How Much should we Worry About Fracking?

A huge divide is developing across America as citizens are choosing sides on the use of hydraulic fracking to extract huge quantities of oil and gas.

If you live in a state where the push is on to embrace fracking as a means to greatly increase output of fossil fuels, you are probably well aware of the pros and cons being advanced by industrial and environmental groups. If the debate over this heated issue is new to you, then it is important to pay attention to how this scenario unfolds as the decisions on its future will eventually impact all Americans.

On the one hand, greatly expanding the use of fracking is naively hailed as a “magic bullet” with the potential to make America totally energy independent (and turn us into a major fossil fuel exporter) within a decade. Opponents of this process – which can cause major environmental damage – hold that it is important to put the brakes on fracking now before it gets too far out of control.

NPG’s concerns over America’s quick embrace of fracking have prompted us to take an ad in a forthcoming issue of E-Magazine with the headline: TOO LITTLE GAIN, TOO GREAT A LOSS. In it we state:

There has been increasing pressure on political leaders to authorize the use of hydraulic fracking in an effort to expand gas and oil production. Technological optimists are hailing it as the answer to a global decline in fossil energy production. “Pro-growth” advocates are celebrating the prospect of continuing the status quo for a few more years, deferring the sacrifices of shifting to a more sustainable way of life. However, delay is not victory.

Fracking has proven a significant disappointment – another example of the depletion of resources with a very limited return. It uses a huge volume of water per well, a short-sighted strategy in an era of growing water scarcities. It holds the potential for major pollution, further contaminating our fragile air and water resources. And its projected results are wholly inadequate – experts say it would not delay America’s energy crisis by more than a few decades.

NPG is proud to stand with U.S. environmental leaders working to protect natural resources, local communities, and public health. To proceed with fracking would be a huge setback to America’s environmental efforts, and it poses a genuine threat to our nation’s future. We cannot allow policy makers to endorse fracking based on political pressure from special interest lobbies.

One of the primary causes of America’s natural resource shortage is overpopulation. More people mean more cars, buses, and trains are needed. More housing must be built, which requires additional power and water. NPG has worked for over 40 years to educate American citizens and legislators regarding the damaging effects of population growth. Fracking, a dangerous “quick fix” to one of the many problems caused by overpopulation, is not the solution.

Our nation’s leaders must be extremely cautious in their consideration of fracking. There is a definite need for more thorough study of the potential environmental and social consequences it may yield. Together, we bear the responsibility to weigh how these decisions will impact future generations. Don’t be silent on this critical issue! NPG encourages all Americans to contact their local, state, and federal officials and make their voices heard.

In December 2011, NPG released an 8-page Forum paper by Lindsey Grant titled “Is Fracking An Answer? To What?” We recommend it as a valuable source in understanding this issue. Today, NPG calls on our members to get involved in this debate – especially if leaders in your state are ready to move.

Contact your local, state, and federal officials and make your views heard.

NPG

There is no remedy that can possibly avert disastrous Climate Change and Global Warming unless we first address the problem of world population size and growth, and its impact on the size of the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.That means that we need to address the population size and growth of each nation, which together make up the world total.

World population, now over 7.3 billion, is predicted to rise to 9 billion by 2050, an increase of almost two billion, or 23%, in the short space of only 34 years from now.In the highly unlikely event that per capita greenhouse gas emissions could possibly be decreased by an equal percentage in such a short space of time (a blink of an eye) the total amount of worldwide emission would remain the same!

From this simple illustration it would appear that without drastically reducing the size of world population, there is no solution to the problem.None at all.So then why do our world leaders pretend that there is one?What is to be gained by pretending rather than by proposing a solution that would solve the problem – a reduction in the size of world population to not more than 1- 2 billion?
Like and Share:

, ,

advert
Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial