Kelly 1 Kevin Kelly Fiona Harris-Ramsby English 1010 13 December 2013

Fracking- Environmental disaster or financial windfall

Introduction
The term Fracking is a word that has been derived from a new method of oil and gas recovery. The impact of this method of oil recovery is alleged to cause sickness in humans and animals by contaminating ground water. There are even claims that this type of mining can even cause an earthquake. Elizabeth Royte tells us in her article on fracking and food supplies that the amount of water used in this type of mining can reach into the millions of gallons for just one site (ROYTE,12). The water is mixed with chemicals and forced into the ground with such high pressure that the geological formations in the earth actually fracture. These fractures (Fracking) open up these hard to reach deposits of oil and gas so that they can be retrieved. With this research I will compare 3 viewpoints providing the individual opinions of experts and observers on the impacts of fracking on the environment, personal health and the economy. The potential for this type of mining has unlimited potential in comparison to the more conventional methods that we have seen over the last 100 years. These types of deposits have changed the oil and gas industry across the world and are very prevalent in the United States. Michael Ratner and Mary Tiemann provide data in their report on unconventional oil and natural gas showing that the United States became the worlds largest producer of natural gas in 2009. Additional data from their legislative report show that between 2008 and 2012 oil production in the US increased by 1.5 million barrel per day and 92% of that increase is due to unconventional

Kelly 2

recovery (Ratner, Tiemann, 2). The chemical risks and hazards that come with this type of recovery method are causing concerns for the people who live in these resource rich areas. A number of these areas that are laced with oil and gas just happen to be under neighborhoods and communities. This close proximity of the mining operations to the public is driving suspected health issues and escalating the risks of environmental damage to the water and surrounding areas.

Environmental Impact
The first perspective that we will explore is the impact that fracking is alleged to have on the environment. There is certainly a lot of speculation on the chemicals that are used in these types of mining activities. Do we have any concrete evidence that fracking is causing the damage that is claimed? Bill Slack who owns an environmental fracking company makes the comment in his article for pollution engineering he states These specialized additives are proprietary and the primary source of environmental concerns when describing the chemicals used in the fracking industry (Slack, 18). In Slacks article he explains that the fracking that is being conducted to extract oil and gas is using a technology that is similar to a method that has been around since the 1940s. Slack tells us this type of technology is used by his company for decades to deal with environmental issues in the remediation of contaminated sites. Ratner and Tiemann state that the EPA is looking into the impact of fracking on drinking water. A majority of the claims in the research are of contaminated water supplies as the cause of sickness. However the release of that data from the EPA has been delayed multiple times and is now scheduled for release in 2016 (Ratner, Tiemann, 15). Slack refers to a proprietary mix that each of the companies is using and these companies are using an intellectual property protection so they dont have to divulge the

Kelly 3

actual chemical list that is being used. The two main chemicals we see stated the most in the research are Benzene and Methane. Levy, Kaktins, and Sattler nursing professors published in the American nursing journal stated that In Pennsylvania, Osborn and colleagues found that the average methane level was 17 times higher in private drinking-water wells within one kilometer, or about 3,280 feet, of active drilling sites, compared with those in non-drilling areas (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 48). Methane is in abundance in these types of wells and tends to get burned at the site leaving pollutants in the air and left to contaminate the local area (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 48). Nick Grealy in his article in Engineering and Technology states In any number of scientific studies from the UK, EU and the US, nobody has found evidence of what is alleged by the environmental lobby (Grealy, 24). Grealy claims that the media has exaggerated and overstated what problems have occurred which is causing a distortion in the public perception (Grealy, 24). These are a few of the factors that influence the perception of experts and the public. The combination of secrecy on the part of the fracking companies combined with the medias input has created a negative opinion of the impacts to the environment.

Health Risks
Further research provides not only impacts to the environment but also the negative effects to our health. Can the reported health issues be a leading indicator to what is being done to the environment? Are the people living near these fracking operations acting as the canary in the mine shaft for what is going to happen? There are claims by nursing groups that the environmental and health impacts of fracking are real. They state that the health claims by the people who live in these areas are evidence that fracking is damaging to our health and the environment. Levy, Kaktins and Sattler (The 3 nursing professors) tell the stories of 2 separate

Kelly 4

families who have health issues related to the families close proximity to fracking operations (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 45). They go on to state that the workers who work in this industry have a propensity for a number of diseases including cancer and repertory issues (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 46). The professors also question the decision making processes of the government by stating Public and individual health concerns are rarely raised when energy policies are discussed on the state or federal level (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 50). Another perspective is the impact to our food supplies that if people are sick so are the animals and if the water is contaminated so are the crops (ROYTE, 17). One study showed that although the companies are secretive about what specific chemicals a list has been compiled showing some 350 chemicals used in the fracking process (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 46). Of the reported chemicals 75% are known to cause repertory problems in humans (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 46). The professors also state that with the millions of gallons of water used there is also some 80-300 tons of chemicals mixed with the water. This cocktail is then put into the well with the majority of the chemicals are returned to the surface and captured in an open air containment facility (Levy, Kaktins, Sattler, 46). On a positive note in the journal article by Ratner and Tiemann they state that there has been no direct correlation to fracking projects and contaminated groundwater. They also comment on the fact that geologists say that the wells are so deep below the water supply that the fractures created during the process are not large enough for the fractures to reach the water supply and contaminate the supply (Ratner, Tiemann, 7).

The Economic Factors

For the final perspective we are willing to risk health and environment to do this then it must be very prosperous to the industry and also to the states that are allowing this to continue at a

Kelly 5

phenomenal rate. With input from Ratner and Tiemann we can provide the growth that is expected in this type of extraction process. Their Congressional services report shows that by 2040 over half the gas and 35% of the oil that will be extracted will be with this method (Ratner, Tiemann, 3). It has been stated multiple times in the research that this unconventional mining will provide high wage job growth numbered in the hundreds of thousands of jobs. With an abundance of new gas reserves the prices of natural gas has dropped significantly. Natural gas is expected to be the energy of the future saving nearly 50% on the amount of VOCs produced when burned (Ratner, Tiemann, Summary). This is not just prevalent in the United States this is worldwide with deposits of resources being discovered in larger supplies than those of North America. All the major oil companies are participating in this type of mining and all the major service companies like Halliburton will be drilling these wells even in Utah. There are others who say this is just the oil companies and the lawmaker getting together to make money. Charles Davis of the University of Colorado states in his paper on the politics of fracking that Oil and gas companies were able to forge close working relationships with state regulators who shared the belief that building and maintaining a strong economic base offered multiple benefits for the state (Davis, 177). Davis believes that the politics of the oil and gas industry are keeping this going and disregarding the environment in lieu of making money. What is the cost of our health and the environment can we pay the bill in oil and gas?

Conclusion
In closing we have reviewed multiple conversations on the topic of fracking and how it being perceived in the industry. I believe anything new is going to attract a multitude of perspectives until there is a better understanding of what the impact may be from this mining technique. If

Kelly 6

there are secretive company procedures then people will be suspicious of what is going on. If there were truly indications that there was a contamination of water supplies would the EPA take the time to do further investigation or would there be a federal injunction on mining while additional studies are conducted. Are the oil companies big enough to command this type of power over local government? Will we destroy our land and our health to make money? We have discussed these perspectives from the angle of the environment, health and prosperity what will we chose as the most important factors in the future.

Works Cited
Davis, Charles. "The Politics of Fracking: Regulating Natural Gas Drilling Practices." Review of Policy Research 29.2 (2012): 177-191. Web. Grealy, Nick. "Fracking [is one oflhe best." Engineering and Technology 2013: 24. Web. Mcdermott-Levy, Ruth, Nina Kaktins, and Barbara Sattler. "Fracking, the Environment and Health." American Journal of Nursing 113.6 (2013): 45-51. Web. Michael Ratner, Mary Tiemann. "An Overview of Unconventional Oil and Natural Gas: Resources and Federal Actions." 2013. ROYTE, ELIZABETH. ""What The Frack Is In Our Food?."." Academic search premier 18 November 2013. Web . Slack, Bill. "Environmental Fracturing Vs. Fracking." Pollution Engineering 11 Nov 2013: 18-23. web.

Kelly 7