What Is Fracking and Its Effect on Water Quality

Fracking and Water Quality Ethics Literature Review

What is Fracking?

Fracking is used to extract natural gas from shale layers located deep in the ground. The impermeability of the shale layers leads to the gas being trapped. The rocks are blasted with pressurized water that contain sand and chemicals capable of increasing friction between the rocks and water. However, the percentage of the fluid consisting of the chemicals is very small. Some of the chemicals, for instance ethylene glycol, are poisonous, while other components are 'trade secrets'. The sand contained in the pressurized solution helps in cracking the rocks so that they release the gas (Schrope, 2012).

A lot of controversy has been generated by the increase in the sources of natural gas and oil obtained through the use of hydraulic fracturing. Those in support make the argument that fracking has the capacity to speed up growth in the economy, increase the energy supplies that can be sourced domestically, and help in transitioning to cleaner sources of energy (The Perryman Group, 2008; Considine, et al., 2010; Hultman, et. al., 2010; EPA, 2010). Those opposed tend to focus on the potential effects on the environment and public health given the proximity of the neighboring communities to the sources of energy (Boudet, et al., 2013).

Literature Review

Hydraulic fracturing is one cog in the wheel of the gas or oil development process. This process includes: the clearing of land where the wells are to be dug, construction of the transport infrastructure such as compressor stations and pipelines, processing of the extracted fossil fuels, water transportation, wastewater treatment, disposal of wastes, and bringing new populations to the community. Such activities have potential health, social, environmental, and economic impacts that come with fast growth in population as well as cycles of 'boom and bust' associated with the sector (Jacquet, 2009). How well these factors are managed, and their impact on the community is dependent on several factors. These factors include the time frame in question, the inherent characteristics of the area impacted, and such details as the nature of the population, and the area's history as far as extraction of fossil fuels is concerned (Brasier, et al., 2011).

Fracking and Water Resources

Several reports have been made on water contamination and overuse in various places. It has been noted by the Council of Canadian Academics (cited in Kairos, 2015) that there isn't enough evidence to show that shale gas development poses risks to water resources. However, if there is any actual risk, its extent cannot be accurately measured because scientific data is lacking. According to the council, the biggest threat happens to be gas leaks from the wells. For this problem, not even the current best practices offer a long-term solution (Kairos, 2015).

Social Impacts of Fracking

The Chief Medical Officer in New Brunswick (cited in Kairos, 2015) cautions against going on with fracking of shale gas until the concerned parties carry out further research and study on the potential effects on public health. Besides the effects that might be caused by air and water pollution, she asserts, the parties must look at the impacts on the social environment like heightened crime, cases of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), domestic violence and drug abuse (Kairos, 2015).

Water Quality

One of the central points when debating fracking issues is water pollution. The position of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) is that fracking doesn't lead to drinking water contamination. According to regulators, the areas of Alberta and British Columbia have seen not less than 175 000 wells sunk in the past six decades without there being any reported cases of water contamination. These records are due to the very strict standards and regulations that have been imposed on industry players. However, there are complaints in Alberta that they are unable to drink the water from their wells and the skin of their children is burned by the tap water (Fenton, 2013). Andrew Nikiforuk, a journalist, says that there are now so many complaints arising in the Alberta area among landowners that there are now complaint backlogs (Nikiforuk, 2013).

Encana Corporation was in fact sued by Jessica Ernest who formerly consulted for the oil and gas industry for alleged contamination of her water supply because of the corporation's shallow coal bed. The company, in its defense, stated that it hadn't fractured any coal beds in the region but had just stimulated them. Although there was a ruling to the effect that the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB), which had granted Encana the license, could not be sued, the suit against the Canadian Ministry of Environment could proceed. The United States' Energy Policy Act of 2005 exempts corporations engaging in natural gas fracking from the provisions of the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Clean Water Act. In the energy bill, there was a provision called the 'Halliburton loophole'. The provision exempted companies from demands to disclose the chemicals employed in the fluids they used for fracking (Kairos, 2015).