Introduction
Shale gas is a natural gas that is found deep in the earth’s crust. This type of natural gas usually forms in shale deposits and can be released with a drilling technique known as fracking. Shale gas has become the most important source of natural gas in the United States. Scientist and researchers have always known of shale gas, but none have had the technologies to reach it till now. In early 2000, shale gas compensated for one percent of the United States supply of natural gas resources, but by 2010, shale gas accounted for over twenty percent of the United States supply of natural gas.
Fossil fuels have many advantages, and are a good way to break the dependency on other countries for their natural resource supplies, but they also take the pressure off of non-renewable energy. Fossil fuels are quite adequate to run vehicles, electricity, and heat. Fossil fuels, like shale gas, are in abundance and not expensive, but with the world’s oil supply declining the price of natural gas is rising. While shale gas can help provide an endless supply of energy for America’s future the way of extracting the gas, fracking, poses a real threat to the environment and wildlife.
Counter Argument
There are those who support fracking as a means of extracting natural gas from shale deposits. They believe that fracking is a good thing and that it can have benefits on the environment. In their article Shale Gas: Fracking Great, The Economist suggest that the risks from fracking can be managed, “the risks from shale gas can be managed. Properly concreted well-shafts do not leak; regurgitants can be collected and made safe; preventing gas venting and flaring would limit methane emissions to acceptable levels” (Economist, 2012). Th...
... middle of paper ...
...rom other countries. The fact that fracking is so damaging to the environment should make one rethink the process they use. In order to reach gas deposits that far under the surface, one has to drill. The best way to do this would be to develop a type of drill that could be constructed without clearing land and could reach the depths required using green chemicals that are both safe and biodegradable, that way if there were a leak it would not harm the environment.
Works Cited
eferences
Allen, J. (2013) Shale gas: Harmful to the environment. National Geographic
Burnham S., Dodge L. (2012). Shale gas the future of America’s energy. American Journal
of Science and Industry.
The Economist (2012). Shale gas: Fracking great. The Economist Journal
Truong, A. (2012) Pros and cons of shale gas. American Journal of Science and Industry
The United States has an immense amount of proven natural gas reserves that could become a major source for the nation's energy future (1). The mining of the natural gas resources have become feasible and cheaper due to the advancement of hydraulic fracturing technologies which have increased the amount the extraction and enabled “greater access to gas in shale formations” (2). Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking of shale formations has positive benefits that includes economic growth and the natural gas extracted is cleaner than coal and oil, however it has caused serious environmental problems and possibly could be the cause of recent seismic activity in areas where fracking operations exist (3).
In today's global economy, energy is one of the most crucial and sought after commodities. Who supplies it and how much they supply determines how much influence they have over other countries as well as the global economy. This is why hydraulic fracturing is currently such an important and controversial topic in the United States. Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as "fracking" or hydrofracturing, is the process of using pressurized liquids to fracture rocks and release hydrocarbons such as shale gas, which burns more efficiently than coal. This booming process of energy production provides a much needed economic boost, creating jobs and providing gas energy for Americans. The efficiently burning shale gas reduces carbon emission from electricity production plants, reducing carbon footprints on the environment. However, the process of hydraulic fracturing uses millions of gallons of pressurized liquid, which contains toxic chemicals, and some of this water is left over undealt with. The air near fracking sites is often also polluted and unsafe for nearby community residents. Injecting millions of gallons of water laced with toxic chemicals into the rock thousands of feet deep can cause earthquakes, causing a safety hazards for all nearby areas. Hydraulic Fracturing makes rare natural gases easily attainable, boosting the economy and reducing carbon emissions. However, the negative side effects such as contaminated water and air, make hydraulic fracturing a process that may not be worth the benefits.
The United States relies on imports for about forty percent of its crude oil, which is the lowest rate of dependency since 1991 according to the U.S Energy Information Administration. Today our country is trying to keep on track in becoming less and less dependent. When it comes to the topic of the future ways the United States will get its fuel, most of us readily agree that the United States should become more independent by using natural gas that is already here on our land. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of the consequences drilling for natural gas brings. Whereas some are convinced drilling is safe, others maintain that it is actually in fact dangerous. Hydraulic fracturing or "fracking", the terms for drilling for natural gas, is dangerous to our public health and to the environment because of the water contamination it causes. Therefore, it is not something that should become a project for alternative fuel used by the United States.
“Hydraulic fracturing involves the use of water pressure to create fractures in rock that allow the oil and natural gas it contains to escape and flow out of a well (Energy From Shale).” Fracking has served to extract natural gas and oil where other methods would not be as successful but many environmentalists argue that fracking is affecting the environment and our drinking supply of water. Although fracking is still a controversial topic, it provides Americans jobs, increases the economy of the region, and the natural gas and oil are cleaner and more affordable source of energy. The EPA recognizes that natural gas and oil are an essential part to help our planet survive but do not want fracking to come at an expense to the public health of the citizens or to the environment.
Fracking is quickly becoming a debatable topic in our society today. The practice involves injecting fluid into the ground to fracture rock in order to release natural gas. It sounds like it would be a safe way to harness fuels in the earth’s surface, but it actually is a danger to our environment. Because of the dangers of fracking, what little fresh water remains on earth is being contaminated. It is also releasing toxins into the airs creating contaminated air and acid rain. Because of the many health and environmental dangers of fracking, it should be stopped immediately to help prevent more worldwide health issues down the road.
In the article “The End of Easy Everything” by Michael T. Klare he details the controversial process of how these unconventional sources of oil and gas are extracted. “To obtain gas in this manner, a powerful drill is used to reach a gas-bearing shale formation, often thousands of feet underground, and then turned sidewise to penetrate the shale layer in several directions. Then concrete is applied to the outer walls of the resulting channels, explosives are set off to penetrate the rock; then millions of gallons of water-usually laced with lubricants and toxic chemicals-are poured into the openings to fracture the stone and release the gas. The “frack” water is then pumped back up and stored on site or sent for disposal elsewhere, after which the gas is sucked out of the ground.” Although this process has only recently existed making fracking much more alluring in an article by Matt Egan “Oil Milestone: Fracking fuels half of U.S. Output” he details how the fracking revolution has taken place. “Innovation has made previously-expensive fracking much more efficient. High oil prices before and after the Great Recession lured tons of investment dollars fueling a technological revolution.” In addition the United States sits on massive shale reservoirs such as the Green River formation and the Marcellus
Natural gas burning plants have replaced many coal burning plants, which benefits the environment greatly. Also, as the United States continues to become a prominent exporter of natural gas, the price of natural gas has dropped by about 30%. This is why I believe it is important to strictly regulate fracking, as opposed to stopping the practice as a whole. If regulations were placed that called for the fracturing to take place exclusively within the layer of shale, the toxic fluids and the gas would not have access to pathways that would allow them to seep into neighboring aquifers or permeable bedrock. This would make groundwater contamination by hydraulic fracturing much more unlikely. Also if the companies that engaged in the technique were required to be more transparent and disclose the chemicals that they were using in their fluid, it would allow the public to have more power and discretion in regards to which companies they support. If a company was found to use toxic chemicals in their fluid, then pressure could be put on the company to change their fluid’s composition through boycotts or through political
Environmental and socioeconomic debate over an alternative method of extracting natural gas thousands of feet below the surface using horizontal drilling and hydraulic “fracking” has risen in last twenty years. Fracking is the technique of drilling deep wells under high pressure with sand, water and a variety of chemicals to crack open rocks to release natural gas (hydrogen carbons) and oil from shale or coal bed methane deposits. Townships in Colorado like Lafayette and Fort Collins, voted on a moratorium to ban fracking within city limits. Environmental organizations like the Clean Water Action and Sierra Club claim that that fracking causes environmental degradation, health issues and impacts negatively on communities and their infrastructure. Whereas organizations like the Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA), Halliburton and other oil and gas industry and construction groups, and some local, state and federal politicians, claim that fracking is a safe method of onshore drilling. By burning natural gas which is considered a clean fuel reduces the amount of greenhouse gases that coal does as well as lower carbon energy use in the future. Fracking decrease dependence on foreign oil and gas, improves ability to generate electricity and heat home cheaply. Fracking supports local economies and provides much needed jobs (energyfromshale.org).
The search for a good oil supply has been going on ever since cars first started to run on gasoline. Although while there are great ways to drill, there are extremely dangerous environmental hazards and risks to animals that come along with it. Fracking, many argue, is the best form of drilling that we have today. Fracking is the use of sand, water, and chemicals injected at high pressures to blast open shale rock and release the trapped gas inside. Still, many debate the use of fracking because while it provides jobs and helps the economy, fracking is awful for the environment because it uses many chemicals in the drilling process and it contaminates large supplies of drinking water.
Before one can see the devastating effects of fracking, one must first understand how fracking works. As previously stated, the main intent of hydro-fracking is to access and harvest natural gas that lies below the surface of the Earth. Having formed over 400 million years ago by the collision of tectonic plates (Marsa 3), the Marcellus Shale plays host to a gold mine of natural gas, which is currently at the center of the fracking debate in the Northeastern region of the United States. Unfortunately, access...
In regards to a lack of advancement, many people are concerned that due to how easily we can attain natural gas through fracking reaching difficult deposits, we will not look into a situation that proves harder-finding renewable and alternative energy resources. Rather than search for solar, geothermal, or wind energy perhaps, we will continue to pump harmful chemicals into the ground and cause global warming much more rapidly due to our excessive use of fossil and atmosphere-damaging fuels. Based on this point, it is no wonder that another con to fracking pertains to the conflict of air pollution. In regards to the prospect of seismic activity, based on the 2014 Annual Reviews of Environment and Resources paper, between 1967 and 2000, geologists observed a rate of 21 earthquakes level 3.0 Mw or greater in the central US per year. In 2001, when fracking was used to provide shale gas and other “unconventional” energy sources more frequently, the number increased to 100 earthquakes of that caliber, with 188 in 2011 alone. Supplemental research in Texas and Oklahoma also suggest that fracking can cause risky changes on seismic activity. Lastly, one of the greatest concerns with fracking- water pollution. The water that is pumped into the ground during fracking is filled with chemicals, and is not always properly
Although environmental extremists consider fracking as danger to the environment, it has done little to no harm. For one, the natural gas that is extracted burns
Fracking is a method of obtaining oil and natural gas from deep areas of the earth by mining very deep into the ground and injecting fluid into the ground at a high pressure in order to fracture the rock. When the rock is fractured, natural gas is released and harvested by large hydraulic fracturing rigs (Brooks, 2013). Though the process is an effective way of obtaining energy sources, it is a highly controversial topic so it is not massively used worldwide. Fracking works great and provides effective results but there is a diverse amount of downsides to the mining technique that have caused many people to take anti-fracking stances. The main argument against fracking is that it comes with environmental downsides, using immense amounts of water, infecting the earth with hazardous chemicals, and leaking methane into the atmosphere. Though many of the environmental downsides of fracking have been proven, the benefits of the energy source outweigh the downsides.
There are many problems with “The entire process of fracking – from drilling a well to transporting waste – endangers our water and the health of our communities” (“Fracking”). The process of fracking contaminates drinkable water and many other resources along with it. When rivers or lakes are contaminated it can lead to the extermination of wildlife in that certain area because they no longer are able to breathe due to the amount of chemicals and waste in their habitat. After an accident with a decent amount of exploding trucks, “Twenty-five families living nearby had to evacuate their homes, one person was injured, and toxic chemicals leaked into a nearby stream” (“Act On Fracking”). Companies involved with fracking should either move away from important resources when drilling or completely stop the operation as a whole.
In the U.S today, many oil companies are fracking, or drilling holes for oil, on our precious land. In the United States, the midwest is where most of the fracking is coming from. The fracking has made the diversity of the local wildlife slim. Many things can be done to improve the environment to help with fracking. Fracking causes our environment to change in bad ways, we have to help stop or lessen it.