By Gregory Solman

In Fracknation, Irish investigative journalist Phelim McAleer finds a combustible metaphor for the contrived controversy of hydraulic fracturing in the footage of the Sautner family hustlers of Pennsylvania.

McAleer couldn’t politely interview the couple without Craig threatening a lawsuit (apparently emboldened by the radical National Resources Defense Council), and Julie threatening to pull a pistol on McAleer on a public road, where she voluntarily stopped to shout at him. (It’s rich to watch her sheepishly press a gun permit against the inside of her car window, demonstrating the Defense Technique When Not Being in the Least Threatened.) So McAleer pulls a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain a taping of the Sautners, apoplectic upon hearing the Environmental Protection Agency—such a right-wing frat under Lisa Jackson—confirm the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s finding that their water tests safe and clean.

McAleer notes the irony that not having contaminated water would be considered good news to all but those looking for an Erin Brockovich ending to their woes, real or imagined, or in ideological lockstep with what is now a full-fledged anti-fracking movement, replete with its own agitprop such as Josh Fox’s polemic GasLand and Gus Van Sant’s desperately “relevant” fiction, Promised Land. For the greenshirts, only bad news is good news: Recall that the same eco-special interests were all for using natural gas when it was an empty-handed gesture, when they thought we were almost out. (Their next suggestion: Francium power—but only if actually bottled in France, in IWW-run shops.)

In Fracknation, McAleer is mostly after the would-be Michael Moore, Fox, in whose disputatious documentary the Sautners display their dubiously adulterated water and others light their taps—and a large part of the impressionable public—on fire. But that’s a well-known, ancient phenomenon having nothing to do with fracking, and everything to do with methane naturally seeping wherever it can, as surely a few of Fox’s newfound celebrity friends must know from living near the La Brea Tar Pits, where the streets spontaneously combust from time to time. (Clearly, if the greenshirt “gascists” could redevelop Los Angeles, there’d be nothing within miles of mid-Wilshire—well, except maybe environmentally sensitive Ed Begley-esque manses—an area that would be turned into a no-man’s-land preserve to hasten the return of the kangaroo rat.)

When McAleer catches up to Fox—he, too, in the Moore mode—and accuses him of recklessly associating fire-water with fracking (which has never once been proven to have contaminated groundwater, occurring thousands of feet beneath the water table), Fox says, “Yes, but it’s not relevant.” And from his perspective—which smacks of Hillary Clinton’s on Benghazi—it isn’t. Despite Fox’s pose as a friendly naïve explorer in GasLand, reinforced by a lazy narrative drawl suggesting Bill Murray’s muttering groundskeeper in Caddyshack, his project aims to stop shale gas production, by any means necessary.

The moratorium on leasing that GasLand inspired animates McAleer to work the other side of the documentary-cliché fence, matching Fox’s often sincere-sounding fracking alarmists with a Depression-era revival of plaintive, tearful farmers fearful of losing their land because their gas leases have been shut off amid already hard times. Besides them, McAleer finds plenty of residents in Dimock, Pa., who don’t appreciate GasLand’s suggestion that their homesteads are toxic wastelands, inhabited by greedy despoilers and easy marks for Matt Damon.

McAleer systematically eviscerates GasLand’s false implications and sloppy inferences (finally, not even distinguishing between oil and gas production, and instantly trotting out a Halliburton/Cheney conspiracy, the not-so-secret handshake of Club 9/11 Truth). McAleer interviews specialists who assure us that the mathematical detection of seismic activity does not constitute an earthquake (and that the greenshirts’ beloved geothermal energy is worse). He unveils collusion between biased government officials, liberal media, non-governmental organizations and their Hollywood waterboys. He embarrasses Fox, a Columbia University grad, for his woeful ignorance of physics, engineering and chemistry.

Fracknation then travels to Europe to suggest that new-school communism under Vlad Putin has a hidden hand behind the anti-fracking agenda, so that Russia can continue to use a gas monopoly in the Ukraine and Eastern Europe as a political cudgel, turning it on or off as it pleases, and charging little old ladies in Poland half their pensions for gas and electricity, bringing to mind Dr. Zhivago’s arrests for foraging firewood. (He might have contrasted their plight with the thousands of Californians driving natural-gas Honda Civics—the cleanest cars on the planet, including electrics—for an unsubsidized $1.36 a gallon, thanks to fracking, what reasonable people call a win-win.)
Fracknation’s timing is good, though it’s unlikely to crack already ossified myths or affect fracking’s prospects, when even the use of that vulgar-sounding nickname is as devious as cubic zirconia ads referring to the genuine article as “mined diamonds.” Fracking friends and foes—and the movies they love—have formed skirmish lines almost identical to those of the climate-change controversy.

So we’re going nowhere from here. But it’s heartening to see someone take on a few of the anecdotal, unscientific and politically motivated accusations against the practice, before they, too, become immune to counter evidence.

The frack list (neuropathy, fish kills, cancer, dead bunny rabbits, migraines, animal hair loss, neighborhoods erupting in flames) is already reminiscent of the hysterical global-warming compilations which currently run from “acne” to “yellow fever”—until “aardvark population decline” and “yam rust” are added by someone, anyone, somewhere. The same camps have enlisted the same recruits, including anti-capitalists out to control the economy by fiat, communist style; enrich themselves, like Qatar’s over-compensated useful idiot, Al Gore; or just feel morally superior to others and, in the sweetly juvenile manner of the Mars Attacks! teen hero, suggest, to a mariachi version of the national anthem, that “maybe, instead of houses, we could live in tepees, ’cause it’s better, in a lot of ways.”

Hurricane Sandy has long since passed, but concern remains over lasting environmental hazards

Though the waters have receded after Hurricane Sandy, many downtown residents may be facing a yet-unseen but potentially hazardous problem as a result of the severe flooding. Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who represents Lower Manhattan communities hit especially hard by the storm, has expressed concern over what he predicts will be a serious mold and contaminant problem in homes and workplaces that found themselves in the flood zone.

“We must not repeat the same mistakes of 9/11 by leaving people to their own devices to clean up complex toxins without proper guidance or assistance from the federal government,” Nadler said in a statement, urging federal oversight of mold and toxin cleanup following the storm.

Nadler has contacted both the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to insist that comprehensive testing for mold and toxins be conducted in homes and workplaces affected by the storm.

David Frome, owner of the Air Cleaner Store and an expert in mold and toxins, said Nadler’s concern is justified.

“Sandy’s floods released toxic chemicals and biologic waste into the water,” said Frome. “Sheetrock and carpeting that was soaked by the storm’s water should be treated as hazardous waste. Removing it safely needs to be our first priority.”

Frome said everyone who experienced flooding is at risk for mold and mold spore exposure, which is “perhaps the largest of the immediate health problems.”

“The Federal government has not established safe levels of mold exposure,” Frome explained. “Each person has a different sensitivity. Some people can be exposed to high concentrations of mold without effect; others can develop a range of symptoms.”

According to Howland “Howdy” Russell, the spokesperson for Paul Davis National, a cleanup service that specializes in natural disasters, the complex cleanup process is already under way in badly affected areas of New York, where the group had been deployed following the storm.

“It’s quite a challenge, as the buildings are filled with sand, mud and debris,” Russell said. “A key priority is to contain and control any microbial growth right away, ensuring a healthy and safe environment for the property owners and families.”

Others insist there’s no reason for New Yorkers to panic about the issue. Ron Alford, a crisis management and recovery coach whose official website says he has “spent his lifetime helping other people in a crisis,” believes the issue of mold is exaggerated as a money-making scheme.

“The mold, asbestos, lead issues are overblown and are in my opinion scare tactics that the new mold industry uses to scare people out of their money,” Alford said.

“There is not one active kitchen or bathroom in NYC that does not have some form of mold,” he added.

While Alford believes the mold-related fear-mongering is hyperbolized in the wake of Sandy, he said he does not feel qualified to comment on the toxic after-effects of 9/11.

Bob Carlson, who has taught mold remediation for years and helped draft a textbook on the subject, echoed Alford, saying the important thing is not to overreact to the situation.

“People freak out when they don’t need to, and miss the insidious hazards that may be lurking,” said Carlson.

“There are many thousands of species of mold, and they come in all colors,” he said. “Aspergillus floats in the air easily, and is one of the most common genera of mold out there.” According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, most people breathe this mold’s spores on a regular basis.

Carlson said with some of the most dangerous molds, you would have to go out of your way to have them be of any consequence to your health.

His analysis of some of the unpredictable aspects of the environmental impact, however, was a bit on the ominous side.

“As far as toxins go, after disasters all kinds of stuff happens,” Carlson said. “Underground storage tanks pop out of the ground, aboveground tanks collapse, pipelines rupture, 55-gallon drums go floating downstream—you name it.”

West Side elected officials and advocates urged the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Education at an Oct. 7 rally on the steps of City Hall to start investigating the levels of toxic PCBs in hundreds of potentially affected city schools.

The results of a pilot study conducted this year with the federal agency and the city DOE found airborne PCBs that exceeded recommended levels at P.S. 199 on the Upper West Side, P.S. 178 in the Bronx and Brooklyn’s P.S. 309.

From 1950 to 1978, before a Congressional ban went into effect, caulk and lighting ballasts—a fixture that controls electrical flow—used to construct buildings and schools contained PCBs, which studies suggest can cause learning disabilities in children, cancer and cardiovascular and immune system disease.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, an Upper West Side Democrat, wants Judith Enck, regional administrator for the EPA, to immediately expand its oversight of PCB management in the city’s public schools.

“The problem is much more serious than we originally believed,” Nadler said.

The EPA, in a statement, said the elevated PCB levels found in those schools “do not pose an immediate health risk in the short term.”

“Any needed repairs or renovations to address PCBs problems are conducted in ways that protect everyone who works in NYC school buildings,” an EPA spokesperson said in a statement.

The EPA expressed confidence in the study and said it has been communicating with federal and state officials about the feasibility of funding a broader approach.

The city estimates the price tag to remove the PCB to be $1 billion. The EPA wouldn’t foot the entire bill. Already, the city has spent $3 million on remediation efforts. But Nadler said the city would “find the funds if we have to.”

West Side Assembly members Linda Rosenthal and Daniel O’Donnell and 15 of their colleagues signed a letter to Enck asking the federal agency to inspect roughly 700 schools that may have PCB-laden caulk and light fixtures. Rosenthal plans to reintroduce her 2008 legislation that would require citywide testing of schools.

“Are we content to let New York City schoolchildren in untested school buildings serve as the proverbial canaries for future generations?” she asked.

Miranda Massie, litigation and training director with New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, expressed concern that the agency’s study downplays the risks of PCBs, she wrote in a letter to the EPA.

“It is important to note that independent experts regard the EPA guidances as inadequately health-protective, in part because they are based exclusively on cancer risks” and overlook “the many other substantial, negative health impacts of PCBs,” she wrote in a letter to the EPA.

The EPA, in its statement, said, “We will continue to work closely with New York City on the pilot program, which we believe is providing valuable information about the extent of the PCB problem and measures we can take to address it.”

That continuation will begin this weekend with an additional round of testing at P.S. 199.

Though West Side auto traffic certainly contributes to pollution levels—the neighborhood is packed with traffic from the West Side Highway and Broadway—the survey found that oil-burning furnaces are a big culprit.

A separate study by the Environmental Defense Fund estimates that 1 percent of the city’s buildings that burn the dirtiest grade of oil—known as No. 4 and 6 oil—accounts for 87 percent of the soot pollution. The Upper West Side, as well as lower Manhattan and the East Side, have a high cluster of buildings that burn these dangerous oils, according to the fund.

Throughout the year, the city’s health department collected and analyzed air samples around the city for four pollutants: fine particles, elemental carbon, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. The survey states that these pollutants have adverse health effects, and cause lung irritation and other respiratory problems, such as asthma and emphysema. Seniors and children are especially at risk.

“It’s been the case for years that New York City air does not meet [Environmental Protection Agency] clean air standards for air pollutants that are known to be harmful,” said Dr. Thomas Matte, director of environmental research at the city’s health department. “If someone lives in a neighborhood where there’s more exposure to air pollution and they have a health condition that predisposes them, they are more likely to be affected.”

Though there are higher rates of asthma and other respiratory problems in neighborhoods like the South Bronx and Harlem, Matte said other factors need to be considered, such as access to quality health care and exposure to pollutants in the home.