Fracking In Gasland

At what measure does the cost of an action outweigh its benefits? Is it the profit to be gained? Is it the environmental effects? Or is it the lives it affects? Hydraulic Fracturing or “Fracking” is the process of extracting natural gas from the ground using water mixed with “fracking chemicals,” and it recently gained great popularity with energy companies due to the immense amount of gas available under the United States. Energy Companies call it the United States’ path away from foreign oil and the ability for the U.S. to once again be an energy superpower. They may be right. They may also be hiding something. Gasland, directed by Josh Fox, seeks to find these hidden facts about fracking and tackles the task by explaining in-depth the effects

The film seems to make attempts to explain the other side or get the other story by attempting to set up interviews with CEOs and directors of various energy companies involved in “fracking.” All of which end in with a denial to be interviewed. However, beyond attempting to interview large energy companies the film does not address any advantages to using “fracking” besides the ability to bring the United States back the the level of an energy superpower. This only being stated at the start of the film, with no other reference back to it as the documentary progresses. While it is not a necessity for a film, such as Gasland, wishing to make an argument to make the Pros and Cons of a given topic even, it is a necessity to adequately explain the counterargument and not dismiss it as a whole. Any reasonable person could tell that, but for some reason Gasland blantaly seems to ignore the other side. Some may view this as a strong point, but an educated argument will always include the counterargument as it lends credibility to the piece and makes more likely to agree with the argument being made. Gasland as an argument piece would’ve benefited by ceding some point or simply explaining the counterargument, but without that key element Gasland just appears