Michael D. Holloway's '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.

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.

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

Paragraph 1: Fracking, also known as hydraulic fracturing, is a method designed to extract oil and gas from shale rock. According to Susan L. Brantley and Anna Meyendorff from the article, The Facts on Fracking, “The word fracking comes from the fracturing that occurs when the high-pressure water is injected into the rock. The process of fracking is accomplished by drilling into the earth where a mixture of high-pressure water is drilled into the rock causing the gas to be released.” The high-pressure water can have a mixture of materials such as water, sand, and different chemicals. The pressure of the water being injected is so high that it allows gas to burst out of the head of the well. The process can be achieved through two different ways, one being more common than another. One of the processes can be done vertically but the more common method is done horizontally. According to the New York Times, when the drilling is carried by horizontally, “New pathways can be used in the rock layer. Due to new pathways being created, more gas can be released,” (Marshall, 2015). Drillers can create mini-explosions in the wells to boost flow. How do mini-explosions not increase the probabilities of earthquakes? The horizontal drilling can allow millions of gallons of high-pressure water into the fractures of shale. Chemicals can be added to the high-pressure water for the purpose of dissolving minerals as well as inserting sand to open fractures made by the drillers and kill the

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

This debate covered the controversial issue of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The two sides that can be taken within this debate are, Bruce McKenzie Everett’s side or John Rumpler’s side. Everett believes that hydraulic fracturing is completely worth it, due to the fact that the economic benefits outweigh the negative impacts on our environment. While Rumpler argues that there are very crucial tolls fracking is taking on our environment, and also our health. Throughout the article there are 6 question proposed to each person. The first, and maybe most important, question asked is ‘is fracking safe?’ Everett responds first by saying that nothing in the world is entirely safe, and then continues to nullify the multitude of threats fracking

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 this webpage we are given facts and a reason why Fracking is dangerous. As we already know Fracking is hydraulic fracturing. This means that the hard rock that is in the earth itself is so hard that we use a certain chemical to break it. In the facts section we learn that Fracking can make people sick. Toxic, hurt the environment, and can cause climate change. Finally we learn why Fracking should be banned and gives us reasons why this technique should be terminated.)

Following the release of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) draft report on their study of the effects of the fracking industry to ground water, the New York Times published the article titled “Fracking has not had a big effect on water supply, EPA says while noting risks.” The article conveys to the readers on the release of the study and gives opinions of the report’s findings from both sides of the fracking debate. In order to review the content of the article, the specifics presented in the article were compared to those cited in “Hydraulic fracturing: a toxicological threat for groundwater and drinking-water?” by Gordalla et al. This scientific paper had been released two years before the EPA’s report and had also assed the

Hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking, is a drilling method used for extracting oil or natural gas from deep underground. Fracking is a problem that not many see as controversial. Each human being depends on daily energy, as long as they see the cost for use of energy is cheap they won't question the actual effects it may present to the environment. The energy sources can be mined or pumped from locations worldwide. Each technique for extraction of the resource is having serious impacts on wildlife. Even worse is that fracking can have a serious impact on our water supply. Large amounts of gas now is available due to high use amount of fracking. Though fracking is used worldwide to extract gas and oil, a fracking boom has occurred

Public health issues do not have straightforward solutions, including fracking effects on children’s health. There are various challenges, including economic considerations (e.g., economic growth vs. the well-being of future generations) and what to do with residents near fracking sites. With regard to economic considerations, the focus in the United States has been on the access to natural resources, for example coal and natural gas (Mathews & Tan, 2014). Obtaining natural resources, like natural gas, is easier today because of the development of fracking technologies (Jain, 2015). Consequently, the US can become more energy independent, can decrease the money spent on foreign natural resources, and can provide low-cost natural resources

California faces an imminent danger from Big Oil. Big Oil wants to use millions of gallons of water and frack oil from Sacramento, my hometown, to Los Angeles. Fracking, also known as Hydraulic Fracturing, is a method of obtaining natural gas by drilling a hole into the ground and than injecting “water, sand, and a proprietary mix of chemicals into the shale fracturing the rock and releasing the natural gas, which is captured when it flows up and out of the hole (Mitka).” In the process millions of gallons of water are polluted and large amounts of air pollutants are released into the atmosphere. The ramifications on human health as a result of fracking is what causes most to worry. In the next four decades, fracking possesses dangers that directly affect human and animal health, the land, and our ecosystems.

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.

Unfortunately, the extent of the environmental risks that are associated with hydraulic fracturing are largely unknown. According to a number of studies and publications GAO reviewed, fracking may pose risks to air quality. This ‘wishy washy’ finding was because the studies that were reviewed were not taking into account the long-term, cumulative effects of this extractive process (“Oil and Gas” 2012). The increase in air pollutants, the reports found, were more likely a result of engine exhaust, emissions from diesel-powered pumps, gas that was vented or flared for operational reasons, and unintentional emissions from faulty equipment or storage areas for waste (“Oil and Gas” 2012). Not surprisingly, a number of studies and publications GAO reviewed also indicated that fracking only might put our water quality at risk. Fracking can cause the contamination of surface water and groundwater as a result of erosion, spills and releases of chemicals, or the underground migration of chemicals (“Oil and Gas” 2012). So we have oversight agencies that release reports siting cases that are understudied, yet in the meantime permits are still being