U.S. energy question defines era

One of the major issues defining the 21st century will be where we get our energy. One of the sources of energy that the United States is currently considering is hydraulic fracking, a.k.a. hydrofracking.

Hydrofracking has been praised as a way to reduce our foreign dependence on oil. However, the benefits of hydrofracking are exaggerated by its supporters, and the process has devastating environmental impacts.

Hydrofracking, as used in the United States, is a process used to extract oil and natural gasfrom the Marcellus shale, a geological area running through much of the American northeast. First, water is mixed with chemical additives and then pumped into the ground to push up the oil and natural gas. (The process takes six to eight million gallons of fresh, clean water per fracking.)

The water is then either left underground or is pumped to waste treatment plants. The effects of hydrofracking have been widely debated. Some experts speculate that hydrofracking could be causing minor earthquakes in areas where it is practiced.

Furthermore, it is a huge drain on the fresh water supply. The water used in fracking is mixed with dangerous chemicals and thus becomes hazardous waste, but in many instances is not properly disposed of.

Supporters of hydrofracking argue that the process will reduce the United States' dependence on foreign oil. In his recent State of the Union Address, President Barack Obama endorsed hydrofracking, and promised Americans that steps would be taken to ensure it would be done safely and transparently.

However, even this argument misses the point, because much of the oil acquired via hydrofracking is set to be piped out of the United States, and therefore it would have no impact on imports of foreign oil.

There are undeniable benefits to hydrofracking. Hydrofracking does create new jobs for Americans, often in regions that are struggling economically.

The parts of New York situated above the Marcellus shale are upstate, and the potential increase in jobs has the ability to greatly improve the economy. Furthermore, hydrofracking makes energy more affordable because it makes the process of extracting natural gas easier.

Despite the economic expansion offered by hydrofracking, however, many cities have already decided the environmental costs outweigh the benefits. Buffalo sits on top of the Utica Shale, but has already passed a ban on hydrofracking. New York State currently has comparatively strict laws regarding hydrofracking, in contract to West Virginia and Pennsylvania, where most hydrofracking occurs. Energy companies have spent millions of dollars on lobbying the administration of Governor Andrew Cuomo to allow hydrofracking. Environmental groups have also been active in their opposition. The New York State government recently indefinitely postponed voting on a bill that would allow hydrofracking; this can be seen as a minor victory for grass roots movements opposed to it.

The Vassar Greens are opposed to hydrofracking, as its environmental impacts are devastating. The Greens have been actively involved in protests against hydrofracking in the past year.

Hydrofracking is going to be among the most relevant issues in this fall's elections, especially at the state level.

Elected officials' decisions on hydrofracking have the potential to drastically affect the environment in New York in the very near future, and potential voters should follow the discussion closely.

—Claire Oxford '14 is a member of the Vassar Greens.