Abstract
This study explores strategies in pro and anti-shale organizations’ discourse by combining the Discourse-Historical Approach (Wodak, 2001) with corpus linguistics. With the help of keyword lists, collocations, concordances, and key semantic domains, the representations of shale gas extraction, relevant actors and argumentation schemes in opposing discourses of the pro-shale Marcellus Shale Coalition and anti-shale Americans Against Fracking were analyzed. The findings of the study show that the advocates presented shale gas as a bonus for the crisis-struck American society while backgrounding its environmental impacts. The opponents, on the other hand, represented shale gas as a threat to the American ecosystem and public health through an alarming and scientific discourse. The empirical findings of this study add to a growing body of literature on discursive strategies employed by opposing camps of environmental controversies.
Highlights
1 Introduction Depletion of conventional energy resources, growing demand for energy, and advanced drilling technologies have led many energy companies to steer towards unconventional sources of fossil fuel like shale gas
It is claimed that shale gas with lower carbon emissions than coal means less pollution (Engelder, 2011)
6 Conclusion This study set out with the aim of finding discursive strategies adopted by two opposite groups to justify their standpoint in the fracturing controversy
Summary
Depletion of conventional energy resources, growing demand for energy, and advanced drilling technologies have led many energy companies to steer towards unconventional sources of fossil fuel like shale gas. The extraction process involves horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing which means drilling and injecting chemical solvent at high pressure into the hole to crack the rock formations so that trapped methane gas in the miniscule pores of shale deposits can be released (Finewood & Stroup, 2012). The extraction of shale gas is known as (hydraulic) fracturing, fracking, or fracing. The advocates claim that the extraction of domestic shale resources guarantees national security by ending reliance on energy imports and flourishes national economy by creating new jobs (Kay, 2011). It is claimed that shale gas with lower carbon emissions than coal means less pollution (Engelder, 2011). The opponents argue that fracturing causes irreversible damage to ecosystems with the excessive
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
