Should Fracking be “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” or “Guilty Until Proven Innocent”?

Fracking and the Precautionary Principle
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”, is an industrial process used to extract natural gas from layers of shale (Weinhold). In the United States, fracking has been used in areas such as Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Texas. Far from being a new process, fracking has been used in the United States since 1949; it is only recently that attention has been drawn to the process (Process Industry Forum). Shale layers are generally located thousands of feet below the surface of the planter, far beneath water tables used for human consumption. Most of the gas is trapped within the shale, so in order to release it the rock is blasted with water pressurized to extreme levels. The water contains chemicals designed to decrease friction between the rock and the water. While some of the chemicals are toxic, they are present in very small amounts. But chemicals are not the main problem with the wastewater from fracking: it’s salt (Westenhaus).
However, there is not enough research available to determine if fracking is dangerous to the environment and, therefore, to the human population. Environmentalists feel fracking operations should be halted until research shows the practice is safe in terms of polluting by-products.
The dominant fear associated with fracking is contamination of water supplies. The human health conditions that could be affected by drinking water polluted by fracking include immediate death, cancer, birth defects, or other serious illnesses (McKenzie et al.).There are a number of routes chemicals can enter water from the pockets of natural gas. However, an representative of the natural-gas industry, The Independent Petroleum Association of America, issued a press release stating there are “ … no proven cases of hydraulic fracturing impacting groundwater “ (Fuller). Researcher like James Saiers, professor of hydrology at F&ES believe it is not likely that fracking would open a pathway to water sources used for drinking; water is only a few hundred feet below the surface, while fracking takes place a mile or more down (Schrope).
In addition to concerns over water pollution, fracking requires huge amounts of water for the process and areas with scare resources have farmers and cities competing for the supply (EPA). Through using electrodialysis to desalinate the wastewater from fracking, it can be reused in further drilling processes. Although it does not make the wastewater clean enough to drink, it would decrease the amount of potable water needed for drilling (Westenhaus). The technology for desalination of the wastewater requires upgrading to make the process practical. To determine the amount of water used by the fracking wells in the United States, the approximately 27,000 wells use about five million gallons per fracking job (Jenkins). The math comes out to about 135 billion gallons of water per year or around 0.3 percent of the freshwater withdrawals. In comparison, agriculture uses 243 times more water annually and gold courses use 0.5 percent of the freshwater consumption.
Some scientists believe fracking causes earthquakes. Oklahoma has been using the process for years, and in 2009 it was reported the state experienced over 1000 earthquakes per year compared to the 50 per year reported in the years prior to allowing the fracking process for drilling (Process Industry Forum). The United States Geological Service recorded an earthquake near Prague, Oklahoma in 2011 that was a reported magnitude of 5.0 and it may have caused the large M5.7 quake less than 24 hours later USGS.gov). This is probably the largest earthquake cause by the injection of wastewater into the earth. Ohio and Pennsylvania have also reported earthquakes contributed to fracking.
However, the oil and natural gas industry states fracking is not a threat to the environment, although they are taking steps to comply with the EPA impositions for environmental protection. In a press release in June 2012, the American Petroleum Insti¬tute and Ameri¬ca’s Natural Gas Alliance states the most recent estimates of emission of industry methane are about 50 percent of those of the EPA (Bush). It is difficult to measure the escaping methane from inefficient pneumatic systems, loose pipe flanges, pipes that are corroded, stuck condenser valves, compressor that are outdated, and leaking storage containers (Druoin). Although the cattle industry produces more methane that fracking, about nine percent of the greenhouse gas emissions come from methane leaking in drilling. While methane does not linger as long as carbon dioxide, it is far more potent in contributing to global warming. With the industry expected to increase 56 percent over the next 25 years, efforts to reduce methane leakage is crucial.
Installation of equipment to catch and separate the gases and liquids flowing from the fracking wells are part of the “greening” activities the natural gas industry is taking in an attempt to satisfy environmentalists concerning pollution (Weinhold). Green completions became mandatory in January 2015 with larger companies complying more quickly. The EPA estimates the use of green techniques will reduce approximately 95 percent of the volatile organic compounds emitted annually from fracking wells (Overview Of Final Amendments To Air Regulations For The Oil And Natural Gas Industry). Another positive aspect of natural gas is the fact that it burns fairly clean, creating much lower greenhouse gas emission than fossil fuels (Schrope).
Aside of the safety proposed by the natural gas industry, there are economic advantages to using natural gas. Fracking has the potential to chop the cost of energy to Americans, saving $1200 annually for the average American household (Cutler). In addition, the economic boost to drilling areas in terms of jobs and leasing rights leaves many people supportive of the process in the face of possible environmental hazards. For instance, in Colorado the oil and natural gas industry provides 110,000 jobs with an average of $74,000 annually; constituting 11 percent of the economy in the state, it is a $30 billion yearly business (Staff).
Even after considering the current information, the debates in the media and literature concerning fracking seem limitless. Environmental groups weigh in against economists and corporations, and studies are not providing conclusive evidence in any direction. The precautionary principle advocates placing a burden of proof on the fracking industry to establish safety prior to use. The question remains of whether fracking should be considered safety until it is show not to be so, or should it be assumed it is unsafe until shown that it is: in other words, should fracking be “innocent until proven guilty” or “guilty until proven innocent”?
There is no question that the United States has an ever-increasing need for energy. While strides are being made in the direction of solar-powered technology, significant changes in the lifestyles of American are far in the future. In an effort to decrease the nation’s dependency on foreign oil, the creation and expansion of drilling for natural gas in the form of fracking offers an alternative to the purchase of fossil fuels. However, concerns about the impact on human and environmental health from polluting by-products of the industry generate serious debate on the wisdom of using fracking. The precautionary principle states that the energy companies must demonstrate that compliance with federal standards will generate the results to guarantee safe quantities of pollutants. The drilling companies believe results show they are already within those guidelines.
The underlying problem is that there does not appear to be significant scientific evidence to support one viewpoint over the other. States are allowing drilling until environmentalists can prove dangerous damage. Companies are taking steps to avoid contamination of water sources and other pollution, but it cannot be determined if they are sufficient. A comparison can be made between the development of human vaccines and fracking.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) originated at the Division of Chemistry in 1901 and used healthy human volunteers to determine the effects of food additives (FDA.gov). However, the FDA didn’t achieve any real power until 1938 after a public outcry following the deaths of over 100 people (many of them children) after taking Elixir Sulfanilamide, a toxin similar to antifreeze. The agency set the standards for experimentation and other forms of proof of safety prior to human administration.
A polio epidemic in 1916 in the United States left 6000 people dead and 27,000 paralyzed. A vaccine for polio was developed in 1935 and was tested on 3000 children in California. This was prior to the power of the FDA to regulate testing and human administration. In regards to medicine, the FDA regulates the creation of drugs and their administration. In the natural oil industry, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) serves the same purpose. Just as a vaccine for polio was testing without government approval in 1916, fracking has come into operation with the EPA looking on for possible problems.
A comparison between the development of vaccines and fracking may be farfetched, but the roles of governmental agencies remain the same. Drugs are required to undergo extensive testing for years in an effort to determine safety for patients receiving them. In the event there are significant cases of adverse reactions, the drug is pulled from the market and the drug companies liable for damages. However, the use of fracking has not undergone the same testing needed for a drug that has the potential to adversely affect thousands of human lives. In the few instances lawsuits have been filed against drilling companies, payments have been made with admission of guilt.
The United States rushed into fracking as a means of gaining independence from the foreign producers of oil. The prices set by those nations affected almost every American in terms of gasoline for automobiles, manufacture of products, and fuel for heating. There are numerous problems associated with the industry, and there has not been sufficient research conducted to address the concerns of the public about pollution. This author feels the statement, “Fracking should be guilty until proven innocent” is a realistic attitude given the possibility of the pollution of vast amount of land. The EPA should impose on fracking the same types of guidelines as the FDA imposes on drugs and humans should not be subjected to exposure until it has been deemed safe.

Last Completed Projects

Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.

[order_calculator]