Hydraulic Fracturing

Driving down the quiet empty streets of my home town, I am reminded of the feud between neighbors. I look at the dead brown grass, the lawns of my neighbors, the signs that sit on these lawns are old and warn by the weather. However, these signs still show the struggle between pro and anti-fracking supporters. My own father will not let me place a sign on our lawn saying he does not want to be involved in “small town politics,” but that he is in support of anti- fracking. I have place a sign saying, “No Drill No Spill” in my bedroom window facing the street. The debate that is currently happening in my town is between people who support hydraulic fracturing and people who do not. I do not. While if you mentioned fracking anywhere in my town people would have an opinion, I have been surprised by how many well educated people don’t realize what hydraulic fracturing is.
Hydraulic fracturing is a method to extract fossil fuels from the ground that was first used in 1948(“The Regulation”). Before you can understand the pro and cons of hydraulic fracturing or known as fracking you need know what it is. Hydraulic fracturing is a process that used in the extraction of underground resources, such as oil, natural gas, geothermal energy and water(Jamtveit, B., and B.W.D. Yardley). The process of hydraulic fracturing is controversial, but natural gas plays a key role in the U.S. for fossil fuel energy. There are concerns that water is being affected by hydraulic fracturing.(Knudson, Thomas J.) Larger oil and gas industries used hydro-fracking, a slang ward for hydraulic fracturing, to enlarge the fracturing system underground and to create more room in the pores of the ground for production wells. This process creates more room to move more oil and gas to the surface(Mader, Detlef). Natural gas was found in shale gas formations and coal beds. Groundwater is the type of water that hydraulic fracturing affected the most. I do not support hydraulic fracturing. In upstate New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio this method has been used or will be used on the Marcellus shale. If you look at the picture(above), you can see that the Marcellus shale is the largest natural gas shale basin in the United States.
The debate of hydraulic fracturing is scary, because the division of people who do not understand or do not care that is could lead to harm. It makes me angry that large oil companies deny and do not care or take responsibility for the harm the process will cause. In twenty years from now, the natural gas will still be there and there may be better technology to retrieve it. I wish there was a way to make them care. I understand the point of view of the locals who support because they need the money, but in the end, it will do more harm than good. The debate is very important and not many people know about it. I do not understand how New York state can justify protecting certain water areas like New York City and Syracuse, but allow it in others.
The oil companies supporting the drilling take no responsibility for the damage on people’s health and water quality. Even though there is a trend between poor water quality and sites of hydraulic fracturing. Hydraulic Fracking uses water filled with 408 complex chemicals. A few examples of these chemical are sintered bauxite, peroxydisulfates, methanol, and various aromatic hydrocarbons. (http://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/hydraulic_fracturing_101) These chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing can leak into the ground water. Leading to people falling ill illnesses with cancer.
One of the first complaints about natural gas drilling and unsafe water was in an article in August of 1986 in Southwest New York State, “contaminated ground water has[had] become an everyday experience for many residents”. (Knudson, Thomas J.) The gas and oil industries would improperly dispose of the wastewater. Today, some of the wastewater is sent to a treatment plant, but many plants do not know or have the equipment to treat the toxic or radioactive contents. Wastewater is released into rives or used to suppress dust or de-ice roads. By disposing of the wastewater filled with gas and chemicals it contaminates ground water and leads to people falling ill(New York Times). In some wells, 65 to 91 percent of the fluids remain underground, they can migrate through finding drinking wells (Berkowitz, Michael). In Southwest New York in 1986 chemicals contaminating their well water was “benzene, a petrochemical suspected of causing cancer.” The safe level for drinking water is 5 parts per billion, when levels in the wells were 140 parts per billion. This is because industries “dumped brine, a toxic byproduct of natural gas drilling, in environmentally sensitive areas.” Oil and gas industries should have been held directly responsible for the unsafe disposal of the toxic wastewater. Do to the environmental abuse that was common during the early years of the oil and gas boom “1981 and 1982, when environmental regulations were less stringent and often not enforced.” the industries were not held responsible. In some homes, methane tainted their water, leading to explosive accidents. This is an example of an accident, “drawing water for a bath when he[a Chautauqua County resident] lit a cigarette, causing an explosion that scorched his face.”(Knudson, Thomas J.). The effect on people and the environment because of improper drilling and disposal of toxic matter led to the contamination of water wells. People where upset because they were promised economic upturn and jobs, but got contaminated water wells.
I have spent time going to debates and listening to both sides. While I agree with the anti-fracking side, it is important to understand both. The pro-fracking side believes that hydraulic fracking will bring more jobs to the area. Though it will bring more jobs, the jobs will not go to local citizens. The large oil companies contract out bringing workers in. These works live in camps, where the crime rate is high. They are known for crimes like drugs and raping. The small town that I grew up in would not be the same. While initially leasing the land brings in money, it is not enough money to cover later medical bills or by containers of uncontaminated water. Both sides use advertisements to draw attention to their point. A pro-fracking sign on my neighbor’s lawn says, “Drill a well, bring a solider home.” They are playing on the emotions of people to gain support.
Some of the negative effects of hydraulic fracturing, including the contaminated well water, were addressed in the amendment to the 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act in 1986. The act that was passed by both the House and Senate with overwhelming margins created a program to protect aquifers and groundwater from pollutants. Under the amendment, a section addressed groundwater. However, before the amendment the states were in charge of drinking water safety. These amendments affected hydraulic fracturing because fracking consists of injecting chemical into the ground.(EPA: History President Signs Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments). The affects on hydraulic fracturing were not seen. This could have been because of a state and federal issue like in 2005, hydraulic fracturing may have been exempted from the act. Solutions to drinking water challenges had to be addressed by both the state and federal government. The EPA hoped that the amendment would strengthen its relationship with individual states(EPA: History President Signs Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments). This was a classic case of Federal vs. States rights that had been addressed since the beginning of a Democratic federal government in the United States. The act gives more power to the federal government, but its function is to work with states to achieve the most efficient enforcement of the amendments. The EPA would take action against violation to the protection of water when the states government did not take the appropriate action. The enforcement plan of the amendments tries to balance the issue of Federal vs. States rights.
Part of the problem of fighting hydraulic fracking is the jurisdiction. Your neighbor a ½ mile way could lease their land to the oil companies. They would be paid a substantial amount of money. While the actual drilling out take place above ground on their land, the drilling below land could take place on yours. You neighbor lease their land could lead to you water being contaminated and because the actual ground under the top soil is not officially owned by you there is nothing you could do to stop them once they started. I believe that the only time to take action is in the present. I believe that someday the technique of hydraulic fracturing may be safe, unlike now. The EPA must put a nationwide moratorium on hydraulic fracturing. The moratorium would give scientist the time to would with the technology to find an ecological way of retrieving the gas. I hope the water systems are protected from hydraulic fracturing.

Water flows through me
thought the world
interconnected like us.
Water is now fire,
No longer life
Fracking is regret
The future is death.