Hydraulic fracturing or fracking has become a concern both environmentally and in the public health sphere in Western Maryland. In analyzing these ideas, the environment and public health concerns intertwine in a discourse about the relationship on both power and knowledge. Fracking is a new issue for the state of Maryland to consider; therefore dominant narratives on this subject are still being developed and legitimized. Studies have been conducted in other regions around the world to analyze the various effects fracking has had on the environment and within communities, both economically and politically. However, despite the potential for Western Maryland to become a possible new site for fracking, there is a lack of literature that specifically analyzes the environmental and public health concerns as a discourse that may be detrimental to the people and the environment in this region. Also, as a result of fracking being a relatively new source of natural gas, there has yet to be a significant number of studies analyzing the health effects caused by fracking even in regions that have allowed fracking for a number of years.
The Marcellus Shale underlies Western Maryland along with New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia and is the United States’ largest on-shore natural gas reserve (Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative, 2015). Maryland is unique in its fracking regulations as emphasized by former Governor Martin O’Malley, who in 2011 signed the Marcellus Shale Safe
For the past twenty to thirty years, hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as fracking, has been the number one source of natural gas, oil, and energy in the United States. The process of fracking is that a well is built above the ground and then a drill digs several thousand feet deep into the ground to extract the oil and natural gas that is trapped inside of rock formations. Fracking is very controversial because of the cost of the process and the environmental “threats” that it poses. From methane emissions to earthquakes, fracking has been accused to be linked with several environmental issues. To prevent any environmental dangers, states place regulations and boundaries that energy companies have to follow in order to build a well and keep it up and running. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) also works with states to help regulate these wells. More importantly, fracking in the United States is very important and acts as a bridge to the future. While it may be argued that hydraulic fracturing is not beneficial to the economy and harmful to the environment, fracking in the United States should not be banned because fracking is not only imperative to the growth of jobs and the economy, but it also does not put the surrounding environment in danger.
Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the process of extracting natural gas from shale rock layers deep within the earth.The dangers of fracking are the chemicals that go into fracking and how much water is used and contamination of city water. Some dangers of fracking are water usage. They use 2 to 5 million gallons of water. Not all of the chemicals are recovered from the ground. We only know of 8 out of 600 chemicals. To many chemicals are used and some a harmful. Fracking water usage is too high for instance one well can use 144,000,000million gallons of water. 50%-70% of the fracking fluid is left in the ground and isn’t biodegradable. The waste fluid that is outside in the sunlight evaporates and releases volatile organic compounds(Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are organic chemicals that have a high vapor pressure at ordinary room temperature. Their high vapor pressure results from a low boiling point, which causes large numbers of molecules to evaporate or sublimate from the liquid or solid form of the compound and enter the surrounding air.) Due to the VOCs acid rain, ground level ozone and contaminated air. Ground level ozone is bad, but ozone up high in the atmosphere protects the earth from the Sun’s harmful rays.
“Fracking: the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, boreholes, etc., so as to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas”(Google). Ten years ago no one would have thought hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” would have caused such environmental harm; infecting public and private water systems, cutting down national parks, and causing extraneous health problems.
As the pace of shale gas drilling has accelerated in recent years, so have environmental concerns. Incidents such as a 2007 home explosion in Bainbridge, OH, the 2008 groundwater contamination on Wind River Indian Reservation in Pavilion, WY, and the 2008 chemical poisoning of an emergency room nurse in Durango, CO, have intensified the debate over regulation of fracking.10 As a result, new laws regulating fracking activities have
Over the past decade oil and gas producers have increasingly used hydraulic fracturing also known as fracking to extract oil and gas from the earth. Most people believe fracking is a new process but it has been around for over 100 years. Modern day fracking began in the 1990’s when George P Mitchell created a new technique by combining fracking with horizontal drilling. Since then, U.S. oil and gas production has skyrocketed. But the “new” perception of fracking leads people to incorrectly believe that fracking is temporary and that it somehow harms the environment. The truth is fracking is a reasonable energy solution if oversight and safeguards are used. In the last ten years fracking has improved conditions in the U.S. in three
In recent years, the subject of hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking has been a constant subject of interest in the news media. The pros and cons of fracking are passionately debated. However, the public should become educated on the subject of fracking prior to choosing a side of the argument. In the scholarly article, “Super Fracking,” published in 2014, by Donald L. Trucotte, Eldridge M. Moores, and John B. Rundle, a detailed description of fracking is provided, followed by their analysis of current issues surrounding the controversy. According to Trucotte, Moores, and Rundle, fracking saves the consumer money. The wellhead cost to produce natural gas in January of 2000 was two dollars and sixty cents per one thousand cubic feet. At an alarming rate, the cost at the wellhead to produce natural gas had risen to eight dollars per one thousand cubic feet by January of 2006. Comfortingly, the wellhead cost dropped to two dollars and eighty-nine cents by the end of 2012. Impressively, gas production increase and price decrease over the time period are a result of fracking. In their article, Trucotte, Moores, and Rundle describe in great detail that hydraulic fracturing, most commonly referred to as fracking is the process of drilling down into the earth to fracture the layers of rock so that a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the oil or natural gas inside. This method of fracking has been used commercially for the last fifty years.
“Fracking” isn’t a word that most people are familiar with unless they are well informed or active in local government or natural gas extraction. “Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves extracting natural gas from shale formations underground” (Collier, Galatas, Harrelson-Stephens, 2008). During the process known as fracking, millions of gallons of water are shot underground into shale formations to help bring the natural gas trapped inside the formations to be released so that it can surface and become available for extraction. This is the technique that is used for traditional fracking methods. Although fracking increases the states natural gas production, it also carries some negative side effects that are affecting the state and its people.
The mismanagement of the practice has the potential to create environmental damage such as water contamination, radioactive spills, and increased seismic activity that could cost thousands in dollars in damage. Furthermore, the unintended consequences of fracking can have detrimental effects on the environmental. The potential for water contamination can pose both an immediate and long term risk to environmental stability, including landscape distortion, inhabitability and ecological displacement. This contamination of drinking water can also be detrimental to the human environment, limiting the amount of safe water available for both the residential and commercial human environment. With the increase of fracking, the level of disapproval for the practice has only mounted. Concerns including overconsumption of
“Fracking is the process of obtaining Natural Gas from below Earth’s surface by drilling 1000’s of feet into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside.” Water, sand and chemicals are injected into the rock at high pressure which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well.” (Jackson). Hydraulic Fracturing got its name due to the fact of how the rock is fractured apart by the high pressure mixture of a number of chemicals, sand, and water. Drilling companies first began Fracking in the early 1940’s, and starting in the 1990’s companies began “safer drilling” due to the amount of concerns that had arisen because early drillers had to detonate small explosions that eventually ended up killing many people. Fracking has been used for nearly 60 years and the number of concerns about it are rising every day. Due to the new technological advancements in drilling Fracking has changed greatly over the years. Before, the drilling would go on for weeks on end in order to extract only a small amount of natural gas. Now, due to the invention of higher powered drills, the drills get double the amount then they used to be able to get in more then half the time. Over 95,000 square miles of shale deposits have been found around the Appalachian Basin but the only way to reach these deposits of shale is through fracking. “Fracking is a technique designed to recover gas and oil from shale rock by drilling
Fracking has become a nation wide debate and one that doesn’t seem to have an end. The state of North Carolina is one of the most involved areas of the fracking process. “North Carolina is sitting on top of large natural gas reserves (WRAL 1).” For this reason, many natural gas companies come to North Carolina for business. This helps the states economy because it produces more income and creates more jobs. The only problem is that the hydraulic fracking process has a reputation of contaminating local drinking water. This causes controversy with the citizens in cities such as Raleigh. Many cities welcome fracking while others try to completely ban it. The worst problem with fracking is that there seems to be no alternatives for it.
In 2026, life in Dimock, Pennsylvania was a lot different than how it was twenty years ago. This is evident by all the new advances in technology within the two decades. However, what changed the town the most was the hydraulic fracturing boom back in the mid-2000s. The town has experienced many ups and downs because of all the gas companies coming in to extract the natural gas from the Marcellus Shale, that lies underneath the land. Dimock had received a lot of attention from the media due to the side-effects of fracking, some families also engaged in long lawsuits against the companies because of these harmful side-effects of fracking. The government finally stepped in and demanded the gas companies to pay for
The issue of whether we should continue fracking without research has been widely debated around the world. The issue is important because it has fundamental environmental concerns and economic questions about the process of hydraulic fracturing. “Fracking” is the process of penetrating down into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is absorbed at the rock to release the gas inside. Water, sand, and chemicals are then inserted into the rock with compression which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well. Fracking fluid, which can be polluted with heavy metals like arsenic, known human carcinogens, has seeped into local waterways and polluted groundwater. People who live near fracking wells have a heightened danger of developing cancer, asthma, and other serious ailments associated with inhaling or ingesting the toxic chemicals involved in the fracking process. Countries approach fracking and researching much differently from each other. The injection of fluid into shale beds at high pressure to extract petroleum resources has been happening across the United States of America at rapid pace. By 2003, a gigantic public relations campaign was launched to lobby Congress to pass what is
No matter what the government does to promote hydraulic fracturing, it is still going to be extremely unappealing to those knowledgeable on the topic. As Lisa Bracken states, “Crap is crap no matter what package you put it in” (GasLand). Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is the process of drilling about a mile into the shale below. Once the shale has been reached, water, sand, and a mixture of over 500 chemicals are injected into the Earth. When the pressure of the Earth hits a certain point, a portion of the injected water flows back up to the surface and the well begins to produce the valuable resource known as natural gas (McElroy and Lu 27). Fracking currently occupies thirty-four states and is quickly expanding. The government is
The implementation of fracking has had a dramatic economic impact on the United States. The use of fracking in the last decade has increased the production of natural gas from shale formations by 10 times. (Issues) This has resulted in the United States moving more toward natural gas and away from coal to fulfill its energy power needs. In fact, one of the largest production growth areas of
In “Fracking” authors Michael D. Holloway and Oliver Rudd cover the technology and methods of hydraulic fracturing while explaining the consequences it has on our health, agriculture, and the planet. The two set out to expose the truths and fallacies regarding impacts of the controversial topic. Throughout the book excerpt, the authors reiterate their goal of not making false claims; “the goal is to educate and share insight.” The authors work to relieve the public of common hydraulic fracking related misconceptions brought on by the media. While the majority of citizens opposed to fracking report contamination to their water source and air, the authors’ collected studies reveal that these problems are not unique to fracking; they occur whenever