What’s the Fracking Deal?

What’s the Fracking Deal?

The use of natural gas for the generation of electricity is expected to increase by 60% in America over the next 25 years (Jackson, Vengosh, Carey, Davies, Darrah, O’sullivan, and Pétron 329). A significant proportion of the natural gases are extracted using the fracking process. This paper argues that the cons of fracking outweigh the pros when it comes to the health of the masses and the negative effects on the environment.

There are many benefits associated with shale drilling. To begin with, natural gases act as a crucial source of electricity. Their use in energy production decreases the demand for the utilization of fossil fuels. At the same time, natural gas has nearly half of the carbon emissions of coal and no mercury (Espectas). This suggests that shale drilling has lesser environmental effects in comparison to the use of coal in the generation of electricity. Besides, the United States has large volumes of natural gases (Espectas). This means that shale drilling may reduce or eliminate the United States’ reliance on energy sources from other countries. Besides, shale drilling is turning many rural farmers into overnight millions as these people rent out their land for the exploration of natural gases (Espectas). As such, shale drilling can be an important source of income for many Americans.

On the other hand, fracking is considered to carry too much risk for human health and the environment. For instance, many of the additives used in the fracking process are mutagenic, toxic, and carcinogenic (Engelder 272). One of the air contaminants associated with fracking is benzene. On this note, the state of Texas has observed high benzene concentrations in the atmosphere in the area where the Barnett shale well is located (Engelder 273). These toxic levels are higher than the recommended standards. As a result, the activity of the fracking wells poses a significant effect on human health. This is because the high levels of air contaminants produced by shale wells expose people to the risk of cancer (Engelder 273). At the same time, air pollutants may impact the ground-level ozone. The worst part of it is that most of the fracking process uses a massive amount of water, which is a resource that is not in huge supply across the world.  For example, a site the size of two hectares that has at most 16 wells uses 300 liters of water and additives a day (Engelder 272). In some areas, hydraulic fracturing only accounts for a small proportion of the total water usage. In other cases, shale-gas wells use gallons of water each day.

It has always been argued that fracking is a safer source of energy in comparison to conventional methods. However, recent data has started to disapprove this claim. For example, a recent peer-reviewed study revealed that shale gas wells release more methane into the atmosphere than conventional wells (Engelder 272). Methane is a major greenhouse gas even when in small quantities. As such, the large volume of methane gas released into the atmosphere by wells using fracking can have devastating effects on the environment and global warming.

The fracking method raises serious issues as far as wells integrity is concerned. Poor wells integrity increases the financial, health and environment costs of the fracking process (Jackson et al 337). Studies have revealed high gas migration around wellheads. For example, a recent study revealed that 23% of the wells had soil and surface gas leakage of 0.01 to 200 m ³ methane per day (Jackson et al. 338). At the same time, it is likely that fracking-return fluids may contaminate drinking water. As already established, the fracking method compromises well integrity. Hydraulic fracturing could result in the opening up of cracks in wells resulting in the contamination of groundwater (Jackson et al. 341). Groundwater is a crucial source of water for many people. According to Engelder, contamination may occur through improper disposal of fracking fluids, surface spills, and blowouts (273). Some wells that use fracking method do not have proper ways of disposing the fluids coming from this process. In some places, such as Pennsylvania and New York, the fracking fluids are treated using the municipal sewage management plants (Engelder 273). Unfortunately, these plants were not designed with the fracking fluids in mind. These fluids form dangerous contaminants end up forming part of the municipal drinking water thereby risking the health of many people.

However, there is an ongoing debate on whether or not fracking companies are responsible for the high level of methane seen in fresh water reservoirs in areas where these firms operate. The local government and the representative of shale drilling firms argue that there is no evidence that hydraulic fracturing can be attributed to the presence of methane and other air pollutants in fresh water sources (Journeyman Pictures). However, other YouTube confirms that the presence of methane in rivers can be attributed to fracking. Jeremy Buckingham, in the video titled “A river on fire! Gas explodes from Australian river near fracking site,” demonstrates the extent to which well leaking as a result of fracking expose people to the dangers associated with methane. In this video, lighting of a match stick in a river near fracking site result in massive flames. The flames last for a while. According to the video, the river in question is a kilometer away from the fracking sites (Buckingham). This video demonstrates the extent to which well leaking and the negative effects this problem poses to the society. At the same time, the YouTube video by the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition shows a homeowner demonstrating how methane gas from fracking ends up in water taps. In this video, the homeowner places a lighting match stick close to the water flowing from the tap (Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition). The results are unbelievable since a larger flame is witnessed which is a sign that the water being supplied to homeowners for domestic use may be contaminated with the dangerous methane gas.

To sum up, this paper has demonstrated that fracking poses serious effects on human health and the environment. At the moment, fracking should be stopped since it has more serious effects than conventional sources of energy when it comes to releasing the dangerous greenhouse gas methane among other air pollutants. Going forward, engineers should come up with more environment-friendly methods of disposing the fracking-fluid return wastes.