Hydraulic Fracking for Natural Gas Extraction in Pennsylvania

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Clean energy
Developments in technologies
Economic benefits
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

According to an article, Hydrofracking: Issues & Controversies, hydraulic fracking or fracturing is a method of extracting natural gas from deep shale formations (Hydrofracking: Issues & Controversies 1), and Gilliland notes that hydraulic fracking has become one of the most polarizing topics today (Gilliland 1).

The process of hydraulic fracking entails drilling several thousand feet into the ground, followed by heavy pumping of several gallons of water with chemicals at considerably high pressure (Gilliland 1). Mufson comments that many industry professionals and several politicians have exalted hydraulic fracking as the best method for extracting natural gas because there are more than adequate measures to control the process (Mufson 1).

Conversely, some environmentalists have demanded a total suspension of the method due to several complaints of polluted drinking water from wells and its long-term impacts on the environment (Williamson 1). These activists have warned that possible dangers of hydraulic fracking have not been fully explored (Piddock 1). Therefore, it does not worth the risk.

To this end, they claim that the US should concentrate on renewable energy sources, which have no negative impacts on the environment. Pennsylvania and other states have large reserves of shale gas. As a result, several supporters of hydraulic fracking have claimed that the US has the potential to be energy sufficient and independent if the method is given a chance (Loris 1).

Mufson identifies the energy potential for shale gas (Mufson 1). Today, it is one of the fastest developing sources of energy for the USA. According to Robinson, in less than a decade, the percentage of shale gas production has increased significantly (Robinson 1). While hydraulic fracking presents possible risks, its potential benefits outweigh possible risks.

This essay supports hydraulic fracking in Pennsylvania as a technique of extracting shale gas and shows that it is a method worth exploiting.

There are three major reasons for supporting hydraulic fracking. First, hydraulic fracking involves the production of clean energy, which reduces the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Second, the technique relies on sophisticated technologies, which reduce risks associated with conventional drilling. Finally, the technique can boost the economy and create millions of jobs for Pennsylvania and the US.

Clean energy

Piddock observes that natural gas has a significant role in the production of clean energy for the US (Piddock 8). Hydraulic fracking has become a single important means of extracting natural gas for clean energy.

Mufson writes that in the last few decades, the use of hydraulic fracking to extract natural gas has risen and expanded to several locations with different geological formations in the US, including Pennsylvania (Mufson 1). According to an article by Loris, supporters of the hydraulic fracking technique have touted it as an environmentally safe and highly regulated method of gas extraction (Loris 1).

Moreover, the industry has embarked on the use of advanced technologies to ensure the safety and efficiency of the extracted gas through fracking. Hobson explains that the need to get clean energy from natural gas has been driven, to some extent, by developments in oil and gas technologies (Hobson 8). While hydraulic fracking has existed since the 1940s, innovations in the industry and improved processes have unlocked massive supplies of shale gas.

Loris points out that both facts and myths are available regarding hydraulic fracking and its potential for extracting clean gas (Loris 1). Hence, it is imperative to differentiate facts from fiction in an argument. Hobson notes that Pennsylvania has an exceptional opportunity that could change its economy, energy security, and the environment (Hobson 8).

Moreover, Whitten and Beinecke focus on the potential of shale gas to provide clean energy for the US for several decades (Whitten and Beinecke 1). Gas firms have recognized that hydraulic fracking and extraction of natural gas present both opportunities and challenges about land, air, and water pollution (Gilliland 1).

Consequently, they must deploy the best methods of extracting the gas and be dedicated to environmental conservation ambassadors. To this end, natural gas industries must help local communities to understand the verified scientific facts about hydraulic fracking (Renewable Fuels Association 6).

At the same time, these firms must also demonstrate that their operations are in harmony with laws and regulatory frameworks that guide the extraction of natural gas in a safe and friendly manner (Loris 1).

Pennsylvania does not have to choose between promoting the use of clean energy and protecting the environment as Tuttle shows (Tuttle 44). With safe and responsible extraction of natural gas through hydraulic fracking, it can achieve these goals simultaneously.

Hydraulic fracking presents an opportunity for the US to rely on clean domestically available energy. It would enhance the country’s effort to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases and air pollution because natural gas is clean, has no mercury, and has low-levels of pollutants relative to other fuels.

Developments in technologies

From Porter’s article, the need to find suitable hydraulic fracking technologies have led to aggressive studies and research in the past years (Porter 1). Gas companies and other stakeholders have introduced some of the most advanced tools for extraction of natural gas as they respond to public pressure and as a part of their initiatives to enhance efficiency at the well and reduce pollution.

Hydraulic fracking can restore and improve outputs of wells in different types of formations and reservoirs. As a result, the technology has become highly applicable in operations that involve shale gas and other locations, which do not require conventional gas extraction (Mufson 1).

About pressure pumping, hydraulic fracking is the most effective method of stimulation. Hydraulic fracking allows natural gas companies to drill a few wells and drain any type of reservoir (Gilliland 1). Previously, gas companies could not extract gas from shale effectively and cost-effectively because they lacked hydraulic fracking technologies.

Pennsylvania has incredible shale formations. Gilliland shows that hydraulic fracking technologies stimulate wells and reduce costs of hydrocarbon extraction (Gilliland 1). This is beyond the normal costs for alternative energies, including solar, nuclear, and even wind.

On this note, environmentalists and other critics of hydraulic fracking technologies must realize that this method allows for stimulation of wells in shale, tight sands, and in coal bed methane (Gilliland 1). It is also the most cost-effective way of producing natural gas.

The technology allows gas firms to extract the gas from large wells, which do not use stimulation procedures. Further, technology vendors for natural gas companies are not complacent with the current state. As a result, they strive to improve hydraulic fracking technologies to cater to the needs of the industry and address the concerns of environmentalists adequately, as Porter writes (Porter 1).

According to Piddock, the major reason behind the hydraulic fracking debate is the possible contamination of drinking water and the environment (Piddock 8). Williamson notes that gas companies have different advanced techniques for protecting drinking water and the environment from the effects of hydraulic fracking (Williamson 1). They ensure that basic procedures for protecting water are implemented and completed.

Also, they also observe cases of perforation during hydrocarbon production. As Loris puts it, environmentalists and local communities in areas where hydraulic fracking takes place should not demand moratorium because, from the hydraulic fracking point of view, several methods exist to protect drinking water aquifers (Loris 1).

Gas companies monitor the fracking process through advanced technologies with the aim of protecting drinking water and the environment.

Moreover, the Renewable Fuels Association promotes transparency and informs stakeholders about processes involved in hydraulic fracking (Renewable Fuels Association 6). The community and other stakeholders can analyze all components and chemicals used in the extraction of natural gas through hydraulic fracking. The fundamental issue is the need to establish transparent processes and accountability.

In other words, gas companies must reveal the specific nature of all chemicals and other materials involved in hydraulic fracking processes (Renewable Fuels Association 8). Also, they must conduct regular studies to understand the effect of hydraulic fracking processes on the air and water quality. Such information should be available to the public for review.

From Piddock’s argument, gas companies can evaluate behaviors of wells and processes to promote the best methods of fracking (Piddock 8). Several technologies support these procedures through monitoring, assessing, and gauging elements of fractures as soon as they are formed.

As a result, companies can use more developed strategies and control the amount of fluid, the type of chemicals, the rate of pumping, and the orientation of casing to protect water and the environment. One must understand that the industry understands hydraulic fracking technologies at advanced levels because of decades of experiences (Williamson 1).

Moreover, they collect data for analysis to make informed decisions and improve the process. Technologies in hydraulic fracking have improved over the years. Therefore, Loris notes that gas companies can improve their processes through further studies in fields and laboratories and eliminate potential challenges and pollution of drinking water, air, and land (Loris 1).

New technologies could lead to the development of advanced fractures. Moreover, they can also assist in designing and developing highly permeable reservoirs for hydraulic fracking processes in different environments where fracking takes place.

Developments of technologies to focus on different stages and processes in the last decades have facilitated the development of several tight gases and shale gas resources. Consequently, firms can handle treatment in different types of wells. These developments account for different methods of drilling and extracting natural gas.

Economic benefits

According to Loris, hydraulic fracking can boost the economy and create millions of jobs in Pennsylvania and the US as a whole (Loris 1). Several studies have documented potential benefits, which the US could derive from hydraulic fracking (Loris 1; Porter 1; Mufson 1). One cannot deny this fact, and Hobson asserts that shale energy could transform the entire economy of the US by creating millions of jobs (Hobson 8).

Apart from job creation, hydraulic fracking would reduce reliance on energy imports, earn revenues for the State and Federal governments, reduce household energy bills, costs of running the manufacturing sector, and position the US as a critical player in the world energy platform and markets (Loris 1).

A closer look at these benefits shows that hydraulic fracking could be what the US economy requires to maintain steady growth as Mufson notes (Mufson 1). Today, natural gas is a critical part of US energy sources.

Consequently, it has significant influences on economic growth. The US has relied on natural gas for electricity generation, a source of livestock feedstock, chemicals for drug companies, food processing, and treatment of waste. While the price of natural gas in the US has rarely been stable, the likelihood of a large-scale extraction through hydraulic fracking could change this trend and establish steady and affordable gas prices (Loris 1).

Whitten and Beinecke claim that natural gas could support the country’s energy need for many years at the current rate of energy usages (Whitten and Beinecke 1). Hydraulic fracking ensures that drilled wells stay viable for more than ten years. Large quantities of natural gas and the ability of Pennsylvania to extract it would make the State one of the best States for conducting big businesses, particularly for the manufacturing sector.

As a result, some multinational oil and gas firms have expressed their intentions to construct petrochemical plants in Pennsylvania (Loris 1). They have located areas, which are close to the natural gas locations. Residents will enjoy permanent jobs and temporary ones during construction.

According to Hobson, abundant natural gas for extraction could make Pennsylvania one of the most attractive markets for the production of different chemicals as (Hobson 8). Moreover, dwindling growth of counties could record positive outcomes as manufacturing to re-emerge to create new employment opportunities and markets.

Industry professionals note that the rising domestic production of natural gas presents a promising future for the US (Mufson 1). Cheap and available natural gas will flood the US market. This would result in low prices of energy in the US than in other regions. Hence, the US would be able to attract new manufacturing firms. Conversely, environmentalists view shale gas from both political and environmental point of view.

New gas supplies will result in additional industries. As a result, many citizens would have considerable stakes in the gas industry. This implies that it would be politically difficult to impose additional regulations and controls Tuttle’s article demonstrates (Tuttle 44).

Still, environmentalists consider extraction of shale gas as a disruptive process, particularly drilling in which there is contaminated water from fracture formations and other drilling activities, which pollute the atmosphere. Therefore, environmentalists have considered issuing of additional regulations to control adverse outcomes of hydraulic fracking (Piddock 8).

Moreover, they might also consider other regulations that impose drilling techniques with limited contamination to the environment.

While the New York governor is unable to make any decision on whether to drill or not (Tuttle 44), the State is losing revenues and opportunities to create jobs. One may wonder why some politicians and environmentalists have ignored facts, which show that hydraulic fracking is safe and friendly to the public and the environment. The opposition could be nihilism without any sound grounds (Williamson 7).

Debates about the best hydraulic fracking practices, new regulations to control emissions, wastewater management, and other technical processes may not yield any tangible results because the industry has shown that the current practices are safe and are within the existing regulations.

The public may not understand all the details about hydraulic fracking, but they oppose it. Some politicians have called for additional regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act. On this note, it would be prudent to conduct studies on the safety and environmental outcomes of hydraulic fracking so that both politicians and environmentalists can make informed decisions about the technique.

Hydraulic fracking in Pennsylvania is advanced and safe, and Porter’s work shows how Pennsylvania can exploit its technologies for economic gains beyond its borders. Emerging economies like China suffer from severe environmental pollution because of the excessive use of coal in the manufacturing sector (Porter 1).

According to Porter, the State could create jobs and export its expertise and technologies to other countries, which do not know how to extract shale gas like China (Porter 1). Also, the State can help China to clean its polluted environments by focusing on hydraulic fracking for the production of clean energy.

Pennsylvania can sell its technologies and expertise to China, which has natural gas but lacks technologies and expertise to exploit it. Today, the State has some of the most advanced technologies in hydraulic fracking, which can position it as a global leader in safe exploitation of shale gas. Clean energy will address global warming and climate change.

A highly polluted country like China must reexamine its energy sources and make the necessary changes (Porter 1). Countries, which rely on coal, must seek alternative sources of energy, and that is where Pennsylvania shale gas techniques will solve their problems.

Since Pennsylvania has already seen surging extraction of natural gas, job growth, and a significant improvement in emission, the State has massive opportunities to gain from these abilities (Hobson 8). For instance, Pennsylvania will export its clean gas to other nations and receive revenues from its technical capabilities.

Therefore, environmentalists and local communities do not need a moratorium on hydraulic fracking because the process is safe and well regulated under Pennsylvania laws, such as Chemical Disclosure, Groundwater Protection, and Wastewater Management among others.

Moreover, hydraulic fracking has improved the process of extracting the previously inaccessible shale gas, and it will continue to shape the US gas industry and sustain economic growth for several decades. Therefore, Pennsylvania does not need to stop hydraulic fracking because of its potential economic benefits – jobs, revenues, economic growth, and cheap energy, among others.

Conclusion

This essay has supported the use of hydraulic fracking to extract natural gas in Pennsylvania. It has focused on clean energy, the use of advanced technologies in natural gas extraction to protect the environment and the public, and economic growth as potential benefits of hydraulic fracking.

Despite its existence for many years, hydraulic fracking has attracted the most controversial debate based on both facts and myths, which emanate from misreporting and exaggeration. A great deal of the environmentalists and community issues because of hydraulic fracking are because of the likely contamination of drinking water with chemicals used in the drilling procedures.

They also argue that the process could result in earthquakes and poor waste management. However, these claims have failed to consider both Federal and State regulations, which protect the environment, water, land, and air. The major issue is to extract natural gas without compromising the safety of the community and the environment. If gas companies can achieve that, then they can overcome energy challenges and provide clean energy.

This is a possible process because hydraulic fracking is safe and has several regulations and laws to protect communities and the environment. Also, the industry has focused on new, advanced technologies and processes to enhance the effectiveness and safety of natural gas during fracking processes.

Pennsylvania has the main role in protecting its environment and communities alongside oversight roles. It can develop specific laws and regulations, which account for its geology and hydrology to regulate the extraction of natural gas through hydraulic fracking. Communities and environmentalists can demand accountability and transparency in the process. This would eliminate myths about hydraulic fracking.

At the same time, undecided leaders must allow hydraulic fracking in their states because any delays have massive financial losses. The Federal government should not introduce new redundant regulations to control hydraulic fracking because the existing laws have adequately addressed all major concerns regarding the public and environmental safety.

Such new laws are likely to derail any progress and create a red tape system that would hamper energy production and the highly needed economic growth in Pennsylvania and other States.

The industry must commit itself to be safe and responsible practices to ensure environmental sustainability and protection. This would ensure that shale gas and hydraulic fracking play key roles in shaping the future source of energy for the US. Pennsylvania should adopt hydraulic fracking for gshale gas extraction.

Works Cited

Gilliland, Ellen. Fracking can access energy from deep below. 2012. Web.

Hobson, Margaret Kriz. “The Pennsylvania Gas Rush.” National Journal. 7 (2010): 8. Print.

“Hydrofracking.” Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 2011. Web.

Loris, Nicolas. Hydraulic Fracturing: Critical for Energy Production, Jobs, and Economic Growth. 2012. Web.

Mufson, Steven. The new boom: Shale gas fueling an American industrial revival. 2012. Web.

Piddock, Charles. “Fracking fight: the pros and cons of a new drilling technique.” Junior Scholastic/Current Event (2013): 8. Print.

Porter, Winston. The China-Pennsylvania connection. 2013. Web.

Renewable Fuels Association. Hearing on The American Energy Initiative Testimony of Bob Dinneen. 2011. Web.

Robinson, David. National Fuel’s shale gas production in Pennsylvania keeps soaring. 2013. Web.

Tuttle, Ian. ” To Drill or Not to Drill? Governor Cuomo refuses to answer the question.” National Review 65.11 (2013): 44. Print.

Whitten, Daniel and Frances Beinecke. Is fracking our energy future? Hydraulic fracturing (fracking, for short) is a new drilling technique that can extract hard-to-reach oil and gas. 2014. Web.

Williamson, Kevin D. The Truth about Fracking. 2012. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!