Reid Short
7 January 2014
Ms. Cameron- AP 11
The Faults of Fracking
Hydraulic Fracturing is a process that sends pressurized liquid down to a target
depth to fracture rock and draws out liquids, such as natural gas. This process is used to
retrieve the gas from rock formations beneath the earth that were previously thought to be
unsuitable for gas production (Helman) (Rao). Fracking is now being implemented all
over the world. Many countries have turned to this method of extracting gas to lower
fuel costs and balance their trade deficits, but these countries, including the United States,
are allowing fracking to cause major damage to the environment. The water pollution,
and air pollution that are caused by fracking, and the law exemptions it has, are
inexcusable because of the damage and danger they cause to the environment.
The EPA has finally linked fracking and water pollution together. The fracking
process forces millions of gallons of water into the earth to fracture the rock, usually
shale, and releases natural gas. The water is filled with numerous chemicals that keep the
cracks in the rock open so that the natural gas can come out. Not all the solution can stay
down under the earth, or else there would still be high amounts of pressure underground
and the gas would not come out of the rock (Helman), so much of the water is pumped
back out of the earth and put into waste pits or shipped off in trucks. These waste pits are
simply ditches that have been dug cheaply and sometimes not even lined with plastic or
hard clay. The contaminates are allowed to seep into the ground and wreak havoc on our
water supplies as seen in the state of Wyoming. Thirty-three abandoned waste pits
leaked dangerous chemicals, such as the cancer causing benzene and 2-butoxyethanol,
into the groundwater. In 2008, the EPA found water contaminates that could be related
to fracking, and another EPA water sampling confirmed that relation. The EPA and other
federal health officials then warned residents not to drink the water for their own safety.
Homeowners were also cautioned to ventilate their homes because of the levels of
methane found in their water, which was enough to be lit on fire. Hydraulic fracturing
supporters have long said that geologic layers that they were drilling underneath would
be a sufficient barrier to protect groundwater from fracking fluids, and the EPA reports
also found that, “Those layers were not sufficient to provide a reliable barrier to
contaminants moving upward…” (Lustgarten and Kusnetz). Water pollution is a serious
issue and it takes a very long time to restore if polluted, especially when it is
underground. Water is a very valuable resource that we all need to survive. If fracking
has the possibility to poison us all, why should fracking be allowed?
Fracking also causes harmful air pollution. The EPA has concluded that they have
found toxic chemicals in the air around fracking sites. One of these toxic chemicals is
benzene, which has the potential to poison the groundwater. The EPA also states that
these chemicals could do harm to people living around the well. Chemicals that are
released, and are not connected to cancer, are linked to causing an array of health
problems, such as headaches, irritated eyes, sore throats, and breathing difficulty. A
Texas study revealed that air pollution in some places was five times the limit and visible
emissions were being given off from 296 of the 388 that were examined. Not only do
people have to be worried about the water they drink, but now also the air they breathe?
If we should not stop fracking for people in the vicinities of the wells, then who for? The
world? Fracking also releases 3.4 million tons of methane gas, the most potent greenhouse gas (20 times more potent than Carbon Dioxide), into the atmosphere. The
emissions from the wells combine with the heat and sunlight to form ozone, which is
helpful at much higher altitudes, but is harmful to life when it is close to the surface.
These emissions would be equivalent to 11 million automobiles driving around and is
cause for about 25% of the smog forming emissions (Polson and Efstathiou). This is a
major contributor to future global warming.
Well, what are the benefits of hydraulic fracturing? Fracking gives us another
hundred years’ supply of natural gas, but one hundred years of gas is nothing to the how
long the damage of fracking will last. Natural gas power plants also are “cleaner” than
coal power plants, and more efficient (Rao). But this is not an excuse for the irreparable
damage that it has already done. What about the people who are afraid to drink their
water because of the health risks? Those people who cannot turn on their faucets in fear
of blowing up their house? These people cannot just move away from the fracking either.
Their home values have dropped so severely that moving would be like giving away their
house, so they are trapped in an environment that is slowly killing them. Fracking not
only affects humans, but wildlife as well. Trout streams have been completely desolated
by the pollution, and exposure to open pits have killed birds and countless other wildlife
(Thompson). One of the saddest things about this whole ordeal is that fracking is exempt
from the laws to protect the environment as seen in The Safe Drinking Water and Clean
Water Act, The Clean Air Act, The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the
EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory. These laws ensure the quality of Americans’ drinking
water, regulate pollution runoff and air emissions, protect human and environmental
health from hazardous waste disposal, and require the gas companies to disclose what
exactly they are putting in the ground. Due to these regulations, fracking companies do
not have to worry about anything related to controlling the pollutants they create.
There are laws that could be put in place to help control the effects of fracking.
Although these laws could help control the effects of fracking, not allowing fracking at
all would be the only way to do it with no harm to the environment. A start could be
making fracking comply with all of the laws that were aforementioned. Also, since
fracking is being used within hundreds of feet of homes, there could be a law restricting
fracking from being within a certain distance of residential areas. Fracking could be
made a safer endeavor by adding more inspectors and ways to check on the safety of the
procedures that fracking uses. For example, there are less than ten inspectors for the
whole state of New York (Thompson). Fines could be steepened for having waste spills
and not complying with the law, and whistleblowers who report on these infringements
could be guaranteed job security and protection. Some areas should also be off limits to
fracking, with the cost of an accident being too high. For instance, an accident in the
New York City water supply could hurt nine million people (Thompson). This would be
a catastrophic event, like the one that happened when the Charleston, West Virginia
water was contaminated by chemicals, except it would be much, much larger. These are
the least we could do to help our safety and environment.
Each one of these reasons is a well placed argument to limit and regulate, if not
ban fracking. But together, these arguments provide overwhelming reason to not allow
fracking in the United States. The amount of damage to the environment with all the
poisoned water and air is ridiculous. The future that fracking seemingly secures, one
hundred years of natural gas, is too small, especially when compared with its negatives.
Fracking benefits are too small, and the consequences too large for it to be viewed as an
environmentally-friendly and ethical way to recover energy from the earth.
Works Cited
Helman, Christopher (23 January 2013). "Energy's Latest Battleground: Fracking For
Uranium". Forbes. Retrieved 11 August 2013.
Horwitt, Dusty, and Alex Formuzis. "Fracking Causes Seismic Instability and
Earthquakes." Fracking. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press,
2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "USGS: Recent Earthquakes 'Almost Certainly
Manmade'—Report Implicates Oil and Natural Gas Drilling." 2012. Opposing
Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
Jones, Nicola. "U.S. Investigates Safety of Natural Gas "Fracking": Scientific American."
U.S. Investigates Safety of Natural Gas "Fracking": Scientific American. Nature
Magazine, 12 May 2011. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
Lustgarten, Abrahm, and Nick Kusnetz. "Fracking Contaminates Drinking Water."
Fracking. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt.
from "Feds Link Gas Fracking to Drinking Water Pollution for the First Time."
www.propublica.org. 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
Polson, Jim, and Jim Efstathiou. "Fracking Pollutes the Air with Hazardous Chemicals."
Fracking. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt.
from "Fracking Wells' Air Emissions Pose Health Risks, Study Finds." 2012.
Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
"The Serious Risks of Fracking Outweigh Its Benefits." Fracking. Ed. Tamara
Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Protecting
Americans from the Risks of Fracking." 2012. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Web. 5 Dec. 2013.