Abstract

Hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” is a relatively new method of energy extraction that makes it possible to use considerable amounts of shale gas that were hitherto unreachable. Although proponents of fracking voice their hopes for energy independence and an economic boost, fracking has been under discussion in several countries, its possible risks playing a key role when it comes to political decisions regarding the technology. This paper shall examine media discourses surrounding the usage of fracking with a specific regard to the risks that are constituted. Discourses in the UK, the US and Germany are compared, focusing on similarities and differences. These three countries are chosen since the political approach on fracking has been quite different, with the US being one of the first countries to use fracking. The corpora are analyzed with a focus on the depiction of conflictive issues in the framework of so-called agonality. The public perception of risks is shaped by their dominance in the media and the way they are phrased (e.g. as something to worry about), which means that differences in the depiction of risks between the corpora of these three countries are particularly noteworthy. Most readers will not be experts on fracking and thus rely on linguistic descriptions of the technology and its possible potentials and risks. Thus, it is important to analyze how language constitutes fracking. While all three corpora focus on risks concerning drinking water, there are major differences, e.g. when it comes to the discursive weight of earthquakes that might be caused by fracking. Although this is a risk that could affect all countries, only the UK press describes this as a serious risk. The paper also focuses on risks that are harder to grasp, e.g. threats to the traditional social structure of communities where fracking is practiced.

摘要

水力压裂或“水力压裂”是一种相对较新的能源提取方法，可以使用迄今为止无法获得的大量页岩气。尽管水力压裂法的支持者表达了他们对能源独立和经济增长的希望，但水力法压裂法已在多个国家进行了讨论，其可能的风险在有关该技术的政治决策中发挥着关键作用。本文将研究围绕水力压裂使用的媒体话语，并特别关注所构成的风险。比较英国、美国和德国的话语，重点是异同。之所以选择这三个国家，是因为水力压裂的政治方法截然不同，美国是最早使用水力压裂的国家之一。痛苦. 公众对风险的看法是由他们在媒体中的主导地位和他们的表述方式（例如，作为令人担忧的事情）塑造的，这意味着这三个国家的语料库之间的风险描述差异尤其值得注意。大多数读者不是水力压裂方面的专家，因此依赖于对该技术及其可能的潜力和风险的语言描述。因此，重要的是分析语言如何构成水力压裂法。虽然所有三个语料库都关注与饮用水有关的风险，但存在重大差异，例如在涉及水力压裂可能引起的地震的话语权重时。尽管这是一个可能影响所有国家的风险，但只有英国媒体将其描述为严重风险。该文件还侧重于难以掌握的风险，例如