Throughout the entirety of the sustainability lecture there were three points that really stuck out to me. I found the goals of Danish architect Bjarke Ingels admirable. I think that the public views on a healthy economy versus a healthy environment interesting. Also, the debate on fracking within the UK is something that caught my attention. I believe that all three of these topics/people can relate to one another regarding the conversation of sustainability, not just in the UK, but around the entire world. First, I would like to discuss public views within the UK about a healthy environment. According to yougov.co.uk people within the UK are more concerned with a healthy economy rather than a healthy environment. This may be shocking to some people but I would have to agree with the people who voted for a healthy economy. This is a similar argument to one in the US. So many people are concerned with a healthy environment or social issues that they aren’t paying attention to the …show more content…
Once a healthy economy is managed, then other concerns can be taken care of. However, this leads me into my next point, fracking. Fracking is drilling down into the earth before a high-pressured water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside. Water, sand and chemicals are injected into the rock at high pressure, which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well. This is a major topic of controversy in the UK. Some of the issues raised by people who argue against fracking argue that it uses huge amounts of water that has to be moved to the site, which greatly impacts the environment. There is also a concern that dangerous chemical from the fracking site may leak into the ground water which can certainly affect the health of the people who live near the site. There are also concerns with the fact that fracking can cause tremors, or small
There are many articles, studies being done, and organizations fighting for what they think is right. Two organizations involved in fracking are the American Gas Association (AGA) and FracDallas. AGA is a natural gas utility association supporting fracking, its priority is to use natural gas for transportation in order to increase the demand for it. FracDallas “does not oppose gas well drilling” it “opposes unsafe, untested and unproven gas well drilling in densely populated urban areas”
While solving the issue of having to rely on others for oil and gas, fracking is also creating the problem of harming the environment and creating issues for residents living near the sites and the leasers themselves.
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 is a highly controversial practice that utilizes the injection of water, chemicals and abrasives to extract relatively inaccessible pockets of natural resources. Although fracking has the potential to benefit the domestic economy, the practice of hydraulic fracturing, if left unregulated and mismanaged poses significant risks to the environment, the ecosystem and safety.
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
Firstly, I think it was apparent that the previous UK energy policies did not pay sufficient attention to environmental problems which was quite an unethical standpoint. It was therefore necessary that a major policy direction of the EWP 2003 was a commitment by the UK government to invest resources towards meeting national milestone of reducing
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
“Fracking is the process of obtaining Natural Gas from below Earth’s surface by drilling 1000’s of feet into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside.” Water, sand and chemicals are injected into the rock at high pressure which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well.” (Jackson). Hydraulic Fracturing got its name due to the fact of how the rock is fractured apart by the high pressure mixture of a number of chemicals, sand, and water. Drilling companies first began Fracking in the early 1940’s, and starting in the 1990’s companies began “safer drilling” due to the amount of concerns that had arisen because early drillers had to detonate small explosions that eventually ended up killing many people. Fracking has been used for nearly 60 years and the number of concerns about it are rising every day. Due to the new technological advancements in drilling Fracking has changed greatly over the years. Before, the drilling would go on for weeks on end in order to extract only a small amount of natural gas. Now, due to the invention of higher powered drills, the drills get double the amount then they used to be able to get in more then half the time. Over 95,000 square miles of shale deposits have been found around the Appalachian Basin but the only way to reach these deposits of shale is through fracking. “Fracking is a technique designed to recover gas and oil from shale rock by drilling
Although the process of Fracking seems reasonable because it is something we use in our daily lives for cooking food, heating homes, and amongst other things, the question remains whether it is an actual positive or negative to not only us (not even a question) but to the environment? When looking at the pro side one main reason would be the additional access to gas and oil fracking would give us since “many scientists believe we only had a few years left to use fossil fuels before they ran out” (2015). The second positive effect for us would be the lowering of taxes. With more accessibility to gas and oil it wouldn't be such a demand allowing gas for cooking to lower as well as petroleum for cars. Lastly, it can create a
While fracking has provided a cleaner fuel, there are many negative effects to the environment, the beef industry, human health and little positive effects. Some of these effects include; ground water being polluted with harmful chemicals, this polluted water can cause extreme sickness in humans. Fracking disrupts the habitats of animals and they have to leave the area to find clean water and a better food supply. Also it has been taking an effect on the beef industry in how farmers raise and sell their cattle. Fracking can have negative long term effects on the people living in the local area and make that area inhabitable.
If John D. Rockefeller, one of the first oil tycoons, were to look at the oil industry today, would he believe his eyes? With millions of oil barrels being imported and exported each year, the oil industry has changed dramatically since the 19th century. At the forefront of the oil industry is the emergence of an oil drilling technique known as fracking. Fracking is an unconventional drilling process that is accomplished by using high-pressured water to release oil and natural gas from rock formations, known as shales. The use of fracking in the United States has made it one of the top oil producing countries in the world. However, this newfound oil and gas drilling method has not come without its costs. Despite the economic boom near drilling locations, politically, fracking has caused some international relationships to be strained. Also, fracking is seen as highly controversial by conservationists because of the environmental threats that it poses. The drilling method of fracking has deeply impacted the United States from an economic, a political, and an environmental standpoint.
This brings up the first issue against fracking that critics point to, which is the fact that it often occurs near established towns and cities where many live. This would be merely an issue of aesthetic unpleasantry occurring near peoples' homes (paving the way for this issue to join so many others under the theme of "Not-in-My-Backyard"-style public protests) were it not for the fact that the chemicals being pumped into the ground are not just limited to the veins they create, but in fact may seep into groundwater, contaminating it. These two issues, water contamination and the right to private property, are major sticking points when a company wishes to set up a rig near a human population close enough to be affected by it. In 2006, the state of Texas ruled in the case of Coastal Oil and Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy Trust that damage to any property by or through the act of inducing hydraulic fracturing would not warrant a trespass claim. In 2012, four towns in Pennsylvania attempted to bar drillers from setting up infrastructure at the companies' discretion, with some to be built near homes and schools. Coastal Oil is being used as a precedent case now, but here the local courts ruled in favor of the towns, protecting their zoning rights. Going beyond the fact that oil rigs near homes can create what can certainly be called an unsafe, or at the very least unsightly,
“I´m very proud that the state of Vermont banned fracking. I hope communities all over California, and all over America do the same.”- Sen. Bernie Sanders. Although, fracking may seem safe, it really isn't. In fact, many have reported contaminated sources near fracking areas. However, living near a fracking well can cause a hard life in the household, that is near a site. Once again, problems arise as fracking becomes a common practice. Even though, there are advantages they are not reasonable. All in all, there are multiple reasons why fracking is not safe.
The fracking industry in its entirety, although surrounded by a shroud of controversy, is an economic stimulator that many do not acknowledge. The potential replacement of coal for efficient and clean energy would not be possible if it weren’t for the utilization of hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, and horizontal drilling. To consider fracking as only a danger to the environment would be an overstatement while saying fracking only provides natural gas and nothing else is an understatement. It’s important to consider all of the potential benefits that fracking gives to the economy and how its minor environmental destruction could lead to an economic reconstruction. Although fracking has a negative connotation with most people,
The main environmental effects that hydraulic fracking could have on a local environment are largely, ground water contamination, aesthetic appeal, and the risk of a seismic activity increase in the local area. All three of these issues would, clearly, have a negative impact on a local environment. The contamination of ground water is a legitimate question to ask and concern to be addressed. When comparing conventional oil drilling to non-conventional oil drilling in terms of water contamination, the unconventional method of fracking looks to be safer. The drilling of fracking is much deeper within the earth than more conventional drilling methods. There are several impermeable levels of rock and material that prevents gas and oil from reaching the water table. With conventional drilling, there is an impermeable level of rock between the gas and oil pocket, however, it is much closer to the water table than the location of the fracking. Even though the actual location of the extraction of the oil and gas is generally further from the water table, studies have shown that it is probable that water can still be contaminated through fracking. “The authors of the PNAS study conclude that the contamination they document is likely the result of “… poor well construction.” This quote suggests that the reason for the contamination in the ground water is because of poor construction of wells due to demand and production rates. Another view comes from