Fracking Conclusion

                Hydraulic fracturing and the production of shale gasses can easily help us reduce our debt as a country while helping the environment with burning less of the damaging, expensive, and foreign oil that we rely on as an economy. Instead of us spending the money to purchase the oil, we would be the ones making the money while marketing this product to other nations around the world. While people believe that fracking can be damaging to our environment, studies show that well-regulated and overseen wells have a very small chance of leaking methane and other gasses harmful to our water and air supplies. (Garnesh, 2) The reported water contamination from hydraulic fracturing is mostly in early wells, back when construction of wells was unregulated and barely watched over by the EPA and other organizations. Now that we understand the potential risks of hydro-fracking, we can start to learn how to prevent those risks and perfect the process of well creation. With simple research and advances to our current fracking technology, we have a potentially risk-free, cheap, abundant, and a more environmentally fuel source, that is more importantly under our feet as we speak. People say the money should be put into more green, renewable technology, but the fact is that those technologies are in the too distant future to have us continue our current lifestyle while researching. Shale gas can be a quick-fix to generate money, potentially funding even more green energy source research with the profits from the marketing of shale gas. To sum everything up, we have the technology to run our current facilities on shale gas; not yet for solar or wind power. That is the biggest monetary concern for green energy companies. But we have power plants that fuel themselves with oil that can be quickly converted into a shale-powered plant. So, who would like to disagree with a cleaner fuel source that will reduce our countries debt, create jobs, and will help the environment while paving the way for more future green technology?

Bibliography

John Manuel, Environ Health Perspect. 2010 May; 118(5): A199. , http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2866701/

http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/wells_coalbedmethanestudy.cfm

Elliott, Justin. "Donate." Top Stories RSS. Propublica, 8 Apr. 2013. Web. 16 Apr. 2013
http://www2.epa.gov/hydraulicfracturing


Kusnetz, Nicholas. "Donate." Top Stories RSS. Propublica, 4 Apr. 2011. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.propublica.org/article/deteriorating-oil-and-gas-wells-threaten-drinking-water-homes-across-the-co


Greene, Jay. "Hydraulic Fracturing in Michigan: Waiting for the Boom." Crain's Detroit Business. Crain Communications, 24 Mar. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20130324/NEWS/303249962/hydraulic-fracturing-in-michigan-waiting-for-the-boom


Snow, Nick. "Special Report: States Regulate Hydraulic Fracturing Well, Officials Testify."Login to Access the Oil & Gas Journal Subscriber Premium Features. Oil&Gas Journal, 7 June 2009. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.ogj.com/articles/print/volume-107/issue-25/General_Interest/special-report-states-regulate-hydraulic-fracturing-well-officials-testify.html

Research., Ian Urbina And Jo Craven Mcginty; Jeremy Ashkenas And Kitty Bennett Contributed. "DRILLING DOWN; Learning Too Late of Perils in Gas Well Leases."The New York Times. The New York Times, 02 Dec. 2011. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/drilling-down-fighting-over-oil-and-gas-well-leases.html


Biello, David. "Hydraulic Fracturing for Natural Gas Pollutes Water Wells: Scientific American." Hydraulic Fracturing for Natural Gas Pollutes Water Wells: Scientific American. ScientificAmerican, 5 Aug. 11. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-for-natural-gas-pollutes-water-wells
Bradbury, James. "Capturing the Fugitives: Reducing Methane Emissions from Natural Gas."On Environmental Expert. World Resources Institutes WSI, 4 Apr. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.environmental-expert.com/articles/capturing-the-fugitives-reducing-methane-emissions-from-natural-gas-365187

Agyarko, L. B. "A Review of Non–Renewable Energy Options in Illinois." A Review of Non–renewable Energy Options in Illinois on Environmental Expert. International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Technology (IJOGCT), 26 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.environmental-expert.com/articles/a-review-of-non-renewable-energy-options-in-illinois-362995

Parker, Chloe. "Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources." On Environmental Expert. IWA Publishing, 2 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.environmental-expert.com/articles/study-of-the-potential-impacts-of-hydraulic-fracturing-on-drinking-water-resources-347033

McLendon, Russell. "MNN - Mother Nature Network." MNN - Mother Nature Network. MNN Mother Nature Network, 10 Dec. 2010. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/translating-uncle-sam/stories/big-frack-attack-is-hydraulic-fracturing-safe

Atlanta., Hollie Deese And Robbie Brown; Hollie Deese Reported From Nashville, And Robbie Brown From. "University of Tennessee Wins Approval for Hydraulic Fracturing Plan." The New York Times. The New York Times, 16 Mar. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/16/science/earth/university-of-tennessees-fracking-plan-wins-approval-and-stirs-protests.html

Wernau, Julie. "Illinois' 'fracking' Future Fractured." Chicago Tribune. Chicago Tribune, 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-15/business/ct-biz-0113-fracking-20130113_1_shale-gas-natural-gas-american-gas-association

Mage, Michael. "On Hydraulic Fracturing." CEN RSS. CEN News, 14 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i2/Hydraulic-Fracturing.html

Jacobs, Nicole. "Digging Into the Real Facts Behind Hydraulic Fracturing." Energy In Depth Northeast Marcellus Initiative. Marcellus Shale, 9 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://eidmarcellus.org/marcellus-shale/digging-into-the-real-facts-behind-hydraulic-fracturing/17040/

Ehrenberg, Rachel. "The Facts Behind the Frack | Science News." The Facts Behind the Frack | Science News. Sciencenews.org, 8 Sept. 2012. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/343202/description/The_Facts_Behind_the_Frack

Drye, Kelley. "Hydraulic Fracturing: A Status Report On Regulations | The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel." Hydraulic Fracturing: A Status Report On Regulations | The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel. Metrocorpcouncil.com, 21 Mar. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/23068/hydraulic-fracturing-status-report-regulations

Thakur, Garnesh. "President's Column." Journal of Petroleum Technology. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 6 Mar. 2012. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
http://www.spe.org/jpt/article/86-presidents-column-2012-03/

The Facts Behind the Fracks

                                                         

                As we look further our technology to make current fuels more efficient, there are some alternatives in the meantime we could be looking at to potentially help our environment. “Natural(shale) gas provides almost 25% of the U.S. energy supply and could provide 50% by 2035” says John Manuel, author of many books about hydraulic fracturing. Shale gas is a resource that is very abundant in North American regions. This natural gas can be used as a less-damaging alternative to fuel our current lifestyle, while also being much cheaper to produce and distribute than oil. However, many people are concerned about potential damage to the natural water supplies, earthquakes, food supply contamination, and the health of people living in “fracking zones”, or areas in which this natural gas is being obtained.
                The process behind extracting natural gas from deep underground rock is known as “Hydraulic fracturing”. This involves putting millions of gallons of water laced with various chemicals into a well, drilled deep down, and then horizontally. This fractures the rock surrounding the well, releasing the gas encased inside, which can then be contained and marketed for various uses. The fluid used by fracking engineers is mostly sucked back up, and stored in an on-site pool designed for containing chemicals and large amounts of liquid. The problem with these fluids is being referred to as “backflow”, in which the chemically laced water can sometimes seep back down through the well, as it doesn’t all get sucked back up. Also, fracking fluids are not regulated in some states for means of disposal, so in some cases, fracking companies are dumping it where ever, with little regard or knowledge to the public. According to Peter Heywood, the process of drilling and operating these wells use so many chemicals for various purposes on the machinery. With all these different uses of chemicals, the result is a waste-pool that is basically a large, disgusting toxic pit, which is not good for anything nearby.(P. Heywood, 2-4) Government regulations are in place or are being put in place to help contain these fluids, but without much knowledge about the damaging causes of fracking, it’s still a work in progress.
             There are debates over hydraulic fracturing having an effect on natural ground water and the wellbeing of people drinking said water. John Manuel, author of various books on the topic, says that fracking has a potential to cause damage to the environment, but also can help us achieve “energy independence”. Water samples near fracking wells have been shown to contain methane, a gas given off in the process of extracting natural gas. However, with more testing and improvements in fracking techniques, we can make natural gas a more reliable energy source. Current studies reveal that the process shows “minimal threat” towards environmental matters, but still should be looked into (J. Manuel, 4-5).
               However, that’s only one of the possible threats fracking poses. There have been reports ranging from contaminated drinking water to kidney damage to sickly or dying livestock near fracking sites. Elizabeth Roytes, author of the article “What the Frack is in our Food?” discusses the effects the polluting qualities of hydraulic fracturing and the effect it is having on farmers with fracking wells on or near their land. She leads us to know the problems associated with the contamination of the air, water, and ground, which affect the food grown there and whoever lives there, including livestock, which has tested positively for neurotoxicity. This reveals that fracking can have more of an effect on not only our              water, but food and air supplies also. (Royte 11-18) Veterinarian Michele Bamberger says that animals contaminated by fracking elements “are making their way into the food system”. The only way these animals could have become exposed is by the water they drink, food they eat, or air they breathe. The old term “you are what you eat” comes into play here. As our food sources are exposed to this contaminated water, they themselves become contaminated and unsafe to consume. Inedible, contaminated cattle isn’t the only problem, it’s the fact that they’re producing dead or sick calves. Even if the calves are born completely healthy, the cows are producing less milk to help them grow, which also can affect the lifespan/growth of livestock. The sex of the cattle in question are also becoming more erratic, producing many more females than males, which is also an uncommon problem, but it is believed that the steers aren’t complaining. (Royte 11-18)
              Though there are many speculations about the probability or potential of hydraulic fracturing, the research hasn’t been in-depth enough yet to make a conclusion on the topic. Basically, we know how to do this process, but we’re unsure of the facts about the fracks. Naturally, people are concerned about fracking when they hear the risks it involves, but experts agree that regulation is the key to safely operating fracking machinery without harming the environment. Even without any federal intervention, companies are working to improve their techniques, making landowners feel more comfortable with these companies working on their land. While this is going on, more investigation is urged by more people, and the result is a $107 billion program funded by the European Commission. This money will go to research in new green tech, which does include fracking. The research done on fracking will reveal if the process really does cause environmental damage; if it does, we will learn how much and what we can do to prevent it. Maire Geoghegan-Quinn, commissioner for research, innovation, and science for the multi-billion dollar project describes the future with this project, as it will help us understand everything that’s happening with the world’s climate, which includes much research to be done on hydraulic fracturing. The research project will most likely lead to a “smarter, more sustainable and more inclusive society”, as it will help us understand best methods for obtaining natural gas, or if the shale gas is even worth the mining with the environmental damage. At this point in time, there’s not much to know because in all honesty, we don’t know yet. (Heywood 42-45)
Once we fully understand fracking, we can start to create regulations to make it safer for everyone.
                Referring to the second paragraph, stories of fracking affecting livestock and crops have been alarmingly reported. Jackie Schilke, a farmer in northern North Dakota has been directly affected by a fracking well near her land. Ever since the wells drilling she got periodically more unhealthy as time went on, and she figured it must be the water, as her crops began to fail and cattle began to drop dead or become ill. She herself had developed kidney and respiratory problems. Studies showed that “Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene—compounds associated with drilling and fracking, and also with cancers, birth defects and organ damage.”(Royte 11-18.) Also, her contaminated livestock is deemed unsafe for consumption, and now cannot be sold.
                Also, the fracking debate also brings in the question of creating jobs. It’s true, someone needs to be building and operating these wells, so there are definitely new jobs being made. In today’s economy, that’s always a great thing. However, local residents of fracking areas argue that most of the jobs being created are taken by out-of-staters, and therefore pointless, apparently. The Marcellus Shale region, ranging from West Virginia to southern New York, cans alone support 21,000 new jobs in PA alone. Even if most jobs go to out-of-state workers, that’s still a hefty chunk of jobs left over for the locals, while their local economy may get stronger also due to having more activity and people around. (Speakman, 3). Burton Speakman, author of the article “Review cuts confusion, bias from studies on shale jobs says that “This year, IHS, a company that compiles economic reports, stated that in 2010, Ohio had 31,462 jobs attributable to shale-gas production.” According to the IHS study, that number is expected to increase to 41,366 by 2015 and 81,349 by 2035. Studies show that the number of jobs is expected to greatly increase by 2015(Speakman, 1).
                Thankfully, because this is America, companies are working their best to make their processes more eco-friendly than their competitors. People owning land desirable for fracking tend to get a lot of offers from these companies doing the fracking. Because people tend to be concerned with the environmental hazard, it’s a business technique to have the most efficient, less-damaging method for fracking, and therefore increases their business. According to John Meyers, the fracking industry does have precautions in place for protecting the environment. He claims that when drilling the wells, they’re protected by steel casings enclosed in cement to prevent leaks of various harmful gasses into the groundwater. There are various fluids that come up in this process known as “back-flow fluids”, which are bad for the planet. These are stored in pits designed for holding such substances. Though there’s no law against lining these pits, which would most likely be a good thing to do. “Utility companies are now growing their programs and better responding to the needs and demands of their customers” says John Klein, author for Journal of Property Management. Basically, this means what I described above. Organizations naturally want to better themselves for the sake of profit, and in this case, making fracking “greener” is what sells, so that’s what they’re busy working on. (Klein, 2-3)
                To sum this all up, fracking has its potential pros and cons. There have been reports of environmental damage, which can be linked to hydraulic fracturing, but we aren’t sure what part of the process is causing the damage. With more research and regulation to come, fracking will most likely become a much more prominent fuel source in the future, as current tests only show about 2% of all fracking wells leaking methane gas (Manuel, 33-34). Before we can make a concrete decision on whether hydraulic fracturing will help us in certain ways, we need to wait for more research to be done by professionals to truly understand the facts behind the fracks.