The use of hydraulic fracking has been around since the 1940’s to extract small batches of natural gas. It was not until 2003 that the fracking process started extracting large quantities of natural gas and oil. Today, there is major controversy over the idea that hydraulic fracturing may or may not be harmful to the earth. One side says it is safe to use hydraulic fracking, others state that it is dangerous to society. Many people believe fracking is harmful to the environment because it pollutes the air and water and can possibly inject harmful chemicals in the earth.
For many years scientists have studied the effects of hydraulic fracturing on water sources. With much controversy they say that hydraulic fracking is “subject to both federal
…show more content…
Oil companies construct “drilling wells with steel casings and cement barriers” to prevent the movement of gas and oil (“Not a Public Health Risk”). The steel is impermeable to the chemicals used in the fracking process. Cement barriers are a second layer of protection in case of human construction error and stop the chemicals from leaking if they were to ever leak. In an interview with Oil and Gas Attorney, Diana Dean, she was asked about the probability of the leakage of harmful chemicals like hydrochloric acid or methanol, she responded “ It is not likely but it is very possible due to human error in the building process of the wells” (Dean). The casings are assembled by man and have a ninety-nine percent success rate in preventing leaks. Although the majority of the wells are built successfully there is that one percent chance that a casing has not been put together properly. If both of the safety precautions are properly exercised it is almost impossible that there would be any harmful chemicals leaked into the …show more content…
Overtime-harmful chemicals leak into the surrounding soil and rocks (Squire 31). Though there is a ninety-nine percent chance that there are no leaks during fracking there is always the one percent chance that human error can cause leaks. Most of the time, that one-percent of error is caused by humans when the drill is assembled. When these chemicals leak they “can cause series damage to the surrounding ecosystems” (Squire 33). If hydrochloric acid were to leak into rivers or into soil it would essentially kill everything living near it. Preventing this is a major concern in protection our environment. Injecting chemicals in the earth can ultimately kill everything on
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
Fracking involves drilling a hole into the ground and injecting a combination of fluids and chemicals into the shale. The fracking fluid contains upwards of 600 different chemicals (David). The pressure of the fluid is what causes the shale to fracture, then releases natural gas. That fracking fluid is what is really dangerous, as this is what poses the biggest threat, since many of those chemicals are extremely dangerous and some are completely unknown by the public. After the fracking process is complete, the fracking water, known as flowback, which includes water, chemicals and additives, is either collected and transferred to holding-tanks or it is injected back into the ground for storage
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
This began to cause controversy when a veteran scientist whistleblower, Weston Wilson, called the study “scientifically unsound” (The Halliburton Loophole). Wilson encouraged the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a new study which did not involve the opinions of members of the hydrofracking industry so it would hopefully be non-biased (the Halliburton Loophole). While the integration of the hydrofracking industry into the Safe water Drinking Act appeared to be a good thing for regulating the industry, there is still a long way to go when it comes to actually controlling what is injected into the ground and its
Fracking one well can take millions of gallons of water, but it 's not just water. In the water there are chemicals, helping to break down the rock. According to the article, Fracking Fury, “ the fluids consist of millions of gallons of water, chemical additives, and proppants” (2 AT). Chemicals like benzene, toluene, and ethylbenzene are shot down into a well. The author claims that, “Critics are nervous the cocktail of fluids will leak”(2.3).
Fracking is a heated subject for debate because of its prospects and its many dangers. This debate not only applies to the federal government but to people in
Drilling in Alaska “ In reality drilling is the slowest, dirtiest, and most expensive way to solve our energy crisis”-Lois Capps. This quote explains how there different ways to solve our problems and drilling is not the right way to solve this. In addition to costing a lot of money, it would also destroy animal habitats.
The hospitals and clinics reported that over 1,000 documented cases of water contamination surround the areas of gas drilling involving sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water. The amount of water used in these processes and the amount of waste produced are also major issues. To start the oil fracking process, a massive amount of water is used. This means, a huge amount of water being transported to the fracking site, at significant environmental cost.
In Dimock Pennsylvania, Natural gas fracking caused a gas leak which caused many long term and short term impacts on the earth and town itself. Cleanup has been ongoing for over eight years, and it seems that the area may never return to its original condition. Even though it provides many jobs to unemployed people, natural gas fracking damages the environment, poses health problems, and damages manmade and natural infrastructures. According to Rafuse in “Don’t let extremists undermine fracking boom.” , “gas jobs have grown by 18 percent in the last five years, compared to just 4 percent for the rest of the economy.” Natural Gas fracking damages the environment in many ways, including contaminating water.
One of these groups that proclaim this has been the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. According to the Texas Tribune, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reported that there is “no evidence that hydraulic fracturing has led to widespread, systemic impacts on the nation’s drinking water” (Malewitz). This report was published to calm the public’s concern over the possibility of water contamination. Christi Craddick, chairwomen of the Texas Land Commission, states that, “Texans have known for sixty-plus years that hydraulic fracturing, when well regulated, is not only safe but critical to unleashing America’s true oil and gas production potential” (Malewitz). Critics of this finding still have problems with this publication due to unanswered questions.
In addition, there are more downsides to fracking than just water pollution, and that is the pollution of our environment. The condition of our environment is horrendous when fracking is conducted. To add on to that statement, fracking has caused natural gas leakage into the air, marred landscapes, and many more hazards to our environment. Fracking has already caused pollution to the air, and fracking companies have to remove trees, then that takes away more air from our environment. Trees are vital to Earth’s supply of oxygen, and these companies are just taking the air straight out of the lungs of the people.
Researchers have “requested data from Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, and Texas, all states heavily involved in the recent surge of oil and gas drilling, about complaints related to hydraulic fracking for oil and gas” for their research on fracking (Dechert). The research collected was shocking, over 2,000 complaints in Texas alone and several cases on well water contamination within the states mentioned in Decherd’s article. People need to be alerted about how real fracking is and the damages it is doing. These complaints and cases should be a wakeup call to the world and say that we should put it to a
For the citizens, “fracking will give them jobs so they can make money and support their families” (Rogowsky). Furthermore, with the addition of fracking “the United States can get about 1.8 trillion barrels of shale (“sedimentary rocks that have rich sources of petroleum and natural gas” (Rogowsky)) a year compared to Saudi
Therefore, fracking will not continue because of its bad reputation. Fracking companies should also list the chemicals used in fracking fluids so that the contamination in water can be reversed. Linda Dong from dangersoffracking.com clearly explains that the underground water that is contaminated is permanent damage. Without knowing the chemicals in fracking fluids, better alternatives to harmful chemicals cannot be found. However, the fracking fluid that is left underground damages the environment that we live in.