Persuasive Essay On 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.

However, no one was warned about the issues that may occur because of fracking. For instance, many individuals water supply became contaminated without their knowledge and they became extremely ill from drinking their water. Sadly, some of these illnesses resulted in tragic deaths. Moreover, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health discovered that “preterm births were 40 percent higher among women who lived in areas of intense drilling and fracking operations, and these women’s pregnancies were 30 percent more likely to be considered high risk” (Page, Samantha). Fracking is not only hurting living individuals, but preexisting ones as well. What's more, there are many other connections between fracking and tragic occurrences, thus, fracking must be terminated. Truthfully, it is difficult to say whether or not these issues occurred because of lack of initial research or because fracking companies felt as though they invested too much to stop fracking when issues arose. No matter the reason, it is now known that fracking is dangerous, therefore, new ways of obtaining energy/resources must take

Hydraulic fracking isn 't all good though, there are many controversial things about it. First off, water contamination is a hazard. There are many ways that the water supply could be contaminated by fracking. One way is by groundwater entering through cracks that fracking has made. The water solution that 's pumped into the ground is a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals. Water and sand make up 98% of the mixture, while the remaining 2% is chemicals. Although fracking companies have never realised the chemicals used, scientists studying wastewater have found many harmful additives. A few of these are benzene, toluene, and many acids, all of which pose huge threats to humans. For each fracking well, more than 8 million liters of

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

“Fracking” isn’t a word that most people are familiar with unless they are well informed or active in local government or natural gas extraction. “Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves extracting natural gas from shale formations underground” (Collier, Galatas, Harrelson-Stephens, 2008). During the process known as fracking, millions of gallons of water are shot underground into shale formations to help bring the natural gas trapped inside the formations to be released so that it can surface and become available for extraction. This is the technique that is used for traditional fracking methods. Although fracking increases the states natural gas production, it also carries some negative side effects that are affecting the state and its people.

The mismanagement of the practice has the potential to create environmental damage such as water contamination, radioactive spills, and increased seismic activity that could cost thousands in dollars in damage. Furthermore, the unintended consequences of fracking can have detrimental effects on the environmental. The potential for water contamination can pose both an immediate and long term risk to environmental stability, including landscape distortion, inhabitability and ecological displacement. This contamination of drinking water can also be detrimental to the human environment, limiting the amount of safe water available for both the residential and commercial human environment. With the increase of fracking, the level of disapproval for the practice has only mounted. Concerns including overconsumption of

An individual’s environment plays a pivotal role in their overall health. The environment can affect a range of physical and mental processes, and is considered a defining factor of well-being. As a result, specific geographic areas are instrumental in shaping an individual’s health profile. This is clearly seen in the disparity between those living in areas exposed to toxic substances, versus individuals living in clean environments. Individuals in unpolluted environments experience the advantage of a body system free from the barrage of chemical assault. Unfortunately, people who live near toxic wastes or byproducts of industry, have a body that is in constant defense of attack. This natural defense mechanism can prove

Even though I would need to do more research to have a more coherent opinion, I believe that fracking should not be practiced in the United States. My opinion is heavily based on the fact that fracking is still such a new discovery and that safe methods have not been identified. Thus, too many people are at risk for being exposed to contaminated drinking water (Jackson, 2014). The methane contamination of the drinking water is very concerning because it is very flammable, which can be incredibly dangerous to the citizens in the affected area (Hoffman, 2016). Thirdly, the amount of pollutants that are released into the atmosphere is not safe for people to inhale. Both children and adults have been exposed to these pollutants, which have had severely negative effects. Lung disease is just one of the major negative health effects of fracking. Cancer and birth defects in infants are other incredibly disabling diseases that affect people in proximity to these wells (Kiely, 2016). Another issue that I find disturbing about the process of fracking is that the waste water wells are disposing of the chemical waste deep into the Earth’s crust. However, some of this chemical waste is disposed of in landfills, which, in turn, pollutes the groundwater (StateImpact, 2017). Overall, I find the process of fracking

Going through the Shapiro Library on SNHU Wedsite, I found a few great articlesabout the drilling going on in North Carolina called Fracking. The first article that I foundis titled, “ Fracking Fight Advances in North Carolina” by Sarah Ferris. The secondresource I found that had a lot of great information and facts is titled, “ North Carolinawants in on Fracking Game” by Reid Wilson. I found these two articles very interestingbecause they both are telling the pros and cons of fracking and what the government’splan is with the drilling.The article written by Sarah Ferris, titled “Fracking Fight advances in NorthCarolina” stated the concern of what drilling in North Carolina will do to the surroundingenvironment. Ferris stated,” The backlash

According to the results that were found 25% of people have heard of the term fracking but have don’t fully know what it is and what some of the effects of fracking is. As can be seen in the graphs provided about on 30% of people know that chemicals used for fracking can cause cancer and 15% know that infertility and birth defects are results of fracking. Of the 70% of people that know fracking pollute the environment more than 50% percent of them stated that chemicals used are able to contaminate water and hence pollute the environment. When asked if they know whether or not fracking is a contributor to air pollutions 95% of them said no, showing that these people are not aware of the fact that fracking is something that is contributing to climate change. A final questions of whether they think the government should allow for fracking being done,

Hydraulic fracturing, also known as "Fracking", is drilling into the ground for gas. This process injects over 500 chemicals into the ground which sometimes reaches peoples water supply. When the water becomes polluted it can harm not only humans, but animals. In Gasland ,Josh Fox talks to people about their problems with Fracking and goes in depth about the damage it is doing.

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.

Fracking has actually changed out future as we know it, and has made it possible for many things. Fracking will make the world run on natural fossil fuels for much longer, which is also better for the environment and us. In 2015, the U.S. reached its all time high in oil production in 14 years and is only expected to continually rise. Oil production in the U.S. is one of the main sources of jobs for people living in the U.S. (Nunez, 2013). Fracking is a good way to employ U.S. citizens and is also a good way to get natural ways of oil production. As we all

While vertical wells do yield gas, they are mainly used as a base to connect several horizontal wells, which is where the money lies in the industry. After drilling, about “2 million to 10 million gallons of water [is used] to extract the gas” (Marsa 3-4). However, high pressured water alone will not break away the shale rock, therefore sand is added to enable further fracturing. The controversial issue fueling the debate is the third substances added to the water which allow the natural gas to escape for collection. “A cocktail of friction-reducing lubricants [are used] to make the water slick enough to slide through the pipes swiftly” (Marsa 4). A geochemist by the name of Tracy Bank conducted a study at SUNY Buffalo which concluded that the lubricant contained an abundance of toxic metals, “including uranium, barium, chromium, zinc and arsenic” (Marsa 2). This is just a short list of the negative compounds used in fracking. It is likely that the public will never get the full story as to the composition of the lubricants, as major fracking companies refuse to release that information, “claiming that doing so would reveal trade secrets” (Rahman 1). So where do these contaminants end up? After reaching the surface, the waste is emptied into tanks for storage. However, sometimes ponds are also used to hold the pollutants, therefore releasing the harmful toxins into runoffs. Once the gas has