Is Fracking Safe? Debate on Controversial...

Comments: 10

Char H. Jan 11, 2013, 10:56am UTC

I used to think fracking was OK. After further consideration, I have decided the disruption of the crust, risk to groundwater, air pollution by low level ozone and increases in acid rain are just not worth it. The thought of killing the ocean food chain, and the fresh water supply over large aquifers, etc is too great. this in addition to triggering earthquakes, wow. No way. Very dangerous, there has to be a better way to become energy independent. It must be done, but not this way.

reply to this comment

Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Jan 11, 2013, 11:17am UTC

I was as couple of months ago speaking to a man whose son is a seismologist and he said that his son assured him that fracking is safe if done with the right precautions. That's what they're saying in that video too. It's a big if, though, because they'll think nothing of cutting corners and taking unnecessary risks if they can get a bigger bang for their buck. (no pun intended) We've already read and heard the stories of what fracking has done to the water supplies of communities in the surrounding areas, and so it's not an easy call to make.

Char H. Jan 11, 2013, 11:39am UTC

If seismology were the only risk, I too could say "maybe". The extra release of methane and potential for groundwater contamination were the main things that changed my mind.

Even the acceptable settlement of the crust might trigger a large enough quake to cause a contamination of the aquifer if the slightest mistake or short cut is present, or so it seems to me. I am reminded that the BP oil spill probably wouldn't have happened if they had double poured the joints, like they knew they should.

Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Jan 11, 2013, 11:43am UTC

Would you please explain what you mean by your contingency phrase, "If seismology were the only risk?" I just don't understand what that means.

Char H. Jan 11, 2013, 11:36pm UTC

Fracking may be safe to a seismologist, who has reviewed the matter from earth changes viewpoint. What I was thinking of is all the polluting chemicals they push into the earth, which over time could eventually filter through to the water supply, no matter how carefully deposited, or how well injected below the aquifers. I was thinking of all the methane that escapes with the removal of the natural gas, and the acid rain it causes. Methane is way worse at trapping heat than CO2, and therefor a huge contributor to global warming. It seems even safer to burn the coal ore, and scrub the output from a pollution point of view. That is just my layman opinion. I know it costs more, but is a good step to energy independence, and a bigger step than bio fuels as they are in their current advancement.

Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Jan 12, 2013, 2:20am UTC

I have to think that he has considered where those released chemicals will go and what the consequences might be too. (Even if someone is merely a ditch digger, they probably think just a little past the actual digging aspect.)

It sounds to me as if you know more about this than I do. I was just reiterating what a professional had said, and what was also said in the video from the side that agreed with that seismologist. As a layperson without much knowledge of the issue, I can't imagine how it wouldn't have a deleterious effect on the immediate enviornment, something that means more to me than a provincial concern supposedly focusing on preventing a global catastrophe. And I've read the stories of when and how it did affect the immediate enviornment adversely. So no matter what they say can be done, what has been done so far is not proving what they're saying. I'm certainly not in any way versed in this to offer any comparison with this method and any other.

Char H. Jan 12, 2013, 4:49am UTC

I am not on a big soap box on this issue, because scientists from both camps have a strong case, but for those who think it is safe, there Re those to disagree. I saw this one video that showed the whole thing so clearly, the damage to the crust, the injections, the methane forced out and it made me decide it is too much. I reserve the right to continue to learn, in case their methods improve. :)

I can't believe I transposed those letters twice in the same comment.

Char H. Jan 12, 2013, 9:56pm UTC

NP, I knew what you meant.

I suppose I could have done worse at 2:30AM.

reply to this comment

Is Fracking Safe? Debate on Controversial Natural Gas Drilling Technique as NY Moratorium May Expire

2 people recommend this post

Comments: 10

Join the Conversation