Hydraulic Fracturing : Good Or Bad?

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

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the process of extracting natural gas from shale rock layers deep within the earth.The dangers of fracking are the chemicals that go into fracking and how much water is used and contamination of city water. Some dangers of fracking are water usage. They use 2 to 5 million gallons of water. Not all of the chemicals are recovered from the ground. We only know of 8 out of 600 chemicals. To many chemicals are used and some a harmful. Fracking water usage is too high for instance one well can use 144,000,000million gallons of water. 50%-70% of the fracking fluid is left in the ground and isn’t biodegradable. The waste fluid that is outside in the sunlight evaporates and releases volatile organic compounds(Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are organic chemicals that have a high vapor pressure at ordinary room temperature. Their high vapor pressure results from a low boiling point, which causes large numbers of molecules to evaporate or sublimate from the liquid or solid form of the compound and enter the surrounding air.) Due to the VOCs acid rain, ground level ozone and contaminated air. Ground level ozone is bad, but ozone up high in the atmosphere protects the earth from the Sun’s harmful rays.

effectively argue for its continued use and expansion in its current form. Finally, I will support

Veronica Kronvall remembers how excited she felt about buying her house in 2007. It was her first house, in the small city of Ponder, Texas. Her kitchen was filled with her favorite color, purple, everything from mixing bowls to the microwave. She planted roses and planned on having a garden. She planned at living in this house for decades. What Veronica did not imagine was that 4 years later and energy company would drill 5 wells behind her home, with the closest being less than 300 feet from her backyard. Green pipes and tanks loom over her fence. The rumble of trucks and equipment rattled the glasses in her cupboard, and the smell of an acrid blend of chemicals was constant. She began having symptoms she had never had before, her eyes

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

Hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, is the process of removing oil and natural gas from in between layers of shale and other low-permeability rocks. This is done by drilling both a well and a horizontal tunnel. Sand and chemicals are shot through the tunnel with incredible pressure, which cracks the shale allowing the oil and natural gas to travel up the well (Jackson, 2014). Fracking has caused a breadth of controversy due to the economic benefits and the geological consequences.

Fracking is a cause of water contamination in parts of the United States that have activity in

Respiratory problems have been created by fracking pollution. “Impacts of can include asthma attacks, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing and lung disease. Levels of pollutants high enough to cause respiratory problems, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children, have been found both close to fracking sites and in regions with intense oil and gas activity.” We must guard the air we breathe because we are going to the be the ones who will get harmed by it. Exposure to pollutants such as hydrogen sulfide and VOCs can cause neurological problems with ranges from a headache and dizziness to loss of consciousness and seizures. “Multiple studies have measured benzene levels close to fracking sites that are higher than the thresholds set to protect people from these impacts.” These are the problems that a lot of people living near the fracking wells have to face. A number of PAHs and VOCs have been found to interfere with fetal and child development resulting in dangerous harm to the developing brain, nervous system, and heart. “Because even short-term exposures to these pollutants at critical moments of development can result in long-lasting harm, health experts have identified this as a threat to communities living in close proximity to fracking sites.” These impacts can change a child’s entire life with the child having many kinds

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

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.

The process in fracking involves injecting water and chemicals into the ground, which can have negative effects on the water quality. Carpenter (2016) states that up to 40% of the water that is put into the ground turns into produced water (i.e., a byproduct of the fracking process) and the produced water contains unsafe chemicals (e.g., radium, uranium) that may not be removed by water treatment. Numerous chemicals found in the produced water are known or possible carcinogens that heighten the chance of developing leukemia (Elliott et al., 2017), which is one of the most common childhood cancers (U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group, 2016). Moreover, fracking affects children in underserved communities, which is referred to as environmental injustice (Johnston, Werder, & Sebastian, 2016). In their study, Johnston et al. (2016) discovered that disposal wells for water used in the fracking process were more likely to be built close to communities of color or low-income in Southern

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.

“Fracking chemicals damage fertility and cause birth defects. A recent study suggests of the 750 plus chemicals used in fracking, over 130 are endocrine disruptors. Once in the body, these toxins have been linked to fertility issues in men and women as well as birth defects” (Group). These chemicals can be put into the water supply, Without any knowingness of it if not frequently checked.

Another problem that we know exists with hydraulic fracturing is the contamination of the water, the ground, and the air around the sites (Goldman pg. 2). It has been shown that “…residents living near the hydraulic fracturing sites are increasingly worried that the drilling process might be contaminating their well water, polluting streams, and releasing toxic gases into the air (Hobson).” Water sources, as well as the soil, are often polluted from flowback fluid and from production brine (Hydro-Fracking pg.4). Flowback fluid is “the contaminated fluid that returns to the surface during the drilling process, and is estimated to be between 9% - 35% of the fluids injected during