'Just report the science': How scientists frame their engagement in contested debates over fracking in the Barnett Shale

Unconventional natural gas exploration using hydraulic fracturing has spread rapidly from its “birthplace” in the Barnett Shale to shale plays across the globe, spurring polarized discussions about its environmental and social risks. These debates have engaged many stakeholders, including some individuals with natural and physical science backgrounds. This study presents results from semi-structured, in-depth interviews I conducted with these individuals, which demonstrate how they framed their engagement in these debates. I argue that the process of interacting in politicized debates over hydraulic fracturing impacted how these individuals constructed what it means to provide objective information to the public. In order to demonstrate objectivity, a number of these participants emphasized their role as problem solvers for, rather than opponents of, the oil and gas industry. Also, to provide balance against their critical evaluation of the environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing, several participants emphasized the (assumed) social benefits of energy exploration. Through exploring the “problems of method” faced by natural and physical scientists engaged in research on controversial energy topics, and their impacts for my own engagement as a qualitative social science researcher, I seek to contribute to our understanding of the challenges scientists face as they engage in energy research.