Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Hydraulic Fracturing and Contaminants

"Fracking" can cause dangerous contaminations in drinking water. This picture shows the shocking flammability of the water people are expected to drink.



Hydraulic fracturing is the process used by some oil companies to attain oil from areas not usually used for oil seeking. In this process, harsh chemicals and water are pumped into the earth, used to break the rock layers and free the oil. However, fracking, as it is called colloquially, causes major contamination of water sources. The chemicals and contaminated water used in the process are pumped elsewhere for storage, while the drinking water of local people is severely contaminated, due to the permeable nature of the rocks. In Dimock, a town in Pennsylvania, contaminant levels were extremely high, yet the EPA did not consider it a violation. This is because some of the chemicals in the water were not even considered on the list of limited contaminants, such as methane. The tap water of many of these people contains so much methane that wells and pipes explode, water can burst into flames, and the air in their homes shows a higher concentration of methane. Though it is not poisonous to be consumed, it can accumulate in homes and suffocate the residents. When tested, the water also showed, in some cases, twice the legal amount of arsenic. Some cancer causing chemicals along with lead were also found. Water is being tested again by the EPA to see if there is a definite connection between fracking and high levels of contamination. Of course, it probably is the case, as many areas with fracking in place experience similar problems.


Fracking is a serious problem, and needs to be addressed. Of course, economic issues prevent much from being done. Fracking is a positive thing for local economies, and creates jobs.  For this reason, officials may be hesitant to address the issue. Of course, they should realize that the health and safety of the citizens and environment is much more important than economic worries. Flammable water, suffocation, lead, and carcinogens are extremely problematic, and to not address these worries is to show a blatant disregard for human life.

1. What chemicals are used in fracking? How can they be harmful?
2. What are some postives of fracking?
3. Why would the EPA standards for contamination not including these contaminants prevent them from challenging oil companies?


http://www.propublica.org/article/so-is-dimocks-water-really-safe-to-drink



4 comments:

  1. Why did you post a second time?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think fracking is wrong. It may though have to be pushed to the side for a little while, so that more jobs can be made in other areas. If that is done, then it would be easier to get rid off. One of my concerns though is the future. I know PA has lots of natural gas. If we were to switch to that would it be any better, or would it be worse. I just hope our state can just be as beautiful as possible.

    What is more important health or money?
    Should we switch fuel sources to something else?
    If we were to get rid of jobs now, where would people work?
    By Ryan Marinelli

    ReplyDelete
  4. While it is a (good?) source of oil, I don't think that it's worth contaminating drinking water for. If I was able to light a glass of my tap water on fire, I'd be upset. PA may have a lot of natural gas, but people have to make a safer way of getting it before it can become a reliable source. In response to question 2, positives are a supply of natural gas, and... um...flaming water is pretty cool? ...

    ReplyDelete