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.
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.
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
Prior to watching Gasland 2 and Truthland, I am familiar with the term “fracking” but never took the time to look into it. After watching these two films, I realized how fracking is a controversial topic in the world of environmentalists. These two very different films explain how fracking is effecting the environment around us. Before explaining further into these films, we need to know what fracking really means. Fracking is “a process by which the rock is split so that natural gas can flow to the surface,” defined by Terry Engelder, a professor of geosciences at Penn State University.
Paul Galley an accomplished environmentalist enters the controversial debate about Hydrofracking in New York, with his article “Hydrofracking: A bad Bet for the Environment and the Economy” published in the Huffington Post on January 05, 2012. Galley states “Net-Net, fracking is simply bad bet” fracking poses serious risk to New Yorkers. Galley, president of Hudson Riverkeeper has worked for over twenty-five years to protect the environment and support local communities, as a non-profit, public official and educator. This piece continues his devotion to protection of the Hudson River, and the drinking water supply of New Yorkers. Galley effectively convinces his audience through his use of appeals to pathos and logos that hydrofracking will have negative impacts on New Yorkers.
The article Gasland Debunked and the documentary “Gasland” discuss the very controversial topic of “fracking.” According to the beliefs of Josh Fox, fracking is extremely dangerous to the environment and the Earth’s groundwater supply. Contrary to this, the article Gasland Debunking claims that Fox is trying to portray untrue words as facts. In the article Gasland Debunked, there are many pros to how the article was written.
Although we do not know the long term effects of fracking for natural gas just the short term effects can be seen. We may be jeopardizing our children’s future. It would be more prudent to understand all we can about fracking before it is expanded across the country. Many believe the short term ramifications of fracking is only the beginning of a devastating destruction of our
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
Fracking poses potential danger to all of the workers. For example fracking can cause small earthquakes that can be harmful. The earthquakes have not been a safety concern yet but if they get any bigger they can become a big concern. During fracking it takes several days, during those days it requires continuous monitoring to ensure the safety of the workers.
Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, states that, “The EPA’s water quality study confirms what millions of Americans already know—that dirty oil and gas fracking contaminates drinking water” and that “the EPA chose to leave many critical questions unanswered” (Malewitz). It is critical that the EPA works with the general public to answer every question so that we can begin to work together to understand the complexity of this
A local community Board of Supervisors has been approached by a company wishing to use hydraulic fracturing in the county. Fracking is drilling into the Earth and injecting a high pressure water, sand, and chemical mixture to crack the shale and release the gases inside. Natural gases are trapped inside shale rock, and are becoming more and more important to U.S. and world economies. Its proponents advocate the economic benefits of more extensively accessible hydrocarbons. However, opponents argue that these are outweighed by the potential environmental impacts, which include risks of ground and surface water contamination, air and noise pollution, and potentially triggering earthquakes, along with the consequential hazards to public health and the environment.
Some people argue that natural gases are environmentally safer because they don 't emit as many harmful chemicals as similar oil products (Loris). However, these people don 't understand or have never been informed of the chemicals that are being forced into the ground water systems right below their very feet. New York is trying to implement new hydraulic fracturing regulations that would allow companies to drill an estimated 48,000 gas wells. Some people argue that New York will use these regulations to benefit both the environment and the economy. In reality, both will suffer if the hydraulic fracturing is used.
What is fracking? Fracking is the process of drilling into the ground and releasing a high-pressure water mixture into rocks in order to fracture them and release the natural gases inside. The water mixture consists of water, sand and chemicals. Fracking is beneficial because it lowers the prices of oil and gas, reduces America’s dependency on foreign oil, and reduces CO2 contribution.
These individuals are more than willing to risk oil spills, water pollution, reliance on fossil fuels, and higher unemployment rates. There are several environmental concerns that should be known. “If constructed, the pipeline, known as Keystone XL, will carry one of the world’s dirtiest fuels: tar sands oil. ”(1) It has been shown that the tar sand oil from this region of Canada is some of the dirtiest fuel on the planet; the extraction and refining process is just as dirty.
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.