Hydraulic Fracking In Oklahoma

Hydraulic fracturing is also known as “fracking” is a technique which involves drilling down, then horizontally as far as 10,000 feet below the surface to release natural gasses stored in the sedimentary rock known as Shale. The channel is then encased with concrete or occasionally steel to allow millions of gallons of water to be injected into the wellbore. Most water used in fracking comes from surface water sources such as rivers, lakes, or other accessible bodies of water nearby. Not only is there water being funneled into the wellbore, but also a mixture of sand and other chemicals. When the high-pressure mixture is injected underground it fractures the Shale around the wellbore and creates fissures. The fissures are then held open with

In recent years, the subject of hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking has been a constant subject of interest in the news media. The pros and cons of fracking are passionately debated. However, the public should become educated on the subject of fracking prior to choosing a side of the argument. In the scholarly article, “Super Fracking,” published in 2014, by Donald L. Trucotte, Eldridge M. Moores, and John B. Rundle, a detailed description of fracking is provided, followed by their analysis of current issues surrounding the controversy. According to Trucotte, Moores, and Rundle, fracking saves the consumer money. The wellhead cost to produce natural gas in January of 2000 was two dollars and sixty cents per one thousand cubic feet. At an alarming rate, the cost at the wellhead to produce natural gas had risen to eight dollars per one thousand cubic feet by January of 2006. Comfortingly, the wellhead cost dropped to two dollars and eighty-nine cents by the end of 2012. Impressively, gas production increase and price decrease over the time period are a result of fracking. In their article, Trucotte, Moores, and Rundle describe in great detail that hydraulic fracturing, most commonly referred to as fracking is the process of drilling down into the earth to fracture the layers of rock so that a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the oil or natural gas inside. This method of fracking has been used commercially for the last fifty years.

If the practice of fracking continues without the necessary regulation and management to construct the infrastructure required for extraction, transportation and consumerization, the practice has the potential to generate serious problems.

With earthquakes on the rise, we must figure out the cause of them and determine a solution to help limit or even prevent them from occurring. Since early 2009, earthquakes have been sweeping across the state of Oklahoma, causing many people to worry about their own well-being. Many scientists speculate the source of the earthquakes might be a result of Hydraulic Fracturing deep down in Earths’ crust. Hydraulic fracturing is a process in which oil and natural gas companies pump up to millions of gallons of wastewater, sand, and chemicals down drilled holes in order to release pockets of shale within the earth. This use of technology is in question of the potential cause or inducement of earthquakes in

The most dangerous consequence of fracking is that hundreds of chemicals are blasted into the Earth’s crust, which creates cracks in the bedrock. Many times, these cracks lead to an aquifer, in which case, all of the water in the aquifer becomes contaminated with these chemicals (Jackson, 2014). Additionally, when the natural gas is being pumped out of the wells, methane is released into the atmosphere. A study conducted by NOAA found that approximately 4% of the methane is being released into the atmosphere. This same study found that methane pollution increases climate changes because it traps heat in the atmosphere 25 times more than carbon dioxide (Hoffman, 2016). Furthermore, fracking waste wells are the primary cause of the increase of earthquakes in the Central U.S. This is because these wells operate for a longer period of time, which means that they inject more “solid ‘cake’” into the Earth than the actual fracking process (USGS, n.d. and StateImpact, 2017). Finally, recent studies have found that people who live near a fracking site are at higher risk to develop respiratory problems, which is due to the increased levels of pollutants. These pollutants are not only affecting the people who live in close proximity to these sites, but to the workers, as well. The most common type of respiratory problem reported was lung

Researchers say they found elevated levels of these chemicals, known as endocrine disrupting chemicals, in surface water and groundwater samples collected in the state's Garfield County where more than 10,000 gas wells exist (Mosbergen, 2013). A single well requires up to 7 million gallons of water, plus an additional 400,000 gallons of additives. These additives include lubricants, biocides, scale and rust inhibitors, solvents, foaming and de-foaming agents, emulsifiers and de-emulsifiers, stabilizers and breakers (Royte, 2012). At almost every stage of developing and operating an oil or gas well, chemicals can be introduced into the environment. While many people get sick from drinking water that turns out to be contaminated by fracking, cancer has not been proven to be caused by this but people living near a fracking well have been more likely to get

Earthquakes in North Texas have been popular in the past couple of years. Texas has never been a state to host earthquakes like the ones being experienced. There has been many theories from locals about the causes of minor earthquakes. What are their theories about the increasing in earthquakes in North Texas? One, is the Hydraulic “fracking”, the drilling that effects the underground soil to crack. It only gives airways for gas or oil to work its way up to the surface. The theory of hydraulic fracturing does not add up for some but that the wastewater disposals theory is a better conclusion. Wastewater disposals or water injections are related to “fracking” institutions. Wastewater disposals are water tunnels filled from underground that can

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.

“DEC 's own review identified dozens of potential significant adverse impacts of (fracking)” (Krisberg 18). There are some potential impacts in the fracking process, it will bring a lot of health risks to people. The major constituents of produced water are salt content, oil and grease, various inorganic and organic chemicals, and naturally occurring radioactive material. Salt content in produced water makes the freshwater to salt levels up higher than seawater. Oil and grease makes freshwater is getting oily. Various inorganic and organic chemicals are found naturally in the formation or are chemical additives used during drilling and operation of the well, such as benzene and methane. “Many of the fracking additives are toxic, carcinogenic or mutagenic” (Howarth, Ingraffea 272). This quote tells us that why fracking is contaminating the drinking water. Benzene are one major concern. “The state of Texas reports benzene concentrations in air in the Barnett shale area that sometimes exceed acute toxicity standards” (Howarth, Ingraffea 273). It shows benzene makes drinking water is getting contaminated. “Methane contamination of drinking water reservoirs has been documented in fracking-rich areas of the US. Leading to dramatic videos of seemingly ignitable tap water” (Benusic, 238). This quote tells us that the drinking water is getting contaminated by Methane is proved already. Radioactive material in

Hydraulic Fracturing (fracking) is the process of drilling into the ground and pumping sand, water, and fracking fluid at high pressures in order to extract natural shale gas that was previously unattainable. This process comes with environmental issues: the chemicals from the fracking fluid can contaminate nearby drinking water wells and harm the citizens of that area. Despite the fact that there have been several contaminated drinking water cases reported, there is little being done about this matter. This paper analyzes the available research that asserts why fracking is a dangerous process that should be banned immediately. The intended audience is my peers and instructor, as well as anyone interested in the debacle of fracking-caused water contamination that may come across this piece. As you are reading, I ask that you keep in mind that this is a very perplexing issue that has not been given much of an opportunity for true research and investigation. Therefore, the data discussed has not been officially proven or disproven to be directly related in every way to local fracking. However, the research gathered on the proposed danger of the Hydraulic Fracturing process is solely based on science that has already been proven as well as documented illnesses and symptoms from residents and contractors around or near fracking operation sites.

One of the most common arguments against fracking is that fracking should be banned being that it causes harmful effects on the human body. During the process of fracking, chemicals and methane gas are leaked out of the system and contaminate nearby groundwater. Unfortunately, many people are unaware of the fact that their water has been contaminated so they end up drinking it and causes them to become ill. Due to people drinking this contaminated groundwater, “There have been over 1,000 documented cases of water contamination next to areas of gas drilling as well as cases of sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water” (“What Goes”). Exposure of fracking chemicals to humans can also causes reproductive issues. Out of the hundreds of chemicals used in fracking, “20 to 30% cause reproductive, mutagenic, or cancerous

Citing the documentary “Gasland”, the article brings to account instances in the past where people who lived close to fracking sites had experienced sickness and foul-smelling water. The documentary had then influenced New York State’s decision to ban fracking. By citing this documentary, the article makes the reader to not fully accept the given conclusion. Without going into great detail, the article mentions a couple of environmental groups questioning of the legitimacy of the study, considering that the study uses data generated by oil and gas companies. This also brings to question the limitations of the data used. The article reads unbiasedly towards both sides of the fracking industry, it recognizes the conclusions of the EPA study but still lets the reader know that there is still a lot that has not been explored in the topic.

Hydraulic fracturing is a process used in nine out of 10 natural gas wells in the United States, where millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals are pumped underground to break apart the rock and release the gas. Scientists are worried that the chemicals used in fracturing may pose a threat either underground or when waste fluids are handled and sometimes spilled on the surface. The natural gas industry defends hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, as safe and efficient. Thomas J. Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research, a pro-industry non-profit organization, claims fracking has been “a widely deployed as safe extraction technique,” dating back to 1949. What he doesn’t say is that until recently energy

Energy production has been one of the most paramount forces that have influenced the actions of the United States as a country. Wars have been fought and treaties have been signed over the opportunity for oil. However, there has been a recent transition to cheaper and domestic energy sources of energy. Oklahoma has become a microcosm of these events that have occurred. With the discovery of natural gas reserves throughout the state, hydraulic fracturing has seen a boom in utilization. However, this has been largely detrimental for the state. Fracking should not be allowed in Oklahoma because of its environmental implications, its effect on Oklahoma’s future, and its impact on the people of Oklahoma.