ipl-logo

Cost Of Fracking

1016 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Fracking and its effects

What the Frack? :
The True Cost of Hydraulic Fracturing Hydraulic fracturing is a slot machine that pays out every time. With each quick pull of the lever, a million gallons of natural gas is dumped into the cash box. However, there’s a catch. That cute girl who has been serving drinks is secretly spiking everybody in the casino. By the time anyone notices, it is too late; they have been poisoned. In the modern world, natural gas is an essential source of energy. This allows for only the most practical forms of acquisition. Only two have survived the test of efficiency: fracking and flaring. Flaring is both more expensive and takes longer but does not harm the environment. Corporations have two options, destroying our planet should not be …show more content…

Water bugs and small fish become contaminated with chemicals from the liquid. The food chain is effected from the bottom up, so when the smallest food sources become compromised, all things above them are in risk as well. Humans and animals both are subject to the poison cocktail that is hydraulic fracturing. The gas corporations try to say that the benefits outweigh the consequences and that fracking is the only option. However, all that needs to be done is to stop pulling the lever and find a different machine. That machine exists in the form of …show more content…

After the process of fracking was “perfected” all gas companies hoping to stay competitive and make a profit were forced to move away from flaring. Unfortunately, trading an extreme profit margin for an increase in environmental awareness is nearly unheard of in the corporate world. To stop pulling the lever, when its repercussions will never be seen by the gas company, would show a complete lack of any of business sense. It also shows a complete lack of compassion. The benefits of fracking are short-term and the consequences long term. The shortsightedness of the gas corporations blinds them to the benefits of flaring. It is unacceptable that fracking operations continue to destroy this earth and its inhabitants. Greed must not get in the way of insuring the environment is preserved for the generations to come. The answer to this problem is simple; fracking must stop and flaring must take its

Show More
Related
600 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
1633 Words | 7 Pages

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.

Read More
385 Words | 2 Pages

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

Read More
116 Words | 1 Pages

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

Read More
225 Words | 1 Pages

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

Read More
1385 Words | 6 Pages

Though with those benefits, there are many risks including water contamination, air pollution, high methane emission, induced seismicity, and high worker injury or death. The effects fracking has on the environment and

Read More
1173 Words | 5 Pages

Nicolas D. Loris, who is an economist at the Heritage Foundation, claims fracking helps create new jobs “for geologists, engineers, rig workers, truck drivers, and pipe welders”—such as a plant located in Pennsylvania that will generate about 10,000 new jobs—and also helps create more business for hotels and restaurants (“Fracking is not a Public Health Risk,” Chemicals). Using this method of wastewater injections, says Loris, also generates over “600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas… [which] is enough heat to 15 million homes for one year” (“Fracking is not a Public Health Risk, Chemicals). He continues his argument by saying that, with the creation of new jobs, hydraulic fracking increases the U.S. economy and makes natural gas available for vital things such as food processing, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizers (“Fracking is not a Public Health Risk,”

Read More
721 Words | 3 Pages

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

Read More
537 Words | 3 Pages

This chemically contaminated water will then evaporate into our atmosphere. This would lead to a contaminated atmosphere and communities. In many local cases, nearby residents have experienced health issues due to the unsafe environments fracking

Read More
578 Words | 3 Pages

Some people believe that the environment isn 't being harmed by everyday production, but one can argue that as people move closer to fracking industries, people become exposed to harmful gases and chemicals. Fracking a destructive force, is it safe, is it reasonable, is it right? As Chris Hedges explains in his article “Death By Fracking”, he says, “There are more than 15 million Americans, many of them children, who live within a mile of a fracking site. Most are being exposed daily to a deadly brew of toxins. Because the oil and gas industry is not required under law to disclose the chemicals used in

Read More
343 Words | 2 Pages

Besides these benefits, I feel that fracking has too many adverse effects on the environment and communities that lives within the vicinity of fracking sites. I am very shocked by how our society embraces technology without thinking about its unintended impacts on our environment. We rarely focus on better and sustainable alternatives, particularly when developing energy. I am disappointed

Read More
340 Words | 2 Pages

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.

Read More
679 Words | 3 Pages

Fracking has a bad reputation of polluting the environment that we live in. The government should allow hydraulic fracking to continue only if fracking companies agree to the following. Transporting fuel from foreign countries require a lot of money, the government should spend the money on better things like paying people to work of public projects. David Morris, PhD, Vice President of the institute for Local Self-Reliance states that the expenditures for our transportation fleets are about hundreds of billions of dollars. Since hydraulic fracturing companies pump up more than enough natural gas from the shale rocks underground, the shift in demand for foreign supplies declines.

Read More
943 Words | 4 Pages

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:

Read More
792 Words | 4 Pages

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

Read More

More about Cost Of Fracking

Related Topics

Open Document