Oil and gas are an important part of the U.S. economy. Hydraulic fracturing or fracking is a method used to get oil out of the ground that used water. This water is used and then left over and often times used to water plants. In areas experiencing drought, the disposal of wastewater from fracking is a difficult topic. This may have some effects on the quality and quantity of drinking resources. The government continues to study the relationship between fracking water and drinking water and shows the vulnerability of water sources to fracking.

Fracking in the United States can have perverse effects on the environment. It can destroy habitats and poison the water used to grow crops. While using up resources, humans need to find a way not to waste water to obtain a resource that is harmful to the environment already. In the United States, my opinion is that fracking should be banned so that there is no more waste of water to obtain oil and no more oil obtained that can be burned further and harm the environemtn. The release of Carbon into the atmosphere is destroying the earth and fracking plays a role, so ending fracking in the United States would be a huge step in the right direction.

The export of crude oil from the U.S. was discussed in the past and it was decided that after a ban for some time, oil will now be exported from the U.S. This means that the oil would not need to be refined in the U.S. or Canada before being placed on the open market, and there would be some consequences that follow. American energy independence would be abandoned and less purpose would be placed on American soil. It is considered by some unnecessary that this ban be lifted, but nonetheless the economy of the U.S.’s oil will not be the same.

The environmental consequences of this could be major. Oil should not be burned in the first place and this means that it is once again encouraged to sell oil to foreign countries where they can do whatever they want with it. This means that the U.S. gives up control of its oil for monetary value with no thought as to how this could affect the world’s environment. In my opinion, the U.S. should focus on methods of sustainable energy and not sell any of the oil it possesses to make sure that it is not burned and released into the environment.

President Barak Obama rejected a scheme for a pipeline to be made between Canada and the United States which planned to funnel Alberta oil-sands to the Gulf coast. Obama stated that the pipeline would not serve the national interests of the U.S. for environmental reasons. The end of this deal makes it more difficult for the oil in Canada to reach the world market. This may hinder the economy of Canada and lessen the world’s oil supply, but the president of the U.S. does not think that he made the wrong decision because he thinks that the deal is best for the environment of the world.

This was considered by many a large step forward environmentally because it proved that oil was detrimental to society and made a stand against large oil companies to show that the world economy is not run by oil. I agree with the thinking behind the rejection and find it interesting that there was so much opposition to this pipe line for environmental reasons as opposed to the reasons to make the pipeline for economic purposes and the fact that environmentalists won over economists.

Geiling, Natasha. “California Farmers Are Watering Their Crops With Oil Wastewater, And No One Knows What’s In It.” Think Progress. N.p., 5 May 2015. Web. 23 Aug. 2015.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/05/05/3654388/california-drought-oil-wastewater-agriculture/

The question has been brought up about whether or not reused water from oil fields is safe. There have been tests conducted and high levels of acetone and methylene chlorine have been found in the wastewater.  Both of these are toxic to humans and it is unclear whether or not them being in plants can be harmful. It is necessary to know what is in the water that is being fed to our food so that we can be sure that we are not poisoning ourselves or any animal that might get their hands on it.

The fact that the water is not purified after its reuse from coming from the oil plants is a great concern to me because it could not only kill humans, but destroy the environment even more. With the toxic water being used, plants could die and more of the environment on Earth will be destroyed or the plants might be thrown out if they are not healthy and other creatures might eat them themselves and die which would also impact the environment. I am angry that the oil companies did were not moved by the fact that they could kill people and animals be reusing their water and I am confused at why they don’t reuse that water to continue fracking like they want to.

Gilmour, Jared. “In California and Beyond, Drilling for Oil as Water Runs Short.” The Christian Science Monitor. N.p., 10 Apr. 2015. Web. 23 Aug. 2015.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy/2015/0410/In-California-and-beyond-drilling-for-oil-as-water-runs-short

As the drought in California has become more and more of a problem, water consumption has gone down tremendously and the question has become whether or not oil companies do the same with their water usage.  Although California is using much less water than other states in the oil industry, it is still using up precious water that could be used in more effective ways in the drought. The water is being reused by farmers, but this contaminated water could be destructive to humans and other animals.

This article pushes for the end of oil production which would be best for the environment in California and around the world. With all of the cuts that have been going on in terms of water-usage around California, there should be some regulations of sorts put on the oil industry in California which use thousands of gallons of water to find oil. Although the companies may claim that they are reusing the water, they give them to farmers and that water is used on crops which hurts the wildlife that feeds on the crops and is even more destructive to our environment than no oil drilling in California would be.

Sharp, Dan. “Technically Recoverable Oil in California Monterey Shale Severely Downgraded : Energy News.” Bismarck Tribune. Bakken Breakout, 29 July 2014. Web. 23 Aug. 2015.

http://bismarcktribune.com/bakken/breakout/technically-recoverable-oil-in-california-monterey-shale-severely-downgraded/article_b36fcf50-1751-11e4-8e1b-0019bb2963f4.html

The long-term growth of California’s oil industry was dealt a serious blow when the Energy Information Administration (EIA) downgraded the recoverable reserve estimates in the Monterey shale formation. With the production of oil and natural gas declining, California refiners are depending more and more on Alaska and South America for supplies. The shale was highly fractured and criss-crossed by faults which lead to a misjudgement of the amount of oil available there.

This is a win for the Environmentalists in California because it discourages oil exploitation in California and saves our environment a little bit. Although oil is still being imported from other places nad therefore still being used up and still destroying our atmosphere, the land and habitats that would have been destroyed by the oil fields are not going to happen because of this newfound doubt in the amount of oil available. There is now a greater need for renewable energy technologies because everyone is beginning to realize that oil is not going to be in production forever and will run out sooner than we originally thought.

Street, Chriss. “California State Study Finds No Evidence Fracking Hurts Environment – Breitbart.” Breitbart. Breitbart, 15 July 2015. Web. 23 Aug. 2015.

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/07/15/california-state-study-finds-no-evidence-fracking-hurts-environment/

The final version of a study reported that there is no “science-based evidence” that fracking hurts the environment. With a wide variety of information on hydraulic fracturing and acid stimulation in the state, it was fond that no evidence was found that the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing have harmed the environment. Fracking has also not contaminated ground water, is not likely to cause earthquakes, and does not produce a lot of pollution compared to other sources according to the study. The amount of water used is small as well. Fracking may actually cut water use according to the study because far more water was used in the past for the same reasons. The state of California might be on the cusp of an oil fracking boom.

This article is discouraging towards many people in California who are against fracking because it essentially gives companies the go-ahead signal and makes everyone believe that oil fracking is not harmful to the environment. This is simply not true because digging down into the Earth to take out oil is harmful to the environment in many ways. Firstly, it takes away some space on the surface for animals to live and harms their environment which needs to be taken over by humans overseeing the project. Also, the loss of oil from the Earth means that we are using it for something and often times that means we are releasing toxic chemicals into the air.  Any form of pollution is bad pollution and using water that could be animals drinking water on these projects is even worse. I am disappointed that the study stated that there was no harm to the environment from fracking because it just encourages the use of the resource oil which is eventually going to completely disappear from Earth and change our environment in a bad way.

Karimi, Faith, Michael Martinez, and Sara Sidner. “Santa Barbara Oil Spill: Officials Step up Inquiries – CNN.com.” CNN. Cable News Network, 23 May 2015. Web. 23 Aug. 2015.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/22/us/california-oil-spill/

The federal government ordered Plains, All American Pipeline to make safety improvements to a pipe that had ruptured in Santa Barbara. The oil spill lead to closed beaches and although the cause of the spill is under investigation, the disaster is still being met seriously and the company that was in charge of the spill has played a major role in the cleanup process. Although the oil in the water has been mostly cleaned up since, the main problem has been all the oil on the shoreline that is more difficult to clean up and devastating to wildlife.

This article makes it clear that there are many problems with modern needs and technologies. The spill that occurred in Santa Barbara has caused many problems to the environment around it which has in turn made an impact on the world. The oil that was spilled into the ocean was not all cleaned up and will likely cause problems to other animals later in the ocean. With all of the wildlife suffering as a result of this oil, their needs to be action taken against this so that wildlife populations will not decrease and our environment of Earth will continue to remain active.  I was angry when I found out about all of the wildlife that suffered from this spill and I feel that a change must be made to prevent these problems in the future and make sure nothing like this ever happens again.