|
|
|
|
|
|
by sageikosa
5078 days ago
|
|
|
I'll add a couple of things I didn't originally. First, the operations around fracking do involve risk and the potential for contamination, the same way as drilling any other hole (sealed or unsealed) in the ground, through a water table; and there are already numerous regulations and licenses (and rights issues) involved with these, but typically the fracking injection process itself is fairly well insulated from causing widespread surface damage. Lode-changing stresses on pre-existing faults should probably be the most pressing area of reasearch, and as always, deliberate malfeasance via oversight and enforcement of existing clean-air and water laws is important regardless of the science behind the fracking operation itself. |
|
|
The two biggest areas of concern that I've heard are (1) the possibility of releasing methane into drinking water sources; and (2) the manner in which the used water and fracking fluid will be disposed of.
As you note, #1 isn't specifically a fracking thing, but related to any deep, powerful disturbance of the ground.
From what I've read, #2 is generally OK, but marred by occasional malfeasance. (It's difficult to write regulations to deal with people who are, by definition, breaking the regulations.) But I've also read that there are newer methods of fracking being tried, that don't need the same sorts of chemicals, or quantities.