Ethics Of Fracking

For the past twenty to thirty years, hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as fracking, has been the number one source of natural gas, oil, and energy in the United States. The process of fracking is that a well is built above the ground and then a drill digs several thousand feet deep into the ground to extract the oil and natural gas that is trapped inside of rock formations. Fracking is very controversial because of the cost of the process and the environmental “threats” that it poses. From methane emissions to earthquakes, fracking has been accused to be linked with several environmental issues. To prevent any environmental dangers, states place regulations and boundaries that energy companies have to follow in order to build a well and keep it up and running. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) also works with states to help regulate these wells. More importantly, fracking in the United States is very important and acts as a bridge to the future. While it may be argued that hydraulic fracturing is not beneficial to the economy and harmful to the environment, fracking in the United States should not be banned because fracking is not only imperative to the growth of jobs and the economy, but it also does not put the surrounding environment in danger.

“Fracking: the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, boreholes, etc., so as to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas”(Google). Ten years ago no one would have thought hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” would have caused such environmental harm; infecting public and private water systems, cutting down national parks, and causing extraneous health problems.

Fracking has become a highly controversial and publicized topic in recent years due to rising concerns into the potential benefits and consequences of using hydraulic fracturing to retrieve natural gas and oil reserves. With concerns over water pollution, mismanagement of toxic waste and irreversible environmental damage mounting, the practice of fracking has

Fracking is a complex political topic; nonetheless, fracking is showing a positive impact on the United States economy and leaving a harmful footprint behind the environment. In addition, consumers are experiencing a significant amount of savings due to the overwhelming supplies of oil; thus, the revolution in new technology is triggering an improper fracking system that contributes to airborne pollution and water contamination. Higher authorities should implement the concepts of sustainability and ethical views of large corporations and businesses to protect the consumer’s safety.

Therefore with resources becoming scarce humanity needs to extract the most from what the earth has. In fact from adding gasoline to your vehicle, to power plant facilities using natural gas instead of burning coal to power homes, to computes and cell phones, almost everything in our lives depend on an oil based product and fracking is the solution for the depletion of fossil fuels. Three controversial issues with hydraulic fracking are nearly everything people use daily has a petroleum based product, contamination of drinking water also the surrounding soil, and the financial impact on the economy. Many people in America do not realize the positives that comes with fracking. It is a great way to help the economy in the United States. Fracking decreases the price of all petroleum products including the price in gas. When gas prices decrease it allows other products such as food, plastics, and other petroleum goods to also go down in price. With these savings being passed down to the consumers it makes the cost of living in America much easier for many people who are living with a minimum wage budget. Minimum wage going up in Oregon and gas prices declining creates a stir in people making them spend more and builds consumer confidence on what is spent. In turn this rapid spending creates a boom in the American economy. With fracking producing nine million barrels a day and decreasing prices by forty five

The issue of whether we should continue fracking without research has been widely debated around the world. The issue is important because it has fundamental environmental concerns and economic questions about the process of hydraulic fracturing. “Fracking” is the process of penetrating down into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is absorbed at the rock to release the gas inside. Water, sand, and chemicals are then inserted into the rock with compression which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well. Fracking fluid, which can be polluted with heavy metals like arsenic, known human carcinogens, has seeped into local waterways and polluted groundwater. People who live near fracking wells have a heightened danger of developing cancer, asthma, and other serious ailments associated with inhaling or ingesting the toxic chemicals involved in the fracking process. Countries approach fracking and researching much differently from each other. The injection of fluid into shale beds at high pressure to extract petroleum resources has been happening across the United States of America at rapid pace. By 2003, a gigantic public relations campaign was launched to lobby Congress to pass what is

The PR firms expound the virtues of natural gas and would have us to believe “the negative side-effects caused by fracking are insignificant” (Larson 2). They rattle off information on how natural gas is a clean burning source of energy and how it is now responsible for 30% of electricity production, as well as heating in half of the homes in U.S.; therefore lessening our dependency on foreign suppliers. All positives attributes, granted, but at the end of the day fracking is a business; big business whose primary focus is keeping their shareholders happy with increase revenue. Unfortunately in their quest to make the almighty dollar, they are putting human lives as well as the environment at risk with the use of chemicals that are toxic, some are known carcinogens. To add insult to injury, the government, who is supposed to protect the interests of all, as opposed to the interests of a few, granted the energy companies an exemption from the laws meant to provide protection to humans as well as two irreplaceable resources, water and air. Granting this exemption is a clear indication that public health and the preservation of local ecology were less of a priority than making a profit.

To environmental advocates and opponents of fracking, the process is more than dollars and cents. On a rudimentary level, the oil and natural gas produced via hydraulic fracturing are fossil fuels, and thus harmful to the environment in comparison to renewable, clean sources of energy such as solar and wind power. These renewable energy fields are likewise capable of bolstering American energy production and independence and creating high paying careers. Moreover, research suggests that fracking practices could cause serious methane leaks, canceling out the supposed reduction in greenhouse gas

In “Fracking” authors Michael D. Holloway and Oliver Rudd cover the technology and methods of hydraulic fracturing while explaining the consequences it has on our health, agriculture, and the planet. The two set out to expose the truths and fallacies regarding impacts of the controversial topic. Throughout the book excerpt, the authors reiterate their goal of not making false claims; “the goal is to educate and share insight.” The authors work to relieve the public of common hydraulic fracking related misconceptions brought on by the media. While the majority of citizens opposed to fracking report contamination to their water source and air, the authors’ collected studies reveal that these problems are not unique to fracking; they occur whenever

This week’s discussion was to be on “environmental and economic issues” which we’re facing in our home countries, I decided to do mine on fracking. I’m sure most of us in the US have heard about fracking. There are pros and cons to it, the pro side is that it taps into the natural gas within the earth and provides a natural resource. This, in turn, will allow the US to reduce their reliance on foreign oil. The con side is what it is said to be doing to the earth. The technology isn’t new and neither is the knowledge that there is natural gas and oil below the earth’s surface. However, there’s growing concern from environmental groups concerned with how much harm is being done by pumping water and chemicals into the earth. I’ll only give a few examples of each, considering how many there are. The whole debate has many people are asking “is it worth the risk?”

he fracking truth! Everybody acknowledges the bad side of fracking, but nobody gives credit to the beneficial side. Fracking is our best option in certain circumstances. It is way better and releases less fossil fuel than coal. Europe was actually thinking about using coal instead of fracking. By doing they are ruining the Earth at a faster rate. Fracking is also safe because it won’t affect the water as much. The natural gas industry says that fracking gives less effect on ruining our water. Therefore, fracking is more beneficial than the other resources, like coal. Many countries have shale which help with fracking and it’s cheaper. We might as well use the resources that are given to us rather than wasting time and money by trying to use other resources.

As you know, fracking allows companies such as ExxonMobil to obtain natural gases from the geosphere. Natural gas, of course, produces less

I think fracking is wrong because it hurt our environment because we are put bad chemicals down in the grown pulling the oil up and out of the ground in a bad way. We are also hurting and kill animals because of the oil and once we hurt and kill them we are doing the same thing to us. Fracking will hurt corn farmers that are trying to make Ethanol from there crops it will hurt them because the price of corn will go down.

I do not support hydraulic fracking because of all the negative factors that contribute to the operation. After reading and doing research, I found that there were a lot of unknown answers in the process of fracking and it made me concerned. Although the process is said to lower the price of gas and collect more gas, fracking seems to have more cons than pros. The process does not seem like it was investigated and shows little to no research background observations. Similarly to coal, the process of fracking seems unsafe and does not seem like it will be a good idea in the long run. As a matter of fact, extracting natural gas could possibly have similar environmental impacts as coal does if the process continues. Also, the process of fracking does not have a lot of evidence that it will work nor has it been tested thoroughly. Fracking can cause contamination to groundwater, air pollution, release of hazardous chemicals, huge amounts of water intake, and many other consequences.

Imagine an economy in the United States if we were an oil exporting country, like those in the Middle East. The States falls victim to those countries because we do not export quite as much as they do. This problem could potentially be solved by upping the amount of oil and gas fracking. Then, that now unused oil can be sent out to other countries, turning a profit here. Although many people believe that it is harmful to the environment, and bad for the public around it. The largest being that it will contaminate the underground water supply. Despite this, many people can agree that it is overall beneficial. Hydraulic fracturing is essential to the United States, because it creates jobs, it generates income, it could potentially turn the economy around, and it is crucial to our energy production as a whole.