The Bigger Picture of Fracking Reflection Katrina Iroegbu BADM 328 Professor Watts October 10, 2012 Abstract In recent times, hydraulic fracturing, “fracking” has been questioned as to its positive affects in the American society. Instead of purchasing natural resources from other countries, America wanted to produce their own natural resources, thus, the term fracturing came into existence.
With this in mind, jobs are created, cleaner gas is in the ozone, money is saved for the countries overall expenses, but the process behind to reach that goal consist of risks that can become a threat to water supply, food supply, and the environment as a whole. If certain protocol and procedures aren’t put in place “fracking” can very well be a negative aspect towards energy conservation for America’s businesses, government, and society. Hydraulic fracturing, “fracking” can be considered a potential threat to America’s energy conservation through businesses, government, and society.
With up and coming issues that have been happening in the water supply in rural parts of America, you come to wonder if this method of saving energy is worth putting at risk people’s health. At the same time you wonder what government stand is on the issue, and if this is the right decision made to better the economy. In order to understand the issue upfront we need to know the background of fracking. America usually purchases natural resources from other countries. But in recent years, the U.
S have come across ways to limit their budget spending through finding its own natural resources that can better help the economy. A definition from huffingtonpost. com says that fracking is. . . “Hydraulic fracturing that involves drilling thousands of feet below the earth's surface and pumping millions of gallons of water and chemical additives at high pressure into the well. ” With this method, it brings out a particular gas called shale gas. Shale gas provides a valuable energy source for the U. S, it is a natural resource that is considered a clean fossil fuel.
It can take the place of coal as a better method for energy consumption. In many ways fracking has been seen as an environmental threat in the U. S. In the New Yorker, Elizabeth Korlbert writes how fracking is turning as a potential threat of water contamination as to making the water unsafe to drink. A study by researchers at Duke University says (2011) “Methane frequently leaks into drinking water near active fracking sites, which probably explains why some homeowners have been able to set their tap water on fire. . . . . also, contamination is so-called “flowback” water.
Huge quantities of water are used in fracking, and as much as forty per cent of it can come back up out of the gas wells, bringing with it corrosive salts, volatile organic compounds, and radioactive elements, such as radium. ” With this problem occurring it shows issues that affect business, government, and society. Due to potential harm with the water supply, the economy is truly as risk . Businesses wise, properties of home owners in rural areas in the U. S are being reduced based on the wells that driller s have put in place, thus, reducing the value of the property exposing it to dangers of water contamination.
Governmental issues show that there isn’t any legislation in place to protect the water supply. According to Kolbert (2011) “In the 2005 energy bill, largely crafted by Vice-President Dick Cheney, fracking was explicitly exempted from federal review under the Safe Drinking Water Act. ” Society is exposed to health hazards based on lethal contamination. Through these issues we see that based on fracking there are potential harm to society’s health, government lack of any legislation, therefore enabling drilling businesses to self regulate themselves through their own codes of conduct.
Two negative long term outcome that can happen through these dangers of water contamination varies. For one, people will become affected through the water source, raising medical bills way up the roof. Two dangers through environment can harm a crop, which interferes with our food supply, affect farmer’s productions, and highly affect grocery stores all around the country. Granit, the risks that are involved through fracking are threatening within the process, but the overall picture of fracking is to show favorable long term outcomes.
Fracking will enable U. S to produce their own natural resource, which would then open up more jobs for the U. S. This can also benefit lowering government spending by becoming dependent from foreign import, and spending the money for better uses, perhaps a hundred percent financial aid in college funding programs. The possibilities are endless. I believe that fracking is a potential threat in our business, government and society. Society is at great risk of future health issues, not only health, but as well as the environment as a whole.
Crops are at risk with these toxic chemicals that come from fracking. Business wise, Farms would not be able to produce the amount needed for our nation, thus affecting grocery stores, and then the economy. So instead of the economy prospering, it will still have to suffer based on the effects that fracking would continue to do to the environment. Government would have to find other ways to substitute the loss that would be greatly lost through these toxins. So in conclusion the government is not making the right decision as for bettering the economy.
References List Kolbert , E. (2011, Dec 05). Burning love. New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www. newyorker. com/talk/comment/2011/12/05/111205taco_talk_kolbert Howard , J. (2011, Nov. 11). Fracking pros and cons: Weighing in on hydraulic fracturing. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www. huffingtonpost. com/2011/11/10/fracking-pros-cons_n_1084147. html? utm_hp_ref=fracking Walsh , B. (2011, Nov 21). Political fractures over fracking. TIMES. Retrieved from http://science. time. com/2011/11/21/political-fractures-over-fracking/