DatasetAdded By LanguageFerret
Natural Gas Hydrofracking Terms Inference Matrix 17 – Anthony Ingraffea Cornell
I have been been meaning to post a demonstration dataset and with the significance and importance of the issues and points
Cornell Professor Anthony Ingraffea raises from his unique experience and perspective of the natural gas industry and
Hydrofracking operations pointing out it’s tremendous risks, dangers and overall negligible effect on the total United States
energy source picture is a perfect subject for it.
This substantial Excel spreadsheet “Inference matrix” chronicles and categorizes Internet references or web pages and
online .PDF documents with respect to Dr. Ingraffea displaying his “Internet footprint” just from his name alone and from
especially selected associated search terms (“Auxiliary terms”) in an attempt to specifically find references by the natural
gas industry refuting, challenging, debunking etc. Dr. Ingraffea. These terms also include two other geologic experts:
Dr. Terry Engelder also of Cornell and Dr. Gary Lash.
Dr. Ingraffea has several of his talks posted on YouTube and all you need do is simply search "Ingraffea’ and you should
find the majority of them. However, the best I presentation I found of his divided into three segments on the essentialdissent
To date the three segments are on the main page but if it is not I’m sure there will be readily identifiable links to it.
In an effort to be fair and equitable and somewhat unbiased although the overall tone, demeanor and purpose of these
Hydrofracking datasets is clearly opposed to it, Dr. Ingraffea states that only 10 percent yield of all the natural gas present
in the Marcellus Shale: 500+ trillion cubic feet (cfg); thus a mere 50 trillion cfg can be realized is blatantly incorrect. It is
much larger on the order of 50% and perhaps 60%.
But even with this substantial error, the basic premise that however much natural gas is in the Marcellus Shale and
however much will be extracted from it will certainly not supplant oil as the United States’ primary energy source or have
any near the significance that the natural gas industry and some legislators tout that it will.
Also, in spite of this error, from this dataset and several other “manual” Internet searches I’ve conducted, the natural gas
industry appears not to have taken notice of and/or seized on this opportunity to discredit Dr. Ingraffea and his major
overall concern: What to do with, and the safety of the billions and billions of gallons of Hydrofracking waste/flowback
water or “brine”.
I have my own questions that to date have gone completely unanswered. This is all explained in this free dataset in easy
to follow language with emphasis on documentation to who and when inquiries were made etc. For this dataset, there is
nothing to download; the dataset is essentially the overview or description itself. Just keep scrolling down:
That the overall effect of the highly touted potential of the Marcellus Shale being the foundation for the United States to become energy independent is so off base, and qualified scientists and engineers; let alone myself have not been adequately answered by the natural gas industry by some easy to follow numbers and statistics is an essential consideration.
The “Inference matrix” is a powerful reformat of the “base data” I generate from my app where from inference or extrapolation of currently up to 255 terms the user can make an unprecedentedly accurate determination if the given web page or online. PDF document warrants further scrutiny and examination.
The “terms” can be any combination of proper, place or company names, technical, medical or generic terms and/or just "regular words in any language or better put any language’s alphabet or character set that is represented on the Internet.
The idea is basic search terms are put through a search engine and then respectively for each of the each web page or online PDF document links (URLs) that are returned (i.e. search results), the HTML or text of the given web page/PDF doc is further searched for the presence of the up to 255 user names, terms and words just mentioned; the maximum number of columns in an Excel spreadsheet.
There are currently several free examples here on Infochimps.com that should give you a better idea of gist. These examples are the standard format where the web page URL/link is the “key” and the terms are associated with the web page.
The new format has the terms as the key and the URLs/links as the data. Thus, if you want to quickly see the Internet presence or “Internet footprint” of a Hydrofracking chemical that may be the root of your rare form of cancer you look down the column of the Excel file. If you quickly want to see other chemical names that may be on the same web page or .PDF doc, you look at the rows.
For those of you familiar with Microsoft Excel I want to remind you of and for those of you new to Excel I want to relate to you a nifty Excel feature that will enhance your viewing of these Hydrofracking Inference Matrices.
It is the “Freeze Frame” feature. The idea here is to freeze the first row of the spreadsheet which are located all the “Auxiliary” terms which are the headers for the columns containing the URLs/links that contain the given Auxiliary term.
Thus as you scroll down you don’t need to make time consuming notes what column is for what Auxiliary term or constantly return to row 1 for reference.
To implement the Freeze frame by an easy keyboard sequence first set set your Excel focus (cursor) to Cell B1. Now press [Alt][w] in combination as you press the [Shift] key to capitalize a letter. An Excel drop down menu should appear showing Freeze Panes with the F of Freeze underlined. Now merely press F. The case does not matter for the W or F.
There – The first row should be frozen as you scroll down the speadsheet. To undo just repeat the two step procedure.
As you probably know Hydrofracking abounds with controversy. The Inference Matrix is an unprecedented tool to get to the web pages
closest to or exactly in the ballpark of your interest.
The “Primary” search terms for this dataset are: Natural Gas Drilling Companies
The “Auxiliary” search terms for this dataset: those that are searches for their presence from each URL (web page, online .PDF document) returned from the search engine search results of the Primary terms are:
abnegate accurate agenda annual Anthony arbitrary assume assumed assumption ballpark baseless biased capricious careless challenge clueless conclude conclusion conclusion conclusions confute conjecture consumption contend contest contested contradict contradiction contraindicated contrary contravene Cornell counter critical criticize daily data debatable debate debateable debunk deny depth detail disagree disagreement dismiss dispel disprove dispute disputed downplay dubious energy Engelder engineering Environmental erroneous error evidence exaggerate exaggerated exaggerates expose fabrication fair faulty fear findings flawed fracturing fudge fudged Gary gas generalize generalizes gross grossly hasty hydraulic hydrofracking hypothetical ignorant ignore ignored ignores ignoring illogical inaccurate inattention inconsistent incorrect incorrectly independence industry information Ingraffea intentional intentionally interpretation interpreted invalid invalidate irresonsible lack Lash Marcellus mere meticulous misguided misinformed misstated mistake mistaken mongering monthly natural negate neglect neglected nonsense obfuscate oblivious obscure offbase opinion opinionated oppose overemphasize overstate overstated peer peers percent percentage personal projection prove proven purported quash question questionable reality realization realize rebut refute repudiate retract review rhetoric rhetorical ridiculous rumor shale shoddy significance significant skewed speculation squelch statistics study Terry theoretical unbiased uncertainty uncorroborated unfair uniformed unprepared unproven unqualified wells yearly yield