For those of you BSG fans, forget all you think you know about fracking. Please look at the following three sources, determine your own thesis based on these ideas, and offer some supported opinion (also known as analysis): quotes, summary, paraphrasing. Cite the sources, even if you don't have page numbers (because one is an article, and another is a video), just so your reader will know which information came from which article. Please endeavor to be as scholarly as possible, and remain objective. Should you choose this topic for your paper, you already have a wealth of collaboration, and food for thought.
Hilcorp Fracking Gazette article
Fracking in Colorado - springsgov.com
Interview with Governor Hickenlooper:
Some things to keep in mind (only mention them in your response if they enhance your argument/thesis):
What is the agenda of the writers/politicians/etc.?
What is the credibility of each person/article?
Who is the audience of each person/article?
Keep in mind that this is good practice for writing your research paper. I made sure to keep the articles and the video short, for your convenience, so, if you would like, you may go to other sites, and other sources of information, and put them on your blog to inform your classmates.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFracking has been a source of debate in Colorado Springs and other communities in the state and when looked into I can understand why. The oil company wants the public to just trust what they say and trust the officials that agree with them, but when you read up on past cases it would seem that laws and guide lines on the matter can be over looked. In the slide show, “Fracking in Colorado”, you can see sites of fracking where it looks to have been an oil spill and it is said in the slide that it’s not reported. (Slide 30) If things can happen, like oil spilling onto the top of the ground that have seeped into our water, and don’t need or get reported then how can we trust any of the data that says it is safe to drill? I am against reckless fracking that is not properly regulated. Another problem with fracking and natural gas in general, is methane leakage. (Slide 20, 21, 22) Natural gas a "bridge fuel" because each unit, when burned, produces half as much carbon dioxide as coal ,but there are also significant leaks of methane, a ,greenhouse gas 20 times as potent as CO2, negating most of the benefits of lower global warming pollution. (Slide 44) We should be putting all our efforts right now into energy efficiency, conservation, and truly sustainable forms of energy such as solar, wind, and properly managed bio-fuels. Think of the future you want for yourself and your children.
ReplyDeleteA lot of what you said helped me on understanding where I stood on this subject. Also it helped me find more information. I totally agree with you on being against reckless fracking and if companies choose to take part in it then they should be properly regulated because if one company can get away with a small spill then how many others are going to be able to get away with it. With all that being said their could be better ideas in obtaining these resources or using new resources.
DeleteYes, They do need to come up with a better way to regulate the companies. They should also test peoples water before they start and when they are done to make sure the drilling or fracking is not messing with the water. The fact that they don't check the water makes me want to believe that fracking and drilling will change our drinking water and they know that is why they don't test it.
DeleteJohn Hickenlooper proposes in the video how fracking is a "techonology innovation". Hickenooper explains that fracking isnt a "frieghting thing". At First to me it sounded like a bad idea for the enviroment,After being open minded and doing Further Reaserch and studies I found that Fracking is benefical in the aspect of creating an immense supply of low-cost. Low-cost natural gas reduces the cost of heating for people that are using natural gas to heat their homes. It provides low-cost electricity and a replacement for many older coal-fired power plants.Like everything else over the years Techonolgy will improve so fracking will to help with its efficiency and safety. Theres alot of concern about polution but I also found that if done the right way. By raising standards for water that can be discharged into streams, the state pushed drillers to start recycling their wastewater instead. Im not Saying fracking is totally right but im all for anything that improves or daily lives. Things we do today like driving a car polutes the enviroment but we still drive cars because it makes or lives easier just like fracking would. I look at the Postives of fracking if done the right way.
ReplyDeleteSources
Deletehttp://heartland.org/policy-documents/fracking-risks-and-benefits
http://journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/569446/Benefits-from-fracking-outweigh-any-negatives.html?nav=5061
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteColorado receives an average of only 17 inches of precipitation each year (including snowfall). Combine that with a cycle of unusually hot and dry summers, and our state is a prime candidate for drought conditions. Knowing that, I don't agree with fracking that does leave Soil Contamination, ground and surface water contamination. (Fracking in CO, slide 3)When fracking, "Produced water" is what they leave when they go back to where ever they are from. Produced water is what they will leave in our ground and it is considered a liquid industrial waste. So as far as it being low cost, the cost is Colorado drinking water that is already at time low.
DeleteHydraulic fracturing was first used in Texas to stimulate oil-wells in the lat 1940's. (http://dddusmma.wordpress.com/2011/06/03/fracking-risks-and-benefits/) So it is not “new” and in the last 73 years Technology hasn’t improved fracking. Even if in the next ten years they start to make it safer, they are wanting to drill now not when it’s safe.
I agree that along with the technology increase that fracking will only continue to increase also.I also put in my response that as long as they continue to raise standards that the anything that will benefit is worth a try.I think that with all the other things that cause negative effects on the earth or atmosphere fracking is one of the lower level concerns.
DeleteFrom what I see in all of the information is fracking or drilling could both be hazardous. It's just the matter of trying to figure out which one is less hazardous. The world is moving forward in many aspects and t is all about trying to figure out which one works better for what is going on. Fracking is something new that they are trying and I think it's a fifty fifty. There have been spills with fracking but there have also been spills with drilling so is a spill better if it is caused during fracking or drilling? No they are both bad no matter the cause or the process that is used when the spill takes place. I think that is a good idea to try something new. It the information from Hickenlooper he states that in the last 20 years almost every well has been fracked. In my opinion if it's been working this long why is it such a controversy. As with anything, with more development fracking could be improved.In the Gazette article it is said that sampling will be taken from the wells to be tested and depending on the results they will begin drilling in other sites. They are also developing new regulations. With these changes and keeping an eye on the regulations I think it is could continue to evolve and become a good thing in the oil industry.
ReplyDeleteHow can they express that fracking is new when they have been doing it to every well in the last 20 years? Sense the start of standard oil by John Davison Rockefeller, only one thing has driven other oil companies which is money. Almost all the oil companies you see today are "baby standards" of the 1911 break up of Standard Oil into 34 independent companies. Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and Amoco are all examples of these "baby standards."
DeleteTrue I just reaalized I put something new. I meant that it's a new topic being brought up and causing so much controversy. Something that has been done for so long you would think it wouldn't be such a big deal anymore.
DeleteWell a lot of companies attempt to claim something is new in order to sound unique and fresh. They figure if they claim its new that people won't look into it and find out its not, --like used car sales men.
Delete"I am simply amazed that we are using our most precious resource, (water) to mine for something far less valuable [Fracking in Colorado Powerpoint slide 25]." Yes I started off with a quote because after going through the three forms of media it appears that the effect that fracking has on fresh water supply is one of the main arguments for why it should not be allowed. As always there are people that are for and people that are against fracking. Fracking is a process in which a company will shoot water and sand to fracture a deep rock layer to retrieve natural gas and Petroleum. The media focuses on the chemicals used in the process of fracking as well as the chemicals expelled through the process. The method of Fracking puts out harmful gases and the equipment involved with it has the chance of expelling it's liquid contents into the environment cause damage to the soil and wildlife around the site. With all of this being said my personal opinion is that there needs to be a cheaper and safer way to do this. Everyone has an agenda in this process although it seems that politicians are going against studies to say that this process is unsafe.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you our fresh water supply is valuable. Although my personal way of viewing it is that water is a much cheaper product than natural gas and petroleum. So I much rather waste a little bit of water to obtain gas at a cheaper price locally, although I know there is a chance they may gind niether while fracking.
DeleteFrak cylon style! (Battlestar Galactica Reference)
ReplyDeleteWell, long ago strip mining was supported and accepted. The public was made to think it was safe and wouldn't cause any issues.
During the interview with Gov. John Hickenlooper, he appeared to be nervous and scattered brain. Normally when you see that in a public speaker is means they have been "paid" to say what they are saying and their thoughts are not their own. While the oil industry tries to convince the world that oil is needed, they buy any design that allows better oil consumption. They keep a system in place to in-slave the world for more money.
“I’m simply amazed that we are using our most precious natural resource, (water) to mine for something far less valuable” (Phil Doe).
Humanity has been convinced that fossil fuels will last forever and instead of looking for means to support us with a renewable energy we continue to just waste away.
One thing I’m surprised wasn’t mentioned in any of the articles is “jobs.” If there are going to be so many more wells and methods to produce oil, why are we not being informed about new jobs for Colorado? Normally that is a major sell point for any company to wish to expand in Colorado.
First, in the process of fracking there can be risk and reward but for who and what is at risk is controversial. In the aspect of health and safety the amount of unreported spills, accidents, and contaminations is enough alone to see the damaging impacts (slide 27-32). In the article by the gazette about the Hilcorp oil company and its spill of 3.15 million gallons of fresh water prior to mixing it with all the chemicals; however, imagine the impact it would have had on the surrounding community and wildlife if produced water from the fracking site was spilled. Hilcorp still doesn’t have an explanation for what caused the spill (Hunter article). In Governor Hickenlooper interview I assume he is supporting fracking because he tries to explain fracking in a very subtle way saying that the dangers aren’t really all that prevalent in the process however he didn’t really mention anything about communities suffering from this which would infer hes not really that worried about the communities he’s governing just the reward coming from the fracking.
ReplyDeleteAfter reviewing the information given by Professor Taylor and doing my own research, I have to say that although fracking could be beneficial in that it is a source of recovering natural gas and oil, the danger outweighs the benefits. Fracking can be hazardous to the water supply, and according to reason.tv on YouTube, there has been over 1,000 reported incidents of water contamination in 6 states. They showed a clip where someone was putting a lighter to water running from their faucet and the water was flaming up. I don't know about you, but I definitely wouldn't want my water to do that! This video also says that $4 million has been paid by fracking companies to affected residents. Considering that fracking uses toxic chemicals such as Benzene and Menthanol (with water and sand), that doesn't seem right that such a dangerous practice can be "resolved" by paying fines. This video also have some points on why fracking is beneficial. One is that natural gas is better than burning coal, reducing greenhouse gases. Secondly, fracking could increase oil production by producing 3 million barrels a day by the year 2020. And finally, it could benefit the economy. All in all, I find that the negative outweighs the positive. If there wasn't so much evidence of fracking being so dangerous, I would be all for it.
ReplyDeleteUpon investigating the practice of hydraulic fracturing, more commonly referred to as “fracking”, a bit more, I have come now have a more informed opinion of the practice. Governor Hickenlooper made the practice seem, at least here in Colorado, fairly benign. As an oil and gas exploration geologist in the 1980s, Hickenlooper made a strong argument stating that “almost every drill in Colorado for the past 20 years, we fracked.” It appears that the Governor is attempting to leverage his experience in the industry, to advocate for oil and gas companies, their constituency or others. Although the Governor doesn’t name specifically where the future drilling will occur, we can see from the other two sources where drilling is occurring and is likely to be. The audience seems to be citizens who are interested in information related to fracking, and the “Fracking in Colorado” power point presentation is making a strong, but fairly objective case against it. The two written articles appear to be fairly factual, while the Governor, though experienced, is defending mostly the act of fracking. Later in the film, he does mention the spillage of fluids or “produced water”, as potential hazard. Particularly in cases in which leech pond membranes tear and waste leaks out. The Governor also mentions that some “citizens are concerned about the current 250ft minimum” from properties which environmentalists want extended to beyond the possible 500ft to 1000ft. In the case of Eric Eight Unit Two, near the Thomas Reservoir and a multitude of homes, grave concern is in my mind and 1,000ft doesn’t even come close to the minimum safe distance. The state and municipalities should impose steep fines for safety violations that would not only hurt the revenue of the company, but also their permits on other properties.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with the points you brought up about Governor Hickenloopers interview where he includes more logical and factual views of fracking. I as well, from the little research I have done, found that the safety regulations need to be more severely punishable when violated; thus, violators are less likely to make the wrong decision when it comes to potential harm. They also needs to be more strict safety inspections of the sites and disposal sites.
DeleteI'm read that you agree with the idea of punishing companies who fail to meet their safety obligations. What do you propose as a suitable punishment? I also have not done a great amount of research on the subject of fracking, but after looking through the several page power point presentation, believe that because the distances between residential homes, schools, water sources, etc., could be so small, strongly believe that companies must have severe consequences for both negligent and deliberate environmental exposure. I would propose significant fines to the point of handicapping their operations at that particular well for minor infractions, and of course extreme fines, litigation and criminal punishment for negligent and blatant violations, particularly those that threaten the local community and their future. Lastly, the punishments must be so great, that permits are threatened and if need be suspended and eventually revoked, otherwise as the company's profits grow, small fines will be inconsequential, and safety, honesty and discipline may suffer; leaving those citizens and their future at risk.
DeleteI didn't get a chance to get to this before class and won't get a chance, but here's a better video (parody) about fracking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4aOMKhkhSc
ReplyDeleteFracking can be a positive and negative thing depending on how you look at the issue. Its a way to get a resource that we use, but at the same time it can endanger another resource that we rely on. Given the fact that it can endanger a valueable resource of ours like like freash water then we need to take certain percautions. However, their are records of spills caused by fracking that have seaped through the top soil and into the ground water. Plus there have bin incidents where the oil companies haven't recorded some spills so how can someone say not to worry about fracking. If people want fracking to stay as a way to get energy and gasses then they should be more cautiouse.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there are both positive and negative aspects in the act of fracking. You mentioned that there has been spills as a result of fracking, which ones specifically, as I'm doing more research into the subject? I also agree that we can and should harness this form of energy, but not at the expense of our most vital essence of life: water. Furthermore, I would add to your comment on "cautious", by advocating for severe penalties for those companies involved in negligant and accidental activities. The penalties must not also threaten their botton line, but also jeopardize their permits.
DeleteI got it from one of the videos it features after the video that we had to watch from this weeks blog. I think your right that it should jeoperdize their permits because if they can't do it right they shouldn't do it at all
DeleteMany things in the article "Hilcrop to begin fracking at county site next week" go unsaid. The explaination of fracking is stated very clear altough the conseguences that may arouse from fracking is left in the dark. This article briefly describes the company who has began drilling in search for oil, the location of the drills, thier attempts and findings, and a issue the company had while trying to begin fracking. The article states "The Colorado Springs City Council, meanwhile, has delayed a final decision on regulations governing fracking within the city limits until at least February" with that being said this is where the main problem lies.
ReplyDeleteRead more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/week-149321-hilcorp-fracking.html#ixzz2NMvOOMBH
I found this video link that shows a man lighting his water after they fracked in his town. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U01EK76Sy4A
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete