To Frack or not to Frack?

Fracking is the popular term for a controversial process of retrieving natural gas. Technically known as hydraulic fracturing, this is the industrial practice of breaking apart sedimentary rocks thousands of meters underground to extract natural gas. This is done by using a pressurized mix of water and chemicals.

There is a lot of debate surrounding this technology and often this debate is limited to two extreme viewpoints. One side consists of those who think that fracking operations should be discontinued due to the potential threats posed to the environment and people’s health. The other viewpoint lies with the companies themselves using the process and its supporters (e.g. provincial governments). Their argument is that fracking spurs economic growth and creates jobs.

Both sides present valid and strong arguments. Chemicals pumped deep into the ground to extract natural gas generates risks. Especially when the recaptured frack fluid which contains not only fracking chemicals and salt but heavy metals and radioactive elements leached from shale rock, is brought to the surface. Any accidental spill can contaminate drinking water which becomes an emergency public health hazard.

Proponents of the process argue—and rightly so—that natural gas is cheap. It benefits consumers as a whole. The drilling and extraction process also provides employment opportunities which in turn translates to a livelier economy.

The problem with the current debate is that the right questions are not being addressed. Both sides seem to focus on this issue alone: Should we or should we not frack? There is no doubt that hydraulic fracturing enables us to extract gas from places that conventional technology has failed to in the past. When production has completed full scale, the economic benefits are bound to be tremendous. Not only in terms of cheaper natural gas for the country  and the economic growth that will inevitably occur but also in ensuring that we have our own supply, helping to secure our energy needs well into the future.

The real crux of the matter is this: Are we fracking correctly? Is the hydraulic fracturing process being conducted in a manner that is safe and environmentally sound? As a new and unproven technology, the risk of contaminating drinking water from spills or leaks in improperly managed wells is a real threat.  This threat  is not fully addressed by the current processes used by major practicing companies.

Furthermore, key players have not taken into consideration how fracking operations will compete with the water needs of Canadian communities. Most of the time, the main water sources for hydraulic fracturing are the very same rivers and lakes used for food gathering and travel.
Finally, there is the issue of transparency. Monitoring regulations have not been developed to a point where the public are fully informed of the activities of these companies and how these will affect their health and water supply.

The true debate is not the existence of fracking, but instead how the process can make both sides feel safe and happy.  We must address how to frack in a way that is safe, environmentally sound, and sustainable.