Fracking is the use of high pressure drilling and injecting chemicals deep into the
Earth to harvest natural gas releasing methane. The use of natural gas rather than coal is
more environmentally sound because it emits less carbon dioxide.
Earth to harvest natural gas releasing methane. The use of natural gas rather than coal is
more environmentally sound because it emits less carbon dioxide.
To frack, gas and oil companies must follow Environmental Protection Agency, EPA,
regulations along with state and local rules because it has some serious environmental effects.
For example, methane gas can be accidentally released into the atmosphere while harvesting the
natural gas. Methane gas can increase global warming because it has 80 percent more heat
trapping potential of carbon dioxide for the first 20 years it’s released in the atmosphere.
regulations along with state and local rules because it has some serious environmental effects.
For example, methane gas can be accidentally released into the atmosphere while harvesting the
natural gas. Methane gas can increase global warming because it has 80 percent more heat
trapping potential of carbon dioxide for the first 20 years it’s released in the atmosphere.
Currently EPA regulates the release of methane to combat climate change. EPA requires
gas and oil companies to inspect for methane leaks every six months and to repair the leaks
within 30 days. President Trump has proposed an over hall to these rules which will weaken
the Obama-era EPA regulations to fight climate change. President Trump wants the leak
inspections every one to two years and repairs to be made within 60 days. These changes
will save the gas and oil companies an estimated 75 million dollars per year in regulatory costs.
gas and oil companies to inspect for methane leaks every six months and to repair the leaks
within 30 days. President Trump has proposed an over hall to these rules which will weaken
the Obama-era EPA regulations to fight climate change. President Trump wants the leak
inspections every one to two years and repairs to be made within 60 days. These changes
will save the gas and oil companies an estimated 75 million dollars per year in regulatory costs.
Should new presidents be allowed to roll back the regulations of old presidents?
Is it justified for the EPA to make the proposed fracking regulation changes?
I think it is a terrible to weaken the regulations for mining coal. It is already unfortunate that we are sucking up the Earth and draining it from its resources. We as humans have done so much pollution to the ground and air it only makes sense to try to reverse our damages. The environment isn't getting so much better, so new presidents should really be trying to go harder on the regulations and not easier for corporations to make money. We are responsible to keep our homes clean for future generations. It is unacceptable behavior to destroy it and enjoy the wealth it brings that may only last a century or two compared to the billion of years the Earth has to live.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you are saying; I too believe that it is a terrible to weaken the regulations. On the other hand, although we want to preserve our Earth, at what point should we compromise some land for some oil and natural resources? I believe that we should still frack but only to some degree. We should not significantly increase regulations in my opinion because then our economy will fall; we should also not significantly decrease regulations because then we would hurt our environment exponentially.
DeleteI personally believe that President should be able to roll back the initiatives of previous Presidents, but they should provide ample explanation and dissident regarding the roll back. I believe this because the initiative that is trying to be rolled back may be extremely effective, but is only being rolled back due to political differences among different presidents.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why the Trump Registration would they extended the leak inspection to ever 2 to 3 years. Isn't it worth the money to make sure our environment is well and healthy.
ReplyDelete-Allica Santos
Cool article!
ReplyDeleteI think regardless of economic viewpoints, I think fracking shouldn't be continued to be used as it's harmful to the environment. Long term wise, the excess release of Mathane gas will destroy the ozone layer which will eventually lead to the rise of temperature and destroy many natural habitats. With the rise of temperatures, sea levels will rise and ice will melt which could lead to the extinction of different animals. Trump might see this as an economic pro, but he is not thinking of long term effects or the climate as he believes global warming isn't real. What he doesn't realize is that once the ozone layer is destroyed, it can never be repaired again.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if this is true or not, but I heard that along with pushing forward the removal of some regulations for fracking, they're (the gov't) also trying to lower the limit on the amount of methane that companies are allowed to release into the atmosphere. -Peachey
ReplyDeleteI think that presidents should take better consideration of our environment for the future of our planet. The environment is already producing a lot of gas because of us and regulations should be heavily and regularly enforced.
ReplyDeleteTrump obviously does not have very much regard for the environment. I think that the only thing he is concerned about is retaining the support from his conservative fan-base, and that environmental regulations will continue to deteriorate as his presidency continues.
ReplyDeleteGreat presentation! I like how you talked about how the government relates to environmental problems and gave definitions for the environmental terms. It's so awesome that you care so much about the environment! #savetheworld -Caleb
ReplyDeleteI think new presidents should be able to roll back the regulations of old presidents. And i dont think it's a good idea to weaken the regulation.
ReplyDeleteI think new presidents could roll back the regulations of old presidents if their reasons for doing so are justified with proper evidence. Otherwise, I think presidents should overall initiate more action to prevent the environment from going down a landslide.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that Trump should be legally allowed to reverse environmental regulations place by Obama, even though I don't necessarily agree with his decision. The nature of the US's legal system is that rules and regulation are able to be overruled and changed as time goes on and the world changes. Just as Trump can reverse the environmental regulations made by Obama, the next president can reverse Trump's decisions.
ReplyDeleteLowering the cost of the regulation of oil companies means that this will increase the rate of production which will lead into more pollution. The opposite should be achieved in order to add to the progress that the previous president had made. I believe there should be some protection for some changes made previously and not let progress be taken down each time there's a new president.
ReplyDeleteI think new presidents should be able to roll back older presidents regulations, but they should look into the stats and data and see if the new regulations would actually better the environment.-Amber
ReplyDeleteI think new presidents should be able to roll back older president's regulations. At the same time, the decision for roll backs should be justified and agreed with a majority population. -Donald
ReplyDeleteHow much could regulation cost anyways? If you have a lucrative business from fracking oil, how much could regulations cost compared to the profit made? The fact that environmental regulations can be overruled and recreated every time a different president is elected is mildly unpractical at the very least and extremely inefficient at the most.
ReplyDeleteLike other comments have stated, I think that presidents do have the right to roll back older presidents regulations.However, I think that before a regulation is rolled back, many things should be taken into account. In this case,if the new regulation does more damage to the environment than the old regulation, it should not be able to be implemented.
ReplyDeleteI believe the EPA should have full control of fracking because they are the ones most experienced and have the most knowledge about controlling climate change.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the President should be allowed to roll back the regulations of old presidents. Even though oil companies will save a lot of money, and this policy will help short term, global warming as a definite and increasing problem that should be heavily regulated. I do not believes it is justified for the EPA to make the proposed fracking regulation changes because it will not help the enduring issue of global warming.
ReplyDeleteNew presidents should be able to roll back older presidents' regulations since time change things and policy must update along with it, in a way to improve the previous policy. However, since there has not yet been obvious improvements on climate change from Obama's policy, it's clear that changing the policy to decrease cost for oil companies will only cause more pollution to the environment.
ReplyDeleteI believe the regulations are worth the money if it can help the environment. I think new presidents can roll back regulations old president but they have to consider if it is more beneficial before putting it into effect.
ReplyDelete