013, 7:25 pm

SICK ! GREED ! & TOO LITTLE IF ANYTHING, TOO LATE A.F.T.E.R. THE DAMAGE IS DONE
 

OutofTown M. (444)
Saturday July 27, 2013, 12:42 am
Now that is down right damn pitiful. The photos say it all!
 

Dimitris Dallis (62)
Saturday July 27, 2013, 1:31 am
We will change this too. Thank you Miss Kit.
 

Judy C. (106)
Saturday July 27, 2013, 3:36 am
This is an excellent article. Thanks Kit.
 

Mitchell D. (123)
Saturday July 27, 2013, 2:35 pm
Thank you for the posting.
As in the Rick Perry enriching his sister story, the people running this industry could not care less about the people it impacts, they are only in it for the money.
And tar sands violations are hardly noted. It's all about feeding the greed of the already wealthy.
 

Dandelion G. (401)
Saturday July 27, 2013, 5:52 pm
Stand up to these Environmental Nightmares on November 5, 2013 Check it out at link below.
Relight the Flame of Protest Instead of Lighting Your Faucet on Fire
 

Lois Jordan (55)
Sunday July 28, 2013, 6:15 pm
Thanks for posting, Kit. Amazing photos....very sad. Anyone who gets a chance needs to see Josh Fox's Gasland Part 2. I hope Pres. Obama sees these photos.
 

GGmaSheila D. (89)
Sunday July 28, 2013, 9:07 pm
You gave Dorothy N a star and cannot give her another. Noted with shock and anger. Thank you.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.