The naked truth about fracking

-A A +A

Frank Splendoria’s letter to the editor (published Jan. 18) asserts that I have yet to provide “credible evidence” demonstrating fracking’s proven toxic legacy; specifically, calling one of my two sources cited (www.fraccidents.com) “unabashedly biased.” However, Mr. Splendoria neglected to provide any evidence of bias.

In fact, www.fraccidents.com is a map of the U.S., detailing hundreds of real families whose health has deteriorated dramatically in relation to their proximity to well pads — many such cases involving ranchers whose livestock had suffered slow and agonizing death after exposure to water supplies tainted with methane and other fracking chemicals from leaking wells.  

Yet, at the Jan. 10 public hearing, some eastern New Mexico landowners, their lawyers and “experts” extolled the blessings of drilling, especially in light of the drought’s effect on reduced livestock. The Quinn family, most notably, stated that they were hanging on by their fingernails, expressed how good it would be to have some money from drilling! Yes, that would be as beneficial as burning your furniture to keep the house warm: at first it would seem like a good idea — until the house burns down.

Abby Quinn’s letter (published Jan. 25) described the hearing as “balanced” when, ironically, the Quinn’s and pro-fracking experts were given 30 minutes to speak, while most ban supporters were given 3-5 minutes. And speaking of “cherry picking” facts, the experts (affiliated, no doubt, with oil/gas), armed with studies, maps and charts purportedly proving the safety of fracking, urged the commissioners to allow drilling in our economically depressed county. Blinded by the promise of an economic boom, they made boldly false assertions that water contamination is rare — despite reports about leaking wells and water contamination coming in almost daily from Montana, Wyoming and Colorado, among other states now experiencing the bust that inevitably follows a boom.

Anyone seeking “the truth” need only ask, “Who has the most to gain from lying?” Those who support banning fracking would only gain clean air and water for everyone (putting us on the same side as ranchers: all life and a healthy economy depend on clean air and water).

Shell, however, has millions, if not billions, of reasons (money) to lie, making it self-evident who is telling the truth.  Shell and its paid experts, like the Emperor and his court, are convinced that the charlatan tailor had made a beautiful suit of clothes, but  we common folk see that, in fact, the Emperor is naked.

Diana Presser
Las Vegas