According to a report released on Wednesday by British Petroleum, vast stores of natural gas and oil found in shale formations could sharply increasing domestic production, making the U.S. energy self-sufficient by 2030. There are several reasons for this to happen. The first reason is the decline in oil and gasoline demand recently thanks to significant development in energy efficiency and fuel economy. The second reason is the tremendous demand increasing day by day in China and India, pushing the demand in the U.S. down from the top. The third reason is, of course, the large-scale development of shale formations only in North America along with previously "unimaginable amounts of crude oil and natural gas locked away in shale rock" across the U.S. It will make the U.S. become a global energy production leader, surpassing Saudi Arabia to become the biggest oil producer by 2020 because BP reported that fossil fuels will continue to be the dominant source for world's fuel mix.
However, whether the predictions come true or not, it depends on different factors including government regulatory on oil and gas development and the cost of extracting the oil from the shale formations. Fracking has been a controversial topic for quite some times, and until a new way of extracting the oil from the ground that doesn't harm the environment is found, public will make it difficult to actually unlock tight oil.
So the question remaining is to either keep hydraulic fracturing to get the oil but clearly satisfy the debate around the externalities or found a new practice that is not costly. It is also worth questioning how we are going to use the gas and oil in shale formations, at which rate we are going to extract, produce and consume, and how much to be exported.
Source: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/01/16/bp-shale-boom-key-to-us-energy-self-sufficiency
3 comments:
Are you supporting fracking in this post? Though it has the potential to cause the U.S. to become a global energy production leader, how can we measure whether or not the benefits outweigh the downfalls?
Of the 500,000 fracturing sites in the U.S., each requires an average of 400 tanker trucks to carry water and supplies to and from the site, and up to eight million gallons of water are needed to complete each fracturing job. Around 40,000 gallons of up to 600 different chemicals are used per fracturing job, which includes known carcinogens and toxins.
Those carcinogens and toxins contaminate nearby groundwater, making methane concentrations in drinking water near fracturing sites 17 times higher than in normal wells. Sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage has been reported due to ingestion of contaminated water found next to gas drilling areas. Remaining fluid is left to evaporate, which releases harmful compounds into the atmosphere, also creating contaminated air and acid rain.
If this proves to be our only viable way of oil production in the U.S., I believe it should at least be regulated more thoroughly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
With the demand for fossil fuels increasing, it would be pretty hard for energy companies to ignore the vast amounts of natural gas and oil underground. Even with the serious repercussions of fracking, the idea of America being self-sufficient seems pretty important. Economically, not having to import so much oil and having it domestically produced could create jobs and help boost growth. But the environment shouldn't be put to the side, new regulations should be in place and strictly enforced to make sure the land is restored after the mining is complete.
Personally, I don't support fracking. My post is simply a summarize of the article and raising a few questions I thought worth mentioning. I totally agree with you that fracking is very harmful to the environment. The information you provided is enough reflect that. The fact that fracking can bring billions of dollars to the economy couldn't negate the its bad impact on land, water, and air which in turn result in dead lands, dead animals, and sick people. The people at present can benefits from the huge amount of profits oil companies bring to them, but the next generations definitely have to suffer from the damage. I recommend the movie "Promise land" in which they discuss the debate of fracking.
What I want to say is for now, fracking is the only way to extract oil and natural gas, but billions of dollar spending in subsidy for fossil-fuel industry could be spent to innovate on new sustainable and clean energy. However, it needs time for researchers and scientists to find these innovations. Therefore, the U.S. still has to depend on fracking to supply fuel, but fracking should be slowed down while the place chosen to fracking should be carefully researched.
Post a Comment