In my opinion, the environmental and economic implications of fracking can be divided into pro’s and con’s. The pro’s are the economic aspects which are lower fuel prices, employment and domestic business growth. The negative aspects are all environmental and consist of high water consumption, the use and deterioration of the infrastructure, carbon footprint, voc’s (emission), water resources being contaminated and seismic events. The economic benefits of lower fuel prices means American’s have more disposable income to travel, to buy more manufactured goods or to spend on entertainment, this is all a boost to local economies. The oil and gas companies are able to employ more workers and its estimated “by the year 2035 these companies will …show more content…
A well can “use on average up to 6 million gallons of water plus chemicals and sand to keep the fissures open” each time a well is fracked. For states like California who are in a severe drought (that could be millions of gallons of water a year, depending on the number of wells in the state), that is water being wasted that could be used for agriculture or human consumption. If a well is located near a water supply like a river or underground well, the water can become contaminated like the spring on Jackie Shulkie’s property that began bubbling after nearby fracking started on her neighbor’s yard. In “How Fracking Affects You,” Josh Fox who produced the documentary “GasLand” showed a clip of a man who was able to light the water from his tap on fire, due to Benzene, a known carcinogen, in the water. Drinking water was exempted from the Clean Water Act by the Bush Administration in 2005. This means the energy companies do not have to apply for permits to inject chemicals into the wells they are fracking. Jackie Shulkie began suffering from headaches, nausea and skin rashes and she was diagnosed as having been exposed to hydrocarbons. As Jackie said, she lives out in the open in the country, and she never experienced any of these problems until fracking began on her neighbor’s …show more content…
The state of Texas has “estimated $2B in damage to the roads, not including the cost of maintaining the interstate and state highways” (Hashem, pg 172). The infrastructure is also the emergency personnel who may be called to scene of an industrial accident. It is also neighborhoods, schools and shopping centers. The movie “How Fracking Affects You,” states residential areas are becoming industrial areas because huge shale oil fields have been located under the suburbs in places like South Lake, Texas. Since no long term studies have been done on effects of drilling in urban areas, the extent of damage to the infrastructure is
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
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 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)
In recent years there has been a big issue on fracking in Oklahoma. This is an issue that only continues to get worse. The oil company, , by residents has been blamed for many of these earthquakes. Within the past month, there have been more and more issues. In Edmond Oklahoma, there was a big earthquake, which provoked residents to sue the company for $28 million in damages.
By fracking for natural gas and shifting from coal to natural gas power generation plants, we could benefit economically, save our environment, and save millions of gallons of
In the second article "Fracking Threatens Everyone" it is stated "Fracking remains a dangerous practice that poses a threat even if it is done correctly and is carefully monitored" so it seems that the author wants people to stop Fracking because it generates dangers. It is stated "sources of drinking water can be ruined and all different types of pollution can happen in a second" which poses a great threat to many places. For example, the pollution can enter streams and rivers and kill whatever is in it, and harm even more wildlife. It says "This makes fracking a gamble for communities and individuals who may be tempted by the large amounts of money being offered to those who allow their land to be used for fracking" and the author
The environment, in which fracturing sites are located, go from clean landscapes to factory wastelands. Bruce McKenzie Everett, a professor of international business at the Fletcher School, states that “There are air pollution problems and earthquakes from the deep-well injections of the wastewater into the gas-producing shale, as well as significant global warming emissions.” On a superficial level, this obviously shows that fracking aids the deterioration of the environment, but will also leave lasting effects on the land and the people residing in it; earthquakes do not make for safe surroundings and air pollution leads to external bodily irritations and possible respiratory disease -- these all contribute to the list of negative externalities. A primary dispute over the allowance of fracking is its water contamination. An article by Think Process states, “Scientists have found elevated levels of cancer-causing chemicals in the drinking water in North Texas’ Barnett Shale region — where a fracking boom has sprouted more than 20,000 oil and gas wells….
Despite, the human’s constant concerns about the impact of fracking on the environment, human health and other issues, it has been one of the most important innovations for the economy in Northeastern Pennsylvania over the last century. “It’s almost impossible to overestimate the importance of fracking to the natural gas industry and the nation”. The importance of fracking on the economy in Northeastern Pennsylvania is similar to everywhere else in the United States. However, ever since the discovery of this technology, Northeastern Pennsylvania in particular has transformed completely.
Our natural resources are at risk every time fracking occurs. Fracking needs to be banned since it is hurting our health and that it drains our natural and limited resources required for us to sustain life. Water is an essential to living and it is a need. Without it we would be dead from the dehydration. Fracking in this case can contaminate it to where we cannot drink it and if we do it can lead to death or a trip to the hospital:
Fracking is one of the best ways to get natural resources. “Fracking is a process of drilling down into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside” (Unknown). Adversaries of fracking will say that it is dangerous, use up our water supply, and poison our water supply, but that is not totally true, fracking will bring in more money, save money, and will make the air cleaner and safer. Fracking may seem unacceptable because of what people say about it, however, when they drill deep into the facts they will see that fracking is actually very beneficial. Fracking will bring in tons of money for all of the United States.
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.