Fracking: A Case Study

companies are so influential and why it is difficult to fight against their operation. Natural gas explora-tion and production activities are under the Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC) “which exhibits more of a promotional emphasis rather than concerns for safety and the environment in its dealings with the oil and gas companies.” (Davis, C., 2012). Although the TRRC found complaints regarding water contamination in wells near Fort Worth area, to be without merit, their findings were subsequently overturned (Davis, C., 2012). This could be seen as an example of how regulatory agencies that can be seen as in league with business and not focused on the health and safety of the communities.
According to James Northrup former oil and gas investor,
“economically, I would say, there’s no questions that it(fracking) would be good, if you are willing to write off the lifestyle, the peace and quiet, the surface-value rights, all that sort of stuff.” (Schachter, A., 2012). “Dealing with community concerns is often approached as something to be managed and overcome.” (Pearson, T., 2013). It is tempting for most politicians to blindly support fracking if they can say to their constituents that it will be jobs and boost the economy. We recommend review of this memorandum for Mr. Hillman prior to deciding which position he will take.
In Texas municipalities can operate in a couple different ways, they can follow “general law” or “home rule” (Davis, C., 2012).
Dallas or Fort Worth are typically granted “home rule”, which allows local officials greater discretion to operate independently of State government, (Davis, C., 2012). Smaller municipalities under “general law” have less leeway to regulate industry decisions (Davis, C., 2012). Buford suggested one of the benefits of Federal regulation of fracking “would bring uniformity to the industry and cause all states adhere to minimum standards of regulation (Buford, E., 2012). Some states have also attempted to create more stringent regulations, Colorado drafted regulation that would require disclosure of all ingredients, and in what amounts they would be used, (Buford, E., 2012). In an effort to avoid constant and costly litigation with local governments, and negative publici-ty, many businesses are volunteering this information proactively. As the article from Fox News indi-cated, “opposition to fracking is bad for business.” (Fox News, 2011). Some companies are now not only providing the name of the chemicals used, but also attempting to “go green” with the mixture that they use (Fox News,
2011).
However, there is still one issue that a “green” fracking process may not be able to fix? Wines article contends that even if the process is environmental friendly to water sources, constant drilling is creating a more serious issue, that of quake like tremors. This includes not only the drilling but the storage of drilling waste. A specific incident that deals with fracking involves states like Oklahoma, which have seen increased instances of quakes because of the wastewater storage. “wastewater is disposed of by re-injecting it into the ground, into rock formations, increasing the pressure on existing faults.” (Wines, M., 2016). The area of greatest risk, is a stretch of land along the Oklahoma-Kansas border, three quakes this year ranged from 4.7-5.1 (Wines, M., 2016).
Of course any candidate that is considering taking on an environmental issue, needs to be aware there will be commentary and potential hostile opposition from key environmental agencies and also small community organized groups.
These local groups are good with organizing groups to testify at public hearings and meetings, and whenever there is the option for public involvement (Pearson, T., 2013). There are those the argue the opposite environmental message, by using the method of fracking, not only do we limit our dependence on oil from foreign countries, but natural gas generates less pollution than crude oil and people should be fighting for the use of natural gas. Ac-cording to government experts, there are roughly 2,500 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, which is equivalent to 412.5 billion barrels of oil (Schachter, A., 2012). Also pro fracking proponents site the reduction in the cost of electricity for the average customer. “the average electric bill is “half what it was a few years ago.” (Schachter, A.,
2012).