Jacob Talley
Mellisa Tetterton
English 1200-081
27 April 2012
What
the Frack is Going On?
In
the past decade, efforts to find new alternatives for the United States current
usage of carbon dioxide-emitting fuel sources have increased. The possible destruction of our o-zone layer
and the threat of altering the climate drive a desire to save the planet from
the possible repercussions of global warming and have scientists and
researchers working hard to figure out more innovative ideas to make the U.S. a
“greener” country. One method in
particular, hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” has been a big hit throughout
the country. Hydraulic fracturing has
gained popularity around the country by offering several positive economic
gains including enhancing job availability, boosting the economy, and improving
the health of the environment and by infamously attracting copious amounts of
negative publicity in the form of contaminated drinking water, natural
disasters, and air pollution that could cause numerous harmful diseases and
breathing ailments.
Hydraulic fracturing is the process of pumping thousands
of gallons of a mixture of water, sand and chemicals as far as 10,000 feet
below the earth’s surface to the Marcellus Shale layer. The pressure of this mixture fractures the
shale by making tiny cracks. The sand
particles then hold the cracks open as the natural gas flows back up the pump
and is collected by the company that is running the drill site (ProPublica). Fracking enthusiasts support the process
because of the potential it brings to drastically improve the environment by
reducing our emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse agents, decrease
our country’s dependence on foreign oil, and provide job opportunities to a
struggling economy.
Hydraulic
fracturing provides an alternative fuel source that can cut down CO2 emissions
as well as other greenhouse pollutants in the United States. By decreasing these greenhouse gases, we can
quickly turn our global warming issue around in a positive way and prevent
further damage to the environment caused by the increasing global temperature. At the very least, it provides scientists
with extra time to discover an affordable method of cutting out greenhouse gases
all together. Methane is a greenhouse
gas emitted from natural gas that is also many times more heat-trapping than CO2.
However, the volume of CO2 is
enormous in the U.S. as it makes up 81.3% of all greenhouse emissions. The rate is only 1.1% for methane compared to
8.5% based on the global warming potential.
Natural gas burns 30% less CO2 than oil and 45% less than
coal. Converting to natural gas would
greatly reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere because it is so
much cleaner burning than our current methods of energy production (Natural
Gas). By doing this, the air quality
would increase drastically and provide several health benefits that include
healthier lungs and airways.
Smog is yet another environmental issue that plagues the
big cities in the United States. Smog
along with ground level o-zone can contribute to ailments ranging from
temporary discomfort while breathing to permanent damage to the lungs. Natural gas does virtually nothing to
contribute to smog because it releases very low levels of smog causing agents
such as nitrous oxides and particulate matter.
It produces 90% less particulates than oil and 99% less than coal. The integration of natural gas usage into
public systems such as electrical generation, transportation, and industrial
use would greatly reduce amounts of smog in the country; especially in the
summer when natural gas is cheap and amounts of smog are normally great because
of the heat. Acid rain, which is caused
by a combination of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrous oxides and water
vapor, would be greatly reduced by replacing coal burning plants with natural
gas burning plants. Natural gas emits
barely any SO2 and 80% less nitrous oxides than coal (Natural Gas). By switching to natural gas as a fuel source,
the amount of smog in areas of heavy population would sharply decrease and the
rates of disease and cancer associated with smog would decrease as well. By doing this, the health of the community is
affected in an entirely positive way that makes living conditions better.
Transportation and industrial uses of greenhouse emitting
fuel sources are the largest contributors to air pollution in the U.S. A switch to natural gas would significantly
lower the amount of toxic pollutants being released. Due to the increased presence of hydraulic
fracturing sites, enough natural gas can be harvested to support our energy
needs and improve the environment by reducing many of the harmful pollutants
being released today. In particular,
switching from the current use of diesel and gasoline to natural gas for motorized
vehicles would decrease the amount of carbon monoxide (CO) and CO2 by
97% and 25% respectively. The switch
would also decrease nitrous oxide production by 60% and other non-methane hydrocarbons
by 75% (Natural Gas). The switch would
lead to limiting the damage done by humans to the environment and a big dip in
gasoline usage, which would elongate our current supply of fuel and natural
resources as a whole. It would make the
U.S. a much more energy efficient and cleaner environmental country.
Not
only will fracking clean up the United States environment, it will also reduce
our need for foreign oil. In 2005,
petroleum consumption peaked in the U.S. at over 20 million barrels a day. Since then, due to the success of fracking
and other methods, that rate has decreased to 11.8 as of 2010. Because of the shift from petroleum to
alternative fuels taking place, consumption rates and the dependence on foreign
eastern hemisphere countries have declined.
Of our net imports, 49 percent come from countries in the western
hemisphere, which includes all of North America, South America, and U.S.
territories in the Caribbean (EIA). As the
demand for crude oil and petroleum fuel continues to decrease, so will the cost
of gasoline, which would help many citizens financially in the process that
struggle with the current high fuel costs.
Suddenly, families have a bit more financial wiggle room and can go out
and spend more money on leisure activities and simultaneously stimulating the
economy in the process. This will help
lead to the end and eventual reversal of the current recession.
In addition to lowering the country’s dependency on
foreign imports, the natural gas industry has stimulated the economy by
providing 9.2 million people with jobs of the advanced variety (Energy
Tomorrow). Major companies
such as Exxon Mobil and independents such as Chesapeake Energy, Devon Energy,
and Anadarko contribute many of the new job opportunities (Kusnetz). If the oil and natural gas industry was
granted access to states such as Florida, Pennsylvania, New York, and West
Virginia, the development of the Marcellus Shale could cause over one million
job opportunities to become available by 2020. $176 billion have been distributed by
the industry in the form of wages to U.S. employees that work in positions such
as engineers and geologists and even unexpected occupations such as zoologists
and veterinarians. The industry has also
supported the government through paying leases and royalties for
production. These rents have totaled
over $100 billion since 2000 (Energy Tomorrow).
This provides a huge boost in the economy to help combat the current
recession.
While there are many great outcomes to be gained by
utilizing hydraulic fracturing, the supporters of the practice are met with
just as many people that think negatively of the activity. Those that are against drilling for natural gas
claim that fracking causes more air pollution, is responsible for some natural
disasters, and that it contaminates drinking water. While fracking enthusiasts praise natural gas
for being able to make the United States a more eco-friendly country, there are
those who oppose the industry in itself for doing the exact opposite and
harming the environment.
Environmentalists in states like Wyoming, Texas, Pennsylvania, and
Colorado have been complaining of the air pollution that the drill sites are
causing. The gases from the well escape
from the storage tanks, pipelines and other equipment, and during the drilling process
itself. Environmental regulators in a
small rural town in Texas found high levels of benzene, a cancer-causing agent,
and claimed that the problem stemmed from all of the drill locations and fuel
rigs in the community (Cappiello). Environment
advocates in the Chesapeake Bay area of Virginia videotaped several drill
locations with infrared imaging and found that they were not properly managing
the sites (Associated Press). Levels of
ground-level ozone were found in the Upper Green River Basin in western Wyoming
that exceeded those in other bigger smoggier cities. In 2009 the environmentalists sued the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to force them to take action in
investigating and monitoring the sites for the harmful emissions that were not
being controlled. The EPA responded by
placing regulations on hydraulic fracturing that would halt the release of soot
and smog-causing pollutants. Guidelines
were also given for better management of containment and other equipment to
reduce the amount of leaked gas. These
rules are designed in such a way that actually helps the company save about $30
million every year by selling the gas they collect (Cappiello). Though the environmentalist have fought and
won for tighter regulations, no actual environmental issue has been directly
linked to hydraulic fracturing. Only the
management of the sights has come under scrutiny. The drive to find an alternative fuel source
has stifled efforts to ban the practice that provides the new fuel source.
Citizens who live in areas of heavy drilling have not
only had trouble with pollutants, but they have also been faced with extreme
adverse environmental effects. Several
regions that are being fracked have reported many occurrences of earthquakes
and the blame is pointed squarely at natural gas drillers. When the millions of gallons of water, sand,
and chemicals hit the shale it blasts cracks in the rock layer and brings in
the potential occurrences of earthquakes.
Incidents of fracking-related earthquakes have surfaced in several
states including Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Arkansas and more. Braxton County of West Virginia has had eight
quakes in 2010 alone (RT). Due to the
vast amount of pump locations in Ohio, the county of Mahoning has experienced
11 unexpected tremors in the last eight months.
All of which occurred just two miles from the drilling region (Downing). Virginia has had the oddest occurrence of quakes
however. Dominion Power calculated that
there would be roughly five events of a 5.5 or higher quake hitting central
Virginia in the next 10,000 years. A 5.8
hit the community in August that shook the entire east coast (RT). Arkansas, by far, has had a ridiculous 1,000
earthquakes allegedly related to hydraulic fracturing. Researchers have shut down the operations of
two natural gas drilling companies in order to investigate whether or not it
has been caused by the actions of the drill sites. Since the companies have gone offline,
seismic activity has reduced in the region, but random tremors have still
popped up across the state (Eddington).
There has been extensive investigative research done on the shakes in
relation to the drilling operations, yet no definite connections between the
two have been discovered. As much as it
seems who the obvious culprit is behind the occurrences, the lack of proof
keeps drilling locations up and running.
Without the proper proof, drill sites in other parts of the country will
stay open and continue drilling for the energy that our government puts a high
priority on.
As many cases of natural disasters and air pollution that
have been reported, even more water contamination stories have surfaced as a
result of hydraulic fracturing. In 2005,
as a part of the Energy Policy Act, Congress excluded hydraulic fracturing from
the list of industries that had to comply with Safe Drinking Water Act. This meant that drilling companies did not
have to disclose the exact mixture of chemicals to the public and that the EPA
was not allowed to investigate them. However,
in May 2011 President Obama formed the Natural Gas Subcommittee on the Safety
of Shale Gas Development. The team, led
by U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, works with the EPA and other agencies to
make guidelines that ensure the fracking operations are well maintained and
environmentally safe (Randle). High
levels of arsenic, glycols, and barium were found in drinking water wells in
Pennsylvania in 2009. The EPA charged
Cabot Oil & Gas with several violations and ordered the company to provide
homes with fresh drinking water (Lustgarten).
Officials also found that waste water from the pumping in New York was
being disposed of in sewage treatment plants.
This operation not only posed a danger for drinking water safety, but
also the safety of the workers (Sapien).
In 2009 residents of Pavillion, Wyoming reported that their drinking
water had an oily sheen, petroleum odor, and an abnormal coloration. The EPA quickly came in and began
investigating in March of 2009. Many
chemicals were found in many wells such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene,
methane and 2-butoxyethanol, which is a known hydraulic fracturing fluid. It was also discovered that waste water was
disposed of in the Wind River Formation, which is an Underground Source of
Drinking Water by definition under the United States Code of Federal
Regulations. However, because of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, the EPA could take no disciplinary action (Johnson). Although numerous amounts of evidence towards
contamination were discovered, the investigation ended, yet again, with no
direct connection between the pollution of the water wells and hydraulic
fracturing. After all of the leads and
investigative work done on fracking, the process remains just as strong as it
did the day it started since no evidence has linked fracking to any wrong doing
directly.
There is no doubt that there is certainly evidence of
fracking leading to environmental issues such as water and air pollution and
earthquakes. Government has attempted to
regulate it by forming subcommittee to find the safest method possible for
these operations and to prevent the incidents that have been reported. However, until there is a direct link from
natural gas drilling to harmful effects on the environment, hydraulic
fracturing will continue. The efforts
put forth by our government are extremely important in determining the safety
of fracking. The increased federal focus
on the issue will make the process safer and allow us to obtain more natural
gas to help our countries energy need and consumption. Doing so will tremendously help out both our
economy and environment.
Hydraulic fracturing is a relatively new and exciting
mystery for our country. It could help
fix an environment that has been ravaged by previous poor decisions, diminish
our dependence on foreign fuel sources, and create millions of jobs for our struggling
economy. This would push the U.S. in a
very positive direction and put us in a good position to improve our economic
and environmental situation. At the same
time, this seemingly wonderful method could also be damaging the air quality,
causing strange earthquakes, and making drinking water dangerous to
consume. However, the lack of evidence
linking these consequences to hydraulic fracturing has prevented any official
action being taken to prevent it. Until
there is quality evidence against natural gas drilling, companies will just
continue to frack on and the United States will continue to reap the benefits
and possibly suffer from its consequences.
