Geography 1500 Society and Nature

Frack Off!
Ryan Krajicek
250673043
003
Sarah Levine

Passing the proposal to initiate the construction of a major hydraulic project in

southwestern Ontario would have detrimental and potentially irreversible effects on the
environment and organisms health. Increased economic activity cannot justify the
devastation that the introduction of fracking onto the shale landscape would create.
Shale is a sedimentary rock, often positioned in a layer above rich oil and gas
deposits. The rock contains a cheap energy source called natural gas that can be extracted
by a welling/drilling technique known as fracking. The utilization of natural gas is a
relatively recent phenomenon. In 2000, the United States natural gas production was
almost non-existent, rising by the end of the decade to more than a 20% share of gas
production. By 2035, because of increased drilling in shale reserves, natural gas should
compromise over 50% of United States gas production (BBC, 2010).
By understanding the horrific consequences of fracking, there is potential to limit
the widespread extraction of natural gas. Many small townships in the continental United
States are witnessing firsthand the calamitous aftereffects of fracking. In the small
Pennsylvanian town of Dimock, residents have discovered severe contamination in their
water supply (Fox, 2010). Deemed drinkable by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), the water in the households is fizzy, discolored and flammable. Many local
inhabitants and animals have developed breathing problems, hair loss and high fevers.
The general belief among residents is that hazardous chemicals have leaked into the
groundwater supply thereby contaminating the drinking water (Fox, 2010).
The EPA, one of the key agents in approving potential health-risk projects, has not
taken the proper measures to ensure that the fracking has not harmed nearby residents. A
controversial clause, known as the Halliburton loophole, excluded nearly everything

used in fracking from being regulated by the EPA. The corporations that are using the
fracking technique are essentially injecting known toxins into the environment with no
adverse consequences. Protection agencies like the EPA are designed to protect the
public from large corporations from exploitation. This showcases that even the most
powerful environmental agencies cannot properly protect the peoples interests (Fox,
2010).
Increased levels of air pollution have surfaced across the fracking landscape.
Garfield County, Texas was one of the quaint communities invaded by the oil hungry
titans. The air pollution caused by oil and gas burning is eclipsing the amount of pollution
produced by car emissions. Theo Colburn, a resident in Garfield County, is one of many
inhabitants that are experiencing negative side effects from poor air quality. Some of the
side effects include lesions, localized pain, loss of taste and smell (Fox, 2010).
In conclusion, the consternation created by the fracking techniques is too
detrimental for the publics health to consider potential economic benefits. Extremely
unsafe water and air pollution levels have been observed and without a proper
environmental protection agency overseeing the fracking projects, more communities will
continue to suffer from poor health. Therefore it is not advisable to approve the
development of the proposed hydraulic fracturing project.

References
Fox, J. (Director). (2010). Gasland [Documentary]. USA: Palace Films :.
Q&A: Will shale revolutionise gas?. (2010, September 23). BBC News. Retrieved
November 14, 2013, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11399950