Pros And Cons Of Hydrofracking

1678 Words7 Pages

Why Hydrofracking Shouldn’t Be Our Main Source Of Energy Hydrofracking wells are drilled at a depth between 6,000 and 10,000 feet! It is where all the deepest and weirdest looking fishes in the seas live. But if you look at it in other ways, will the planet be injured because of how deep the wells are drilled, causing the seismic activity to increase? Basically, hydrofracking is a technique in when large amounts of water, combined with smaller amounts of chemicals and sand, are pumped under high pressure into a drilled gas well. Later on, they suck back the water so that the pressure will be released, then the gas will leak out of the cracks of the stone wall and be absorbed back into the pipes. (Dong, n.d.) I believe that hydrofracking wouldn’t be a reliable source of energy for a carbon-free world because our environment will keep getting worse due to pollution, it’s also really costly to build the gas well for hydrofracking. Also, it adds danger to the people who works in hydrofracking fields. The world is changing now. The climate around the world is rising due to all the greenhouse gasses that have been produced by generating electricity. 35% of the energy we use now is petroleum, 20% natural gasses, and 18% with …show more content…

They think that less CO2 would be produced compared to coal, which is also a big energy source we rely on now. The thing is they might be right, but not all right. If you look at one coal burning site and one fracking site with only one fracking machine, then that would be true, a lot less CO2 would be produced. But, the amount of energy that comes out of the hydrofracking site is a lot lesser compared to the coal burning site. For a hydrofracking site to work, you will need more than 1 fracking machines to produce as much energy. Now, the amount of CO2 produced will be equal to the coal burning site, sometimes even more. (Pros Fracking,

Open Document