The CSI episode was over the top – par for the CSI course. Employees of a natural gas giant (ostensibly modeled after Halliburton) were killed after talking to a reporter about how fracking had poisoned their families. Then, instead of telling his story to the police, a nearby farmer dramatically blew himself up at gunpoint by throwing a match into his now flammable well after the water had killed his dear wife and beloved goats.

Yet drinking water is a serious topic, so the 60 Minutes episode featured an interview with Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon. Counterpoints were offered by the Sierra Club’s Michael Brune and residents of Pennsylvania and Texas whose water was poisoned by fracking. My favorite part was when Mr. McClendon said, “if you take away one thing from this interview” it should be that “you don’t want to drink frac fluid.” There are some things that just cannot be spun.

…But that doesn’t mean people won’t try. On Monday, Halliburton announced that it has developed a new “first-of-its-kind fracture fluid system comprised of materials sourced entirely from the food industry.”

Please examine their word choice: not “nontoxic chemicals,” just feedstocks based on materials associated with food that they seem to hope you will assume are edible. Not so. Also, note the position of the word “entirely” in that sentence; it sounds like they’re saying that every
chemical is food-based. Instead, all they’re saying is that an unspecified portion of the chemicals are, themselves, entirely food-based. I could tell you that my body is comprised of water that is entirely wet and metallic elements that are entirely metal, but I have other things in me as well – I am not the shape-shifting T-1000 from Terminator 2.

Halliburton’s carefully worded announcement is timely, and not just because of the CBS fracking lineup. After reports of flammable water and sickness near fracking sites around the country,
U.S. EPA began to investigate (a long overdue venture hampered by the Bush administration’s "Halliburton Loophole"). In September, the agency asked nine major fracking companies to disclose information about just what chemicals they are pumping through our groundwater supplies. Eight of the companies voluntarily cooperated.
Halliburton refused.

So earlier this month, the EPA subpoenaed Halliburton to disclose its fracking chemicals. In its recent press release, Halliburton also announced that it will launch a website with information about what
chemicals are used in “several typical wells” first in Pennsylvania and ultimately on a state-by-state basis.

That’s a nice start, but it’s not good enough. For one, there is no promise that toxic chemicals not used in a state’s “typical” well will be disclosed. And second, residents near fracking sites don’t care what pollutants are typically used in their state. They deserve to know exactly which toxins they need to look out for in their drinking water.

The Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act (which, as luck would have it, abbreviates to the FRAC Act) would require drillers to fully disclose their chemicals. This would
enable sensible regulation and, if possible, the safe deployment of this technology. Please use this EARTHWORKS tool to tell your senators and representative to support the FRAC Act now.

You can also sign this petition to tell Halliburton that their greenwashing actions are not good enough.

Source