Horror films are typically about that one guy with the mask and the knife that moves reeeal slow, or that one ghost child who likes to eat souls. Well, horror fans, it’s time to get acclimated to a new genre of horror film, and it’s positioned to be the most terrifying one ever.

Horror movies about climate change, environmental disasters, GMOs, and scientifically engineered nasties, are “in.” This shouldn’t be surprising, considering the world is in a whole lot of trouble. (Hellllo, climate change.)

While this horror genre is still in its infancy, we’ve recently seen a few titles that any horror fan and climate enthusiast could enjoy.

1. “Consumed”

This film is a tad less horrific than the others and much less gory (in fact, there’s no real gore at all), but it still manages to get its point across. (The point being that GMO food isn’t labeled and we really don’t know what it could be doing to our guinea pig-esque human bodies… Playing screenings now.)

2. “Unearth”

“Unearth” was recently backed on Kickstarter and thank goodness for that because we can’t wait to see this horror story come to life. I mean, just read the description:

“Inspired by increasing environmental concerns ripped from today’s headlines, “Unearth” is a uniquely American horror story about two neighboring farm families whose relationships and very lives are put to the test when one of them chooses to lease their land and have it drilled for natural gas.” (No word on a release date.)

3. “Unnatural”

This is probably the silliest pick on the list, but what is a horror list without a creature feature? In this film, scientists decide to genetically modify Alaskan polar bears after global climate change makes it tough for them to live. Needless to say, the science project doesn’t go well and horrific things happen. (Available on VOD.)

4. “The Bay”

This is the oldest film on the list, but it’s worth a watch. “The Bay” is a found-footage film that tracks what happens to a small town when invasive sea creatures take over the town’s bay. A lot of people end up incredibly sick and dead, and it’s all because of a cover up. Be aware: This film is not for the faint of heart or those with squeamish stomachs.

Related on EcoSalon

2 Horror Films that Depict the Terrors of Motherhood: ‘The Babadook’ Wasn’t the First

8 Spooky, Scary Movies to Stream for Halloween

3 Films that Prove Feminist Movies in the Horror Genre Exist

Women watching movie via Shutterstock

The post 4 Horror Movies That Climate Change Deniers Need to See appeared first on EcoSalon.

One concern that environmentalists have with regards to hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, is the threat that underground aquifers could be contaminated, endangering drinking water supplies. And a new study, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has demonstrated just that.

One particular fracking technique is the most concerning. High volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF) is responsible for the global fracking boom. Fracking consists of fracturing rocks with a pressurized liquid by injecting a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals into deep rock formations in order to allow gas reserves to migrate to a well.

Fracking has changed the face of the industry by making it cost effective to reach natural gas hidden deep below the surface of the Earth and embedded in rocks. But the recent study shows how Marcellus Shale gas wells in Pennsylvania caused natural gas and foam contamination in potable water destined for several households in the area.

The cause of the contamination is most likely stray natural gas and drilling compounds that made their way into the rock fractures and from there, into the deep water aquifers. These deep water aquifers are the source of drinking water for a number of Pennsylvania households.

Such contamination has the potential to contaminate a large quantity of drinking water and make a lot of people sick, especially considering that, as of 2013, at least 2 million gas wells in the U.S. had been fractured and these wells makeup 43 percent of oil and 67 percent of natural gas production in the U.S.

“The fact is that oil and gas drilling and fracking are poorly regulated and inherently risky. This new study, released today, drives home both of those unfortunate truths, with what EWG fears could be the first of many more signs showing threats to our drinking water,” Thomas Cluderay, general counsel for Environmental Working Group said in a statement. “We need robust regulations and more studies to better understand and address the risks associated with these chemicals.  We also need to move away from an economy based on fossil fuels and towards one based on renewable energy supplies.”

Fracking has created such an economic boom that the industry hopes consumers will turn a blind eye to the environmental repercussions. But it’s much harder to look away when contaminated drinking water and mini earthquakes start to happen in your neck of the woods. It’s easy to take our clean drinking water for granted until something like this serves as a reminder as to what can happen if we don’t protect it. It’s one more reason why at this stage in the game we should be moving away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy. Let’s take a closer look at the pros and cons of fracking before it’s too late.

Related on EcoSalon

An Aerial View of Hydraulic Fracturing: From Mini Earthquakes to Airport Reserves

Major Victory in New York: Hydraulic Fracturing Banned

Hydraulic Fracturing to Blame for 11 Texas Earthquakes in 24 Hours

Image of hydraulic fracturing from Shuttershock

The post Fracking Effs Our Drinking Water, New Study Finds appeared first on EcoSalon.

Is hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, to blame for this cluster of earthquakes?

This is one of those stories that seems like something out of a science fiction novel but in fact it’s real life. Over a recent 24-hour period in and around Irving, Texas between Dallas and Fort Worth there were a bundle of earthquakes. And by bundle, I mean 11. The quakes ranged in magnitude from 1.7 to 3.6, according to EcoWatch.

The quakes were felt in metro Dallas where hundreds called 911 in fear. With more than 20 quakes since last September, it’s no coincidence that the area sits on top of a natural gas rich and heavily fracked shale deposit. Many researchers think hydraulic fracturing is to blame.

“The upsurge in quakes started in Texas around the time the oil and gas boom took hold several years ago,” reported StateImpact Texas. “The number of recorded earthquakes (most larger than 3.0) has increased tenfold since a drilling boom began several years ago. The Lone Star State is now one of the shakiest in the country, coming in sixth in the continuous U.S. for having larger quakes last year.”

In fact, the number of earthquakes in an area that rarely saw them before has increased by tenfold since the fracking boom began.

“It’s premature to speculate on the cause of this current series of seismic events,” said Brian Stump, Albritton Chair of Geological Sciences at Dallas’ Southern Methodist University (SMU), in a statement reported in the Dallas Morning News yesterday. “We’re just getting started. We want to support the local community in understanding these earthquakes, and the team appreciates the cooperation of the city of Irving, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and IRIS [the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Integrated Risk Information System] in helping us get the best information possible.”

According to StateImpact Texas, the earthquakes aren’t caused by the drilling used in hydraulic fracturing, they result from the disposal wells located thousands of feet under the ground. These wells store drilling fluid, a chemical-laced water encased in concrete.

“The model I use is called the air hockey table model,” Cliff Frohlich, a research scientist at the Institute for Geophysics at the University of Texas at Austin said to StateImpact Texas. “You have an air hockey table, suppose you tilt it, if there’s no air on, the puck will just sit there. Gravity wants it to move but it doesn’t because there friction [with the table surface].” But if you turn the air on for the air hockey table, the puck slips.

“Faults are the same,” he says. If you pump water in a fault, the fault can slip, causing an earthquake.

“Scientists in my community know that injection can sometimes cause earthquakes,” Frohlich says.

What’s crazy is that more people aren’t nervous that manmade earthquakes seem to plague heavily fracked areas leaving residents wondering what the heck is going on.

Related on EcoSalon:

Tis the Irony: Susan G. Komen Partners with Major Fracking Company

Fracking in Pennsylvania: A Visual

Major Victory in New York: Hydraulic Fracturing Banned

Image: Simon Fraser University

The post Hydraulic Fracturing to Blame for 11 Texas Earthquakes in 24 Hours appeared first on EcoSalon.

New York state’s environmental commissioner Joseph Martens said he will ban hydraulic fracturing in New York. The decision comes in response to a 5-year study done by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Martens says that the practice of high volume hydraulic fracturing will be prohibited.

“I will then issue a legally binding findings statement prohibiting (fracking) in New York state at this time,” Martens said at Governor Andrew Cuomo’s year-end cabinet meeting.

State health commissioner Howard Zucker gave a detailed presentation on why fracking was too risky for the state. Zucker said he would not allow his family to drink tap water in an area where there was fracking.

“The bottom line is we lack the comprehensive longitudinal studies, and these are either not yet complete or are yet to be initiated,” Zucker said, reported on Syracuse.com. “We don’t have the evidence to prove or disprove the health effects. But the cumulative concerns of what I’ve read gives me reason to pause.”

Zucker said that the study showed the harmful impacts of fracking and additionally, there were not enough longterm studies to know what would happen in the future. Martens named a variety of reasons for the ban including the potential pollution of groundwater and the release of methane and ozone.

Governor Cuomo said he would defer to Martens with regards to the decision though he expects lawsuits to be filed as a result of the prohibition.

According to the report:

“The overall weight of the evidence from the cumulative body of information contained in this Public Health Review demonstrates that there are significant uncertainties about the kinds of adverse health outcomes that may be associated with HVHF, the likelihood of the occurrence of adverse health outcomes, and the effectiveness of some of the
mitigation measures in reducing or preventing environmental impacts which could adversely affect public health,” Zucker wrote. “Until the science provides sufficient information to determine the level of risk to public health from HVHF to all New Yorkers and whether the risks can be adequately managed, DOH recommends that HVHF should not proceed in NYS.”

The long awaited study which led to the ban will be released at the end of December.

I’ve written before about the environmental concerns with fracking. For example, the chemicals used in fracking can be mixed with gas and released into the environment in the form of methane. Not to mention that the heavy duty equipment used to fracture wells may cause devastation to delicate eco-systems. Like in Oklahoma, for example, where 2,500 earthquakes are being blamed on fracking and the destruction of rock formations.

“I will be bound by what these experts say because I am not in a position to second guess them with my expertise,” Cuomo said. “I am not a scientist.”

So at least in the near future, New York state residents caught a break. No fracking in this great state.

Related on EcoSalon

An Aerial View of Hydraulic Fracturing

Tis the Irony: Susan G. Komen Partners With a Major Fracking Company

Fracking in Pennsylvania: A Visual

Image: CREDO.fracking

The post Major Victory in New York: Hydraulic Fracturing Banned appeared first on EcoSalon.

At first I thought this was some sort of a tardy April Fools spoof but in fact, it’s true. The breast cancer charity Susan G. Komen has entered into a year long partnership with fracking company Baker Hughes.

And get this: the company is selling 1,000 pink-painted drill bits as a “reminder of the importance of supporting research, treatment, screening, and education to help find a cure of the disease. They’re donating $100,000 to the charity.

Why are drill bits, hydraulic fracturing, and breast cancer awareness an odd combination? Let’s take a look at the irony: Some research has found links between cancer and the chemicals used in fracking. The chemicals injected into deep rock formations in order to allow gas reserves to migrate into wells, includes possible carcinogens like benzene, formaldehyde, sulfuric acid, and more.

According to Breast Cancer Action:

A 2011 study by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce identified over 700 chemicals used in fracking, including dozens of “chemicals of concern.” Of these chemicals, Benzene, Acrylamide, Ethylene Oxideiii, Bisphenol Aiv, and formaldehydev are well-known carcinogens with proven links to increased risk of breast cancer. Fracking also involves the use of endocrine disrupting chemicals such as lead and Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate that can lead to increased reproductive problems and breast cancer.

Strangely, Susan G. Komen’s website also includes a section entitled “Environmental Chemicals Are A Breast Cancer Risk”. However, a spokesperson at Susan G. Komen said that “the evidence to this point does not establish a connection between fracking and breast cancer.”

The response on the move has been, as expected, furious. According to Breast Cancer Action, “many people have wondered whether these pink drill bits are satire and whether The Onion came up with it. Unfortunately, no and no.” In fact, the fracking company even advertises their move under the tagline “Doing Our Bit for the Cure”.

Related on EcoSalon

Fracking in Pennsylvania: A Visual

An Aerial View of Hydraulic Fracturing

Exxon Diesel Joins Hydraulic Fracturing Lawsuit: But Not Why You Think

Image: tanakawho

The post ‘Tis the Irony: Susan G. Komen Partners with Major Fracking Company appeared first on EcoSalon.

More than 310,000 people flooded the streets of New York City at the People’s Climate March on Sunday, September 21st, 2014. Organizers had only predicted 100k, wildly underestimating the passion and wherewithal of hundreds of thousands of people from all over the planet. 

We marched. We chanted. We danced. We sang. And we demanded that world leaders take action on climate change as the United Nations Summit convenes this coming week. Ban-Ki Moon, the Secretary-General of the UN, marched in the People’s Climate March in a rare display of solidarity. Many other celebrities and leaders were there — but that’s not what matters most. What matters is what we do next.

The phrase I heard most often when I asked why people were marching was, “I’m marching for my children.” The science is settled, and the consensus among Americans is that change must happen now — or else the next generations will be forced to move away from the coasts, doomed to constant resource wars, droughts, ever worsening wildfires, superstorms, food shortages, and much worse. Yet our media continues to report on ISIS as if it’s the only existential threat we face — as if climate isn’t in acute crisis. My favorite sign today read: “Your grandchildren are more likely to die from climate change than terrorism.”

Before the march, there was talk that the most influential environmental organizations, some aligned with corporate agendas, had usurped the mission of the People’s Climate March — making it less about people power and more about political and corporate power. Yes, these organizations were there, but they didn’t take up all the air in the proverbial room. The people spoke, the people connected with one another — and if our leaders do not listen to us — the people will build change from the grassroots. Big Oil knows how to manipulate our leaders with lobbying money, but we can outsmart them.

I marched with the fracktivist contingent — we sprawled for blocks. Frackstivists hail from all over the country — fighting poisoned, flammable water and a host of other illnesses that have been unleashed into their communities thanks to the natural gas industry. Fracktivists are now fighting to stop Liberty National Gas from building deepwater terminals off our coasts. One of these export facilities is proposed right off the coast of Long Island, threatening the lives of people in communities already ravaged by Hurricane Sandy. The brilliant activists behind Sane Energy Project just launched a groundbreaking interactive map linking all the areas that the natural gas industry has ravaged in New York (or will ravage if they get their way).

The People’s Climate March was massive — and massively inspirational. Yet there is much more work to be done. On Monday, September 22nd activists will convene to #FloodWallStreet in a direct action that addresses the raw truth of climate change — that Wall Street bankers and corporations are the real reason our seas are rising.

No matter how perfectly we live our lives — recycling, using the right light bulbs, wearing eco-friendly makeup and eating organic food — we cannot save the planet for our children unless we halt carbon consumption. Capitalism runs on unchecked carbon consumption, and unless we stop feeding that monster, there will be no real change. The People’s Climate March started the conversation — and we don’t have much time left to spread this particular truth.

I’ll be at the action on Wall Street — follow my updates @ecosexuality.

Stefanie Iris Weiss is the author of “Eco-Sex: Go Green Between the Sheets” and “Make Your Love Life Sustainable”  (Ten Speed Press/Crown Publishing, 2010) and eight other books. Stefanie keeps her carbon footprint small in New York City, where she writes about sustainability, sexuality, reproductive rights, dating and relationships, politics, fashion, beauty, and more for many publications.

 Related on EcoSalon

On the Front Lines of Global Climate Change and Women’s Rights

Obama Pursues ‘Politically Binding’ International Global Climate Change Agreement

Is it ‘Global Warming’ or is it ‘Climate Change’?

images via Stefanie Iris Weiss

The post Dispatch From The People’s Climate March: To Change Everything, It Takes Everyone appeared first on EcoSalon.

It’s called hydraulic fracturing or fracking for short and it consists of fracturing rocks with a pressurized liquid by injecting a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals into deep rock formations in order to allow gas reserves to migrate to a well.

As of 2013, at least 2 million gas wells in the U.S. had been fractured and these wells makeup 43 percent of oil and 67 percent of natural gas production in the U.S.

In the 1980s, environmental concerns emerged around ground water contamination caused by gas and fracturing chemicals making their way into deep aquifers. Recently two Stanford researchers, Dominic DiGuilio and Robert Jackson, discovered that fracking takes place dangerously close to aquifers thousands of miles below the surface. These aquifers have been categorized as safe for humans but what if they became contaminated with carcinogens and neurotoxic chemicals without us even knowing it?

Los Angeles Times reports:

DiGiulio and Jackson plotted the depths of fracked wells, as well as domestic drinking water wells in the Pavillion area. They found that companies used acid stimulation and hydraulic fracturing at depths of the deepest water wells near the Pavillion gas field, at 700 to 750 feet, far shallower than fracking was previously thought to occur in the area.

“It’s true that fracking often occurs miles below the surface,” said Jackson, professor of environment and energy at Stanford. “People don’t realize, though, that it’s sometimes happening less than a thousand feet underground in sources of drinking water.”

There’s also the concern that fracking chemicals injected into rocks will then mix with gas and once used may be released into the environment in the form of methane. Additionally, the heavy duty machinery used to fracture wells may cause destruction to eco-systems and landscapes. Like in Oklahoma, for example, where 2,500 earthquakes are being blamed on fracking and the destruction of rock formations.

What if these earthquakes happened in vulnerable places like the airport? Random, I know, but it could actually happen. Now Pittsburgh International Airport is diving into the fracking business. Consol Energy will set up right alongside the airport parking lot this month. The gas deposits are a mile directly below the airport. Is this the best place to be injecting and extracting volatile chemicals?

Related On EcoSalon

Exxon CEO Joins Hydraulic Fracturing Lawsuit

Greening Post Sandy New York

Beyond EVs? Two Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars That Are Even Better

Image: Mark

The post An Aerial View of Hydraulic Fracturing: From Mini Earthquakes to Airport Reserves appeared first on EcoSalon.

Apparently everything really is bigger in Texas, even the hypocrites: The head of the biggest natural gas producer in the U.S. is suing to keep hydraulic fracturing (fracking) out of his own backyard.

When we imagine anti-hydraulic fracturing activists, a well-suited executive from the fossil fuel industry almost never enters the picture. That’s why many are reeling after the Wall Street Journal broke the news that Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil, had joined his neighbors in a lawsuit designed to halt nearby hydraulic fracturing operations.

Before we get all excited and start pointing fingers, it’s important to examine the details. Tillerson’s move isn’t motivated by fears of what hydraulic fracturing will do to the air, water, and soil, as some reports have implied. It’s aimed instead at blocking construction of a water tower that’s necessary for fracking operations to continue (hydraulic fracturing requires a huge amount of water). Viewed in this light, Tillerson’s move is more of a strange showing of solidarity between residents of what I can only imagine is a very well-manicured neighborhood in Bartonville, Texas.

As the Wall Street Journal reports: “[Tillerson] and his neighbors had filed suit to block the tower, saying it is illegal and would create ‘a noise nuisance and traffic hazards,’ in part because it would provide water for use in hydraulic fracturing.”

“Tillerson’s attorney told the Journal he had no concerns about fracking-related traffic and rather was simply opposed to a water tower hovering over the 83-acre horse ranch he and wife Renda, a former competitive barrel jumper, share,” explains The Dallas Morning News.

So, a rich guy is more concerned about preserving his view than protecting his water supply–so what? Well for one thing it’s a direct contradiction of rhetoric the fossil fuel industry has forced down the throat of communities from Pennsylvania to California: hydraulic fracturing is harmless, non-disruptive and healthy for everyone.

Unless you’re a wealthy oil baron with lots of clout in your small Texas town. Then it becomes unsightly, a nuisance, and a threat to property values. Whether or not Tillerson says it out loud or not, at the very least hydraulic fracturing disturbs the peace–of the environment, wildlife, and anyone else who happens to be living nearby. No one should be forced to acquiesce these things to the fossil fuel industry just because there’s profit to be made. Whether you’re a stay-at-home-mom or the CEO of ExxonMobil.

Related on Ecosalon

Knocking The Wind Out of T. Boone Pickens

3 Trendy Brands Embracing Clean Energy in a Big Way

China’s Synthetic Natural Gas: Is It Really Clean Energy?

Images: Wikimedia Commons, rifuture

The post Exxon CEO Joins Hydraulic Fracturing Lawsuit, But Not Why You Think appeared first on EcoSalon.

The good, the bad, and the ugly. We take a look at how Obama spoke about the environment in the most recent State of the Union address.

It’s hard for me to watch the State of the Union address each year. On one hand, I feel like it’s a civic duty, to stay apprised of the plans elected leaders have for our country. On the other, I’m almost nauseated by the amount of “PR speak” and self-serving camera work. I’ve come to realize that while I want to take the State of the Union seriously, we have no guarantees that any part of this well-written speech will actually come to pass. Considering what was said in the 2014 State of the Union, that could be a blessing in disguise.

First, the good stuff. During the speech, President Obama reiterated what was made plain during the launch of his Climate Action Plan in June: “The debate is settled. Climate change is a fact,” Obama said. Those five words mark a turning point in our national discussion about the extreme weather and other changes that have been repeatedly linked to human carbon emissions and particulate pollution. Obama’s statement sends the message that America is finally ready to discuss not if but WHY climate change is accelerating, and what we can do about it.

The President also scored points with environmentalists by mentioning the need to reduce subsidies for the oil and gas industries, increased investment in solar energy, set new fuel efficiency standards for trucks, and limits on carbon pollution from power plants. Encouraging words, but still just words.

Then, Obama’s State of the Union took a decidedly un-environmental turn. Despite clear scientific evidence that the fracking boom threatens the health of thousands of Americans, putting our soil and drinking water in jeopardy, the President touted the role of natural gas as a job creator. He even proposed that we further prop up this industry by modifying the country’s fleet of medium- and heavy-duty trucks to run on natural gas.

“The all-of-the-above energy strategy I announced a few years ago is working, and today, America is closer to energy independence than we’ve been in decades,” he said.

Sorry, Mr. President, we’re not buying it. A few weeks ago, four states confirmed that natural gas fracking operations have directly contributed to water pollution in their communities. Just days ago The Rachel Maddow Show reported on a Texas town that’s begging the state to shut down fracking operations that have triggered multiple, devastating earthquakes.

And conveniently absent from the State of the Union address? Any mention of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline–a project Obama has admitted should be rejected if there’s any evidence the project would contribute to air pollution and climate change (which, you know, there is).

So while the State of the Union held many hopeful spots, let’s not forget the contradictions. And as always, that actions speak louder than words.

Related on EcoSalon

Top Environmental News Stories That Ended Well in 2013

Drowning Islands: A Visual Account of the Effects of Climate Change

9 Clean Energy Infographics That Prove Solar and Wind are the Future

Image: Whitehouse.gov

The post Obama’s State of the Union: Climate Change and Contradictions appeared first on EcoSalon.

Want a concrete plant to stop global warming? Just ask Daryl Hannah.

Actress and outspoken environmentalist, Daryl Hannah, recently weighed in on the Wall Street Journal’s blog The Experts in response to the question: “What – if anything – should we do about [global warming]?”

The actress laid out five areas of focus. First up is safeguarding our food and water supply through efficient management and conservation.

Hannah then said that extreme forms of fossil fuel extraction, such as fracking and deep-water drilling, need to be phased out as quickly as possible.

We must also immediately lessen our dependence on fossil fuels, while investing in a combination of decentralized renewable energy.

Hannah urges us to rebuild our soil through regenerative organic farming practices. This can be accomplished through composting, biochar, brown coal, Mycorrhizal fungi, vermiculture and managed livestock.

“If food waste was a country, it would be the third biggest greenhouse-gas emitter behind the U.S. and China,” she said. Soil vitality can be restored, and methane can be reduced, by diverting organic waste away from landfills and livestock manure from ponds.

Hannah also pointed out that the aforementioned practices will do more than simply reduce carbon emissions:

“Maximizing regional self-sufficiency with these agricultural practices and energy production methods will strengthen local economies, make them more resilient, help prevent global conflict, and ease the sense of scarcity and the economic burden increasingly felt by the majority.”

Hannah concluded by saying, “While these changes might seem challenging, we do have the capacity—if we can only galvanize the will. Many communities have already begun implementing some of these solutions. But top-down change is also essential if we are to address the climate crisis with the speed and scale needed. For this to happen, citizens must insist on getting the influence of money out of politics and the legislative process.”

This article appears courtesy of Ecorazzi

Ecorazzi covers news and gossip on celebrities and notables in support of the environment and humanitarian causes. You can follow us on Twitterand Facebook.

Related on EcoSalon:

‘Gravity’ Director Alfonso Cuarón Is Yet Another Hollywood Vegetarian

Blue Whales & Earwax: What Can They Teach Us About Ocean Pollution?

2016 Olympics Hopes To Leave Sustainable Legacy

Image: RavenU

The post Daryl Hannah’s Top 5 Ways To Stop Global Warming appeared first on EcoSalon.