Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Positives and negatives to fracking
Positives and negatives to fracking
Positives and negatives to fracking
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Positives and negatives to fracking
The Politics of Natural Gas Production In 2010, roughly 25 percent of the nation’s energy came from natural gas, a “fossil fuel” which American consumers and businesses heavily depend on for transport, light, and heat (Squire 6). As the U.S. population increases, so do the country’s energy needs. Political debate over how the U.S. can meet those needs has slowly simmered for several decades, escalating exponentially when the energy supply grows short. Disputes over just how clean natural gas is, as opposed to coal, dominate headlines and presidential campaigns alike. During the presidency of George W. Bush, a bill exempting oil and gas companies from federal environmental restrictions was passed, thus paving the way for natural gas companies to expand production across the nation utilizing a new drilling technology, enabling easier extraction of shale gas. The drilling process of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” has become synonymous with controversy. Why? Fracking involves injecting dangerously toxic chemicals, mixed with large quantities of water and sand, into wells at extremely high pressure, to release natural gas. Promoted by the natural gas industry as a cleaner, safer alternative to coal, the process of fracking has made shale gas plentiful, which sounds to some Americans as the best answer to their energy prayers. However, the negative consequences associated with the extraction of natural gas through fracking, including environmental hazards and threats to public health, far outweigh the benefits. Natural gas drilling can cause water contamination. In his Academy Award-nominated documentary Gasland, filmmaker Josh Fox conducted interviews with families in Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Wyoming whose drinking wat... ... middle of paper ... ...Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. Rao, Vikram. Shale Gas: The Promise and the Peril. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI, 2012. Print. "Researchers Taking a Look at Health Effects of 'Fracking.'." Nation's Health 42.2 (2012): 14. Academic Search Premier. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. Roth, Sammy. "Why Move Beyond Natural Gas." Sierra Club. Sierra Club, 15 Aug. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. Squire, Ann. Hydrofracking: The Process That Has Changed America's Energy Needs. New York: Scholastic, 2013. Print. United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Natural Science. Washington: Office of Atmospheric Programs, April 2010. Web. 27 Nov. 2013. Weeks, Jennifer. "Energy Policy." CQ Researcher 20 May 2011: 457-80. Web. 16 Nov. 2013. Wilber, Tom. Under the Surface: Fracking, Fortunes and the Fate of the Marcellus Shale. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2012. Print.
In the video “Fracking Hell: The Untold Story” by Link TV explains how natural gas has been a huge problem not only for the earth in general but for everyone and everything living in it. The video explains how North East of Pennsylvania is having difficulties to conserve a healthy environment and people. North East of Pennsylvania is the main sources to extract gas and send it throughout the United States for gasoline and so on. However, this action is wonderful for the cost of gas, but has a huge impact on the environment and the people living in Pennsylvania. A lot of people in this state are worried having health issues because everything is not usable is being thrown out to the rivers where they get their fresh water.
United States is known for their innovation towards alternative energy like solar power, wind power and nuclear power. However , these alternative energies are not completely beneficial towards the United States. For example, Hydrofracking; What is hydrofracking? Gas industries use hydrofracking to extract natural gases from shale ground in order to power Americans homes. When gas industries hydrofrack, they dig ten-thousand feet into the mantle of the earth and turn perpendicular to the t into shale layers with cement and steel casing to prevent leaks.
The documentary ‘Gasland” is a telling tale of the terrible consequences of natural gas mining in the US. The filmmaker, Josh Fox, travels around the country visiting different homes that are in very close proximity of natural gas drilling sites after receiving a $100,000 offer from a natural gas company to use his land as a drilling site . The film focuses on how the drilling sites not only leave ugly scars on the land, but also the horrendous health problems people get from drinking the contaminated groundwater.
One benefit of hydrofracking is that it creates job in the current economic slump that America is in. The increase of hydraulic fracturing in the United States directly benefits the citizens, with the number of employees i...
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).
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.
While methane is not a rare contaminant in drinking water wells, the fracking process seems to allow more methane to seep into the wells. A study headed by Duke University’s Robert B. Jackson, a professor of Environmental Sciences, shows that in Pennsylvania, drinking water wells within one kilometer of fracking sites contain nearly six times more methane than in wells farther away (Banerjee). Methane, no matter where it is contained, is flammable, thereby posing a risk for explosion, which is not good for homes. Reports show that a fracking site in Dimock, Pennsylvania caused methane to leak into a water well, where it detonated, leading to even further contamination of other water wells and homes (Henheffer 30). The domino effect presented here raises fear in critics of fracking, who seek only to stop the process from happen-
Fracking can cause harm to people, animals, and nature. When they drill into the ground they are pumping chemicals to extract the gas and oil, and this contaminates the water sources around it. “An editorial on gas extraction from the Marcellus Shale in the Post-Star, a newspaper in Glens Falls, New York, contends, “New York state simply can’t take the risk. There are plenty of places to find fuel. It’s not so easy to find a new water supply for 17 million people.”” (Hydrofracking
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.
Conflicting reports make it difficult to discern just how detrimental the practice is to the environment and people. What is known is that fracking uses phenomenal amounts of water, which is becoming a scarce resource in many parts of the country. There is no doubt that the fluid used in the fracking process contains chemicals, and when released into water supplies has negative effects on these sources. Injection of flowback materials into deep wells has been definitively linked to increased seismic activity. Damage to roads due to the high traffic of trucks shipping equipment and product is astronomical. Worldwide, four countries have outright banned the practice and others are waiting for more research to be done before they continue to allow it. A few states know the devastating side effects that come with the practice, and have banned hydraulic fracturing. While there is no doubt that fracking can produce resources that are used by Americans, there is a lot of doubt as to whether it is safe or not. Hopefully, the country will follow those that have banned the practice, and adopt other safer forms of energy
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...
environmental damage mounting, the practice of fracking has only quietly expanded and profited. This concealed expansion into the nation’s backyard has only
Numerous reports have been given on the dangerous affects of hydraulic fracturing. One such affect that has been noticed is that drinking water wells near the fracturing sites have been contaminated. During the hydro-fracking process, injected fluids that help to break and keep open the rock bed where the natural gas is kept, have “been known to travel three thousand feet from the well (Goldman).” This fluid could have the potential to enter and contaminate any water well for homes around hydraulic fracturing sites. This incident is one of the major problems that people want to figure out and know about before they allow a fracturing site by them. It has been the most feared outcome of having a fracking site nearby, and it is highly appropriate. One site in Wyoming had this happen, “…in August, EPA reported that eleven of thirty-nine drinking-water wells near a Wyoming hydraulic fracturing operation were contaminated with chemicals used in the fracturing process (Hobson EPA).” In Pennsylvania, another such case occurred, “There have already been severe pollution cases in Pennsylvania, mo...
...i. "Environmental Pathways Of Potential Impacts To Human Health From Oil And Gas Development In Northeast British Columbia, Canada." Environmental Reviews 20.2 (2012): 122-134. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.
"The Future of Hydropower." Macalester College: Private Liberal Arts College. Web. 03 Oct. 2011. .