Bull3t Hughes "World Wide Web" 8/3/2007 via Flickr. Attribution License.
The following blog post includes an annotated bibliography for the six sources I've found in three of my previous blog posts that pertain to the controversy within my discipline which is the debate on fracking. Each source is cited in MLA format with a paragraph summary to go along with it.
Source I:
American Science Magazine tweeted this so they could inform their followers of a recent interview with fracking expert, Avner Vengosh, about the safety hazards that result from this process (mostly water-related). The tweet includes a link to the full interview where Vengosh discusses the environmental impact that fracking has while also touching on the EPA's role in the regulation on the process and what needs to be done to ensure its safety. This source provides a political and environmental platform for the opposition to fracking that I can use to show what the controversy is based on.
Source II:
Fuller, Dawn. "UC Doctoral Student's Research Digs Deep into the Fracking Controversy." University of Cincinnati. University of Cincinnati, 4/11/2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.
This article seeks to inform of the research that Deborah Kittner, a doctoral student at the University of Cincinnati, did on fracking. The article introduces the fracking process and the concerns that people have with its possible correlation with ground water contamination that makes it a controversy. The article also discusses the fracking industry's collaboration with the EPA to evaluate the system and make it environmentally safe. This article will be used to format how I first introduce the fracking controversy and the concerns with both sides.
Source III:
Jackson, Robert B., Avner Vengosh, J. William Carey, Richard J. Davies, Thomas H. Darrah, Francis O'sullivan, and Gabrielle Pétron. "The Environmental Costs and Benefits of Fracking." Annual Review of Environment and Resources 39.1 (2014): 327-62. Web. 11 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of this article is to lay out the environmental advantages and disadvantages of fracking. The article mentions the costs and benefits in cases of both safe and unsafe practices of the energy extraction process while discussing the regulations that need to be made to ensure its proper output and reduce environmental damages. A major point in the article is that fracking does output greenhouse gases and other toxins into the air, however a switch from oil to natural gas would reduce that output already. This article will be used as a foundation for the environmental aspect of the debate, so I can bring about concerns and potential benefits that come with fracking.
Source IV:
Maxwell-Gaines, Chris (waterthrift). "EPA Study: No evidence that hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has led to widespread pollution of drinking water - http://ht.ly/Q6Kww." 19 Aug. 2015, 12:04 p.m. Tweet.
Maxwell-Gaines composed this tweet to inform and persuade his followers that fracking is safe in its effects on drinking water, revoking the claim by most anti-frackers that it does cause contamination. He uses the EPA's study as a means of securing his claim and supporting the use of fracking. The EPA study in the link provided in the tweet claims that there is no systematic contamination to the drinking water nearby fracking operations, however the study's reliability is still in question by several environmental organizations and remains to be published officially. This tweet and linked source will be used to show public view on the process and any given individual's willingness to site a source that supports their side of the debate, whether it be completely reliable or not.
Source V:
Morrison, Jessica. "Uneven State Rules And Trade Secrets Fuel Fracking Debate." Chemical and Engineering News. American Chemical Society, 16 Mar. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of this article is to inform the reader of the fracking industries' reluctance to reveal the chemical composition of the fluid used in their process and how this obscurity is fueling the debate over the process. The article mentions new state laws that are forcing the companies to reveal this information however they seem to find a way around them. The article discusses how the secrets being kept by the companies have made it harder for people to have faith in the process. This source will be used as a major example of what the fracking industry is doing to propel the controversy.
Source VI:
Osborn, S. G., A. Vengosh, N. R. Warner, and R. B. Jackson. "Methane Contamination of Drinking Water Accompanying Gas-well Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108.20 (2011): 8172-176. Web. 11 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of this article is to convey the results of a study done by the authors on the methane contamination in wells near fracking operations. The researchers took samples from 68 drinking water aquifers in Pennsylvania and New York near natural gas extraction plants and tested them for their pH and chemical content. They found that there was a systematic increase in methane concentration as proximity to fracking sites increased. The article has no bias, as it is a scholarly research study, however it communicates fracking as being dangerous in its contamination of drinking water. This source will be used as an example for the anti-fracking position's main argument against the process.
Source VII:
Channel 4 News. "Fracking debate: 'How dare you lie on national TV?'" YouTube. YouTube, 26 Jan. 2014. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the video is to show two leaders in the debate over fracking in the UK and their argument for their side. Chris Lilley and Vanessa Vine go back and forth over the health/environmental impacts of fracking and no agreement is reached, however Lilley does bring about a strong argument on the economic benefits of the process. This video can definitely be used to portray the debate over fracking as exactly that: a debate.
Source VIII:
Coleman, Jesse. "Documents Reveal EPA's National Fracking Study Halted by Industry Pressure." HuffingtonPost.com. The Huffington Post, 5 Mar 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the article is to show the controversy and the progress, or lack there of, of coming to a resolution to the debate. It is meant to show the fracking industry's influence in government studies and how it is preventing a conclusion to the water safety aspect of the argument. Major findings of the article show industries' limiting and completely shutting down some studies by the EPA, showing their intentions in hiding results that could shut them down. This article will be used to show the little progress that this controversy is making and what is exactly propelling the debate.
Source IX:
Osterman, Cynthia. "Documentary 'Gasland' Pivotal to Anti-Fracking Movement: Study" nytimes.com. The New York Times, 2 Sept. 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the article is to summarize studies done nationwide about the documentary, "Gasland", and its impact in mobilizing the anti-fracking movement across the US and other countries. The article says that posts and their amount of views were monitored before and after the release of the movie and determined that support increased dramatically for the side of the debate against fracking. This article will be used to show the means by which the controversy is being aggravated and how it has brought attention to the risks of fracking.
Source X:
Martin, Rachel. "Both Sides Claim Victory Over EPA Fracking Study." National Public Radio. National Public Radio, 7 Jun. 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the article is to provide a transcript to a discussion by NPR on the EPA's study on fracking's environmental effects and to what extent it has brought support to either side of the debate. The participants in the discussion talk about the study's results in finding that there is no widespread pollution in water as a result of fracking, yet it mentions there have been cases where this has happened. They discuss that the uncertainty and lack of depth in the results has failed to change minds for or against fracking. This article will be used to show the debate's improbability of coming to a conclusion any time soon unless more in depth research is done.
Reflection: First can I say that finding a citation style used that strayed from an MLA-like format was difficult because just about everyone is a science major. I read Jessica and Isabel's annotated bibliographies and the main thing I learned is that I can be more precise. Jessica also used MLA and her explanation of the purpose and context of the source was very well done. Isabel explained the findings of the source in a very detailed, yet concise manner. I think that shortening the annotations can make sifting through the sources much easier when I start citing them in my paper.
Source VII:
Channel 4 News. "Fracking debate: 'How dare you lie on national TV?'" YouTube. YouTube, 26 Jan. 2014. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the video is to show two leaders in the debate over fracking in the UK and their argument for their side. Chris Lilley and Vanessa Vine go back and forth over the health/environmental impacts of fracking and no agreement is reached, however Lilley does bring about a strong argument on the economic benefits of the process. This video can definitely be used to portray the debate over fracking as exactly that: a debate.
Source VIII:
Coleman, Jesse. "Documents Reveal EPA's National Fracking Study Halted by Industry Pressure." HuffingtonPost.com. The Huffington Post, 5 Mar 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the article is to show the controversy and the progress, or lack there of, of coming to a resolution to the debate. It is meant to show the fracking industry's influence in government studies and how it is preventing a conclusion to the water safety aspect of the argument. Major findings of the article show industries' limiting and completely shutting down some studies by the EPA, showing their intentions in hiding results that could shut them down. This article will be used to show the little progress that this controversy is making and what is exactly propelling the debate.
Source IX:
Osterman, Cynthia. "Documentary 'Gasland' Pivotal to Anti-Fracking Movement: Study" nytimes.com. The New York Times, 2 Sept. 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the article is to summarize studies done nationwide about the documentary, "Gasland", and its impact in mobilizing the anti-fracking movement across the US and other countries. The article says that posts and their amount of views were monitored before and after the release of the movie and determined that support increased dramatically for the side of the debate against fracking. This article will be used to show the means by which the controversy is being aggravated and how it has brought attention to the risks of fracking.
Source X:
Martin, Rachel. "Both Sides Claim Victory Over EPA Fracking Study." National Public Radio. National Public Radio, 7 Jun. 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
The purpose of the article is to provide a transcript to a discussion by NPR on the EPA's study on fracking's environmental effects and to what extent it has brought support to either side of the debate. The participants in the discussion talk about the study's results in finding that there is no widespread pollution in water as a result of fracking, yet it mentions there have been cases where this has happened. They discuss that the uncertainty and lack of depth in the results has failed to change minds for or against fracking. This article will be used to show the debate's improbability of coming to a conclusion any time soon unless more in depth research is done.
Reflection: First can I say that finding a citation style used that strayed from an MLA-like format was difficult because just about everyone is a science major. I read Jessica and Isabel's annotated bibliographies and the main thing I learned is that I can be more precise. Jessica also used MLA and her explanation of the purpose and context of the source was very well done. Isabel explained the findings of the source in a very detailed, yet concise manner. I think that shortening the annotations can make sifting through the sources much easier when I start citing them in my paper.
No comments:
Post a Comment