Over the past decade, fracking has spread rapidly, leaving a trail of contaminated water, polluted air, and marred landscapes in its wake. As said in an article in Scientific America "However, the true cost of fracking — ranging from cleaning up contaminated water to repairing ruined roads and beyond — are likely to be borne by the public, rather than the oil and gas industry. And as with the damage done by previous extractive booms, the public may experience these costs for decades to come."
Fracking is the new boom in The U.S., but what people don’t realize is it’s a huge environmental hazard. Some people don’t know what fracking is, so we’ll lay out the basics. Here is some background about fracking before we can talk about the negative effects it has on the environment. "Many sandstones, limestones and shales far below ground contain natural gas, which have formed as dead organisms in the rock decomposed. This gas is released, and can be captured at the surface for our use, when the rocks in which it is trapped are drilled. To increase the flow of released gas, the rocks can be broken apart, or fractured. Early drillers sometimes detonated small explosions in the wells to increase flow." As said by New York Times. On the surface this seems like a groundbreaking discovery and a great way to solve the energy crisis. No!! Fracking is very dangerous and only leads to more pollution into the air. When companies drill and force millions of gallons of water they have this fracking cocktail which includes acids, detergents and poisons that are not regulated by federal laws but can be problematic if they seep into drinking water. This lethal concoction then seeps into the ground and gets into underground streams. Eventually these chemicals get into peoples drinking water. Now thousands of people have to worry about what chemicals are in their water and also the air. A study in Pavillion, Wyoming, has shown that people's “wells were contaminated with fracking wastes that are typically stored in unlined pits dug into the ground.”
What's even worse is that most of the chemicals in fracking are not chemicals that commercial laboratories can detect. These labs were originally set up for the Superfund program, under which EPA cleans up the most contaminated sites in the nation. “They are great at detecting chemicals found at Superfund sites but not as good at detecting chemicals used in fracking.” One such chemical is methanol. The simplest alcohol, it can trigger permanent nerve damage and blindness in humans when consumed in sufficient quantities. This is similar to the a problem mention in Soybeans and Power, where chemicals and pesticides are sprayed into the air and contaminate nearby villages drinking water and can eventually lead to illnesses. In a case study shown on EnvironmentAmerica Dimock, Pennsylvania, fracking contamination ruined the local drinking water supply. The cost to permanently replace drinking water with a new source is estimated at more than $11 million. There are hundreds of cases like this where people are paying thousand of dollars in health cost because of these companies and the pollution they are causing. Fracking is bad for the everyone living in the environment and the earth itself. Is the cost of fracking really worth the health risks, or should our money be spent on finding a cleaner, more renewable energy?
What's even worse is that most of the chemicals in fracking are not chemicals that commercial laboratories can detect. These labs were originally set up for the Superfund program, under which EPA cleans up the most contaminated sites in the nation. “They are great at detecting chemicals found at Superfund sites but not as good at detecting chemicals used in fracking.” One such chemical is methanol. The simplest alcohol, it can trigger permanent nerve damage and blindness in humans when consumed in sufficient quantities. This is similar to the a problem mention in Soybeans and Power, where chemicals and pesticides are sprayed into the air and contaminate nearby villages drinking water and can eventually lead to illnesses. In a case study shown on EnvironmentAmerica Dimock, Pennsylvania, fracking contamination ruined the local drinking water supply. The cost to permanently replace drinking water with a new source is estimated at more than $11 million. There are hundreds of cases like this where people are paying thousand of dollars in health cost because of these companies and the pollution they are causing. Fracking is bad for the everyone living in the environment and the earth itself. Is the cost of fracking really worth the health risks, or should our money be spent on finding a cleaner, more renewable energy?
picture 1
picture 2
Fracking is also illustrative of global power dynamics and exploitation. I watched a documentary that covered Shell's extensive fracking in the Niger delta for an environmental studies class last year. And Shell's immense digging and extracting has devastated the entire delta's ecosystem today. This is undoubtedly but not merely an environmental problem. It is also a means by which corporations like Shell - who we all buy gas from - and countries are continuing to exploit people in other states.
ReplyDeleteAs a native Virginian, this is something close to home for me. Fracking in western Virginia and West Virginia have caused so much destruction and harm to the population. I believe that Fracking is not worth the risk, using Fracking to become energy independent is not worth hurting those who would presumably use the oil. It astounds me that we protect parts of our population from certain environmental hazards but even in the face of certain evidence, our government does not act to fully protect its citizens.
ReplyDeleteFracking is a very pressing issue with devastating effects. You did a great job highlighting the chemical processes involved in it that tend to be less publicized. Fracking reads havoc on human and non-human communities alike, and is not worth the suffering it causes.
ReplyDelete