By Bhaskar Anand
On Feb. 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine. This invasion was essentially an act of Russian aggression that Moscow claims to be a special military operation against an alleged Nazi government in Ukraine. The war has been going on for more than two months now. The repercussions are not limited to only Russians and Ukrainians; more than half of the world's population is directly or indirectly susceptible to its consequences, as Russia and Ukraine are among the world's largest grain exporters.
Russia is also the second-largest producer of natural gas and the third-largest oil producer. Russia fulfills 40 percent of natural gas and 25 percent of oil demand in Europe. The Russo-Ukrainian war has disrupted the global energy market and prices have skyrocketed all across Europe. The rising energy prices are stoking inflation in the European energy market and have reignited the U.K. and EU debate about fracking explorations. Germany, France, the Netherlands, Scotland, Bulgaria, and many other EU countries have effectively banned fracking. However, due to the current fear of the expected energy crunch, the U.K. has already ordered a scale-up of fracking, which currently operates on a small scale. If this armed conflict continues, the EU might also open the doors for fracking to meet oil and natural gas demand. Why is this bad?
Fracking is an advanced technique for unlocking oil and natural gas reserves found in shale and other tight-rock formations. This procedure primarily entails vertical drilling, followed by numerous horizontal drilling in all possible horizontal directions and injecting fracking fluid at high pressure. The injected fracking fluid fractures the sedimentary rock and splits the rock to release the oil and gas trapped within it.
Water and sand make up a large portion of fracking fluid (up to 99 percent), which is harmless. However, the rest commonly includes methanol, ethylene glycol, propargyl alcohol, and other classified chemicals, some of which have been linked to human health issues. According to the EPA, the fracking fluid contains 1,084 different chemicals. The names of these chemical substances are generally protected as trade secrets (confidential business information). Moreover, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, delicate particulate matter (PM2.5), hydrogen sulfide, silica dust, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds are released during fracking, contributing to smog and may even cause cancer in humans. As stated by the U.S. Department of the interior, the disposal of fracking fluid and the byproduct of fracking may trigger earthquakes.
Despite being a potential alternative to address the energy crisis and a possible way to keep a lid on the price of oil and gas, fracking is not morally acceptable. Lifting the ban on fracking may ensure energy security, but fracking endangers human life due to severe consequences such as groundwater contamination, air pollution, and induced seismicity. The greenhouse gas footprint of fracked natural gas/oil is worse than even coal, as fracking causes significant methane emissions and traps more heat in the atmosphere.
Consequently, it will also threaten longer-term climate goals, which are already overdue and might lead to a climate catastrophe. Hence, it is very important to be cautious while addressing energy security challenges. The countries suffering from such an energy crunch should focus on long-term sustainable, carbon-neutral energy sources such as nuclear power or other renewables rather than a short-sighted switch to controversial fracking.
Bhaskar Anand (https://www.bhaskaranandjha.com) is a doctoral student working in air quality and material application at the Department of Civil and environmental engineering, Hanyang University.
 |
Russia is also the second-largest producer of natural gas and the third-largest oil producer. Russia fulfills 40 percent of natural gas and 25 percent of oil demand in Europe. The Russo-Ukrainian war has disrupted the global energy market and prices have skyrocketed all across Europe. The rising energy prices are stoking inflation in the European energy market and have reignited the U.K. and EU debate about fracking explorations. Germany, France, the Netherlands, Scotland, Bulgaria, and many other EU countries have effectively banned fracking. However, due to the current fear of the expected energy crunch, the U.K. has already ordered a scale-up of fracking, which currently operates on a small scale. If this armed conflict continues, the EU might also open the doors for fracking to meet oil and natural gas demand. Why is this bad?
Fracking is an advanced technique for unlocking oil and natural gas reserves found in shale and other tight-rock formations. This procedure primarily entails vertical drilling, followed by numerous horizontal drilling in all possible horizontal directions and injecting fracking fluid at high pressure. The injected fracking fluid fractures the sedimentary rock and splits the rock to release the oil and gas trapped within it.
Water and sand make up a large portion of fracking fluid (up to 99 percent), which is harmless. However, the rest commonly includes methanol, ethylene glycol, propargyl alcohol, and other classified chemicals, some of which have been linked to human health issues. According to the EPA, the fracking fluid contains 1,084 different chemicals. The names of these chemical substances are generally protected as trade secrets (confidential business information). Moreover, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, delicate particulate matter (PM2.5), hydrogen sulfide, silica dust, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds are released during fracking, contributing to smog and may even cause cancer in humans. As stated by the U.S. Department of the interior, the disposal of fracking fluid and the byproduct of fracking may trigger earthquakes.
Despite being a potential alternative to address the energy crisis and a possible way to keep a lid on the price of oil and gas, fracking is not morally acceptable. Lifting the ban on fracking may ensure energy security, but fracking endangers human life due to severe consequences such as groundwater contamination, air pollution, and induced seismicity. The greenhouse gas footprint of fracked natural gas/oil is worse than even coal, as fracking causes significant methane emissions and traps more heat in the atmosphere.
Consequently, it will also threaten longer-term climate goals, which are already overdue and might lead to a climate catastrophe. Hence, it is very important to be cautious while addressing energy security challenges. The countries suffering from such an energy crunch should focus on long-term sustainable, carbon-neutral energy sources such as nuclear power or other renewables rather than a short-sighted switch to controversial fracking.
Bhaskar Anand (https://www.bhaskaranandjha.com) is a doctoral student working in air quality and material application at the Department of Civil and environmental engineering, Hanyang University.
