Thesis statement
The benefits of natural gas hydraulic fracking do not justify the adverse effects it causes through continuous earthquakes, pollution of the water table, or potential health hazards to human populations.
This subject is interesting to me because I work for a natural gas company. I have had many conversations with other employees regarding natural gas fracking, and most of them are biased to the views of the drilling companies which means they do not see any harm in it. There also used to be companies fracking for natural gas in Arkansas on the Fayetteville Shell. The number of small earthquakes did rise (3.0 or smaller), but there was nothing resulting in a large amount of devastation.
I would like to find out if there is a threat of larger earthquakes, how the water table is effected, and what are the health effects. I have heard drinking water can be effected when wasted water is not properly disposed of, and it leaks into the water table. The population is then subject to certain health risks. I am sure fracking causes small earthquakes, but find myself a bit skeptical about the possibility of something larger, as nothing has happened so far that can be contributed to the fracking process.
…show more content…
I am really neutral on the issue. I know there are benefits to fracking for natural gas. It is better for the climate than fossil fuels, and it is cheaper. What I do not know is the extent of the damages it can potentially cause. It is a relatively new practice, and enough time has not passed to cause justification or condemnation. I hope to find a definite answer, but my intuition is that my sentiments will err on the side of safety. I believe if you haven’t conducted enough study on something, especially that can harm the environment, then you should wait until any adverse effects can be ruled out or
deMause wrote, “Of the many troubling side effects of fracking-which run from the ground-water contamination to increased earthquake activity-one of the most worrisome is its impact on climate change” (549). The natural gas technique for extraction is the process of cracking open underground rock layers containing oil and gas deposits and blasting them open with a high pressure chemical slurry. The effects are negative causing water contamination with a possible impact on climate change because of the exploding
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
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
Another professional Shelly interviewed was Dr. Joseph Martin, a professor in Department of Civil, Architecture, and environmental engineer at Drexel University. Her question to the professor was “How is gas drilling compared to coal mining? What is the effect on the environment?” Dr. Martin stated, “The surface impact of this hydro fracking is phenomenally lower than anything you could do. As far as safety issues of natural gas drilling, they’re minimal.
Fracking has been shown to increase pollution in both the air and water surrounding fracking plants which are currently covering a wide area in the U.S. Hydraulic fracture can also lead to polluted ground and surface water (OccupyTheory 2014). Fracking releases benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and n-hexane into the air and can be negative for organisms including humans nearby to fracking plants. Disposing of the waste water improperly is also detrimental to the environment like the example given of the fish kill that happened in 2009. In addition to affecting species nearby and the atmosphere hydraulic fracturing is now being linked to more earthquakes. Fracking is thought to have caused the biggest earthquake in Ohio recorded in 2011.
Universally, fracking and the construction of pipelines consistently have a negative impact on
"Hydraulic fracturing, the process of extracting oil or gas by forcing fluids into the ground to fracture shale rocks, at the Eagle Ford Shale Play has produced more oil and natural gas but at the cost of environmental hazards and affect human health. The part of the process that creates the environmental hazards is the fracking fluids that are forced into the ground. For each fracking job, these fluids are comprised of 1 to 8 million gallons of water and 40,000 gallons of chemicals. Some of the 600 chemical carcinogens and toxins in the fracking fluids are lead, radium, uranium, mercury, methanol, hydrochloric acid, ethylene glycol, and formaldehyde. Once the fracking job is done, about 50 to 70 percent of fracking liquids are left in open
Creating fissures has caused earthquakes making countless potential health hazards associated with fracking. The International Energy agency have yet to overcome the problems of air pollution, the contamination of ground and surface waters, the risk of earthquakes, and the release of greenhouse gases that would produce a larger environmental footprint than conventional gas development. The evidence I have presented means that we need to quit fracking so that our planet will stay clean and beautiful without any
This affects the surrounding area by turning the area around into roadways for the transport trucks(Pros and Cons of Fracking), it disrupts the locals(Pros and Cons of Fracking), and the soil in the surrounding area is being tainted with chemicals(Potential Health and Environmental Effects of Hydrofracking in the Williston Basin,
Fracking is a method used to extract natural gas and should be continued because it is a viable source of energy, economically beneficial, and poses no threat towards groundwater. In the first place natural gas produced by fracking is a viable source of energy. Fracking is so effective that in “4 months of a good shale well will produce enough energy to power around 11,000 homes for those 4 months,” - (Sweet). An example of the energy from fracking is: “Domestic crude production increased from 5 million barrels a day to 7.3 million barrels a day.” - (Kashi)
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
It involves high-pressure injections of water and chemicals into rock formations, which in turn release natural gas (Thompson, “Hydraulic Fracturing Should Be Banned”). However, fracking can result in many negative outcomes. For instance, scientists who conducted the earthquake study for Geology discovered that not only did fracking cause the biggest earthquake in Oklahoma, but it also caused more earthquakes in states that hardly experienced any seismic activity (“Wastewater Injection Spurred Biggest Earthquake Yet, Says Study,” The Earth Institute Columbia University). In fact, quakes have hit so frequently in Oklahoma, that state and oil regulators decided to shut down five disposal wells due to the increasing number of earthquakes in a city named Cushing (“Oil Regulators Shut Down Two Disposal Wells After Earthquakes Near Cushing”, State Impact: NPR).
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
Using natural gas from fracking is a better and safer alternative than using coal because natural gas does not emit as much carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. The graphs presented on natfuel.com shows that the amount of carbon dioxide