Pro-Fracking

10/08/13

Fracking is one of the most controversial and talked about topics related to energy. There are people who both oppose and support the methods fervently. With this intense rift of believe between the two sides, comes a dilemma for bystanders - Who or what can people on the outside of fracking believe when both sides state "facts" that contradict one another? By sitting down a person supports fracking and a person who opposes it, we can begin to better understand the views of either side.

Representatives from both Breakthrough Institute and the National Resource Defence Council (NRDC from now on) sat down to discuss their fracking views for Summits on Tenth. Some important and interesting points were brought up by both sides. Starting with the pro fracking side of the debate, one of the most emphasized points that the representative from Breakthrough Institute (Michael from now on) discussed was fracking in relation to coal. From the pro-fracking side, they see natural gas as substantially better than coal to the point where it validates the use of fracking to obtain natural gas. Michael uses the example from past energy transitions where we went from wood to coal burning energy. He feels the same is necessary for the future - Moving from coal to natural gas as our major energy supply source.

The other very important point that Michael made was the idea of both Regulation and Innovation in the natural gas field. Through bettering regulations to become safer and more environmentally friendly, as well as innovating the technologies to do the same thing, Michael sees natural gas as a fantastic opportunity at progressing energy availability around the world. Not only will fracking supply America with energy, but it will greatly increase energy availability around the world, specifically in Africa where they can skip using coal altogether. Obviously, if Africa could skip using coal as an energy source and move straight towards natural gas, that would be a huge environmentally friendly advancement. While natural gas isn't the perfect or cleanest energy source, both sides of the fracking argument agree that it is substantially better than coal.

When prompted about renewable energies like using solar panels, Michael sees solar energy as an energy of the future, but not before it becomes cleaner. The combination of an abundance of current effective natural gas extraction techniques and the toxic chemicals currently in solar panels, he feels that natural gas is the safer and smarter approach to the world's energy supply. The energy transition from coal to natural gas and then natural gas to renewables will take time, according to pro-fracking views. As someone who isn't too well informed about either side of the fracking debate, this was a slight shock. The idea that pro-fracking viewpoints still see renewable energies as better than natural gas, but still push for natural gas instead, is confusing. Pushing for natural gas instead of going directly for renewable energy sources seems to be counterproductive in the long run, and even the people promoting natural gas see that, but for whatever reason, still push for the lesser energy source.

An interesting argument Michael makes is in reference to increased efficiency in regards to energy. the idea of the Rebound Effect is brought up to discuss the negative impacts associated with increased efficiency according to him. His claim was that with increased efficiency, the amount of energy used will not only not decrease, but will probably increase. Instead of a manufacturing plant, or a train only running for twelve or fourteen hours a day, the plant or train will run twenty-four hours a day because of the increase in efficiency, producing a net increase in emissions. This logic can be seen in regards to flood insurance in major cities that are susceptible to floods, like New York City. By increasing flood insurance coverage in the area, instead of dissuading people from moving to flood susceptible areas, it actually increases the amount of people to move there because they now have a safety if there is a flood. Whether or not this is true is yet to be seen, but is an interesting point nonetheless.

In the next  blog, Anti-Fracking will be discussed from the NRDC's representative, Kate.

"Comprehensive and robust regulations already exist for nearly every aspect of natural exploration and production, including hydraulic fracturing." (American Petroleum Institute)