Essay on Stakeholder Analysis- 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.

the desire to achieve independence from foreign energy sources” (Ben Harris). “The environmental safety of fracking has yet to be conclusively demonstrated, they say, and the industry has a poor track record”(Ben

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.

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

It is a fact that in Wyoming they are finding contamination in water tables as far away from fracking as forty miles. You tube videos of people igniting their tap water are numbered in the hundreds. These gas companies are poisoning our environment and destroying people’s entire way of life just to make money. Now most of us on some level are concerned about the environment, you don’t have to live in a tree and only eat organic fruits and vegetables to care about the future of earth. You just have to open your eyes and become comfortable to the fact that big corporations dictate government. These people live to make money, at all costs.

Possible story: some analogy of something that was a good, necessary idea but just put off the inevitable and had a negative affect than fix it.

that the technology is environmentally friendly and the threats it is said to pose to the underground water reservoirs do not exist in reality. However, the shareholders agreed with the environmentalists that the concerns cannot just be ignored and needed the companies to disclose the full information about the operations carried out in the fracking process and the chemicals used. Some companies claimed to be abiding by the environmental ethics and, therefore, the disclosure asked is not necessary. For instance, ExxonMobil and Chevron which are large gas producers had urged its shareholders against asking the companies presenting the disclosure of the fracking process. However, 30 and 41 percent of Exxon

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, a method of extracting oil and natural gas that is better known as fracking, has received extensive media coverage over the years. This attention has come from both supporters and detractors of this contentious issue, and in the process the debate has been increasingly sensationalized. However, even when looking past the publicity, a careful examination of the scientific and legal implications of fracking reveals that the process carries a number of risks. Thanks to these inherent risks, as well as the behavior exhibited by the companies responsible for fracturing operations, allowing fracking to continue unchecked would lead to detrimental conditions that far outweigh the potential benefits.

Energy sources in today’s world are becoming scarcer by the day, as energy is one of our most needed and essential commodities. Who supplies the energy and how much energy they are supplying typically determines the amount of influence one country might have over another regarding our global economy. This is where hydraulic fracturing becomes a controversial and important topic to those of us in the United States. Lately, environmental campaigners have voiced concerns over the large amounts of water that is needed to carry out the fracking process and the possibility of tremors it could cause. For example, in 2011, the Black pool area in England experienced two relatively small quakes. One reading 1.5 and the other reading 2.2 on the magnitude scale. Collin Richardson, vice president of operations for Mineral Resources Inc., feels that the issue is perplexed when he states, "People go to a light switch and expect energy to be there, but they don't think about where it comes from. I don't think most people understand that without hydraulic fracturing, we wouldn't have natural gas to provide electricity to our homes or gas in our cars” (Rydbom). It seems as though there is a misconception about fracking that arises from the environmentalist groups as to what fracking really is. These misconceptions cause an emotional upset with citizens due to the twisting of facts and fake news.

One of the issues that Texas is currently facing is rooted in a populous industry, fracking. Texas has always been known for being oil and gas friendly, but cities are becoming weary about this industry invading highly populated suburban areas. While local governments have been able to block out drilling and gas wells for some time now, the state has taken a position that is becoming increasingly supportive of the oil and gas industry.

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.

A relatively new process for extracting desired shale oil from the bowels of the earth seems to be shaking things up around operation sites. Environmentalists and oil tycoons have been debating for years over the safety of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, since areas with a high concentration of fracking operations have been affected by several environmental problems. Though many scientists argue that correlation does not necessarily mean causation, the media and many environmentalists use these environmental problems around fracking sites as proof of the long term damage fracking causes. Although it has domesticated the oil industry and reduced usage of coal as a fuel source, fracking is undoubtedly related to many detrimental environmental impacts, such as water table pollution and increased seismic activity.

Hydraulic fracturing, or more commonly known as fracking, is the process of releasing gasses trapped in rocks such as sandstones, limestones, and shales through methods such as pumping pressurized water into the rock. In doing so, the rock is broken apart and the release of gas is expedited (Brantley and Meyendorff, "Facts on Fracking"). As a reporter located in Pennsylvania, I aim to inform my viewers on the harmful effects associated with fracking, both environmental and personal, and how the short-term economic benefits of fracking should not overpower the health of people and the earth. In a recent study, it was revealed that fracking wastewater disposal sites were heavily concentrated in less affluent areas home to poor and minority residents