Amity and Prosperity: One Family and the Fracturing of America Pdfby Published 12 Jun 2018
|Amity and Prosperity: One Family and the Fracturing of America.pdf|
|Publisher||Farrar, Straus and Giroux|
Amity and Prosperity: One Family and the Fracturing of America Book Description
Amity and Prosperity: One Family and the Fracturing of America Book by "Eliza Griswold" gets rating 4.25 of 5 which means good grades. Carefully read the review and description below for reference. find also other interesting ebooks in the box below.
Prize-winning poet and journalist Eliza Griswold's Amity and Prosperity is an expose on how fracking shattered a rural Pennsylvania town, and how one lifelong resident brought the story into the national spotlight. This is an incredible true account of investigative journalism and a devastating indictment of energy politics in America.
Stacey Haney, a lifelong resident of Amity, Pennsylvania, is struggling to support her children when the fracking boom comes to town. Like most of her neighbors, she sees the energy companies' payments as a windfall. Soon trucks are rumbling down her unpaved road and a fenced-off fracking site rises on adjacent land. But her annoyance gives way to concern and then to fear as domestic animals and pets begin dying and mysterious illnesses strike her family--despite the companies' insistence that nothing is wrong.
Griswold masterfully chronicles Haney's transformation into an unlikely whistle-blower as she launches her own investigation into corporate wrongdoing. As she takes her case to court, Haney inadvertently reveals the complex rifts in her community and begins to reshape its attitudes toward outsiders, corporations, and the federal government. Amity and Prosperity uses her gripping and moving tale to show the true costs of our energy infrastructure and to illuminate the predicament of rural America in the twenty-first century.
"Amity and Prosperity: One Family and the Fracturing of America" Pdf Reviews
I enjoyed Eliza Griswold's reporting and writing, but I was deeply saddened by the story she tells in Amity and Prosperity. This is the story of how Big Business, elected politicians, armies of lawyers, and sometimes even the government agencies designed to protect the public from harm conspire to facilitate environmental rape and great harm to public health then aid & abet each other in avoiding culpability. It's also a depressing tale of some of the uglier aspects of human nature. As if the victims aren't injured enough, elements in their community subject them to blame, shaming, ostracism, and even physical attack. Listening to this audiobook, I couldn't help but feel embarrassed to be a member of the human race. Tavia Gilbert is a capable if unremarkable narrator.
If reading about or listening to accounts of grave injustice and the harm inflicted on others bothers you, you may want to skip this one. **Spoiler alert**: The conclusion of this tale was entirely unsatisfactory. The victims suffer and are only poorly compensated for their suffering, and the multiple offenders are richly rewarded.
This scientific and legal drama recounts the harrowing ordeal of several families suffering terribly from toxic chemicals leaching from storage pools of fracking waste into their drinking water and into the air in western Pennsylvania. New Yorker staff writer and journalist Eliza Griswold has excellent instincts for a story and she has honed her skills so that unwieldy real life is put into a clear timeline; we not only understand, we are desperate to learn the outcome.
It is nearly impossible to imagine this kind of deceit and coercion happening today in ‘sacrifice zones’ around the country. After all, it is written in Pennsylvania’s own constitution that
“The people have a right to clear air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and aesthetic values of the environment. Pennsylvania’s public natural resources are the common property of all the people, including generations yet to come. As trustee of these resources, the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit for all the people.”Residents who survived—many of their farm animals did not—had to leave their newly worthless property because the water was not fit to drink and the air was not fit to breathe. This is the story of how these families fought the state and federal agencies (EPA, DEP) charged with protecting them; Range Resources, the company responsible for the fracking work; the companies responsible for testing blood and water for chemical components causing the damage; their own neighbors; and the political leadership including the governor in Pennsylvania who instituted Act 13, giving zoning overrides to fracking companies.
When their lawyers, John Smith and his wife Kendra, finally argued a case about the pollution before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in October 2012, two years after they began researching the cases, the lawyers were afraid the conservative judge known to side frequently with Republican politicians would throw out the challenge to Act 13. [Pennsylvania is known today as the poster child for such severe political gerrymandering Republicans in state and national government far outweigh their Democratic challengers.] State governor Tom Corbett didn’t want “to send a negative message to job creators and families who depend on the energy industry.” Corbett was voted out in 2015.
Speaking of families who depend on the energy industry, the neighbors of these folks who had been so wrongly done by sometimes begrudged the families their lawsuits since it might lessen their opportunity to sell the rights to whatever gas or right-of-way lay beneath their own land. This is a horror story that is difficult to tear one’s eyes from.
“[Range Resources] tried to appeal to those who stood to make money with an unusual letter writing campaign. One mass mailing was addressed to a fictitious ‘Mr. and Mrs. Joe Schmo at 10 Cash-Strapped Lane.’ It urged residents to bring pressure on their local officials to allow companies wide latitude to drill where they needed to, or there’d be no gas, and ‘no gas means no royalties.’”The royalties, by the way, weren’t very impressive to someone who was going to lose their health, their livelihood, their land, their house, their way of life. This was farmland, so most of people discussed here in detail had barns, large animals, etc. This says nothing of the downstream pollution of the groundwater. People can drill on their own property, but not if it affects their neighbor.
Fracking waste is toxic, but much of the time so is what fracking dredges up from deep earth pockets holding Pleistocene-era bacteria and ocean salts. No one wants this waste. Range Resources paid Alan Shipman to truck away waste that didn’t fit in the holding ponds. Shipman was convicted in 2011 of mixing the fracking solutions with less lethal waste so technically it would fall under less stringent guidelines for placement and then he dumped it illegally into public waterways.
A few local public officials thought some of the difficulties lay in the corruption of government by money flowing from the gas companies to people in political office who thereafter tended to cater to those business interests. Even Obama changed his tune from “no fracking” during his campaign, to “gas is good” during his term. Some individuals argue that despite some pollution, gas extraction has made the U.S. practically energy independent, moving the U.S. from importing two-thirds of it’s oil needs to one-fifth. A degree of pollution here may prevent global ocean rise because gas is less carbon-emitting, etc, etc.
To all of this could be argued that the costs of gas are not adequately taken into account by companies operating by deceit. Have the companies pay the real costs and then go find investors. They will, and we will be protected. If gas is judged to be “just too expensive,” we may need to rethink the way we do business or the way we live.
One final note is a very short discussion Griswold adds about the Tragedy of the Commons. I’d never heard of this concept, so I quote her here at length:
“Economists describe the Tragedy of the Commons like this: cattle herders sharing a pasture will inevitably place the needs of their cows above the needs of others’, adding cow after cow and taking more than their share of the common grass. This ‘free rider’ takes advantage of the commons, and consumes it until it’s gone. This, the argument goes, is human nature, which sets individual gain over collective good. Traditionally, the Tragedy of the Commons has supported the case for individual property rights: since it’s impossible for people to act together to protect commonly held assets, we might as well carve up those assets and leave individuals to look after their own. But what if the commons did not need to end in tragedy? What if people were able to work out effective practices of sharing the commons and transmit those traditions to their descendants? Elinor Ostrom, a professor of political science at Indiana University, argued that the solution to the Tragedy of the Commons for the twenty-first century lies in common sense. Sharing has succeeded in the past and could succeed in the future. Ostrom was awarded the 2009 Nobel Prize in Economics for this work. She died in 2012.”This is a terrific, propulsive, horrifying, and important read you are not going to want to miss.
This is a good book I enjoyed reading. It reminded me in many ways of Jonathan Harr's very good book A Civil Action but it lacks the depth of Harr's book and I can't help compare the books and rate this one a star lower.
A very well written book . I learned a lot about fracking. Certainly not as harmless as we are led to believe. The author did not beat us over the head with "science." Some of course, but the main focus of the book was about the personal struggles of those involved with this ecological disaster.
I would recommend this book to others.
A blog post to come! There are a few spoilers in this review. ^^
The book is about how fracking business brought wealth into Amity with large scale consequences to the natural land. Few, poor families were affected adversely from the fracking. Most people were not affected, government thrived on its profits, and the small towns were aided financially to the fracking agreement.
The water, air, and ground became contaminated with all kinds of poisons. For the families living near the Yeager site, they were poisoned everyday!
Two courageous lawyers and few families band together to raise awareness of the risks of fracking. They file suit against the company. It was tough battle, which led to losing the lawsuit. They won in a way that spreaded awareness to surrounding states and countries! The company changed their methods in efficiently extracting the gas with minimal pollution.
This book is definitely worth the read!