Advantages and Disadvantages of Fracking

Advantages and Disadvantages of FrackingResearch Review collect fitting to the nature of the question its structure appears to be formulaic one military position looking at the electric potential benefits and the other presenting return arguments centring on environmental and social impacts. This structure led naturally to investigateing the potential benefits of fracking first. A superb starting point was the official g everywherenment report Shale accelerator and fracking1, this gives a wide overview of the situation regarding fracking in the UK however the area that is of particular relate for this project refers to the Economic implications. Regular comparisons are made with the United States where fracking has been enforced on a thumping scale, dramatically changing their energy adorn for the better. These comparisons have led to the conclusion that shale vaunt was unlikely to be a game- deepenr as in the US, this is down to the comparable before longage of disgrac e on which to drill in the UK. Suggesting that UK fracking leading yield con spotrably move economic benefits than the US, despite this according to a May 2013 report pen in the document a scenario has been put forward Where UK shale gas labor attracts 3.7 billion per year and realises up to 74,000 jobs, clearly showing the potential benefits of fracking.As expected from a government report return arguments are provided in truth effectively, this is a vital part of a cost benefit study the distinguished purpose of the document. A large portion of the document is apply to Environmental considerations, relating well to the environmental and social impacts section of my dissertation, therefore this asc destructionent covers arguments both for and against fracking in the UK and will prove very helpful when create verbally my dissertation.Looking at the origin of the source it appears credible, published on the twenty-second January 2014 suggests that up to date informati on has been employ, it has in addition been written by a plethora of different writers, thus decreasing the chances of any bias influencing conclusions. in conclusion it is an official government document therefore likely to be passing reliable with informed decisions being made following the collation of large amounts of research data. Although the report made clear there is a unambiguous lack of information regarding fracking in UK, for congressman the amount of shale gas that could be commercially extracted is not known, possibly making any and assumptions much(prenominal) as how far could fracking bring down energy be, unreliable as no exact calculations can be made.Shale gas and fracking raised the report of Shale gas being drilld as bridge from char to clearer renewable sources of energy. A similar idea is addressed in Michael Levis research paper Climate Consequences of Natural Gas as a twosome Fuel2 this explores the use of natural gas as a bridge fuel. The ma in function of this bridge fuel is smoothing a transition from fossil fuels to aught light speed energy by temporarily offsetting the decline in coal use. Levi takes a research orientated approach using alleged(a) scenarios to answer this question he begins with 6 traditional stabilization scenarios ahead constructing six new bridge scenarios and final examinati all six delayed contagious disease scenarios. This modelling demonstrates the effects of these different scenarios on CO2 concentration and temperature change this is significant when assessing the potential benefits of fracking as if it can cut back CO2 rig and potentially reduce dependency on coals leading to zero carbon energy it could suggest there is a strong case for it implementation. once again this source presents both sides of the argument, the converse of which is that methane emissions from the extraction of natural gas will severely reduce or entirely negate the climate benefits of lower CO2 emissions. Despite this potential downfall not necessarily meet my counter argument of the environmental and social impacts, it could be used to label the potential benefits of fracking.Dr Levi, a David Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and the environment, is highly regarded having published umteen scholarly articles for a number of academic papers such as the Oxford press. Therefore this source seems highly credible as the creator has extensive experience in the field of energy and fracking. Despite this there is considerable ambiguity over the conclusions made, he is aware that he has lonesome(prenominal) used a limited number of scenarios and that examination of additional scenarios could further reinforce or challenge his result.Upon appraisal it was evident that a clear fracking debate was emerging, this led me to a particular TED talk entitle The Fracking Debate3 delivered by Terry Engelder, a leading authority on the Marcellus gas shale play. Engelder believes that the economy w ill precisely grow in proportion to its handiness to energy and that fracking should be used to fuel this growth. Engelder arguments are not constructed in such a way that champions fracking but instead by deposing its alternatives, for example if America was to implement wide scale renewable energy programs such as solar and wind then it would experience numerous problems. much(prenominal) as, extensive use of solar panels become susceptible to sudden potentiality shocks from the emerging sun causing failure in transmissions systems. He as well as raises the fact that these are heavily subsidised unlike fracking. Finally the counter argument over methane emissions from fracking offsetting the reduction in CO2 in Levis paper is disproved, Engelder suggests that Co2 emissions will have a far more than sever effect on global temperature change as compare to Methane emissions because of its short life.In terms of utility this source is highly inhering Engelders has a strong p ro fracking stance, which may result in bias thus limiting objectivity. Although having said this the arguments raised demonstrate the potential benefits of fracking are very crystalline therefore it will prove useful when writing my dissertation.During this TED talk Engelder refers to the book the end of country4 by shamus McGraw, this provides a valuable case study with personal insight into the effects of fracking on a local scale. McGraw acts a detached narrator recalling the discovery of the Marcellus gas shale play worth an estimated $1 trillion. He demonstrates how some benefited from this discovery change their land to oil companies, but at the same time explores the compound moral homecomings behind selling land that generations have relied on, for a expeditious profit resulting in it becoming permanently scared.McGaw is an experienced freelance writer therefore this book is likely to give an accurate account from a neutral perspective avoiding any subjectivity. Howe ver he may be prone to exaggeration for dramatic effect, which could influence the reader. On its own The end of country cannot be given considerable weighting as it only refers to one example and is therefore not representative of every Fracking scenario. Although it is a good piece of supplementary evidence to support the arguments raised in my dissertation.These local economic benefits raised The end of country could be seen as a positive. Yet Prof. Susan Christopherson of Cornell University argues that these are short-term and that the communities will suffer in the long run, these views are presented on her commons choices website5. She refers extensively to the ripple move that occurs once natural gas extraction has begun in an area, these include count on effects on property values, the local tax base costs associated with increased use of infrastructure, especially roads and bridges. This source will prove extremely useful when examining the social impacts of fracking as it allows a deeper level of analysis looking at the longer term impacts preferably than more immediate ones. It could in like manner provide a good link betwixt my two arguments, as on the one hand you have the short term gain but this is countered by the long term impacts.The Green choices movement is a product of Cornell University therefore we would expect the information provided to be very reliable, having been collated and assed by a number of academics who have devoted many hours of research into these conclusions. However we must consider the number of case studies used to come to these conclusions, if they used a limited number then results may not be representative of all areas.The environmental impacts of fracking are withal explored in the Sustainalytics research paper Fracking under drive The Environmental and cordial Impacts and Risks of Shale Gas Development6. It has subdivided environmental impacts into land and water as well as a specific case study into grou nd water contamination. It also deals with social impacts such as light and noise pollution from perpetually running rigs. However this paper had a disappointing lack of counter arguments, none the less it is still of great use as I am only using to strengthen the Environmental and social impacts side of my argument, thus it is not imperative that in contains counter arguments the fact that it is a high reliable scholarly article is more important. Although it was published in 2011 so it may be subject to out of date information.The final source to add weight to the environmental and social impacts side of my argument is the ReFINE7 project this is the biggest research project of its kind in Europe, dedicated to researching the issue of shale gas and oil exploitation using fracking methods and its potential risks. It not only referred to the already established environmental and social costs of fracking, but also raised some new issues that would add to my argument against fracking e.g. the argument over orphaned wells and who should take responsibility for them. One of most important factors associated with ReFINE is the fact that it has be carried out in Europe sooner than America, making it the most relevant source that I have form as I plan to centre my dissertation around fracking in the UK. A common weakness in many of my other sources is that they may not be applicable to the UK. The source is objective, simply presenting the facts rather than attempt to influence opinions.After reading the ReFINE paper I obdurate to try and gain a deeper insight into the implications behind it and try to obtain out what those behind it personally thought of Fracking in the UK. To do this I emailed the project lead who forwarded me on Dr Liam Herringshaw who was also involved in formulating the project, he agreed to answer any questions I had for him.This is an extremely valuable immemorial source however I am aware it is highly personal as it is only one persons opinion. Therefore I plan to use his responses not to base whole arguments on but rather to support arguments that have already been established.I believe there is no explicit answer to my question views tend to be a result of the perspective, rather than hardened evidence. I hope that by formulating my ideas in a logical way using my sources both as the basis for my reasoning as well as to supplement my arguments I will be able to construct a well-balanced argument from which a conclusion made.1 Edward White, mike Fell, Louise Smith, Matthew Keep, Shale gas and fracking, (London 2014).2 Michael Levi Climate Consequences of Natural Gas as a pair Fuel , (January 2013)3 Terry Engelder, The Fracking Debate, video, TED, (June 2013)4 Shamus McGraw, The end of country, (2012)5 http//greenchoices.cornell.edu/development/shale/6 Sustainalytics, Fracking under Pressure The Environmental and Social Impacts and Risks of Shale Gas Development, (August 2011)7 ReFINE project, (2013)