Experts Debate Fracking as Bridge to Energy Independence
Experts weigh shale gas options with pros and cons for US energy policy. Natural gas offers abundant supply and potential as a bridge fuel but fracking raises water and environmental concerns. Regulatory gaps exist, calls for safe methods and transparency accompany the push to replace imported oil with domestic gas.
MENTIONED IN THIS ARTICLE
Fukushima
Science
Fracking and shale gas uncertain beyond promise
An analysis notes shale gas could reduce U.S. imports but remains uncertain due to limited global reserves concentration in the Middle East and Russia, transportation costs, and geopolitics. Environmental costs of fracking, including water use and contamination, fuel bans and probes, leaving the energy impact unresolved.
MENTIONED IN THIS ARTICLE
United States
U.S. Department of Energy
Department of Energy
U.S
Middle East
Russia
OPEC
Iran
Europe
Marcellus
Pennsylvania
West Virginia
New York
Chesapeake Bay
Science outweighs risk of shale gas reserves and fracking
The U S Energy Information Agency cites nearly 1000 trillion cubic feet of recoverable shale gas and record annual production around 30 trillion cubic feet. Fracking uses water and chemicals to extract gas, but critics warn of environmental risks from surface spills and contaminated fluids.
MENTIONED IN THIS ARTICLE
U.S
U.S. Energy Information Agency
Fracking shale gas moves forward with caution
Curis Law of Southern Illinois University Carbondale argues fracking enables access to shale gas via horizontal wells and slick water fracturing but notes environmental risks and the need for tighter oversight. He suggests environmental reviews, Safe Drinking Water Act closure, and regulatory reforms before widespread use.
Also Mentioned on This Page
U.S. Energy Information Administration
Saudi Arabia
Iraq
Kuwait
European Union
Illinois
Ussr
Chesapeake Energy
Burlington
Bradford County
Agribuline
Wiltowski
America
Curis
Siuc