Betel Ali Multimedia Writing and Rhetoric April 15 2013 Jeff Bain-Conkin Word count: 2417 Hydraulic Fracturing:

A means to a better tomorrow? Driving across the state of Texas and being in the presence of the warm humid air, tall green grass, bright sun light, and the endless blue sky is an overwhelmingly wonderful experience. But among all of this beauty and nature, stands a metallic fortress that seems to strip all of the life around it. The thought of future generations not being able to experience nature on earth the same way that we do today is an unsettling thought. Oil refineries and drilling sites are now a more common sight than most other things. Fossil fuel usage, global warming and alternatives to foreign oil have been the centers of controversy, debate and division in the United States. The question being, how do we quickly fix our environmental issues without dispensing a large amount of our economy? The answer to this question is slowly leaning towards hydraulic fracturing. Hydraulic fracturing or fracking is a process in which high-pressure water with additives is used to increase fissures in a rock to extract oil or gas (Howarth). Even though fracking is becoming a very common practice around the United States, it is the least researched, in terms of its public health effects and environmental effects. If we are going to solve our environmental problems without causing detriments to public health and environment, we need to invest more time and financial support to research that could potentially improve and perfect hydraulic fracturing.

According to the carbon dioxide information analysis center (CDIAC), the United States ranks second in fossil fuel related carbon dioxide emissions with 1.55 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted per year (Boden). This much emission of greenhouse gases cannot in any way benefit the environment; and regardless of whether one thinks global warming is a sizable threat to our future or that is mere conspiracy, there is no rational justification to claiming that the amount of waste products we eject into our environment is not causing any harm. But the fact of the matter is, we cannot just swear off of using petroleum or coal as our resource because of the large economic inconvenience of such a drastic change. Considering the size of emission mentioned above, it is not hard to believe that green house gas emission by the United States has doubled since the 1950s and that global green house gas emissions are also increasing in an exponential manner (Boden). The more one analyzes the statistics of green house gas emissions, the more it is evident that fossil fuel usage is not a trend that is here to stay. So how do we transform and retrain our failing system to revolutionize the way we consume and produce energy? Natural gas is a combustible mixture of methane and other hydrocarbon gases. Unlike other forms of fossil fuels, it is proven that natural gas is clean burning, with very few pollutant emissions (Davis). Our daily energy consumption for daily activities such as; cooking, heating and electricity usage are now mainly supported by non-clean burning fossil fuels. If we were to substitute these fossil fuels with natural gas, we could potentially cut down our green house gas emissions by a substantial amount. Currently natural gas accounts for 30% of electricity production and 50% of home heating (Napach). Besides the fact that it is clean burning, the

other essential perk of using natural gas is that it is a very abundant natural resource in the United States and does not need to be imported. The amount of natural gas that could potentially be recovered in the United States reached a record estimate of 2,384 trillion cubic feet at the end of 2012; an amount that could supply the United States (at current levels of consumption) for 105 years (Proctor). According to the U.S. energy information administration (E.I.A), Texas was the highest producer and consumer of natural gas in the United States with 7.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas produced and 3.6 trillion cubic feet consumed. Louisiana, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and Colorado were also listed as leaders in production as well as consumption of natural gas in 2011 ("Natural gas production by state"). The numbers relating to natural gas reserves are staggering. To think of the amount of time it took to take this new discovery develop it into such a significant part of our energy usage is very promising and exciting. So what is the main driving force in the sudden growth and flourishing of natural gas production and harvesting? The answer is none other than the miraculous development of hydraulic fracturing. A technology that is so future-forward that it revolutionized the way we use natural gas as a resources altogether. After the development of hydraulic fracturing, our natural gas consumption rose 4.4% to 25.5 trillion cubic feet per year (Napach). John Curtis, a professor of geology and geological engineering at the School of Mines and leading Hydraulic fracturing researcher, stated that hydraulic fracturing has unlocked gas resources which not long ago were considered impractical or uneconomical to pursue (Proctor). Hydraulic Fracturing uses a mixture of chemicals and water to create high pressure in underground shale rocks to release the natural gas trapped in those rocks (Davis). Hydraulic fracturing has created an industry with such a high growth rate, that it has inevitably attracted many investors both globally and from all

around the nation. The amount of financial contribution and labor that is needed to run and operate a fracking site is also considerably high. But the technology has improved to the point where new and improved vertical and horizontal drills reach gas reserves to the maximum efficiency. The economic feasibility, advanced technology and marketing appeal have made hydraulic fracturing the go to method of gas extraction. . But since the technology is so new scientific data on environmental detriments is very scarce (Howarth et. al 2011). Since the development of hydraulic fracturing in the 1940s, the economic benefits of natural gas as a resource have been incredibly significant. In 2008 studies showed that 2.8 million jobs were accredited to the fracking industry (Davis). The employment opportunities

(with financially desirable salaries) created by hydraulic fracturing is inclusive of laborers with
different ranges of educational levels and work experience (Proctor). In a country that is recovering from a major financial crisis, the creation of jobs for all kinds of workers should be held to very high value. Evaluating form the state level, many states with natural gas reserves have gained a large economic advantage because of the development of fracking. Texas alone has added 200 billion dollars to its economy from the production of natural gas (Davis). The usage of natural gas the major energy source is also essential in setting the foundation to energy independence from foreign oil. Energy independence would reverse the economic dynamic between the Mideast and the western countries. Judging from the financially devastating oil spill in the gulf coast in 2010, dependency of foreign oil is not only environmentally irresponsible but also economically undesirable (Finkel et. al 2011). As grand and promising Hydraulic Fracturing is, it is not without its flaws. The Academy award nominated documentary Gasland by Josh Fox, show cases a side to Hydraulic fracturing

that is impactful and unsettling. Fox takes the viewer on a very personal journey to the homes of people personally affected by the effects of fracking in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. To better understand the real effects of Hydraulic fracturing on public health and the environment, Fox interviews public health officials, geology experts, environmental scientists, and fracking experts. The suffering experienced by families whose health and life style has been directly affected by the chemicals that have been input their environment is portrayed by the powerful scene in the documentary that shows water from a faucet catching on fire. The documentary show cases the political entanglements and propaganda behind fracking and exposes the carelessly ignored regulations when it comes to hydraulic fracturing. The documentary has inspired a lot of outrage from the public and has brought fracking into the spot light. Hydraulic fracturing includes the input of chemicals mixed with water deep into the groundmeaning that groundwater is not safe from contamination from these chemicals. Those who depend on ground water for drinking water, run the risk of consuming chemicals that could potentially endanger their lives. In addition to that, drilling companies are not legally required to list the chemical compounds used in fracking making it very difficult to assess the full scope of the contents of fracking fluids. By not forcing companies to list and regulate the chemicals they use, the United States government has exempted hydraulic fracturing companies form the clean water act, as well as the safe drinking water act (Fox). However, toxic mud and fluid byproducts from the drilling and fracking as well as spills of oil and gas wastes are not uncommon. (Finkel et. al 2011). Many chemicals that can potentially cause public health issues have been identified in fracking fluid. The identity of the chemicals involved in fracking are kept hidden by drilling companies using the rationale that by listing the chemicals used, drilling companies would lose their competitive edge over other drilling companies; just like a coveted secret recipe at a high

end restaurant would lose value if other restaurants were aware of what made the recipe unique or better. But when it comes to the health of human beings and animals, the significance of whether a company loses its competitive edge should be negligible. Another identified problem concerning pollution of ground water includes the contamination of water by methane. Methane being the main component of natural gas, and because of its gaseous nature, it can easily seep into surrounding water as it escapes from the fissures created by the hydraulic drills (Holzman). Supporters of hydraulic fracking claim that poor drill design is responsible for methane contamination, not the act of fracking its self

(Holzman). But reports of flammable drinking water and explosions near fracking sites raise
questions of how much overall government regulation the fracking industry undergoes. If the proper maintenance and design of fracking sites is not properly regulated and overseen, it is possible there is a conscience neglect of this potentially dangerous industry for mere economical reasons. On the subject of water pollution, what becomes of the water that is actually used in the process of pressurizing rocks? Each fracking site uses up to 1-8 million gallons of water (Fox). Water is a very valuable resource and is becoming scarcer as population and consumption increase. Using the amount of water mentioned above in order to extract natural gas, is quite wasteful and an irresponsible manner to utilize such a valuable resource. The water that is used in fracking fluid cannot be reused or repurposed because of the amount of toxic chemicals put in it. Therefore it has to be disposed of through evaporation and water treatment. (Fox). In addition to environmental pollution by agents input by the process of fracking, the pollution caused by radioactive materials, hydrocarbons, natural salts and heavy metals pose a threat to public health and ecosystems around fracking sites (Howarth). The combination of

carcinogenic, mutagenic, and toxic chemicals in fracking fluids combined with disease causing elements unearthed from the shale rocks, gives a more than a substantial amount of reason to reconsider how we go about hydraulic fracturing (Howarth). Other quite frequently disregarded faults of hydraulic fracturing are air and noise pollution. The drilling sites are major producers of noise and gaseous waste not to mention how aesthetically unpleasant they are. Noise and air pollution intern lower the quality of life in an area. There is a lot of back and forth when it comes to the issue of hydraulic fracturing. The basis on which different arguments for or against fracking are formed does not seem to be from thorough research. The amount of secrecy and lack of information makes it very difficult to make an educated decision on whether to support fracking or not. Especially when being in the shoes of the many different families who are offered large sums of money by drilling companies for their land. Families have to not only consider making drastic life changes, but also have to take into consideration, whether or not they would be harming their community by introducing this potential public health treat. There is not enough peer reviewed data to support the claims of the different families who report decline in their health since the establishment to fracking sites in their area. Those who are skeptical and financially capable have found ways to purchase water in order to avoid being exposed to possibly contaminated water, but those who cannot afford to purchase water for their entire families needs, have to endure the health issues associated with contaminated well waters. Hydraulic fracturing has been a great blessing to the energy production world. It has greatly enhanced the amount of natural gas we can utilize as a resource and it has greatly helped boost our economy. The economical benefits of natural gas are incredible, considering the amount of natural gas reserves the United States is blessed with. It has helped the United States

compete in the energy production market and could potentially sky rocket the amount of economical savings we could have as a country. On the other hand the use of hydraulic fracturing has raised many eyebrows concerning the effects it has on the environment and human/animal health. Secrecy over the materials used in fracking fluids, as well as the pollution caused by the drilling its self has intensified public contempt towards fracking. Hydraulic fracturing has been vilified by social media and press but still continues to be endorsed by the United States government as well as by other nations. Natural gas can be the answer to our environmental problems for many years to come, at least until we are to find a flawless method of energy production to sustain future generations to come. The lack of research and investment to improve hydraulic fracturing not only elongates the process of finding a solution to our problems but also unearths other problems that future generations will have to be burdened with. The future of our nation should be an at most priority and deserves to be fully invested in and supported. By investing in natural gas, hydraulic fracturing and new means of energy production, we ensure ourselves of a future that is worthwhile.

Literature Cited Boden, T.A., G. Marland, and R.J. Andres. 2011. Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A. doi 10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2011 David C. Holzman. 2011 Natural resources: Methane found in well water near fracking sites. Environmental Health Prespectives. Vol. 110: 289. Davis, C. (2012), The Politics of Fracking: Regulating Natural Gas Drilling Practices in Colorado and Texas. Review of Policy Research, 29: 177191. doi: 10.1111/j.15411338.2011.00547.x Fox, Josh, dir. Gasland. HBO, 2010. Film. 15 Apr 2013 Howarth, Robert, Anthony Ingraffea, and Terry Engelder. "Natural gas: Should fracking stop?." Nature . N.p., 14 Sep 2011. Web. 14 Apr 2013. Madelon L. Finkel, Adam Law. 2011. The Rush to Drill for Natural Gas: A public Health Cautionary Tale. American journal of public health. 101: 784-785. Napach, Bernice. "Natural gas boom could make U.S. energy self-sufficient." The daily ticker. N.p., 5 Mar 2013. Web. 1 Apr 2013. Proctor, Cathy. "U.S. natural gas reserves at record levels, says School of Mines panel." Denver Business Journal. N.p., 09 Apr 2013. Web. 14 Apr 2013. United States. Energy information administration. Natural gas production by state. 2013. Web.