Texas has received the most rain in the month of May since June of 2004.
This wonderful upsurge of heavy rainfall has brought Texas out of the
"exceptional drought" category—the worst of the five classifications—that
has persisted for the past three years. The rainfall has recharged many of Texas' aquifers, but it won't make much of a difference due to the burgeoning demand of water for hydraulic fracturing—for the method continues to dominate oil recovery across Texas. To
make matters worse, Governor Greg Abbott has signed House Bill 40—giving the authority
to regulate oil and gas operations to the state—in order to prohibit cities from
banning fracking.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as
"fracking", is the process of injecting fluid underground at high
pressures to fracture shale rocks to release natural gas and oil. This method
of extracting oil creates many problems including pollution and the
spread of toxins.
Fracking involves a considerable amount of water compared to
conventional drilling. Approximately 1-8 million gallons of water are needed to
complete a single fracking. In light of this, Texas is bound to return to a
shriveled, barren wasteland.
This method of oil extraction does not only require a substantial amount
of water, but it also requires the use of toxic chemicals that can contaminate
surrounding water supplies. The result of this pollution can cause
environmental and health hazards. Although fracking is a relatively new practice, there have been numerous reports of health problems in humans and animals in areas neighboring fracking sites.
We must consider the long-term affects of fracking. Are the short-term benefits worth the long-term repercussions? Wouldn't our money be better spent on promoting clean energy, instead of jeopardizing our future by investing in methods hazardous to the lock, stock, and barrel?
We must consider the long-term affects of fracking. Are the short-term benefits worth the long-term repercussions? Wouldn't our money be better spent on promoting clean energy, instead of jeopardizing our future by investing in methods hazardous to the lock, stock, and barrel?
On his blog, Into the Lone Star State, Justin wrote a blog post about the detriment to Texas that fracking can be. His arguments differ from most of the major opposition to fracking that I’ve heard—that it will cause pollution and contamination—in one significant way; Justin thought about Texas specifically, and how, despite our recent rainfall, we are in a long term drought. The argument is that fracking is bad for Texas because of the inordinate amount of water that it requires, which may exhaust our only now filling aquifers.
ReplyDeleteMy only possibly qualm with the argument is the lack of real, peer reviewed studies documenting the contamination due to fracking. However, there is still much research to be done on the polluting aspect of fracking, which will only be accomplished with time. I believe that Justin’s commentary on fracking was well reasoned, thoughtful, and thorough. To answer his questions: I don’t believe it is worth the risk, and I agree that our money should be spent promoting clean energy.