Fracking deserves the negative attention

Asking strangers on the street for their opinions on hydraulic fracturing is likely to elicit some blank stares. But asking them for their opinions on fracking will almost certainly evoke adamant reactions. And considering the results of a Pew Research Center poll from November of last year, those responses tend to be negative.

If “fracking” sounds like a dirty word, that’s because in many communities — including the state of New York, which has issued an outright ban on the process — it is. With local concerns ranging from contaminated groundwater to tectonic disturbance, activists have taken to courts and ballot boxes intent on ensuring that fracking does not happen anywhere near their homes. Since fracking also releases a trapped reservoir of earthbound carbon into the atmosphere, opponents have further decried it for advancing global climate change.

Make no mistake, fracking in the United States has rightfully been met with resistance. But rather than an outright moratorium on the industry, which has experienced growth since the mid-2000s, a change in industry practices could yield environmental safeguards, public protection and a necessary bridge towards a clean energy future. As natural gas produces only half of the heat-trapping emissions as coal, we must reasonably pivot toward natural gas as our primary fossil fuel, while increasing our overall reliance on carbon-free energy such as wind and solar.

Among the chief criticisms waged against fracking is the lack of transparency exercised by companies engaged in the practice. Deep below the earth’s surface, shale and limestone formations contain natural gas deposits that formed over millions of years from the decomposition of organic matter. To access that gas, companies pump high-pressure cocktails of water and chemicals into the ground to fracture these ancient rocks, releasing the gas for capture at the surface. Under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has authority to regulate any fluids injected into the ground. According to Clear Water Action, due to a clause widely known as the “Halliburton Loophole,” however, businesses engaged in fracking are not subject to this regulation.

The refusal of companies to disclose the contents of their fracking cocktails, citing proprietary discretion, has drawn immense backlash from communities fearing groundwater contamination. A U.S. survey conducted in 2014 identified several potentially harmful compounds used to fracture deep shale. Some scientists claim to have found known carcinogens and neurotoxins in the mix. Even among those who are skeptical of such claims, there is general agreement that the lack of knowledge and proper research on the relevant substances violates a precautionary principle that ought to be the golden standard in matters of public health. The ingredients of industry fluids should be public information.

The risk of methane leaks is also an inherent problem that must be addressed, as it negates the potential emissions offsets presented by natural gas over coal. Different gases have different chemical and physical behaviors. When released into the atmosphere, methane has the potential to trap 21 times as much heat as the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide. A study of wells in the Marcellus shale formation in Pennsylvania found that around 2 percent feature structurally unsound facilities resulting in methane leaks. This might seem negligible, but with tens of thousands of wells currently active in the United States, the collective release of methane poses serious issues as we grapple with curbing global emissions. Well operations and infrastructure must be regulated and held to the highest standards, preventing such leaks from occurring.

Lastly, it must be noted that natural gas, like all non-renewable resources, is a temporary solution. Even in the Marcellus formation, one of the largest natural gas deposits in the world, generous estimates forecast the shale will be depleted within a century. Rather than perpetuate the global energy dilemma, dumping the issue on generations to come, we must responsibly invest in renewable, zero-emission energies and the technologies to harness them.

Austin Reagan is a junior majoring in environmental studies and political science. His column, “The Scientific Method,” runs Mondays.