Pros And Cons Of Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing, also known as fracking, is a form of collecting natural gas by driving a drill with a high pressure of water, sand and chemicals in through dense rock formations such as shale, tight sandstone or coal beds to rupture the rock and free gas. Fracking commenced in the late 1940’s drilling into the Earth to free oil and gas confined in bedrock. Over throughout the decades, the use of hydraulic fracturing to gather oil and gas around the world accumulated. Some people say hydraulic fracturing will beneficially affect people all around the US while others think hydraulic fracturing will defectively affect people all around the US. Hydraulic fracturing is dangerous to the environment, requires a vast amount of water, and the

An article titled List of Top 9 Pros and Cons of Fracking by Green Garage the ECO friendly blog mentions, “Each fracturing job would require 1 to 8 million gallons of water to complete. With much of the United States currently experiencing drought, this can mean bad news, especially when fracking is given more importance than the people who need the life-giving water. In a 2014 report, as much as 35 million gallons of freshwater were removed from nearby aquifers in Michigan to be used in just one frack well. It would not be long before fresh water sources are depleted and rivers and streams dry up.” This quote shows that each hydraulic fracturing procedure requires an enormous amount of water while the United States currently is in a drought and others are in need of this “life-giving water”. It also shows approximately 35 million gallons of freshwater was taken for one hydraulic fracturing project and it won’t be too long until freshwater sources begin to disappear due to the collection of water for fracking jobs. If hydraulic fracturing operations continue to use an extensive amount of freshwater, effects would most likely be long lasting droughts increasing in the United States, and since most of the freshwater had been used up for these procedures, it’ll be a challenge for the U.S. to provide what hydraulic fracturing jobs had taken and used. To conclude, obtaining

In a Yale Climate Connections article written by John Wihbey titled Pros and Cons of Fracking: 5 Key Issues, it states, “Increasing reliance on natural gas, rather than coal, is indisputably creating widespread public health benefits, as the burning of natural gas produces fewer harmful particles in the air. The major new supply of natural gas produced through fracking is displacing the burning of coal, which each year contributes to the early death of thousands of people. Coal made up about 50 percent of U.S. electricity generation in 2008, 37 percent by 2012; meanwhile, natural gas went from about 20 percent to about 30 percent during that same period. In particular, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions have been reduced dramatically. Fracking saves lives, and it saves them right now and not at some indiscernible date well into the future.” This quote conveys that gas from fracking has been an alternative source of fuel better than coal due to burning less damaging substances into the air which contributes to less early deaths to thousands of people and saves lives. Though fracking may be a better alternative to coal, having less dangerous chemicals, obtaining natural gas from fracking has non-beneficial effects that may lead to events coal cause too.