Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency came out with a preliminary study that said that fracking has not contaminated drinking water and is essentially safe. So, why is Sierra Club posting this (see right) to Facebook? Isn’t that the opposite of what the EPA published? Sort of.
In addition to publishing the fact that fracking is not polluting drinking water, the EPA also published guidelines on how to keep drinking water safe. Sounds prudent right? Sierra Club is inappropriately leveraging those suggestions as a signal that fracking is a threat. It’s not. But, the idea that fracking is compromising drinking water is a great talking point for greenies – truth be damned.
We did some additional research about things that might threaten drinking water – just to be helpful to the Sierra Club. Here are five additional “threats” to drinking water:
5) Corpses – Even we can’t make this up.
4) Rust – Water is not supposed to be the color of butternut squash soup.
3) Drugs and Personal Products – We are not going to ask why people are flushing so many prescription drugs down the toilet.
2) Microbial Contaminants – Remember when a boy in Louisiana died after contracting a brain-eating amoeba from the drinking water? No? Now you will.
1) Terrorism – Don’t roll your eyes – this is a legit concern. Even Slate.com, which has never been accused of leaning to the right, had this to say about the possibility of terrorists targeting the U.S. water supply:
“There have not been any successful major attacks on American water supplies, but the threat and fear remain because our water supplies cannot be fully protected. We could erect more fences, higher fences, locks, security cameras, and hire more guards—and we have—but with more than 75,000 dams and reservoirs, more than 160,000 drinking water facilities, mostly owned and operated by local government and private parties, 2 million miles of pipe and millions more access points, these measures will never make us completely safe.”
Who knew that Sierra Club and the military industrial complex had so much in common? We would anxiously await Sierra Club’s campaign to secure the water supply from ISIS, but it’s pretty unlikely that Sierra Club would ever join this endeavor. See, the reason that the Sierra Club engages in this fight is because its donors are heavily invested in green energy, which is so expensive that the only way to justify its cost is to make it a moral issue. If its donors were similarly invested in technology to secure our water system, perhaps the organization would engage. Until then, we will do our best to remind PeakNation™ who Sierra Club works for. It’s the Tom Steyers of the world, not you.