This is really not a logical fallacy, it is a technique of misdirection that is based on the average person’s poor concept of large numbers.
A perfect example comes from the infamous John Locke Foundation in North Carolina, a think tank (pronounced “propaganda propagator”) almost entirely funded by ultraconservative libertarian Art Pope. Pope also funds the Civitas Institute, which advocates for conservative ideals. In many cases, Civitas Institute will propose policies, which are then supported by newspaper editorials from the (apparently) independent JLF. Quite a setup!
John Locke Foundation mouthpiece Jon Sanders published a “study” and associated news releases & editorials in 2014 supporting fracking in North Carolina:
Fracking Fluid Consists Almost Entirely of Water, Sand
Please email us if JLF has taken down the article from their site.
The premise of the study and the article is that concern about fracking fluids are overblown, because fracking fluid is 99% water and sand; and the remaining chemicals are one often found in household cleaners everyone has in their kitchen. Whew, what a relief! I guess we don’t have to worry about fracking after all!
Well, not so fast! Sanders is very careful in the article to ever mention the vast quantities of fluid that are used. His language is carefully crafted to direct attention to the innocent ingredients and away from the potentially harmful ingredients, which are then described benignly as chemicals that are common in household cleaning products. The implication is that we are worried about a drop or two of Windex, who cares?
So how much fracking fluid is used in a well? It varies tremendously, depending on numerous factors, including the depth of the well and the nature of the shale deposit. But according to the US Geological Survey, the amount can range from a low of 1.5 million gallons to 15.8 million gallons per well, with the average in the range of 4 to 5 million gallons. See HERE.
Since the average tanker truck holds 9,000 gallons, a well using 4.5 million gallons would equate to 500 tanker truck loads of fluid. That would mean that the 1% of unidentified chemicals (which Sanders is working hard to divert our attention from) would be FIVE TANKER LOADS full, or 45,000 gallons of toxic chemicals. Or to put it another way: each of those 500 tanker trucks would contain a lot of water and sand diluting 90 gallons of toxic chemicals, The list of typical chemicals include petroleum distillates, methanol, formic acid, acetaldehyde, ethylene glycol, and a whole list of other chemicals that are classified as toxic, and in many cases, known carcinogens. Many of them represent a cancer risk at concentrations of less than one part in a million. See HERE.
So let’s rephrase Sanders’ argument in the opposite manner: Would you be comfortable with a fracking company injecting 45,000 gallons of toxic chemicals into your land somewhere near the well you use for drinking water? Suddenly not so innocuous. Both Sanders’ description and my description say exactly the same thing factually — with the emphasis and focus shifted. Technically, Sanders’ argument is correct and factual — but it is carefully crafted to deceive not to inform.
