Why Is Fracking Wrong

Fracking the Good and The Bad In the essay, “Hope It’s in Your Backyard,” by Neil deMause, he wrote about the positive and negative factors of fracking and its effect on the world. The ramifications of fracking could be devastating to the earth with regards to natural gas and oil. It is debated that fracking, in the United States, would stimulate economic growth, lower gas prices, create more jobs, and make our country independent for oil and natural gas. The effects of burning fossil fuels is negative to the earth’s climate and the cause of some pollution. Natural gas is cheaper, but its effect on our ecosystem may be devastating.

These individuals are more than willing to risk oil spills, water pollution, reliance on fossil fuels, and higher unemployment rates. There are several environmental concerns that should be known. “If constructed, the pipeline, known as Keystone XL, will carry one of the world’s dirtiest fuels: tar sands oil. ”(1) It has been shown that the tar sand oil from this region of Canada is some of the dirtiest fuel on the planet; the extraction and refining process is just as dirty.

There are two sides to every argument and hydrofracturing is no different. Phelim McAleer, an investigative journalist and producer of FrackNation, uses logic to convince viewers that fracking does not pose environmental concerns. Josh Fox however, employs a multitude of logical fallacies as well as arguments based on emotions in an attempt to convince the audience that fracturing is bad for the environment. McAleer created his film to refute this opinion. Ultimately, Phelim McAleer’s documentary made a better argument than Josh Fox’s documentary.

SUMMARY Journalist, Nick Stockton, in the article, “Fracking’s Problems Go Deeper Than Water Pollution,” published in June 2015, addresses the topic of hydraulic fracturing and argues that fracking has more negative consequences than one might think. Stockton supports his claim first by appealing emotionally through a short summary of a recent event involving fracking and also by utilizing evidence to back up his statements. The author’s overall purpose is to highlight outcomes of fracking in order to make more people aware of issues that can arise from this common way of obtaining energy. Stockton utilizes a scientific, yet critical tone in order to create an unbiased article and appeal to his audience’s concern for the well being of the

My general overview of this article is the methods used to obtain fossil fuels is hurting people and nature all around the world. People are beginning to come to a realization about how fracking is harming the world. However, people in cities like “Buffalo, New York, Pennsylvania, and the author’s hometown

Another professional Shelly interviewed was Dr. Joseph Martin, a professor in Department of Civil, Architecture, and environmental engineer at Drexel University. Her question to the professor was “How is gas drilling compared to coal mining? What is the effect on the environment?” Dr. Martin stated, “The surface impact of this hydro fracking is phenomenally lower than anything you could do. As far as safety issues of natural gas drilling, they’re minimal.

Paul Galley an accomplished environmentalist enters the controversial debate about Hydrofracking in New York, with his article “Hydrofracking: A bad Bet for the Environment and the Economy” published in the Huffington Post on January 05, 2012. Galley states “Net-Net, fracking is simply bad bet” fracking poses serious risk to New Yorkers. Galley, president of Hudson Riverkeeper has worked for over twenty-five years to protect the environment and support local communities, as a non-profit, public official and educator. This piece continues his devotion to protection of the Hudson River, and the drinking water supply of New Yorkers. Galley effectively convinces his audience through his use of appeals to pathos and logos that hydrofracking will have negative impacts on New Yorkers.

Fracking poses potential danger to all of the workers. For example fracking can cause small earthquakes that can be harmful. The earthquakes have not been a safety concern yet but if they get any bigger they can become a big concern. During fracking it takes several days, during those days it requires continuous monitoring to ensure the safety of the workers.

But, aside from the benefits that the industry has brought, the oil boom, and the widespread use of hydraulic fracturing, has exposed many underlying issues. With the population rising, crime rates have soared; there are more burglaries, rapes and drug trafficking than the state has ever seen. But the issues don’t stop there: the controversial practice of fracking has come under fire as evidence points to fracking as the cause for both harmful air and water contamination. The effects of fracking have not only affected the people living in the North Dakota oil-towns, but also the animals, and the flora and fauna that have been gravely impacted as well. However, to completely eliminate fracking, at least in the short term, is not a reasonable possibility; therefore, it is imperative that short term solutions: such as greater regulation on fracking infrastructure, more police officers to curb crime and a movement towards more traditional oil drilling is imperative.

With the increased scale of fracking in Texas, one might wonder if the oil boom is affecting our water supply. The value of water in Texas is deeply cherished considering Texas’s dry climate and long-standing droughts. One may even wonder if Texas is valuing its water as much as it is its oil. As research furthers, we can begin to weigh the positive and negative effects of oil fracking. By providing overwhelming data on oil fracking

Thesis statement The benefits of natural gas hydraulic fracking do not justify the adverse effects it causes through continuous earthquakes, pollution of the water table, or potential health hazards to human populations. This subject is interesting to me because I work for a natural gas company. I have had many conversations with other employees regarding natural gas fracking, and most of them are biased to the views of the drilling companies which means they do not see any harm in it. There also used to be companies fracking for natural gas in Arkansas on the Fayetteville Shell. The number of small earthquakes did rise (3.0 or smaller), but there was nothing resulting in a large amount of devastation.

The article Gasland Debunked and the documentary “Gasland” discuss the very controversial topic of “fracking.” According to the beliefs of Josh Fox, fracking is extremely dangerous to the environment and the Earth’s groundwater supply. Contrary to this, the article Gasland Debunking claims that Fox is trying to portray untrue words as facts. In the article Gasland Debunked, there are many pros to how the article was written.

The book’s narrative paints a tale of a local man who rallies his small town against the titans of big oil. Briggle’s role in fracking began when a fellow member of the city council asked him to form of group

Modern day fracking was founded in the 1990s. Texas is the state with the most fracking

Researchers have “requested data from Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, and Texas, all states heavily involved in the recent surge of oil and gas drilling, about complaints related to hydraulic fracking for oil and gas” for their research on fracking (Dechert).   The research collected was shocking, over 2,000 complaints in Texas alone and several cases on well water contamination within the states mentioned in Decherd’s article. People need to be alerted about how real fracking is and the damages it is doing. These complaints and cases should be a wakeup call to the world and say that we should put it to a