Pros And Cons Of Hydraulic Fracking
While delving into the advantages and disadvantages of domestic natural oil and gas production I realized that hydraulic fracturing has proven itself to be a valuable asset to the United States economy. In “Fracking: Fix It or Forget It?” by Daniel E. Klein, Daniel shares with his readers that “in the last decade, shale development technologies have become technically and commercially feasible. Pairing horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing, “fracking” has revolutionized the oil and gas outlook as few other industries’ ever have done before. Increased domestic production of both oil and gas has led to enhanced energy security, reduced fuel imports, and improved balanced of payments for the United States.
FRACKING AND ITS CRITICISM Since the mid-80s, The First Nations and their leaders have raised numerous concerns about the failure of the government and industries in Canada to properly consult them before developing any of their lands. Fracking is a technique used in stimulating the fracturing of rocks through the use of pressurized liquid. The fluid used comprises of hot water, sand, and proppants that are thickened using appropriate agents. The fluid enters the deep-rock and makes it possible to have natural gas, petroleum and brine flow up. If the pressure is removed, the grains in the proppants are capable of keeping the fractures while open.
Some might ask why Hydrofracking is positive. Well there can be many reasons. People only hear the negative effects of fracking because when people want something changed they usually tend to leave the positive part out. New York has recently been head of a massive debate among the people and the energy companies. The technology used in hydrofracking is very advanced and has the potential to drastically reduce our reliance on foreign fuel imports.
"Hydraulic fracturing, the process of extracting oil or gas by forcing fluids into the ground to fracture shale rocks, at the Eagle Ford Shale Play has produced more oil and natural gas but at the cost of environmental hazards and affect human health. The part of the process that creates the environmental hazards is the fracking fluids that are forced into the ground. For each fracking job, these fluids are comprised of 1 to 8 million gallons of water and 40,000 gallons of chemicals. Some of the 600 chemical carcinogens and toxins in the fracking fluids are lead, radium, uranium, mercury, methanol, hydrochloric acid, ethylene glycol, and formaldehyde. Once the fracking job is done, about 50 to 70 percent of fracking liquids are left in open
People from the local level should have the right to decide whether or not the community need such types of life-threatening industries. The local government should actively participate to the local people interacting about the advantages and disadvantages of establishing the fracking oil and gas industries in their locality. However, The nation needs the economic uplift it is very important to the state and nation that it should have the industrial development. Local government is important in the community to regulate the rules in a small group of society. According to an article published in CSC e-newsletter, Denton Texas is the first city to ban hydraulic fracking.
Keep in mind fracking has also caused earthquakes, pollution and health issues for humans, but in the early 1980s, there was so much natural gas that all gas prices were reduced. All of that natural gas came from hydraulic fracturing or fracking.
1. Even though fracking reduces carbon emissions, it is still harmful to the environment. For example: water pollution/contamination. There can be accidental seeping of the chemicals (possibly carcinogenic) and can contaminate groundwater around the site due to bad practice (this imposes harm to both the ecosystem and people 's health).
Fracking is a process that should be discontinued due to its various negative effects on the people who live within the proximity of the site by contaminating the water which causes issues of loss of drinking water, health problems and economic
Boom or Bust Just a few years ago Williston, North Dakota, was a quiet small town, with a population of around 12,000. Due to the oil prices and drilling, Williston is America’s biggest oil boom and had over 40,000 residents. The oil boom has caused many problems in North Dakota such as increasing the crime and social problems, housing and roads. There is a lot of wear and tear on the roads, because of the thousands of trucks that are hauling oil, water and other fracking components. According to the Department of Transportation, the state has invested $1.16 billion into the roads.
While the President Election is going on, there are many issues that are being asked to the candidates on how they plan to fix these issues. One of these issues that we are currently dealing with, is the environment, and Bernie Sanders is the candidate to actually plan to make a difference so that in the near future, we will no longer have to deal with these problems. Bernie Sanders strongly believes that the reason the environment is the way it is, is because of human activity. He stated, “If we do not act boldly the situation will only become much worse in years to come in terms of drought, floods, extreme storms and acidification of the oceans.” He plans on reducing the United States carbon emissions by forty percent over 1990 levels
In the U.S. hydraulic fracking has been a main source of energy during today’s times, it 's cheap effectiveness makes us think this . People should know how hydraulic fracturing is not as clean and amazing as we think it is. Hydraulic fracking cannot be a sustainable option for America. There are too many faults for it to be upheld in the long run and we cannot depend on it as our main resource of energy forever.
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….
Some people say fracking is harmful to the environment by damaging nature and by causing water pollution. Some claim that fracking is damaging nature and the landscape; however, there is actually a new technology that help reduce the amount of wells that have to be made. In addition, some people claim that fracking contaminates the groundwater, even though there is no scientific evidence that fracking contaminates groundwater. As a result the National Groundwater Association and the government agency which represents the states have found no evidence that fracking is ruining the drinking water. (No Evidence of Groundwater Contamination from Fracking)
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.
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:
More about Pros And Cons Of Hydraulic Fracking
The Pros And Cons Of Fracking
498 Words | 2 PagesFracking Criticism
1632 Words | 7 PagesWhy Hydrofracking Is Positive
148 Words | 1 PagesFracking Research Paper
491 Words | 2 PagesThe Pros And Cons Of Hydraulic Fracking
994 Words | 4 PagesHydraulic Fracking Benefits
162 Words | 1 PagesFracking Is Still Harmful To The Environment
49 Words | 1 PagesThe Pros And Cons Of Fracking
1778 Words | 8 PagesOil Boom In North Dakota
340 Words | 2 PagesThe Pros And Cons Of Fracking
1005 Words | 5 PagesFracking Pros And Cons
1051 Words | 5 PagesFracking Research Paper
1086 Words | 5 PagesFracking: Harmful To The Environment
181 Words | 1 PagesFracking Persuasive Essay
679 Words | 3 PagesFracking Persuasive Speech
943 Words | 4 Pages