What do you think?
Rate this book
Groundswell: The Case for Fracking
From the bestselling author of Ethical Oil comes a provocative exploration of the shale gas rush. Levant explains what fracking is and explores what its enemies do not want you to know and why it has the potential to change our future.
In Groundswell, Ezra Levant examines the fracking revolution. Fracking (from "fracturing") involves injecting millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals into a well deep underground to fracture shale rock and release previously inaccessible reserves of oil and gas. The United States, Canada, North Africa, and the Middle East have vast reserves of shale gas and accessing it will mean a seismic shift in energy geopolitics. With natural gas in abundance, prices fall and the stranglehold by energy companies like Russia's Gazprom loosens. OPEC, environmentalists, and communities throughout North America are fighting hard to stop fracking, and Levant debunks their motivations and arguments, while arguing that fracking's benefits outweigh its costs, even environmentally. With Ethical Oil, Levant completely changed the debate surrounding Canada's oil sands. In this timely and controversial book he provides desperately needed perspective on a subject of growing global importance.
From the Hardcover edition.
274 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 4, 2012
2 people are currently reading
68 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
March 28, 2024
Ezra Levant’s “Groundswell” presents itself as a bastion of truth, but upon closer inspection, it reveals itself as a labyrinth of deceit and unsubstantiated claims. Levant’s work is not merely a collection of conspiracy theories; it’s a manifesto of misinformation and fear-mongering, designed to manipulate and mislead its audience.
From the outset, Levant employs a rhetorical sleight of hand, weaving together cherry-picked anecdotes and conjecture to construct a narrative that demonizes certain groups while exalting others. His narrative lacks nuance and depth, reducing complex geopolitical issues to simplistic binaries of good versus evil.
Throughout “Groundswell,” Levant shamelessly peddles conspiracy theories, presenting them as established facts without any credible evidence to support his claims. He relies heavily on innuendo and insinuation, hoping to create a sense of urgency and paranoia among his readers rather than engaging in genuine investigative journalism.
One of the most egregious aspects of “Groundswell” is Levant’s propensity to vilify marginalized communities and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. He scapegoats immigrants, refugees, and religious minorities, painting them as existential threats to Western civilization without providing any substantive evidence to support his assertions.
Moreover, Levant’s disdain for journalistic integrity is palpable throughout the book. He selectively omits crucial information that contradicts his narrative, manipulates quotes out of context, and disregards expert opinions that challenge his worldview. In doing so, he undermines the very principles of responsible journalism and erodes public trust in the media.
Beyond its factual inaccuracies and ethical lapses, “Groundswell” serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of echo chambers and confirmation bias. Levant preys on the fears and insecurities of his audience, feeding them a steady diet of sensationalism and conspiracy theories to keep them hooked and compliant.
In conclusion, “Groundswell” is a reprehensible piece of propaganda masquerading as a work of journalism. It not only fails to uphold the standards of integrity and accuracy expected of the media but actively undermines them for the sake of advancing a divisive and dangerous agenda. Readers would be wise to approach this book with skepticism and critical scrutiny, lest they fall victim to its manipulative tactics and falsehoods.
From the outset, Levant employs a rhetorical sleight of hand, weaving together cherry-picked anecdotes and conjecture to construct a narrative that demonizes certain groups while exalting others. His narrative lacks nuance and depth, reducing complex geopolitical issues to simplistic binaries of good versus evil.
Throughout “Groundswell,” Levant shamelessly peddles conspiracy theories, presenting them as established facts without any credible evidence to support his claims. He relies heavily on innuendo and insinuation, hoping to create a sense of urgency and paranoia among his readers rather than engaging in genuine investigative journalism.
One of the most egregious aspects of “Groundswell” is Levant’s propensity to vilify marginalized communities and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. He scapegoats immigrants, refugees, and religious minorities, painting them as existential threats to Western civilization without providing any substantive evidence to support his assertions.
Moreover, Levant’s disdain for journalistic integrity is palpable throughout the book. He selectively omits crucial information that contradicts his narrative, manipulates quotes out of context, and disregards expert opinions that challenge his worldview. In doing so, he undermines the very principles of responsible journalism and erodes public trust in the media.
Beyond its factual inaccuracies and ethical lapses, “Groundswell” serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of echo chambers and confirmation bias. Levant preys on the fears and insecurities of his audience, feeding them a steady diet of sensationalism and conspiracy theories to keep them hooked and compliant.
In conclusion, “Groundswell” is a reprehensible piece of propaganda masquerading as a work of journalism. It not only fails to uphold the standards of integrity and accuracy expected of the media but actively undermines them for the sake of advancing a divisive and dangerous agenda. Readers would be wise to approach this book with skepticism and critical scrutiny, lest they fall victim to its manipulative tactics and falsehoods.
June 4, 2024
Second time I have read this book and while not as good as the first time, it is a classic Ezra Levant book. Full of string arguments backed up by solid evidence. While I think that no one believes the FUD that came in the early days of fracking anymore, it is still good to remember that people actually thought fracking well thousands of feet below of the ground could contaminate ground water.
“But in 1947, the Standard Oil and Gas Corporation – Formerly JD Rockefeller’s Standard Oil of Indiana – tried out an experiment to increase the production of a 2,400-foot-deep gas well in Grant County, Kansas. A thousand gallons of gelled gasoline were injected into the well under hydraulic pressure, to create little cracks in the limestone half a mile underground, with the hope of releasing the gas that was trapped in the porous rock. The process was call Hydrafrac, and it was patented in 1949. The Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Company was given an exclusive license to use the process.”
“But it was not until fracking was combined with another technology, horizontal drilling, that the fracking revolution took off.”
“It was developed by a boarding engineer making incremental, practical improvements on existing drilling technology, a private businessman almost no one has ever heard of, named George Mitchell.”
“A natural gas plant replacing a coal plant can produce the same amount of electricity but with emissions that are just a third of the level of that coal plant.”
“And the amount of CO2 produced by all the natural gas burned for all reasons in the United States in 2011 – every molecule of gas burned in the world’s largest economy – amounted to approximately 1,200 megatons (million tons). That sight sound big, but to put that into perspective, the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere by entirely natural causes is 770,000 megatons, more that 600 times as much as US natural gas.”
“If there is a place somewhere in the world where an unusually high price exists for oil, it won’t be long before some shipping company takes the opportunity for some arbitrage and ships in some cheap oil to fill the demand.”
“Al Jazeera is the international media group owned by the Emir of Qatar, Sheik Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. Really, it is his royal messenger.”
“This is the reality for so many former Soviet colonies that once lived in the shadow of the hammer and sickle; they now live is the shadow of Gazprom’s fortress-like “candle”, forced to choose between independence from the Kremlin and affordable energy for their citizens and industry.”
“This is not just a theory, Gazprom and Russia are blatant about the use of Gazprom as a political instrument. Putin has categorized Gazprom as a “strategic company”, a pillar in his re-creation of Russian clout.”
“Not only have regulatory investigations everywhere across the United States found not a single drop of drinking water contaminated by fracking, but it in not actually physically possible for something like that to happen. Why? Because in not one single case does hydraulic fracking even come close to the water table.”
“It takes 750 times more water to develop the same amount of ethanol fuel energy as shale-gas energy. But, then, agriculture – which is here corn-based ethanol comes from – requires gargantuan volumes of water.”
“The flowback is actually preferred to fresh water anyway, he said, because with all the dissolved metals and mineral it brings back up, it is “heavier” and more effective when you are use it again for fracking shale.”
“But earthquakes below 3.0 on the Richter Scale are too gentle to be felt at the surface; that is why only scientists with specialized sensors can detect them.”
“There is no perfect energy source that comes without some impact on the environment and some risk.”
“Even the name “The Ukraine” literally means “The Frontier” of Russia.”
“Those jurisdictions that refuse to take advantage of fracking, the ones that pass up on the opportunity for secure, ample, and cheap energy inputs, won’t be seeing any ‘reshoring’ of industries lost to China.”
“Quebecers already tend to lean further to the left than most Canadians, and they take their cues more from Paris, when it comes to environmental attitudes, than from Ottawa or Toronto.”
“Quebecers live in a kind of linguistic bubble inside Canada. They are more likely to get their wider news coverage from France – The heartland of anti-fracking hysteria – than from Canada or the United States.”
“Even less politically put, New Brunswick is poor. It is the third-poorest province in Canada. Its per-capital GDP is 18 percent lower than the Canadian average. But compared with the energy-producing provinces, like Alberta or Saskatchewan, its GDP per person is more than 40 percent lower.”
“That is where we get the term “Luddite” from, a word we use as a joke to describe people who are slow adopters of modern technology.”
“Deep green activists don’t think there is any way we can be richer and healthier and happier, even with eco-friendly technology. They think that is fooling ourselves, and the sooner we come to accept it, the sooner we can start de-industrializing our economies and transitioning back to the kind of life people led before industrialization changed the world.”
“Nobody talks about peak oil much anymore. Not since technology – including fracking – has given the world more oil proven reserves than at any time in human history.”
“But in 1947, the Standard Oil and Gas Corporation – Formerly JD Rockefeller’s Standard Oil of Indiana – tried out an experiment to increase the production of a 2,400-foot-deep gas well in Grant County, Kansas. A thousand gallons of gelled gasoline were injected into the well under hydraulic pressure, to create little cracks in the limestone half a mile underground, with the hope of releasing the gas that was trapped in the porous rock. The process was call Hydrafrac, and it was patented in 1949. The Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Company was given an exclusive license to use the process.”
“But it was not until fracking was combined with another technology, horizontal drilling, that the fracking revolution took off.”
“It was developed by a boarding engineer making incremental, practical improvements on existing drilling technology, a private businessman almost no one has ever heard of, named George Mitchell.”
“A natural gas plant replacing a coal plant can produce the same amount of electricity but with emissions that are just a third of the level of that coal plant.”
“And the amount of CO2 produced by all the natural gas burned for all reasons in the United States in 2011 – every molecule of gas burned in the world’s largest economy – amounted to approximately 1,200 megatons (million tons). That sight sound big, but to put that into perspective, the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere by entirely natural causes is 770,000 megatons, more that 600 times as much as US natural gas.”
“If there is a place somewhere in the world where an unusually high price exists for oil, it won’t be long before some shipping company takes the opportunity for some arbitrage and ships in some cheap oil to fill the demand.”
“Al Jazeera is the international media group owned by the Emir of Qatar, Sheik Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. Really, it is his royal messenger.”
“This is the reality for so many former Soviet colonies that once lived in the shadow of the hammer and sickle; they now live is the shadow of Gazprom’s fortress-like “candle”, forced to choose between independence from the Kremlin and affordable energy for their citizens and industry.”
“This is not just a theory, Gazprom and Russia are blatant about the use of Gazprom as a political instrument. Putin has categorized Gazprom as a “strategic company”, a pillar in his re-creation of Russian clout.”
“Not only have regulatory investigations everywhere across the United States found not a single drop of drinking water contaminated by fracking, but it in not actually physically possible for something like that to happen. Why? Because in not one single case does hydraulic fracking even come close to the water table.”
“It takes 750 times more water to develop the same amount of ethanol fuel energy as shale-gas energy. But, then, agriculture – which is here corn-based ethanol comes from – requires gargantuan volumes of water.”
“The flowback is actually preferred to fresh water anyway, he said, because with all the dissolved metals and mineral it brings back up, it is “heavier” and more effective when you are use it again for fracking shale.”
“But earthquakes below 3.0 on the Richter Scale are too gentle to be felt at the surface; that is why only scientists with specialized sensors can detect them.”
“There is no perfect energy source that comes without some impact on the environment and some risk.”
“Even the name “The Ukraine” literally means “The Frontier” of Russia.”
“Those jurisdictions that refuse to take advantage of fracking, the ones that pass up on the opportunity for secure, ample, and cheap energy inputs, won’t be seeing any ‘reshoring’ of industries lost to China.”
“Quebecers already tend to lean further to the left than most Canadians, and they take their cues more from Paris, when it comes to environmental attitudes, than from Ottawa or Toronto.”
“Quebecers live in a kind of linguistic bubble inside Canada. They are more likely to get their wider news coverage from France – The heartland of anti-fracking hysteria – than from Canada or the United States.”
“Even less politically put, New Brunswick is poor. It is the third-poorest province in Canada. Its per-capital GDP is 18 percent lower than the Canadian average. But compared with the energy-producing provinces, like Alberta or Saskatchewan, its GDP per person is more than 40 percent lower.”
“That is where we get the term “Luddite” from, a word we use as a joke to describe people who are slow adopters of modern technology.”
“Deep green activists don’t think there is any way we can be richer and healthier and happier, even with eco-friendly technology. They think that is fooling ourselves, and the sooner we come to accept it, the sooner we can start de-industrializing our economies and transitioning back to the kind of life people led before industrialization changed the world.”
“Nobody talks about peak oil much anymore. Not since technology – including fracking – has given the world more oil proven reserves than at any time in human history.”
December 2, 2016
A very witty and astute review of a practice that will lead to a wholesale culture of western energy independence from the plains of Oklahoma to the Baltic shores of Lithuania.
Levant, who we all know as a professional rascal, spends the first half of the book explaining the geopolitical ramifications of relying on countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Russia for natural gas and how those countries are exploiting liberal democracies through maintaining strict LNG monopolies (see Gasprom) Levant then turns to debunking the leftist ignorance point by point, offering a mountain of scientific evidence and detailed profiles of the counties that could be effected by embracing energy independence.
Also a great field guide to seeing the histrionic lies and manipulation the left plays in the war of ideas - Levant reviews Josh Fox's 2010 film Gasland and deconstructs the downright fatuity and vogue drama applied therein.
All and all, a great way to win the next argument you have with conscientious , but ill-informed people.
5 Stars.
Levant, who we all know as a professional rascal, spends the first half of the book explaining the geopolitical ramifications of relying on countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Russia for natural gas and how those countries are exploiting liberal democracies through maintaining strict LNG monopolies (see Gasprom) Levant then turns to debunking the leftist ignorance point by point, offering a mountain of scientific evidence and detailed profiles of the counties that could be effected by embracing energy independence.
Also a great field guide to seeing the histrionic lies and manipulation the left plays in the war of ideas - Levant reviews Josh Fox's 2010 film Gasland and deconstructs the downright fatuity and vogue drama applied therein.
All and all, a great way to win the next argument you have with conscientious , but ill-informed people.
5 Stars.
November 28, 2014
If you know Ezra Levant then you can imagine the flavour of this book. He rants and raves, he plays loose with the truth, he lambastes environmentalists. He has a particular hate on for Russian company Gazprom. However, mixed in with all that are some quite interesting perspectives and factoids about shale gas (take them with a grain of salt though). He is quite influential in some political circles in Canada, so if you are interested in energy/environment policy in this country this book is worth a quick read.
December 11, 2014
Very interesting perspective in support of fracking. The book appears to be very well researched and am sure that the "anti" groups would rather suppress some of the details. The whole Russia thing is disturbing though. I tend to agree that it would certainly change the world economic map.
September 3, 2016
Before I read this book I wasn't a fan of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and I'm still not, but I will admit that Ezra Levant has laid out a succinct case for it that is food for thought.
September 13, 2014
Read this with Russell Gold's book called Boom. Both terrific books for the general reader about how natural gas will change the world.
October 1, 2014
Completely different than I expected. I finished it, even though I expected not to be able to (that is a good thing). Mr. Levant is an engaging writer; I may even read his other books eventually.
July 19, 2015
Levant's love letter to the USA.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews