The framework keeps shifting

Posted 1/24/12

An idea that would have been unthinkable four years ago has been gaining public traction. It is the idea that maybe hydrofracking for natural gas should be banned entirely—and not just in a single …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

The framework keeps shifting

Posted

An idea that would have been unthinkable four years ago has been gaining public traction. It is the idea that maybe hydrofracking for natural gas should be banned entirely—and not just in a single municipality, but in an entire state.

We have several times on this page discussed the concept of the Overton window, a framework that helps activists who want to influence public policy to map out their game plan. It consists of a continuum of public evaluations of any given policy position ranging from “unthinkable” at one end to “popular” at the other. In between come gradations like “radical,” “acceptable” and “sensible.” The name of the game is to move the position you favor toward the “popular” end.

Back in 2009, we noted that a barrage of talk from grassroots organizations had succeeded in moving the idea of limiting gas drilling activity via increased regulation away from the “unthinkable” end of the spectrum toward “radical” and even “acceptable.” The idea of a complete ban on drilling at that time wasn’t even on the radar. But a number of recent news stories make it clear that Overton shifts on this issue are still occurring.

The first indicator is an article in The New York Times, dated January 9 and titled “Drilling Critics Face a Divide over the Goal of Their Fight.” The article reports that “the antifracking movement itself has become divided over what its goal should be: securing the nation’s toughest regulations, or winning an outright ban,” and notes: “Whatever the result, the split among the industry critics reflects how the opposition has exponentially hardened since fracking emerged as a statewide issue in 2008.”

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s recent statements on provisions in the New York State budget for oversight of hydrofracking are also of interest in this regard. “You would not be hiring staff to regulate hydrofracking unless you believed you were going ahead with hydrofracking, and we haven’t made that determination. So the budget won’t anticipate hydrofracking,” he said.

Admittedly, this is far from an endorsement of a drilling ban. But Cuomo is known as a canny political player, and one who may well have presidential ambitions. The fact that he refuses to commit himself to funding related to this activity over the coming year suggests that he believes that the portion of his constituency that opposes it may be more substantial than that which favors it.

There is one obvious reason, however, why the idea of banning hydrofracking faces an uphill battle. It is the assumption that has long lain over at the “popular” end of the Overton window, that siphoning every last drop of fossil fuel from the earth’s crust is humanity’s only viable energy option. But it’s high time that this idea were pushed across the window as well—toward the “unthinkable” end. A number of studies have been done indicating that if an all-out effort were made, the planet could derive the vast majority of its energy from renewable sources as soon as 20 years or so from now. Given the increasing evidence that climate change is indeed occurring—and is causing devastating weather patterns around the globe—as well as accumulating data on the negative health and ecological impacts of fossil-fuel related emissions, it’s hard to think of any reasons other than laziness and avarice to continue to focus our investments on such fuels.

The massive transformative effort required would even be good for jobs. There’s no better job engine than gearing up totally new industries, which would require hiring in research; retooling of plant and capital equipment; manufacturing of new products like wind turbines, solar panels and passive buildings; and retrofitting and installation. This kind of “moon shot” effort could be just what the doctor ordered, in fact, for the U.S. economy. We’re not going to get it with the current Congress—but this is an election year, so times could change.

We are not going to stop using fossil fuels tomorrow, and the idea of New York or any other state actually imposing an outright ban of hydrofracking must still be termed “radical.” But the conversation needs to keep shifting toward the idea that the damage done by extracting and burning fossil fuels must be phased out, and an all-out effort be made to replace them with sustainable, more environmentally benevolent options. If we fail to do so, the alternative in terms of human health, environmental damage, climate change and even the economy would be, well, unthinkable.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here