The Blog

In Part 1 of this two part series, I outlined the different kinds of knowledge and skills needed to teach about the Marcellus Shale. In Part 2, I'm pointing to some resources that are intended to help our readers build that set of skills and knowledge.

In the course of writing Part 2, I also realized that two parts is too few. Occasional posts will follow to address some of the gaps, but this should give you plenty to think about.

What do you need to understand to teach about the Marcellus Shale? Part 2 of 2: Resources for Teaching

I included in the first post a bulleted list of relevant topics, and asked for suggestions about what I missed. Here's that bulleted list:

• Geology;
• Technology (of extraction);
• Hydrology;
• Ecology;
• Economics;
• Cultural Issues;
• Pedagogy;
• Technology (for teaching).

Here are some suggestions about what I missed:

• The emotional components of the Marcellus Shale;
• Context, or a systems perspective (which was addressed in the text, but omitted from the list);
• Human health;
• Alternative energy;
• Climate stability/climate change; and;
• Government/Civics

Also suggested was, "proper framing of the fuel as a threat."  In this National Science Foundation funded work, we will not advocate for or against slick water high volume hydraulic fracturing, but we will do our best to identify risks.  In discussing risks, we will be attentive to comparative risks, for current energy practices also substantially and negatively impact the environment.

We strive to provide evidence-based information that is relevant to the Marcellus Shale, and provide programming and resources to help people understand that information.  Many readers like and value this approach, but a few critics on both sides of the issue express frustration that the information we provide does not always fortify their own positions.  Readers of these materials and participants in our programming can then reach their own, hopefully informed, decisions about whether to support or oppose drilling in the Marcellus Shale.

Natural gas industry gives $1.34 million in campaign contributions to New York State politicians.

A day before the Department of Environmental Conservation's (DEC) deadline for public comments on hydrofracking (also called hydraulic fracturing or fracking), a report was released by Common Cause indicating that the natural gas industry gave $1.34 million in campaign contributions to New York State politicians and their parties.

“Hydraulic fracturing has raised environmental questions, and now financial ones, about the influence of the natural gas industry over state lawmakers and public policy,” said Common Cause Executive Director Susan Lerner, as reported in the NY Daily News.  “New Yorkers need to be assured that such a controversial issue will be decided based on merit, not money,” Lerner added.

From January 2007 to October 2011, the Natural Gas industry made 2,349 campaign contributions to state and local level New York politicians and parties, according to the Common Cause report entitled "Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry in New York to Influence Public Policy - Part III."  A breakdown of the $1.34 million in campaign contributions by type is shown in the figure below.

Photo Credit: Common Cause/New York, Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets (click image to enlarge)