I consider myself an environmentalist.
I don't have a family or a job or hobby requiring a big vehicle, so I drive a Honda Civic, and the back is always filled with assorted re-usable bags to tote around groceries. I recycle and try to remind my husband, also an energy journalist, to put the beer bottles in the recycling bin and not the trash.
I'm like a lot of Americans, including a lot who work in the energy industry. People who work at energy companies plant trees as part of a volunteer day, recycle, use energy-saving windows in their houses, and take those same re-usable bags with them when they shop.
The energy industry as a whole has to be pretty cognizant of the environment; frankly, it can't afford not to be. There are regulations in place that must be adhered to, there are communities that want to protect their land, water and air, and it's in the best interest of energy companies to ensure their production practices are as environmentally sound as possible.
New (and old) technology has let the gas industry foray into new production techniques that are, according to industry insiders, more environmentally friendly. The water used in fracking can be replaced by compressed gases such as nitrogen or carbon dioxide, or by liquefied petroleum products like highly pressurized propane, which takes on a gel-like consistency.
In July, I wrote a story about these techniques to reduce water usage with another Platts colleague, Katie Bailey, and what she found in her reporting is that a lot of environmental groups are still concerned about these new techniques. They worried they could bring risks that have yet to be identified, since they're fairly new to the industry and there haven't been many studies evaluating conditions before and after production.
This story stuck out to me because it encapsulates something I've run across so many times: how we talk about the environment. The word "environmentalist" is often viewed with contempt in the energy industry, as just a label for people or organizations who get in the way of energy production, who gets in the way of keeping all our lights turned on and houses warm in the winter. You can feel the crowd in an energy conference get a little tenser when someone who works for an environmental organization stands up to take the podium.
Likewise, the words "natural gas" or "oil" can automatically conjure up images of clouds of pollutants into the air or dirty water or felled trees. You can say the word "fracking" and someone could bring up earthquakes, water on fire, cancer and destroying our own habitat as well as those of other flora and fauna. It doesn't matter whether these things are related to fracking; the assumption is that they are.
I feel like I need another category of words to use in stories about the intersection of energy, the environment, and all the people who have exposure to both every single day. Someone who works for an environmental group also turns on the lights in their home and shuttles a family around in a vehicle; someone who works for an energy company also goes camping with their family or hiking on the weekend. Many of the words I want to use have carry too much baggage. Each side has legitimate concerns about the other, and I feel like both sides are working toward one another, working out common ground.
In the meantime, I called a source for an interview on this story and asked him about the differences between his technique and hydraulic fracking. Simply because I used the word fracking, he asked me, "Are you one of those environmentalists?"
To subscribe or visit go to: http://www.platts.com