Ryan, you make a good point mentioning that fracking towns set up to mine the gas increase crime, illness, and stress on rural communities. This affects every country with fracking towns, regardless if it is a developing country or not. Stress is an important aspect related to health, and stress increase in the entire population of a fracking town will also increase the illnesses of these people. These illnesses can make the fracking workers decrease on their work efficiency, that can lead to very important mistakes that could harm other or result in mistakes that can contaminate the environment around the fracking towns. I know I sound very pessimistic, but under constant (even permanent) stress (plus illness) people tend to work less efficiently
Fracking the Good and The Bad In the essay, “Hope It’s in Your Backyard,” by Neil deMause, he wrote about the positive and negative factors of fracking and its effect on the world. The ramifications of fracking could be devastating to the earth with regards to natural gas and oil. It is debated that fracking, in the United States, would stimulate economic growth, lower gas prices, create more jobs, and make our country independent for oil and natural gas. The effects of burning fossil fuels is negative to the earth’s climate and the cause of some pollution. Natural gas is cheaper, but its effect on our ecosystem may be devastating.
Why is fracking dangerous? During the fracking process natural gases are realized into the well where they are drilling often contaminating the nearby groundwater with methane gases and chemical toxins. After the fracking process the waste fluid is evaporated releasing volatile organic compounds causes acid rain, contaminated air, and ozone at
There are two sides to every argument and hydrofracturing is no different. Phelim McAleer, an investigative journalist and producer of FrackNation, uses logic to convince viewers that fracking does not pose environmental concerns. Josh Fox however, employs a multitude of logical fallacies as well as arguments based on emotions in an attempt to convince the audience that fracturing is bad for the environment. McAleer created his film to refute this opinion. Ultimately, Phelim McAleer’s documentary made a better argument than Josh Fox’s documentary.
SUMMARY Journalist, Nick Stockton, in the article, “Fracking’s Problems Go Deeper Than Water Pollution,” published in June 2015, addresses the topic of hydraulic fracturing and argues that fracking has more negative consequences than one might think. Stockton supports his claim first by appealing emotionally through a short summary of a recent event involving fracking and also by utilizing evidence to back up his statements. The author’s overall purpose is to highlight outcomes of fracking in order to make more people aware of issues that can arise from this common way of obtaining energy. Stockton utilizes a scientific, yet critical tone in order to create an unbiased article and appeal to his audience’s concern for the well being of the
My general overview of this article is the methods used to obtain fossil fuels is hurting people and nature all around the world. People are beginning to come to a realization about how fracking is harming the world. However, people in cities like “Buffalo, New York, Pennsylvania, and the author’s hometown
Universally, fracking and the construction of pipelines consistently have a negative impact on
Have you ever thought that fracking should not be allowed and that it could be dangerous for all living creatures. Fracking is the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, boreholes, etc, so as to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas. The process can become dangerous to the environment and all species on the planet. Fracking can have negative effects on human health. Benzene and methane was found in groundwater and aquifers used for drinking water and benzene has been strongly linked with childhood leukemia.
Fracking is not a new think it was invent seventy years ago in 1947(“ Thanks To Fracking, Earthquake Hazards In Parts Of Oklahoma Now Comparable To”).For most of those years it has been loosely regulated because people were further worried about what was happening with the coal industry. The fracking fluid starts in a tank then it moves through a pipe into a sand truck. Then the mixture is moved into the blending truck.
Some people believe that the environment isn 't being harmed by everyday production, but one can argue that as people move closer to fracking industries, people become exposed to harmful gases and chemicals. Fracking a destructive force, is it safe, is it reasonable, is it right? As Chris Hedges explains in his article “Death By Fracking”, he says, “There are more than 15 million Americans, many of them children, who live within a mile of a fracking site. Most are being exposed daily to a deadly brew of toxins. Because the oil and gas industry is not required under law to disclose the chemicals used in
Proposition P================ Propostion P was advanced by an advocacy group known as the Santa Barbara Water Guardians, mainly to prohibit the usage of hydraulic fracturing (i.e fracking) within Santa Barbara, threatening its water supply. As such, Proposition P is absolutely essential, not only to ensuring the health of residents in Santa Barbara, but to ensuring long term social, economic, and environmental stability. Where opponents to Proposition P may tend to make arguments which solely favor the number of jobs in the community, or which perhaps presume the importance of the oil industry in Santa Barbara, over other concerns in the community, these other concerns need to be considered more fully in order to illustrate why support of Proposition P is absolutely essential.================
With the increased scale of fracking in Texas, one might wonder if the oil boom is affecting our water supply. The value of water in Texas is deeply cherished considering Texas’s dry climate and long-standing droughts. One may even wonder if Texas is valuing its water as much as it is its oil. As research furthers, we can begin to weigh the positive and negative effects of oil fracking. By providing overwhelming data on oil fracking
Fracking has helped the United States and other fracking nations reduce CO2 emissions since natural gas is one of the cleanest energy sources.
David Glazer AP Language and Composition Johnson 2/3/16 Analyzing “A Field Philosopher’s Guide To Fracking” In his book A Field Philosopher’s Guide to Fracking, Adam Briggle documents his journey to fight fracking in the small town of Denton, Texas. Recently hired as a professor of philosophy at the University of North Texas, Briggle moves to Denton never having heard of fracking before. Fracking is a type of drilling that increases oil production and effectiveness but, as Briggle would learn, has severe consequences on the community.
People complain about pollution from factories, cars, global warming, and the melting of polar ice caps, yet many people disregard the dangerous that come with fracking. Fracking is the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, and/or boreholes to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas. Fracking is causing an epidemic economically and environmentally. Fracking is continuously destroying the earth day by day. From the endless fracking today’s economy is depleting.
What do you do when you run out of gas in your car? Will you stop using your car? or Will you go to the gas station and refill your tank? Natural gas that has been pumped up from fracking nearly fuels 40% of the U.S. energy consumption. Without fracking, the price of gas would have a drastic raise from $3.25 to $11 per gallon, so consumers would have to pay about $130 or more to refill their gas tank.