Hydraulic fracturing or fracking is a technique used to obtain natural resources. Fracking is popular technique in the oil industry because of the rate at which it obtains these resources. Fracking is benefiting the United States in several ways. Despite the benefits, fracking has not received full support from the population. Environmental activists have hindered the use of fracking. Hydraulic fracturing should be more widely used. Originally, fracking was the process of placing gunpowder down a vertical shaft and the generated explosion would create cracks in the shale. The natural gas inside the shale would be released and collected above. Fracking began in the late 1800s and the use of gunpowder remained for decades. Gunpowder was abandoned
…show more content…
(2)Safety is an important issue to the public, and news of risks are easily accepted. Unfortunately, the majority of people do not questions if those risks are true. Instead, they accept the news and convey it to others. Due to fear, the risks of fracking are often misunderstood. Those misunderstandings can become fact to the public. For example, hydraulic fracturing was believed to cause water contamination. (3) A couple hundred water wells near fracking rigs in Pennsylvania contained undrinkable water. The news of undrinkable water in Pennsylvania caused a panic in which people correlated undrinkable water with fracking. Unluckily, only part of the story reached the public. (4) “In one study of 200 private water wells in the fracking regions of Pennsylvania, water quality was the same before and soon after drilling in all wells except one. The only surprise from that study was that many of the wells failed drinking water regulations before drilling started” (Brantley 3). (5) The condition of those wells did not change with the introduction of fracking. Several wells contained contaminated water before fracking rigs were constructed. (6) People will learn of an incident which harmed people, and not delve if there was actually correlation between fracking and water contamination. The apparent risk of hydraulic fracturing are based on false …show more content…
(2)Coal has been the main energy source for America, but has several weaknesses. For example, coal has a high emission of greenhouse gases. These gases contributes to global warming and regional air quality. Coal burning is not environmentally safe. (3)Fracking has brought natural gases as a source of energy, and natural gases are not as destructive as coal. Natural gas is a viable alternative to coal. (4)“…natural gas produces only somewhere between 44 and 50 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions compared with burning of coal” (Wihbey 4). (5)The gas emissions from natural gases is half of the emission of coal. Natural gases are drastically safer than coal. The reduction of emissions, such as sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide, makes them safer for the environment and people. The amount of water used in fracking per the amount of energy created pales in comparison to the amount used in coal and oil removal. Increase fracking will produce more natural gases to be used as an alternative for
(2)Safety is an important issue to the public, and news of risks are easily accepted. Unfortunately, the majority of people do not questions if those risks are true. Instead, they accept the news and convey it to others. Due to fear, the risks of fracking are often misunderstood. Those misunderstandings can become fact to the public. For example, hydraulic fracturing was believed to cause water contamination. (3) A couple hundred water wells near fracking rigs in Pennsylvania contained undrinkable water. The news of undrinkable water in Pennsylvania caused a panic in which people correlated undrinkable water with fracking. Unluckily, only part of the story reached the public. (4) “In one study of 200 private water wells in the fracking regions of Pennsylvania, water quality was the same before and soon after drilling in all wells except one. The only surprise from that study was that many of the wells failed drinking water regulations before drilling started” (Brantley 3). (5) The condition of those wells did not change with the introduction of fracking. Several wells contained contaminated water before fracking rigs were constructed. (6) People will learn of an incident which harmed people, and not delve if there was actually correlation between fracking and water contamination. The apparent risk of hydraulic fracturing are based on false …show more content…
(2)Coal has been the main energy source for America, but has several weaknesses. For example, coal has a high emission of greenhouse gases. These gases contributes to global warming and regional air quality. Coal burning is not environmentally safe. (3)Fracking has brought natural gases as a source of energy, and natural gases are not as destructive as coal. Natural gas is a viable alternative to coal. (4)“…natural gas produces only somewhere between 44 and 50 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions compared with burning of coal” (Wihbey 4). (5)The gas emissions from natural gases is half of the emission of coal. Natural gases are drastically safer than coal. The reduction of emissions, such as sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide, makes them safer for the environment and people. The amount of water used in fracking per the amount of energy created pales in comparison to the amount used in coal and oil removal. Increase fracking will produce more natural gases to be used as an alternative for