The Pros And Cons Of Fracking

Hydraulic fracturing, also known as “fracking” is the process where natural gas is extracted from the layer of shale rock found deep in the earth’s crust. Fracking is a highly controversial topic. Controversy arises from debates tying fracking to contaminated drinking water, excessive amounts of water use, higher greenhouse-gas emissions, the use of carcinogens during the process. Few people that are educated on the topic will not choose a side, most will form a strong personal opinion swaying either for or in opposition to fracking. I believe that fracking is dangerous, not only for those living today, but also those that will have to endure the consequences of fracking in the future.

Robert Howarth, an ecologist, and Anthony Ingraffea, an

His argument is highly economical. He believes the economic stability value that fracking can provide compared to energy expenditure is important until renewable energy sources can be further explored. “Global warming aside, there is no compelling environmental reason to ban hydraulic fracturing” (pg 274). Engelder acknowledges the environmental risks that come with fracking, but argues that over time and by improved technologies, these risks will become obsolete. He suggests that fracking mimics a natural process. “The process happens naturally: high-pressure magma, water, petroleum and gases deep inside the Earth can crack rock, helping to drive plate tectonics, rock metamorphism and the recycling of carbon dioxide between the mantle and the atmosphere” (pg 275). Engelder also delves into the argument of the emissions of methane gas. He concludes that the methane argument is highly overrated since the majority of methane gas (96%), other gases, and oil has been previously released from their original form. He also argues that methane is a non-toxic gas that should not be fretted over. To counter the argument made by Howarth and Ingraffea detailing larger scale fracking compared to historical fracking, Engelder says that larger scale decreases the amount of wells needed and the amount of equipment, roads, and piping that are required of small-scale fracking. Water use and water

There are many places for an emotional argument to being with fracking, yet assessing the facts beyond emotional appeal provides a stable footprint for the beginning of a solid argument. I believe that fracking is dangerous and the industry does not have enough provisions put in place to ensure public and environmental safety. Water is at a shortage, therefore it is logical to conserve it as much as possible. Contamination of the water we do have is also a concern. This may be a huge factor in an emotional appeal argument against fracking. Methane release is also concerning. While methane gas is naturally occurring, it is also a highly potent greenhouse-gas (pg 272). Greenhouse-gas admissions cause concern for the collapse of the ozone layer of the Earth’s atmosphere and beyond, as my generation and previous generation have her ad noisome for years. As far as the Halliburton loophole is concerned, there are many things that are not readily revealed to us and are not mandated to be by law. It would not be wise to rely solely on what is easily exposed to you, as a consumer, conservationist, and a well-read human being. Using carcinogenic products, especially to inject into the Earth’s core does not sound like an environmentally responsible thing to do. I am an environmental steward and avoid using as many products as possible that are not environmentally friendly. There is only one Earth to share, and to