Fracking. Part 4.

The dome on the Illinois State Capitol in Spri...
The dome on the Illinois State Capitol in Springfield is taller than the dome on the United States Capitol. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Posted August 19, 2013

by Jerry Alatalo

In states around America many groups have joined together to express concerns and use legal means to stop fracking in their communities. In Illinois a bill is up for vote to place a two-year moratorium on the practice, with the hope of more extensive health and scientific studies becoming available in the near future.  Governmental bodies from city, county to state across the nation have taken actions to slow or stop fracking in their regions.

The man and woman in this talk are obviously in the group of people from Illinois who are not in favor of fracking. If there is anyone reading this who can point to persons who have, or documentary films which contain, persuasive arguments for fracking, please enter such persons or films in the comments below.

This writer wants to hear all sides of this issue, as this allows for people to have more information to make up their minds. All viewpoints which are explained in a respectful, thoughtful way are welcome. This is a large issue with tremendous consequences that cannot be dismissed or ignored.

The major concern for citizens is the safety of drinking water supplies. I have said it before but it has to be repeated: water is life.


2 thoughts on “Fracking. Part 4.

  1. Fracking, like so many other issues, pits economic interests against the public interest. The ostensible arbiters in this dynamic – government institutions – are increasingly one-sided in their actions due to the influence of money in our political system (i.e. corporatism). Complicating factors included external practicalities such as the nature of global markets (e.g. energy) and international relations. For average people suffering from industrial water contamination, it’s unfortunately a David vs Goliath situation.


    1. Robert,
      Nice to meet you. I agree with your description of the situation. The David vs. Goliath analogy pertains to the amount of financial and political power of corporations, derived from campaign contributions and lobbying, versus the average folks who do not send big money to candidates. Those who have been harmed physically, emotionally, spiritually from drinking contaminated water are human beings and have as much value as any CEO, congressman, senator or governor. For that reason the practice must be studied exhaustively before going full on with well-drilling. In these times of economic downturn it is understandable that discussions are sometimes charged with emotion. It’s a bear of an issue. Hopefully wise choices will be made going forward.
      Thank you,


Comments are closed.