A hydraulic fracturing drill rig near Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, in 2012. Photograph: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA –
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump clashed over fracking during Tuesday’s presidential debate. Here’s an introduction to the gas and oil extraction process that has transformed the US fossil fuel industry.
What is fracking?
Hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, is a method of extracting fossil fuels. Producers drill into shale and other rocks deep underground, then pump in water, chemicals and sand to form cracks and release oil and gas.
By providing access to once hard-to-reach oil, the technology unlocked oil and gas reserves across 20 US states including Texas and Pennsylvania. It is now the most commonly used fossil fuel extraction method in the United States.
Since the fracking boom, US oil production has surged at a historic rate. No country in history has extracted as much oil and gas as the US has in each of the past six years, and gas has become the country’s most commonly used electricity source, eclipsing coal.
Why is fracking so controversial?
Fracking is controversial because of its environmental and health impacts. Scientists have long warned that the world must phase out fossil fuels to preserve a livable climate.
The drilling technique can also contaminate drinking water. Many Americans’ introduction to these risks came from the 2010 documentary Gasland, which famously showed a homeowner who was able to light on fire the water flowing out of his kitchen tap
More than 17.6 million people live within a mile of a fracked well, researchers found in 2022, with those living in close proximity to wells commonly reporting health issues ranging from headaches and nosebleeds to low infant birth weights and endocrine disruption. Pennsylvania researchers have found that children living close to active wells or near many wells had a higher risk for developing lymphoma, a kind of cancer.
The practice is also water-intensive, and has been linked to earthquakes.
But it has become part of a larger culture war, with some rightwingers believing that calls to end fracking are anti-American calls from the so-called “woke left”.
Is fracking actually bad for the climate?
Fracking is used to produce fossil fuels, which account for the vast majority of all planet-heating pollution. A 2022 report found that planned US fracking projects could release 140bn metric tons of planet-heating gases, tipping the world toward climate disaster.
But fracked gas has long been pitched by companies and even some environmentalists as a “bridge fuel”, or a temporary solution to transition from coal to renewable energy sources. When burned, gas emits about half of the greenhouse gas emissions of coal per unit of energy, and it can also have a smaller land footprint than coalmines.
Some studies, however, suggest fracked gas may be even worse for the climate than coal throughout its life cycle from extraction to transport to usage. Importantly, fracking for gas can lead to leaks of methane – a greenhouse gas that warms the planet far faster than carbon dioxide – which research suggests are routinely underreported.
The US is aiming to reduce emissions by at least 50% by 2030, but, under current plans supported by green policies in the Inflation Reduction Act, is on track to see only a drop between 32% and 43% by that time period, researchers have found.
Why was fracking such a contentious topic in Tuesday’s debate?
When it comes to fracking, politicians can find it hard to determine the best pitch to voters. Pennsylvania, where Tuesday’s debate took place, is the second-largest gas producer in the US – and also an important swing state in the presidential election.
But Pennsylvanians have decidedly mixed opinions on the practice, with a 2020 survey finding that a slight majority of Pennsylvanians – 52% – actually oppose fracking, and a 2021 poll by the progressive thinktank Ohio River Valley Institute finding that less than a third of residents say they want fracking in their state.
Some Americans are concerned about a loss of fracking jobs, which have already been steadily declining, including in Pennsylvania.
Research shows clean energy currently employs eight times more people in Pennsylvania than gas. But though unionization rates are increasing in clean energy, concerns about pay and the need to organize remain.
Why is fracking such an issue in the 2024 election?
Trump has been a staunch supporter of the fossil fuel industry. On Tuesday, he reminded viewers that Kamala Harris once supported a ban on fracking – something he said would devastate the Pennsylvania and US economy.
During her 2019 presidential campaign, Harris did back an end to fracking. But in July, her campaign said she was no longer in favor of such a policy, to the disappointment of green groups and some climate-concerned Americans.
Harris reiterated her support for continued fracking during Tuesday’s debate, even boasting that the Inflation Reduction Act, which contained historic investment for green energy, also opened more leases for fracking.
She also said that while her “values have not changed”, she now feels that “we have got to invest in diverse sources of energy so we reduce our reliance on foreign oil”. The prioritization of “energy independence” is often viewed as a point in favor of continued fossil fuel extraction including fracking.
But oil and gas are part of a global market, and every US president in the past 75 years has continued to import foreign fossil fuels. And some argue that clean energy could play an important role in untethering US energy supply from volatile energy markets.
–
I hope you appreciated this article. Before you move on, I wanted to ask if you would consider supporting the Guardian’s journalism during one of the most consequential news cycles of our lifetimes.
We have never been more passionate about exposing the multiplying threats to our democracy and holding power to account in America. In the heat of a tumultuous presidential race, there is an urgent need for free, trustworthy journalism that foregrounds the stakes of November’s election for our country and planet.
Yet a small number of billionaire owners have a powerful hold on so much of the information that reaches the public about what’s happening in the world. The Guardian is different. We have no billionaire owner or shareholders to consider. Our journalism is produced to serve the public interest – not profit motives.
And we avoid the trap that befalls much US media: the tendency, born of a desire to please all sides, to engage in false equivalence in the name of neutrality. We always strive to be fair. But sometimes that means calling out the lies of powerful people and institutions – and making clear how misinformation and demagoguery can damage democracy.
From threats to election integrity, to the spiraling climate crisis, to complex foreign conflicts, our journalists contextualize, investigate and illuminate the critical stories of our time. As a global news organization with a robust US reporting staff, we’re able to provide a fresh, outsider perspective – one so often missing in the American media bubble.
Around the world, readers can access the Guardian’s paywall-free journalism because of our unique reader-supported model. That’s because of people like you. Our readers keep us independent, beholden to no outside influence and accessible to everyone – whether they can afford to pay for news, or not.
If you can, please consider supporting us just once, or better yet, support us every month with a little more. Thank you.
Betsy Reed
Editor, Guardian US
Explore more on these topics
Most viewed
- –