Several lawsuits have been made against drilling companies, as well as the documentary, Gasland. If you watch the documentary, you will see numerous accounts of groundwater contamination around fracking sites and how it has affected people's health, safety, and financial status. It also shows flammable water. Flammable water.
In 2004, the EPA, however, claimed that hydraulic fracturing fluid "poses minimal threat" to underground water sources. They will issue a new review in 2012.
Should Governor Paterson sign the bill? What do you think about the risks involved with fracking?
Here is a video of flammable water: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/09/13/griffin.gas.danger.cnn
5 comments:
I am skeptical of fracking. While we may be able to obtain more natural gas to supply our immense consumption of the substance, we still don't really know that much about the intensity of the threats that accompanies fracking. Even with research, there will be effects that are unforeseen, as is just about always the case with new technologies. This is also a short term solution to our energy problem that will only give rise to additional problems. Rather than fracking, we should be focusing on alternative energy because there is only so much natural oil in the earth. But, we aren't going to run out of sunlight, and the day we do, we'll have more than energy issues to deal with.
Although the EPA currently has regulations on fracking, many businesses still cut corners to cut costs and increase profit. These short cuts can result in a devastating environmental issue from fracking and possibly a danger to the health and safety of the public.
First off, the contamination of groundwater posts risks that are almost always can not be irreversable; and would take years to fix. The health problmes associated with contamination can be lethal and the situation is even worse considering this fracking would be done in New York-of high population. Not to mention if people become very ill, the matter can result to law suits being made against the company incharge of the fracking. These law suits would be nasty, and would only result in the state of New York spending more money(they don't have) to fix the problem.
I'm with the previous two posters. Groundwater contamination is simply terrible, because the expenses of cleaning it up are enormous, take too much time, isn't worth it. Even though the EPA said that it will not hurt the environment, just remember that the EPA in 2004 was all appointed by Bush, part of the ways a president can appoint the bureaucracy ;) Bush did not give a crap about the environment and only cared about business. Think of how much companies can make from fracking. That would open up an entirely new business in New York, something that Bush would have been extremely supportive of. So I would be dubious for that reason alone.
I don't think I know enough about fracking to clearly take a side but from what I am reading, I think that pending further fracking is a better way out. If there is any enviromental or safety risks, it must be strictly monitored. But if the merits do outweigh the negatives then I will be willing to look into it a little more. I think this goes back to the issue of enviroment or economy. I am an advocate for the enviroment but I think that unless we have a stable economy we cannot start "saving" the enviroment. I don't think that to save the economy we should be allowed to do anything we want but I also believe that the enviroment (nature) is made to fix itself. Fracking may cause humans harm but nature will fix it like the way nature is fixing the oil spill in the Mexican Gulf.
Just based on what I know I am a little nervous about this practice. At this point, even with the EPA's approval of the practice, the bill seems like a perfectly appropriate response. Ground water needs to be protected from unnecessary contamination, and while natural gas has potential as fuel because of the U.S.' large supplies, it is far from necessary. Other non-coal/oil energy sources have much more potential as alternate fuels, so I think the bill should be signed.
Post a Comment