Is It Worth the Damage?

For this week, I was able to locate an article from Discover Magazine on hydraulic fracturing, written by Linda Marsa- an accredited scientific reporter.  Something interesting about this particular article was that it was able to expose even greater conflict between those in favor of fracking and those against it by revealing some startling facts.  One major argument for those in favor of drilling is that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruled in 2004 that hydraulic fracturing posed "little or no threat to underground drinking water,"a claim they are now reconsidering after thousands of water supplies have been polluted after natural gas drilling began in the area.  Also, if we could hypothetically disregard the direct impact of fracking on an area for a moment, this article addresses the multitude of less obvious environmental outcomes from drilling.  For example, fracking releases immense amounts of methane, which in small doses is not considered harmful, but when concentrated in small areas, it is highly dangerous and explosive.  Additionally, methane is a greenhouse gas that is a staggering twenty times more damaging than carbon dioxide (released from fossil fuel burning).  Another point that is discussed in the source is the incredible amounts of water that are required for the process and consequently the mass amounts of waste water it produces.  One single well (and there can be up to 16 in one pad and hundreds of pads in an area) can require 10 million gallons of water combined with chemicals and sand to release the gas.  Lastly, the article addresses minimal practices that are being attempted to fix or minimize the effects of fracking through researching alternatives and providing incentives for companies who practice clean drilling techniques.

With these facts and the consideration of the perhaps less obvious environmental impacts, I have a difficult time comprehending how this process evades more direct scrutiny from both the EPA and the public.  I believe that with great risk comes great reward, but do the benefits outweigh the damages in this circumstance? With fracking we can supply millions of people's homes with an energy supply, but is that trade off enough to compensate for the other immense amounts of damage being done to the environment through fracking?  Thus far in my research, I do not feel I have found substantial evidence to support the practice of hydraulic fracturing.