Mexico City, August 16 2014

Dear Dr. Anthony Ingraffea,

First of all, of course, I would like to present myself. I am Carlos D. Garca, I am neither an engineer
nor a scientist. My PhD. is in philosophy, particularly in Ethics and human passions certainly a
very complicate marriage. This public missive addressed to you has therefore mostly an ethical
background; and is described as urgent for the reasons that will be evident at least I assume it
in that way- through the text.
In second place, this letter was sent to you because I consider that yours is one of the most
prudent voices about the so called fracking issue in the United States. With this I mean that I
have heard your speeches, conferences, read some of your articles, along with many other
detractors or positive opinions which I find either very passionate but poorly fundamented, or
openly tendentious towards certain interests. I do not find these two last characteristics in you
declarations. A second reason for this missive is the place from where you speak. You are probably
acquainted that in Mexico fracking the specific kind of fracking that represents nowadays a
problem- has just been approved. Most of the citizens who know about it maybe a 70 or 80 per
cent- are with good or partially good reasons against it. But this large number is in reality
unimportant. Even loud, our voices are mostly unheard. I may say that your position is in this
sense privileged. And according to your expressed concerns about this issue, I think that you have
to know what I am about to say and, if possible, speak about it (that is my central request).
I could see that the fracking problem (I will use just that name from now on, referring to the
unconventional gas extraction method) in the USA has a delicate equilibrium. In spite of the large
inconveniences of fracking, the affected people are presumably well payed, they actually vote
and decide whether they want this industry in their communities or not, there is a more or less
efficient government organism that makes inspections and evaluates risks, there is an important
debate about the subject. Maybe I miss some points, maybe I am misguided or mistaken about
others. But what I find important to say is that in Mexico none of this equilibrations will exist. I
am sure that greed within politicians and businessmen is not unique to my country. But I have to
sadly confess that the group that is in our government, despite their party or supposed political
tendency, is not a moral one. For decades the same people and their families have been in the
congress, in states government, as mayors, high level government bureaucracy, ministries, etc.
Many of them end being extremely rich businessmen thanks to illegal contracts and very evident
conflicts of interest. I am mentioning these, because a considerable number of those politicians
will be or are already associated with the oil companies. With this I mean that profit is and will be
the only rule. Even they are a lot more complicate, the new energy laws which were approved in
Mexico with a mayor popular rejection, consider that the lands with a fracking potential, even
owned by particulars or by a hole community, will be expropriated; the only option seems to
accept in good terms and receive a minor (maximum 5%) part of the profit, or accept in bad terms
and get evicted by the police. This will create that ideal scenario that you described, where the
whole area will be fracked. I am not sure about the size of the Mexican potentially frackable
land, but it is at least in the order of hundreds of thousand square kilometers. The human cost
with this first law variable will be immense, besides the already known consequences in the USA.
Farmers have already stated that they would not let this to happen, that they will defend their
lands even with violence; a violence obviously between the people and the police, soldiers or hired
security. If a local water source is polluted, it will be very difficult to replace it. Almost no one will
have money to bring it from somewhere else. Will the oil companies provide it? Due to the
conditions in the country, honestly I do not think so. I do not know your position about the
migratory problem; but the massive land expropriation will certainly increase it, just like drugs did.
The cartels literally emptied complete towns, would fracking have a similar effect by making
dwelling conditions equally unsafe?
But the most important possible consequence of these events when happening has to do with the
leaks of methane you mention; more transcendent because it will have global and not local or
regional affectations. Companies are ruled in essence by the criterion of profit, and the actual new
laws will virtually let them do whatever they need to do to reach this end. More important: many
of those not moral politicians mentioned are or will be very deep in the gas business. A few years
ago a coal mine, owned by the biggest mine company in Mexico, due to the lack of enough
security measures, had an explosion where 65 miners were killed. We actually ignore whether
they died in the explosion or later under the wreckage. There was no investigation, the bodies
were never rescued and the company was never officially responsible. Two weeks ago, this same
company threw by accident or that is the official version- 40 thousand square meters of sulfuric
acid into a drinking water river. An intentionally hidden event until the effects were perceived. The
punishment for the company was ridiculous, even the medium and long term effects have not
been investigated and maybe will never be. The list of similar events is horribly high, but these
two examples are important because this company will surely participate in the fracking gold
mine. Being politician or millionaire in Mexico means to be able to do everything (really, it is
incredible the quantity and nature of their corrupt actions) without punishment. With all this
narrative, I want to contextualize a point: if it is more profitable to increase the pollution of
methane, industrial water or whatever, they will surely take the profit. An extreme example: if
after making the math of loses and profits, fixing a leak costs one dollar more than leaving it, they
will take the dollar. The Mexican state does not have a real instrument for the ecological issues. As
in many other social problems we have, the citizens and our NGOs are the ones defending,
investigating, reporting, acting and solving the problems when possible. Formally nobody will
inspect the fracking. If a mayor accident occurs, is highly possible that no one will be made
responsible. But if a profitable mayor methane leak happens and no citizen sees it or is directly
affected by it, is very probable that the leak will continue. As you said, the possibility and quantity
of errors increases with the growth of any industry. I do not know how many kinds of mistakes or
intentional accidents are possible for this specific industry, nor how many of these will occur in
Mexico. But I do know that, here in Mexico, most of them will never be known, punished or
mended. And it will not be because of incompetent workers or engineers, but to the greed and
impunity of the owners.
Dr. Ingraffea, I was certainly worried for the Mexican people that will be surely affected by the
entrance of this technology in the country, but the worry of global damage due to methane is
surely greater; a worry that I know you also have and maybe even without regarding in which part
of the world it happens. I also know that all the arguments and data I gave you are full of
uncertainties, possibilities and hypotheses. In human phenomena there is never complete
certainty or absolute truths. But I can tell you that emotions have their own laws, and
sometimes these laws coincide with reasonable actions. For certain causes I cannot express now,
greed never does. It is something like the antithesis of reason; and the greed of a very few number
of people is unfortunately the loudest voice in this country. I would like to give you an equivalence
of incontrollable greed of Mexican millionaires, and increases of global temperature due to
methane, or years of acceptable weather we have to take off from the graph you presented. It
sounds absurd and is surely impossible to do, but it somehow occurs. These people really do not
care about anything but money, and if more or less controlled fracking is as dangerous for the
entire world as you said, doing it (especially) here in Mexico and (especially) with the described
conditions, will be especially dangerous.
Finally, I am also aware that your position about this problem is more local than global. At least
that you affirmed in one of your conferences. I understand it, the world is just too big and we are
too little. I also understand that speaking publicly so bad about a foreign government as I just have
done about my government is very inappropriate and rude. I am not asking you to do it. But
honestly, I think that a local struggle with a global enemy is like putting the thumb on half the exit
of a hose; it only augments the pressure on the unblocked area. We are not too little. None of us is
getting richer, not even better with gas extraction. We are most of humanity although separated,
and we all need our planet at least as half clean as it is today. This is, thus, a will of approaching
that separated even similar in ends humanity.
I appreciate your time and hope you can answer.
Best regards,

Carlos D. Garca.