Americans View of Fracking - Literature review Example

Introduction A sufficient amount of natural gas can be extracted in many s across the United s. A few of thesestates include West Virginia, North Dakota, New York and Pennsylvania. Natural gas and oil have emerged as the greatest contributors to the economy of the U.S., and it is the fracking that has made it possible. Natural gas is plenty in the U.S. with estimates that 482 trillion cubic feet of gas can be easily mined with the help of the fracking. As such, the large quantity mentioned can supply the U.S. for decades and so consumption of other forms of energy such as fossil fuels is reduced. Natural gas is environmental friendly, unlike coal and oil that emits a large amount of carbon dioxide when burned. The availability in large amount in the U.S. could help in reducing the release of CO2 to the atmosphere. As such, the use of natural gas will slow down climate changes that result from global warming. Fracking, a technology that has proved effective in extraction of natural gas has improved the economy. The use of fracking has enabled the companies that extract natural gas to reach natural gas in shale rocks that could have been impossible if other methods are employed. On the other hand, critics of fracking method explain that fracking is a danger to the environment, population and health. They point out that fracking has increased the occurrence of the earthquakes in some places. Health-related impacts include the exposure of gases and heavy metals. Despite the calls by some people to ban fracking, the use of this method has continued to increase the economy of states using it. In this case, this paper explains the importance of fracking to the United States. It also reviews pros and cons of fracking as wells as the health and environmental impacts of fracking. The paper also discusses the fracking process and controversies of fracking. Fracking Process Fracking is a process that requires the use of sand, water and chemicals. The combination of the three contents is injected into a wellbore with a high pressure. High pressured liquids are meant to create small fractures on rocks deep on the ground. Aluminum is also added, together with the sand, it holds the fractures formed by the pressured liquids. The flow of gas and oil will increase ones the rock fissures attain the equilibrium (Thomas 270). There has been a bit of confusion between drilling and fracking. Some people think that the two terms mean the same thing. The objectives of the two processes are similar, to reach gas and oil deposit deep underground. Pipes are rotated to bore the earth during the drilling process. It is done several times until the pipes reach the deposit of gas and oil. The process can be done vertically or horizontally. On the other hand, the fracking process uses high pressured liquids mention earlier (Obo 59). The gas or oil, deep on the ground located in the shale escapes ones the pressured liquid fractures the shale. The Sand holds the fractures wide open to give a room for gas or oil to escape into the bored well upwards to the collection reservoir. It is possible to create fractures in the impermeable rocks that have oil or gas using fracking process. The fractures run from the wellbore to the impermeable rocks containing deposits of gas and oil. And so it allows gas to flow to the wellbore. Natural gas, both conventional and unconventional gases has been mined several times by use of the fracking process. Natural gas, as the name suggest, is a gas that lies deep on the ground covered by either porous or non-porous rock. Natural gas is formed when organic matter decomposes. Coal and oil are also formed by the process of decomposition of the organic matter though all the three contents take millions of years to form. Natural gas contains no liquid at standard pressure and temperature. It is chemically composed of propane, butane or methane. It also occurs naturally, and it is associated with petroleum. Additionally, in most cases the natural gas is named with oil as oil products, and so less attention is given to gas. Natural gas is mostly used for heating, lighting and cooking. The gas is also used in industries for heating and generation of electricity. Natural gas can be combined chemically with feedstock to make fertilizers. Natural gas exists in both conventional and unconventional gas. Conventional gas is easy to extract because they are found in porous sandstones. It can be extracted freely without spending much as in the case of unconventional gas. A huge amount of resources is spent during the extraction of unconventional gases. The method is applied to the extraction of gas that is deep on the ground and so it is not possible to extract with the use of basic technology. For many years, such minerals have been avoided due to the inexistence of technology for extraction. Additionally, mining companies have to spend a large sum of money to extract unconventional gas. As such, extraction of unconventional gas became uneconomical. However, with the fracking method, extraction of unconventional gas has become easy, effective and economical possible. Unconventional gas can be found in shale gas, deep natural gas and tight natural gas. Shale gas is found deep on the ground at approximately 5000 to 8000 feet below the earth surface. It is located in the low permeable shale beds. Unlike conventional gas, the properties of the shale make it quite difficult to extract natural gas. Shale basins are located in many parts of the United States; they are part of the recoverable resource base. Gas found in shale basin is only extracted using the fracking method. The method is effective because shale basin holds unconventional natural gas. Studies reveal that shale basin is formed in a tight rock that makes it impossible to for gas to escape. The fracking method can be used to break the shale rock and let the gas out (Obo 10). Deep natural gas, on the other hand, as the name suggest are found beyond the reach of normal drilling. The deposit of natural gas is approximately 15000 feet below the earth surface (Obo 11). Americans’ View of Fracking Based on the study by Swift, close to 40% of the U.S. population supports the idea of fracking. On the other hand, 40% do not agree with the idea of fracking while the remaining percentage has no idea. Clear analysis of the population in favor and those against it reveals something interesting. Swift points out that population supporting fracking are young people and mostly Democrats. Nonetheless, the population against the idea of fracking is old people and mostly Republicans. A survey was conducted recently and out of 10 Americans, 8 were willing to give their views in relation to fracking. It was noted from the study that those in favor and people opposing are split into half. Fracking has brought heated debate among the politicians and the population in the United States. Young people are in favor of fracking despite the difference in political inclination. For example, it is noted that 52% of the US. The population of age 65 supports fracking. However, studies reveal that the support is among the population of age 18 and 32. Furthermore, it noted from the research that middle-aged Americans are against the idea of fracking. Environmental Risks of Fracking The number of fracking has risen in the U.S. for the past few years, and the people are worried about environmental risks associated with it. Many questions have been asked about the relation between earthquakes and fracking. Some people think that fracking contaminate underground water causing health risks to the population. Across the U.S., those fears are common, strong and sometimes emotional. However, studies reveal that earthquakes depend on the nature of fracking. Additionally, some researchers think that it is the reluctance of the government to take control of fracking companies that result in earthquakes. In order to understand the relation between earthquakes and fracking, the definition of earthquake must be understood. According to Obo (61), the earthquake is “Shaking and vibration at the surface of the earth resulting from underground movement along a fault plane or from volcanic activity.” According to Obo’s definition of the earthquake, earthquake result from the movement of the earth’s fault against another fault along the plane. So the question is; can the fracking or the hydraulic fracking cause earthquake? Another question is; how earthquakes happen? As mentioned earlier, earthquake occurrence is triggered by the movement of faults against each other. The cause of the movement of the faults is a huge force that can is enough to push the faults against each other. Additionally, the force must be enough to push the faults and release energy and tension stored on the faults. A force powerful enough to push faults against each other is the nuclear explosion because its force can cause seismic activity. However, studies reveal that the fracking process is less likely to cause the earthquake. There is a need to understand that the objective of fracking is to increase the permeability of the rock so that a room for gas and oil flow is created. Fracking, in this case, causes fractures and not faults. Many thread-like fractures are created during the process of fracking. The engineers that undertake mining process are aware of places with the fault that are likely to move. In this case, it is not possible to operate hydraulic fracking in places near the earth’s fault. In case this happens, the earthquake is likely to occur because the liquids pumped into the bore wells reaches the fault hence lubricating them. The lubricants reduce the friction between the faults making them easy to slide. Lubrication of the faults can cause the earthquake, but the earthquake is so small and cannot be felt by humans. Additionally, experts that deal with mining of gas and oil are well aware of places with faults that can move. They study the earth faults with the help of large-scale seismic mapping of the places that supposed to be drilled. Faults can also be known by reading the pressure of liquids when the pressure drops sharply, faults could exist in the area. State of Oklahoma has reported a number of earthquakes with the recent one estimated to be of magnitude 5.6. Studies, however, reveal that the earthquake was big enough to be associated with fracking. Between 2009 and 2010, the state of Oklahoma recorded several earthquakes of the magnitude of 4.7 and 5.7. The earthquakes raised a lot of questions about whether fracking was related to the earthquakes. The study in the U.S. and other countries worldwide reveals that there are close relationships between fracking and earthquakes (Spotts). The study by Spotts reveals small magnitudes of earthquakes in Oklahoma that ranges from 1 to 2.8 in the southern part of Elmore City. The study was conducted after several complaints were raised by the Oklahoma residences. After the several analyses, it was concluded that fracking and earthquakes are closely related. That is; hydraulic fracking is likely to cause earthquakes. However, data was not enough to support the notion that fracking causes earthquakes. On the other hand, the studies in England came out clearly that fracking causes earthquakes. It was only that the earthquakes resulting from fracking were small; still it was enough for the population to feel it. Several studies have been contacted, the recent one noted that the root of quakes was deeper enough to be associated with fracking. The state of Ohio was hit hard by the recession, but with fracking, it was relieved for the population because it increased the number of jobs and brought in other necessities. Nonetheless, questions have been asked on whether fracking will have implications for human health. According to Helen (556), Fracking is a technique that uses hi-pressured liquids to break the shale and release natural gas. The state of Ohio is witnessing a rising number of wells. According to the author, the number of gas wells is set to increase from 77 to 2300 in a few years. Ohio is, however, trying to regulate the rising number of gas wells. The set regulations are as a result of increasing debates about fracking and environmental degradation. However, regulation is set to begin with little knowledge on fracking. For example, no one knows the ingredients used by the mining companies apart from the usual contents such as water and the sand. Additionally, many are not aware of the substances exposed to people near the wells. Due to lack of knowledge on what is going on in gas and oil industry, the state of Ohio passed a bill that requires fracking companies to give the details of ingredients used. The problem, however, is that the companies operating in Ohio cannot give a list of all chemicals that are used in fracking. Some of the chemicals cannot be revealed because they are supposed to be secret. The failure to disclose all the chemicals is the greatest problem to the environmentalist. Furthermore, the failure by the companies to disclose the chemicals used makes is impossible to for researchers trying to know more about the risks associated to fracking. Lack of data is another problem to the researchers and environmentalist. Studies reveal that chemicals used in the extraction of oil and gas varies from place to place due to geological differences. Fluids used by most mining companies are water and sand. However, chemicals are also added to assist in horizontal fracking of shale. Some chemicals used are less likely to cause harm to humans such as coffee grounds and citric acids. Others are harmful if contaminated drinking water; some of these chemicals include toluene or benzene. Additionally, Helen (557) reveals that waste water flows back to the surface after contaminating with radioactive and brine. Other threats to the public include, wastewater pits, storage and transportation of the products. Studies indicate that it is possible to have leaks or spills during the transportation. The state of Ohio is, however, working to ensure the bill relating to the fracking process is implemented. Ones implemented; the bill will give doctors an opportunity to demand the list of chemicals used for fracking by any companies if a person working for the firms visits hospitals. Additionally, research points out that the doctors will break confidentiality that has existed in gas and oil firms relating to chemicals used for fracking. Researchers are concerned with the effect of the water by fracking or hydraulic fracking. In this case, the waters are drinking water. It is believed that drinking water are exposed directly or indirectly to chemicals used for fracking. In the process of fracking, fluids injected to wells can reach the areas of can flow to areas of formation, also known as fluid leak-off. Fluid leak-off can reach 70% if not controlled; this percentage may reach drinking water aquifers. Additionally, drinking water will remain unsafe because drilling fluids and stray gas can move from unused wells to drinking wells and finally to our homes Palliser (21). According to Palliser (21), traces of diesel, toluene, benzene, naphthalene and acetone have been found in wells drilled deeper to the aquifer in Pavillion, Wyoming. The area has had repeated gas production for the last 20 years, as such, Pavillion is estimated to have more than 100 wells. Due to high exposure to chemicals such as benzene, the residents of the area have experience nerve pain, neurological impairment and loss of smell. Fracking requires large quantities of water for the effective process; in this case, companies have to large amounts of water. For example, in North Dakota, approximately 5.5 billion gallons of water are drawn every year for fracking. Waters are obtained from the ground water sources or local surfaces. On the other hand, wastewater treatment plants are effective enough to remove traces of contaminants such as radionuclides and chlorides. After treatment, water is released into the rivers. Such case is a threat to the health of people within the area because they take water with chemicals. Health Impacts Some people suggest that health impacts of fracking are still at early stages. However, studies reveal that fracking is likely to increase health risks. The study noted that health risk related to fracking is much more as compared to conventional gas mining. The threats to human health are attributed to large surface footprints for fracking. In the U.S., studies reveal that approximately 52000 shale gas bores have been drilled. In this case, the large numbers of shale gas drilled in the U.S. are likely to increase environmental risks. Furthermore, studies reveal that environmental contamination happens in all stages and so the authorities are calling for changes in shale companies. There is a need to surface the spillage, oversee the spillage in storage facilities, and measures taken on to curb emission by the equipment used. It has been noted that environmental degradation are also contributed by heavy vehicles transporting gas and oil from the sites. Environmental problems result from outdoor air pollutants such as diesel particulate matter, tropospheric ozone, and volatile organic compounds. Other pollutants include hydrocarbons, benzene, and heavy metals. The pollutants mentioned above happen in ground and surface of the earth. Palliser (21) point out that health risks are common in places near hydraulic fracking sites. According to the author, the health risks are associated with water contaminated with chemicals used for fracking. The effects that have been reported by the population within such areas include headaches, burning of through, nose and eyes, nosebleed and neurological. Other symptoms reported by people within the fracking sites include urological, sensory, rashes, vomiting, and diarrhea. Such symptoms are common when people within or in other places use contaminated water for cooking and drinking (Kovats 757). Economic and Political Importance of Fracking in the United States According to Russell (33), fracking dates back to 1940s, technology has, however, changed and so new discoveries have changed the economic viability of the fracking process. Fracking entails removal of oil and gas deposits from shale rocks according to the author. Economic transformation brought by the fracking process has not only improved the economy of most countries practicing it, but also changed political landscape globally. The increasing use of technologies for the fracking process in the U.S. for oil and gas production has increased the economy. With fracking technologies, it has been easy to unlock resources hidden in shale rocks or deep in the ground where previous technologies were not useful. Additionally, increase in discovery of resources is an opportunity for U.S. population to make use of less expensive resources such gas and oil. The fact is that the use of fracking technology has changes the lives of people in Northern America in the face of the World. Based on that, the U.S. estimates that it will be the largest producer of gas and oil by the year 2020. Additionally, studies reveal that unconventional gas production will increase to 45% in the U.S. by the year 2030. Furthermore, as stated above, the United States estimates that it will be the largest producer and exporter of gas and oil. Among other countries that will be on the same level are Canada and China. Because of this change brought by the fracking process, the U.S. will have changed the significance of OPEC and other largest producers of oil such as Russia. Previously, the U.S. depended highly on countries in the Middle East for oil and gas. However, fracking technology has changed everything. It must be noted that most countries in the Middle East are ever politically hostile. The U.S. will be free from obstacles brought by conflict in the Middle East. Additionally, the fracking process has faced a number of hurdles because some lobby groups have been trying to impede the use of fracking technologies for petroleum production. However, the industry has improved substantially despite the calls to stop the fracking process. Shale gas in the U.S. is important both locally and internationally. According to Marcovici (200), closing down all the shale gas production sites in the U.S. will affect the supply of oil within and outside the United States. The author argues that the close down will reduce the supply of petroleum products by 9% globally. In addition, the breakdown in supply will affect not only the economy but the fossil fuels, energy security and carbon emission. Additionally, studies reveal that the U.S. population enjoys the lowest fee charged on gas for household. The United States as per 2012 study revealed that Residential House Natural gas was charged at $11 per 1000 cubic feet. However, if the government heeds the calls by people calling for the shutdown of shale gas production sites, cost per 1000 cubic feet will rise. It is estimated that the cost will increase by 50% meaning that the population will have to pay additional $5. As such, the household direct and indirect cost will rise by $127 billion per year. The residences of the U.S. will have to spend more on household expenses. On the other hand, the EU population will have to pay $20 per 1000 cubic feet. The increase in cost per cubic feet in the Europe is due to the competition for limited resources. In this case, the limited resources are oil and gas. Employment will also be affected in and outside the U.S. if the government shuts down shale gas production. Additionally, the closure will affect the economy because it is estimated that the industry supports close to 600000 workers. Furthermore, it is estimated that shale gas production contributes close to $200 billion per year to the GDP. Contribution to state and federal taxes is also amounted to 50 billion per year. In this case, the closure of shale gas sites will affect the employment and economy in general. The U.S. will have to spend close to $100 billion every year for natural gas imports in other countries (Marcovici, 201). Conclusion Natural gas is important to the population globally because it is believed to be cleaner and less likely to affect the environment. Access to natural gas is, however, not possible with technologies that have been used previously for mining conventional gas. As such, the fracking process was developed to access natural gas and oil in shale rocks. However, fracking has met opposition from the population and environmentalists. Some people think that fracking is conducting in areas close to faults. Other thinks that fracking causes earthquakes. Nonetheless, fracking has proven to be important to states practicing it, it has improved the economy, generate employment opportunities, and reduced reliance on politically unstable countries for oil and gas. Works Cited Helen. Thompson."Fracking Boom Spurs Environmental Audit." Nature 485.7400 (2012): 556-7. Kovats, Sari, et al. "The Health Implications of Fracking." The Lancet 383.9919 (2014): 757-8. Marcovici, Michael.The Fracking Debate: What is it really all about? New York: BoD – Books on Demand, 2013. Print. Obo, Okon. Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking): Procedures, Issues, and Benefits. Houston: Okon Obo, PhD, 2013. Print. Palliser, Janna. Fracking fury.” Green Science. Spotts, Pete. "Earthquakes in Oklahoma? is Fracking to Blame, Or Something Else?" The Christian Science Monitor Nov 08 2011: 22. Swift, Art. "Americans Split on Support for Fracking in Oil, Natural Gas." Gallup Poll News Service 23 Mar. 2015. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 18 May 2015. Read More