Hydraulic fracturing, known by its nickname fracking, is a controversial method by which natural gas is extracted from the Earth. This technology is relatively new, and has been known to cause some major ecological problems, including groundwater contamination, the release of thousands of tons of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) into the air, and minor earthquakes in areas where it is conducted.
Nevertheless, fracking is widely regarded as a viable solution to the environmental degradation that is normally associated with methods of oil and gas extraction. So, let’s break down the positive and negative aspects of fracking.
So what exactly is fracking? It’s the process by which water is pumped into the Earth with extreme pressure in order to fracture rocks within the Earth’s surface. This releases previously trapped natural gas. In order to increase effectiveness, the water used in fracking is usually infused with chemicals. It takes anywhere from 1 to 8 million gallons of water in order to complete an average fracking job.
There are some environmental scientists who believe that this type of shale gas extraction is much better than the alternative. Before this type of technology was available, thousands of hectares of forests were regularly dug up in order to get at this resource; in comparison, fracking is less destructive of the environments in which it takes place. However, the process also carries considerable risks, whose impacts are only beginning to be felt in Canada’s ecosystem.
The amount of water being used for fracking is a very significant problem, as this water is often taken directly from aquifers and could lead to drought for many communities by depriving them of their own water sources. Also, due to the chemicals used in this process — including formaldehyde, hydrochloric acid, methanol, radium, uranium, lead, and mercury — waste water from hydraulic fracturing is highly toxic. Without proper care, this waste water also has the potential to contaminate our drinking water.
Waste water also poses a danger to animals in their natural habitats, and fracking water left in tailing ponds can evaporate and release pollutant VOCs into the air. It is estimated that 20–80 per cent of the waste water is left in the ground after the fracking is over, which could mean bad news for Canada’s animal populations. In addition, the pressure associated with pumping these liquids into the ground, accompanied by the breakdown of integrity in the bedrock, has been known to cause minor seismic activity.
There are serious dangers involved with fracking, ones that should not go unnoticed by Canadians.
Given all these factors, it is interesting that the provincial and federal governments seem so keen on these types of practices. Here is my question: What kinds of costs are being weighed here, and for whose benefit? The shale gas industry in BC alone pumps an estimated 100 billion dollars into our economy each year, and billions more into Canada’s — but is this worth the human and environmental costs of such risky business?
It is also important to consider who is reaping the rewards of this economic boom. One could argue the poorest factions of our society are not the ones benefiting. These fracking practices also come at a time when the federal government is culling water regulations. This is dangerous, as it jeopardizes the longevity of our natural resources; the ones that have the potential to provide Canadians with the basic necessities of life, such as food and drinking water.
By examining these policies, it becomes quite clear that our government values the economy much more than it values the environment.
Which brings us to the events of the past month. In New Brunswick, widespread anti-fracking protests have been receiving national attention. The now-viral picture of an Elsipogtog First Nations woman on her knees before the police, holding up a single feather, brings to mind the same sort of visceral imagery as the sole protester standing up to a tank in China’s Tiananmen Square. And here is the rub: the county council in this region voted almost unanimously to ban fracking in their community.
This begs the question: since when does the need to pump money into the Canadian economy override our democratic rights, and to what extent is the rest of the Canadian public willing to stand idly by while this happens? Fracking may be a viable way to extract resources from the Earth, and it obviously comes with some serious economic benefits. However, there are also serious dangers involved in this process, ones that should not go unnoticed by Canadians or the world at large.
If we are not able to weigh the costs and benefits of fracking and decide for ourselves the appropriate course of action, what does that mean for our democracy?
