Fracking should not be allowed anywhere in the United States. It causes damage to our environment and that should not be destroyed just because of profit. We should not take our environment for granted because we need to save it for our future generations that will live on earth. We should take steps to make sure we keep the earth suitable for living things to have life. I see myself a light green because growing crops is important and we should create more croplands. Dark greens think that cultivation is detrimental to the planet and I think that is absurd. If we stopped growing crops then we will not be able to support the demands of crops. I would not become a member of Earth First! since they engage in tactics that I find non peaceful. Destroying machines and damaging property will only make a bad name for Green ideologists who want to make a difference. Violence does nowhere and we will not have communication to the officials that are needed so we can share our concerns like fracking. The message should be spread in a way that is effective, yet peaceful so we can gain the respect. …show more content…
Our population continues to grow on earth so that means we have more people that need the resources to live. I think Malthus is correct because we cannot support an exponential amount of more people on earth if we do not produce more food. More people would be without food unless we use our techniques wisely to grow more food. That is why I believe we should not engage in fracking because it will damage the environment. Why should we destroy areas that will be needed in the future so we can grow crops? we will have less areas to be able to grow products that are needed to support a growing
In today's global economy, energy is one of the most crucial and sought after commodities. Who supplies it and how much they supply determines how much influence they have over other countries as well as the global economy. This is why hydraulic fracturing is currently such an important and controversial topic in the United States. Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as "fracking" or hydrofracturing, is the process of using pressurized liquids to fracture rocks and release hydrocarbons such as shale gas, which burns more efficiently than coal. This booming process of energy production provides a much needed economic boost, creating jobs and providing gas energy for Americans. The efficiently burning shale gas reduces carbon emission from electricity production plants, reducing carbon footprints on the environment. However, the process of hydraulic fracturing uses millions of gallons of pressurized liquid, which contains toxic chemicals, and some of this water is left over undealt with. The air near fracking sites is often also polluted and unsafe for nearby community residents. Injecting millions of gallons of water laced with toxic chemicals into the rock thousands of feet deep can cause earthquakes, causing a safety hazards for all nearby areas. Hydraulic Fracturing makes rare natural gases easily attainable, boosting the economy and reducing carbon emissions. However, the negative side effects such as contaminated water and air, make hydraulic fracturing a process that may not be worth the benefits.
In my opinion it should not be allowed to be so close to homes and farm lands. People are getting sick and are not able to drink the water that they have to wash their skin and cook with. Many families have had to leave their home towns to get away from the dangers of what fracking brings. “These … chemical compounds such as benzene, xylene and toluene, which have been found to have detrimental health effects – such as respiratory problems and birth defects” (Naveena). There are thousands of jobs on farms and in factories, we don’t need people digging and pumping chemicals into the earth.
...t decades but recently the government has been more involved trying to regulate fracturing processes so that they are safe to the environment and to the people. Although fracking is not very well accepted, many believe that fracking is the only way to extract natural gas and oil efficiently. While others believe that it is harmful to the drinking supply of water and to the environment as all other extractions of natural resources are. Today states, the House of Representatives, and the Senate are all working to help minimize the effects that hydraulic fracturing has within communities and the environment by enforcing stronger laws and regulations within fracturing wells and fracturing companies. Hydraulic fracturing provides sufficient and clean energy that will help minimize the impact on other natural resources that are used for energy as well.
Malthus’ An Essay on the Principle of Population, he states “I think I may fairly make two postulata. First, that food is necessary to the existence of man. Secondly, that the passion between the sexes is necessary and will remain nearly in its present state.” He came up with the Population Principle in which he argued that population, when unregulated, increases geometrically, whereas subsistence increases arithmetically. This then becomes an issue when the population outweigh the amount of food available. Malthus then said that once this level was surpassed, that famine would be the main source of the limit to population growth and that premature death was the most natural way to control the
Conflicting reports make it difficult to discern just how detrimental the practice is to the environment and people. What is known is that fracking uses phenomenal amounts of water, which is becoming a scarce resource in many parts of the country. There is no doubt that the fluid used in the fracking process contains chemicals, and when released into water supplies has negative effects on these sources. Injection of flowback materials into deep wells has been definitively linked to increased seismic activity. Damage to roads due to the high traffic of trucks shipping equipment and product is astronomical. Worldwide, four countries have outright banned the practice and others are waiting for more research to be done before they continue to allow it. A few states know the devastating side effects that come with the practice, and have banned hydraulic fracturing. While there is no doubt that fracking can produce resources that are used by Americans, there is a lot of doubt as to whether it is safe or not. Hopefully, the country will follow those that have banned the practice, and adopt other safer forms of energy
Imagine a world where fresh and clear water was a luxury. Imagine water so contaminated with chemicals that every plant it comes into contact with dies. As the trees begin to die, oxygen levels drop. As the vegetation dies, wildlife begins to die out. The polluted water which flows through the ground into wells causes instant contamination. As the water flows out of the sink, one can strike a match and light the liquid on fire. Showering in these chemicals is out of the question. Fresh water has become a comfort, rather than a given. Could planet Earth survive this existence? If hydraulic fracturing, otherwise known as fracking, were deemed legal, this question may be put to the test. Fracking is a process in which chemicals, sand and water are used in “high volumes… to fracture gas-bearing layers of rock” (Dolesh 2). As the rock breaks, natural gas is released and then collected to be used as energy. The United States is currently sitting on a gold mine of natural gas which could stimulate our ever declining economy. The question is what price are we willing to pay for a temporary fix? Fracking is a dangerous process that should be deemed illegal due to its harmful short and long-term environmental effects.
The people who are being asked permission to transform their land into drilling sites for natural gas have more reason to be concerned than most because it will affect them more directly than people who do not live in that specific area (although it does affect people who do not live in the vicinity as well). Although fracking may seem to concern to only a small group of people, it should also concern anyone who cares about doing what is safe for our country's citizens. The truth is, fracking is extremely dangerous, not only because of the negative effects on the environment, but also because it could make people ill.
Fracking is quickly becoming a debatable topic in our society today. The practice involves injecting fluid into the ground to fracture rock in order to release natural gas. It sounds like it would be a safe way to harness fuels in the earth’s surface, but it actually is a danger to our environment. Because of the dangers of fracking, what little fresh water remains on earth is being contaminated. It is also releasing toxins into the airs creating contaminated air and acid rain. Because of the many health and environmental dangers of fracking, it should be stopped immediately to help prevent more worldwide health issues down the road.
He believed that population growth would quickly far outstrip the food supply causing famine and depletion of natural resources unless countries applied “moral constraint”. Neo-Malthusianism is the view that the rate of population should be controlled to prevent overpopulation and famine, such as policies enforced by the Chinese government. They also believe that Malthus’s is much more frightening than ever before due to the large growth in population. They argue that world population is also destroying the world’s natural resources, using at a highly unsustainable level, which will have many future implications if they run
Fracking is a highly controversial practice that utilizes the injection of water, chemicals and abrasives to extract relatively inaccessible pockets of natural resources. Although fracking has the potential to benefit the economy, it may also pose a significant impact on the environment, the ecosystem and safety.
Hardin argues how the world only has so many resources and opportunities for agriculture to be expended. Therefore, with enough increase in population, these resources will become extinct. Thus, humans will run out of food and eventually starve to death. As Hardin declares, “a finite world can only support a finite population” (Hardin 98).
Imagine having a loved one with cancer, organ damage, nervous system disorders, or your child having birth defects. Imagine running out of clean water because the only water available is capable of catching fire. Imagine oil in rivers and animals losing their homes. See yourself caught in an earthquake where there should not be one. All of this is increased by fracking and can be prevented. The question is should fracking continue or should it be banned.
“We are consuming the Earth’s natural resources beyond its sustainable capacity of renewal” said by Herman Daly, Beyond Growth, Boston 1996, 61[1] .
One of the major effects of the huge population increase has been the depletion of natural resources and the destruction of ecosystems. In the 1960's, theorist Paul Ehrlich predicted that, given the skyrocketing figures of human population, the amount of food produced would not grow at a fast enough rate for human survival (Professor Carr Everbach, personal communication). He predicted mass starvation and death by the year 2000 as the result of uncontrolled population growth. Clearly, this did not occur. Ehrlich did not foresee the advancements ma...
Fewer people mean fewer demands on the environment. With growth in human population, the grasses and animal populations humans used for sustenance did not have time to recover, which turned into humans using the earth's natural resources in an unsustainable manner (class discussion 02.14.03). Humans living in agrarian society do not necessarily use the environment's resources in an unsustainable manner, but the greater the population density, the more land will be needed to support that population in a sustainable manner. As resources become more and more scarce, field owners will be less willing to let land lay fallow (class discussion 02.21.03). Humans then found a "tech fix" with the development of agriculture and the domestication of animals.