I have spent quite a bit of time researching the chemicals used in fracking and it seems like the only way to get any data in bulk form on fracking chemicals disclosures is from http://pivotupstreamgroup.com/D-FRAC.aspx (D-FRAC). I tried the Frac Focus site but it will only let you have info one well at a time... and there are just too many well frackings for this. Some of the chemicals used seem benign, like guar gum, but others are known to be very toxic to the environment.

Deborah and Kate acquitted themselves quite well in last night's debate, but missed opportunities to drive home some points that blow serious holes in the fracking proponents' lame arguments, the most oft repeated ones being that gas is cleaner than coal (questionable) and that gas and coal are cheaper than wind and solar. To her credit, Deborah did mention in both opening and closing comments that we need to make the energy industries pay for carbon emissions, but she did not elaborate, and I'm not sure that there aren't a lot of people out there who do not understand how having to pay for carbon emissions would level the playing field in the energy market for more sustainable sources.

There was also no mention of how current conventional sources of domestic natural gas (which do not involve fracking) are adequate presently to meet this county's demand for the fuel. That was a pretty big omission, in my mind, since it exposes the gas industry's boom as rush for profits, not a thoughtfully considered strategy for providing for our country's energy needs.