520 ChaPter^10
larly China. The Obama administration continued to partner with Bowie
Resources to subsidize U.S. coal below market prices. With the support of
the federal government, Bowie gained access to cheap coal that it will sell to
China for considerable profit, despite the fact that it disrupts Colorado’s Delta
County and ultimately worsen climate change once China burns the com-
modity.
Hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking, became a major concern of
environmental activists during the Obama administration. Fracking involved
breaking ground by pressurized liquid to create small fractures in deep rock
to allow natural gas and petroleum to escape and eventually be turned into a
source of energy and a commodity, and demonstrated the continuation of the
federal government’s destruction of the natural world for profit. Private com-
panies continue to frack despite the negative side effects: pollution of ground
water and the air, contamination of land surfaces, the potential to trigger
earthquakes, and population disruption. In fact, certain types of fracking have
even been eliminated from the stipulations of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Private companies have gone to dramatic lengths to cover up the harmful
effects of fracking, and by law are not required to disclose the chemicals used
in their work. For example, the EQT Corporation attempted to buy the
approval of residents in the small town of Finleyville located outside of
Pittsburgh. EQT offered $50,000 in cash to residents who agreed to absolve
the drilling company of liability of health issues, property damage, noise pol-
lution, dust, smoke, fumes, air pollution, and vibrations that may or may not
cause earthquakes. Residents who refused to “sell out” are currently being
pushed out of their homes. Others reported that their houses shook vio-
lently; one pregnant woman was advised by her doctor to leave the area
immediately. In Oklahoma alone, the number of earthquakes soared to 2 daily,
22 in a week, 114 in a month, and 825 total in 2014. The Obama administra-
tion did not speak out on this particular situation.
As early as 1972, just as the “environmental era” began, economist Anthony
Downs predicted that the environmental movement would quickly die as a
public policy issue. He projected a path of rise and decline of environmental
politics: a high point of public alarm in the 1970s, subsequent policy solutions
to appease that surge in public concern, an initial decline in attention and
support for policy as the costs and difficulties in creating solutions became
apparent, a period of public boredom with the issue, and the ultimate dete-