President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

50%

50%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 25, 2011 09:26 PM UTC

'Gasland' Nominated for Academy Award, COGA Defends CO Oil and Gas Rules

  • 15 Comments
  • by: ClubTwitty

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

The documentary ‘Gasland’–much maligned by the industry–has been nominated for an Oscar for ‘best documentary feature’.  The oil and gas lobby is fighting back:

It’s not every day a major energy trade association weighs in on Academy Awards nominations, but that’s just what happened Tuesday when “Gasland,” a film about the effects of natural-gas drilling, was nominated for best documentary feature.

America’s Natural Gas Alliance, a natural-gas industry trade group, blasted the Academy Tuesday morning for nominating the film for an award.

The film depicts the growing concern among residents of the nation’s gas fields over the effects of so much concentrated industrial activity on their water sources and overall well-being, focusing on hydraulic fracturing, ‘fracking,’ and the increasing anecdotal evidence, and documented instances, of contamination, mishap, and toxic exposure.

Although much of the film revolves around what is happening in the shale plays back east, Colorado is featured in the film–infamous flaming faucets, problems in Garfield County, and several star activists working on the issue.  In one scene that has caused some heartburn in state offices, the director of the COGCC allegedly dodges an interview.  

Meanwhile also currently in the news, an industry trade group, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, is now in the awkward position of trying to defend the recently enacted oil and gas regulations in a Sentinel article today:

A trade group for western Colorado energy companies says Garfield County’s criticisms of the state’s new oil and gas rules are unwarranted and economically jeopardize the the region.

That’s because for some in the Garfield gaspatch matters have become so untenable as to finally convince the county commission to get involved. Now Garfield County is saying that the oil and gas regulations ‘fail entirely’ to account for the cumulative and overall impacts of ever-increasing well density.  

Oil and gas development is a dirty business. Impacts can be mitigated, best practices can be employed, and communities can have more say over how and where this activity occurs. But no one should expect industry to lead us there, or to tell the real story about what this activity often entails–polluted water, degraded landscapes, declining air quality, and social and infrastructure impacts. And, if public institutions fail, then leave it to filmmakers and citizens to raise the alarm.  And it’s not exactly an even playing field.  

The oil and gas industry is very adept at pushing its own interests, and in selling its products as people-friendly, job-creating, and environmentally-sensitive. Their lobbyists work at the local, county, state, national and international scale.  They employ million dollar messaging campaigns and multi-million dollar campaign expenditures. Neither state government nor feisty citizen group can match their resources by a long shot. Thus a fossil fuel becomes ‘natural’ gas and a ‘clean’ fuel and even Democrats argue for slashing ‘red tape.’

With previous behavior as a sound indication, it’s a safe bet that industry will continue to oppose regulation on every level.  Its spokespeople will do this even while arguing that one set of regulations is both good and bad, depending if its weaker or stronger than whatever alternative is currently being proposed.  

Thus COGA both opposes the new regulations, and regularly mumbles that they need repealed, severely tweaked, and/or to be more ‘flexible’ to account for local variations. And it argues that the new rules should be maintained, that local jurisdictions should not be able to adapt and strengthen them to be geographically relevant. But public attention–thanks in no small part to the large population suddenly living atop newly viable gasfields back east–is starting to notice.

Natural gas, for all its problems at the extraction end–and pretending they don’t exist is not the way to solve our energy needs–burns cleaner than coal and petrol. Cars need to move, lights need to shine. However pushing conversion is a bit of hype–at least worthy of some skepticism, depending on the source.  Many of the gas-pushers also argue that other energy technologies should not be ‘subsidized.’  Natgas remains glutted on the market and export to Asia is a real possibility.

While alternative uses of natural gas should be developed, let’s not pretend that doing so won’t require subsidies and favorable tax breaks. Nor will they be a panacea to the broader problems of inefficiency and over-consumption.  Certainly, that it burns cleaner at the tail-pipe or stack does not address the issues involved with its extraction and development.  

Which brings us back to documenting those impacts and ensuring accountability from this industry.  

Energy is always a trade-off, every form has its impacts and liabilities, as well as its assets. Lobbyists will always downplay one and bolster the other.  But meeting our energy needs is a shared endeavor and should not be left up to them.

Local communities and other interested parties deserve credible and meaningful input into the particulars of energy development in our midst. And America as a whole needs to better understand what the choices entail: what risks and impacts are associated with the various energy sources, what current and potential subsidies for all energy really are, which future we should pursue and collectively support, how effects can be mitigated, and what is an acceptable level of risk.  

Colorado’s featured role in this Oscar nominated film can help keep attention on what some of these trade-offs are, and demonstrate why the particulars of how oil and gas development is regulated, and under whose set of rules, should not be a matter left up to the industry.        

Tweet
Share

Comments

15 thoughts on “‘Gasland’ Nominated for Academy Award, COGA Defends CO Oil and Gas Rules”

  1. who have worked so hard to promote this documentary.  I will hazard a guess that it may be the first time you’ve watched the academy awards in sometime, if ever.

  2. I don’t pay close enough attention to the Oscar nominations to have caught this.

    That film made such an impression on me.  I wasn’t completely ignorant on the issue.  But the pervasive, wide-spread nature of the health ramifications was eye-opening.

    I’m glad the documentary is getting this high profile attention.  

  5. which I thought was sufficiently accurate to be called a documentary, there are some points that can be quibbled over.

    To be fair, there is a (somewhat defensive) memo available on the COGCC website that challenges some points in ‘Gasland.’ Here it is.

    Given that the documentary was produced by non-experts in oil and gas production, some errors of omission and commission can be expected. Had more O&G experts been willing to contribute their expertise, some of the resulting errors (and “errors”) could have been avoided. Thus, if this movie receives awards and thus wider circulation, the uncharacteristically “shy” O&G experts have only themselves to blame if the public draws the “wrong” conclusions about the safety of O&G development.

    A couple of things about the COGCC memo: while pointing out what are claimed to be errors in the film, it simultaneously confirms the accuracy of other incidents in the film; also, I think that the memo does a fine job of pointing out that not all O&G accidents are due to fracking. It’s just as likely that the accident is due to human error introduced during some other aspect of O&G development. (e.g., see Haliburton cement integrity on the Horizon Deepwater well.)

    Fracking has been demonized and tends to get blamed for more accidents than can be linked to it. Every time fracking is incorrectly blamed, industry sycophants can use this to deflect discussion.

    1. And yeah, fracking gets demonized. Then again, that would also be the industry’s fault. If they would own up to what they are using, people would stop second guessing them. The unknown is always more frightening than the known.

      So I guess I’m saying I agree with your comment.  

      1. Agreed: People fear and demonize the unknown.

        If the industry has the information that could reduce what is unknown such that people would be less fearful, then it’s the industry’s own damn fault that they get bad PR.

        On the other hand, if the industry has information that would reinforce what it is that people fear, they may think that protecting that information will ensure they can profit for a few more years.

        The latter is what people will continue to think until, and if, the former is shown to be true.

        2. about this:

          If the industry has the information that could reduce what is unknown

          They do…but what keeps them from doing that is business competition and the fact that that stuff is secret for a reason…it is poison. They put it in our air and water and don’t want to be held responsible.

        1. I don’t recall if Ms Conoly-Schuller has stated explicitly what has changed for the better, just that the “environment” has changed. It’s probably related to the fact that, according to a memo from COGCC Director Neslin earlier this month, the time for the commission to approve permits to drill is now faster than it was before the new rules were adopted.

          1. “political environment” there?

            For whatever reason, it is a thing to be celebrated.

            The leadership of COGA has changed of late, they should be given a chance to see if the new rhetoric is followed by new responsibility. Follow through is everything.

            If the new board at COGA finally understands that Coloradoans will never accept being trampled for the profit of any industry, and I think they do, they will make a dramatic shift in their MO.

            I am hopeful…but time will tell.

      1. points out clearly, rsb, is the culture of mendacity that permeates the O&G industry. I have pointed out before that our most iconic fictional oilman, I think, was “J.R. Ewing”, played by Larry Hagman on the long running TV program, “Dallas”.

        J.R. would consider blackmailing his mother…if the price was right. While that character was played for drama, that sort of corruption and greed is rampant in the industry. It makes for a pervasive attitude of “fuck the regs”. I worked in the industry, so have and do a number of my relatives. Most of the workers do the best thaey can do. It is the big money boys, playing politics, that reap the big rewards for polluting and ignoring regulations.

        If you want to talk about “entitlement”, you are talking about an oilmans’ attitude when it comes to drilling. They believe they have a right to do whatever they think is “reasonable”. The state and feds generally go along with that. More than anything else, the industry doesn’t like being told what to do. They are bigger than nations and governments…they are Big Oil.  

  6. the documentary series Boomtown — “examining how [the discovery of oil in Parshall, ND] could impact that rural community” — begins airing this Saturday (January 29) at 8:00 p.m. on The Green Newtwork (GRNHD).

    I’ve only seen the advertisements for this series, but it looks like it may be worthwhile.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

43 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!