Hydrofracking - Social Context of Business

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.

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

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

Over the past decade oil and gas producers have increasingly used hydraulic fracturing also known as fracking to extract oil and gas from the earth. Most people believe fracking is a new process but it has been around for over 100 years. Modern day fracking began in the 1990’s when George P Mitchell created a new technique by combining fracking with horizontal drilling. Since then, U.S. oil and gas production has skyrocketed. But the “new” perception of fracking leads people to incorrectly believe that fracking is temporary and that it somehow harms the environment. The truth is fracking is a reasonable energy solution if oversight and safeguards are used. In the last ten years fracking has improved conditions in the U.S. in three

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.

A process for retrieving natural gas from 7,000 feet below the earth’s surface has caused environmental concerns. Hydrofracking has been around since the 40’s but wasn’t until the 90’s where technology allowed for a vertical drill to drill horizontally into shall deep below the surface creating several bores and accessing hundreds of acres of shale. Hydrofarcking comes with its controversy, some argue that it is contaminating water sources and creating environmental concerns, while others say there is no proof of this despite many studies.

Hydraulic Fracturing is a process where high-pressure fracking fluids are forced into rich shale to extract natural resources. These fracking fluids are a mixture of proppants and “chemical additives such as surfactants, biocides, fiction reducers and other compounds meant to help in the process of freeing the trapped gas”. In addition, the million gallons of water injected along with the fracking fluids return as flowback water and this produced water have the “potential to mix with nearby aquifers and surface water”. As a result, there is a considerable amount of public concern about water contamination due to this process of hydrofracking (Thurman, Ferrer, Biotevogel & Borch, 2014).

Few issues have recently gotten as much attention as the energy extraction activities involving a controversial procedure called "fracking." As reports of drinking water becoming tainted with fracking fluid flood the news, both oil and gas companies as well as environmental groups are presenting competing "facts" about the effects of drilling on ground water.

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

Fracking promoters say safe hydraulic fracking doesn’t threaten drinking water. They also disprove that the water used in hydraulic fracturing ends up as surface spills. There are three ways reported for waste water disposal including “injecting in permitted disposal wells in accordance with Underground Injection Control Regulations, delivered to water treatment facilities depending on permitting, and reused/recycled” (“Pioneering America’s Energy Future”). These three types of disposals are considered safe as long as agencies are regulating hydraulic fracturing companies carefully. The Oil and Gas Conservation Act makes oil and gas a state priority, allowing companies the legal right to fracture. It is harder to judge whether regulations are actually set in place when government wants to favor the creation of jobs and economic boost rather than worrying about the health of communities affected by

Water contamination is a recurring theme in Wyoming. Encana Corporation, a natural gas company in Wyoming, has planted over 50 oil wells in Pavillion Field, Wyoming, and uses hydraulic fracturing, a technical machine that blasts a mix of water and chemicals 8,000 feet into the ground, to drill for natural gas. During this process, more than 596 chemicals are used and are deposited into groundwater, some chemicals being potentially toxic. In regards to being transparent with the chemicals that they use during hydraulic fracturing, Encana Corporation does not disclose this information, and local residents who live nearby Pavillon Field learn the hard way, in which they discover that their healths become negatively impacted and that their water

The global crisis surrounding energy needs grows in severity as time goes by and in order to solve it, scientists have created the innovative solution known as hydraulic fracturing (Source 5). Hydraulic fracturing, commonly referred to as “fracking,” is a process that injects water, chemicals, sand, and other materials into layers of shale. The injected mixture cracks the layers of shale, releasing trapped natural gasses that can be collected (Source 1). Fracking occurs deep under the surface of the earth, miles below the groundwater that is accessed from drinking-water wells. In the mid-2000s, “fuel prices were rising rapidly” (Source 5). Hydraulic fracturing was a cheap solution that not only brought the world out of a state of emergency but made oil prices drop. The new method of gas collection grew the oil and gas industry, benefiting people all around the world. Fracking is a cheap, effective solution to global needs, but is under attack from skeptics who worry about environmental hazards. The claims against fracking not only have no real evidence but also risk destroying the jobs in the oil and gas industry as well as support for energy needs. Hydraulic fracturing is not only a cheap but a safe method that supports global needs surrounding both energy and jobs.

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

Despite the supposed short-term benefits that hydraulic fracturing, also called “fracking”, may provide for society, the amount of negative externalities conjured via this method of natural gas drilling heavily outweigh the pros. Proponents of the controversial drilling method support their argument referencing potential economic benefits gained from the extraction of hydrocarbons that were previously inaccessible by conventional technologies. However, they fail to factor in the massive environmental impacts that afflict the Earth as a result of fracking such as, contamination of ground water, depletion of fresh water, risks to air quality, noise pollution, the migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, surface contamination from spills and flow-back, and the health effects of these. Furthermore, this method of fuel extraction condones a mindset concerned merely with the fulfilment of short-term ends and does not value future generations under a utilitarian standard. The Kantian standard of ethics holds that whenever an action can be applied to society on a universal scale, it can be considered as objectively just. Kant’s categorical imperative values this utilitarian standard, and when applied to the situation of fracking, the imperative renders hydraulic fracking as inherently unjust.

pg. 1) “In a July 19 letter to ten oil and gas producers – including BP, Chesapeake Energy, and ExxonMobil – the lawmakers requested information on the companies’ hydraulic fracturing operations and on possible human impacts. According to a subcommittee staff memo, the hydraulic fracturing companies ‘do not track whether the wells they fracture are located in underground sources of drinking water (Hobson Penn.).”