* Supporters of hydrofracking say: There is no proven case of hydrofracking contaminating drinking water, and the process is absolutely safe. Natural gas can revive local economies, stretch U.S. dependence on foreign inunct and provide a cleaner-burning fossil fuel. Further regulation is unnecessary and will more thanover prevent an opportunity for the U.S. to develop an alternative readiness source and create jobs.
* Critics of hydrofracking say: The chemicals used in fracking fluid atomic number 18 toxic and pose a danger to public health if they contaminate drinking water reserves or escape out of wells. Oil and gas companies are not cosmos honest with the public about the dangers of hydrofracking, and the federal government should concord much stricter, nationwide regulations to ensure that hydrofracking does not cause widespread health problems that could plague the public for generations. Many observers ask hailed natural gas as a solution to several zip fastener problems facing the U.S. Utilizing the countrys ample domestic supply of the resource, many have said, could greatly decrease U.S.
dependence on foreign oil and possibly drive energy prices down. Furthermore, natural gas produces much less carbon dioxide than other fossil fuels, about half as much as coal, making it the cleanest burning fossil fuel available. Energy experts have also touted natural gas as a cheap alternative to renewable energy sources, such as wind or solar energy, until engineers hammer a way to make renewable energy more cost efficient. According to the Department of Energy, natural gas already produces about one-fifth of the nations electricity, a proportion that may gain as energy firms tap more domestic reserves of natural gas. [See Renewable Energy]
The Marcellus Shale, a 95,000-square-mile geologic...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment