If the Hudson was contaminated by some of the dangerous chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, the amount of money that would have to be spent on specialized treatment plants would cripple the economy. The Hudson River provides 9 million people with fresh drinking water in New York City alone. So, the real question people should be asking is Who does benefit from fracking? As anyone can plainly see after doing a little bit of research and reading the outcry of the people who are living through it, certainly not the public. From the testaments in the interview, it seems as if you are either running with the gas companies or you are running from them.
The next justification of pro-frackers is the idea that fracking is a cleaner, safer source of energy. Scientists from around the world have, in fact, determined that fracking is actually dirtier than coal. It appears that fracking has been touted as a clean-burning fuel because it produces less carbon dioxide than coal. One study by professors at Cornell University asserted that we should be more concerned about methane leaking into the atmosphere during hydraulic fracturing. Robert Howarth, one of the distinguished professors who helped in this study, stated .
.
Natural gas is mostly methane, which is a much more potent greenhouse gas, especially in the short term, with 105 times more warming impact, pound for pound, than carbon dioxide (CO2), which means that even small leaks make a big difference (Shackford). The study also estimated that as much as 8% of the methane is leaked into the air during the lifetime of a hydraulic shale gas well, which is twice of what escapes from conventional gas production. A common myth associated with fracking is that carbon dioxide emissions will be obliterated. Even though hydraulic fracturing is aimed at using natural gas, it does not mean that CO2 emissions will be stabilized. There are many other reasons as to why CO2 levels in the atmosphere have skyrocketed such as our transportation system and meat industry.
