The Interlude

In a calculated jab that attempted to paint his opponent as a radical leftist during Wednesday’s debate, Vice President Mike Pence alleged that a Biden administration would ban fracking. But his opponent, Senator Kamala Harris, categorically rejected his claim.

“I will repeat,” Harris said. “The American people know that Joe Biden will not ban fracking. That is a fact.”

While Harris’ running mate, Joe Biden, has a climate action plan that is slightly more progressive than that of President Donald Trump, the fossil fuel extraction process of fracking can hardly be labeled as clean energy. Yet, unlike former presidential candidates, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren — who are both proponents of the Green New Deal and have pushed for a complete ban on fracking — the Biden campaign has refused to outright denounce the practice. Harris was castigated post-debate by climate scientists and activists alike, who argue that fracking is incredibly damaging to the environment. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also took to Twitter to say: “Fracking is bad, actually.”

Fracking — or hydraulic fracturing — is a drilling method that blasts a pressurized mixture of water, sand, and chemicals through tight rock formations and releases oil and gas trapped within. The process blasts through anything from shale and sandstone, to limestone and carbonite to unlock these precious fossil fuels. While supporters of the practice argue that natural gas is a better alternative than some dirtier fossil fuels like coal and can act as a “bridge” to more sustainable practices, experts are skeptical. Natural gas is still a fossil fuel capable of warming the planet and a concept of a bridge is much more complicated than it suggests. One study from MIT even suggests that reliance on gas can lead to more greenhouse gas emissions in the future. Fracking also poses a risk to human health, air, and water pollution.

The practice of fracking is nothing new — it dates back to 1862. Civil War veteran Col. Edward A.L. Roberts is credited with its discovery after he applied techniques similar to those of artillery hitting narrow, water-filled channels he saw at war to a design of an “exploding torpedo” that could be lowered into an oil well, detonated, and allow for even more oil to gush out. Since then, fracking has been transformed, modernized, and perfected. And in recent years, companies have found an affordable way to combine methods of fracking and horizontal drilling to extract even more oil and gas from vast shale rock formations, but at the cost of fragile ecosystems, public health, and Indigenous communities.

The “fracking boom” has completely reshaped the U.S. energy landscape and has been largely responsible for the influx of cheap oil and gas since the late 2000s. Domestic production has risen sharply and the price of natural gas has dropped significantly. The growing sector also created more jobs. According to Vox, the oil and gas industry grew 10 times faster than other industries between 2010 and 2012, adding 169,000 jobs.

But despite the Energy Information Administration’s optimistic projections, oil and natural gas resources won’t last long. The EIA anticipates tight oil production will be 38% higher and shale gas production will be 81% higher in 2050 than in 2018. But data has shown that technological improvements have only led to a faster depletion of oil and gas reserves, not a growth in the total amount of oil and gas that can be produced, according to Shalebubble.org, a project of the Post Carbon Institute.

The widespread use of fracking across the U.S. has caused much public ire, as it can have serious negative effects on environmental and human health. One concern is groundwater contamination. In a 2015 study, the Environmental Protection Agency concluded that the chemicals used to blast through rock formations during fracking have at points contaminated drinking waters in Wyoming. Another concern is just the sheer amount of water that is needed for fracking, especially in places such as Texas and California, where clean, drinkable water is scarce.

The reported effects of fracking on air pollution are also bleak. Once an area of shale has been bulldozed, gas starts flowing up to the well — and potentially out of the pipes and into the atmosphere. Methane — the primary component of natural gas — is a greenhouse gas that contributes to the planet’s warming.

Health conditions like respiratory diseases and multiple types of cancer have been increasingly linked to fracking. Ashley McCray of the Indigenous Environmental Network tweeted during Wednesday’s debate: “Fracking has destroyed my home state of #Oklahoma. Entire communities of all kinds torn apart at the seams bc of frackquakes, eminent domain, new cancers + respiratory diseases, & environmental destruction. #BanFracking NOW & keep fossil fuels in the ground!”

McCray’s words are especially poignant as oil and gas companies with interests in the untapped resources of Indigenous lands have been gaining ground for decades. One of the most infamous examples of this kind of exploitation is the Dakota Access Pipeline — an underground oil pipeline that carries the black gold from shale fields in North Dakota to an oil terminal in Illinois.

Environmental activists and Indigenous tribes in the region have been fighting fervently against Dakota Access, LLC — the company that constructed the $3.8 billion, 1,172-mile pipeline which runs through portions of their land.

Despite the mounting evidence that fracking is terrible for the environment, people’s health, and Indigenous communities, Biden has refused to commit to banning it if elected president in November. The decision sticks out like a sore thumb in a climate plan that has otherwise adopted many of the tenets of the Green New Deal, like the goal to reach 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions no later than 2050. It is no surprise that the former vice president hammered on this point while campaigning in his native Pennsylvania, where the “fracking boom” helped the state out of the Great Recession. And during a highly tense election year when every vote carries the burden of potentially deciding whether Trump gets another four years in office, Biden’s decision is transparent.

Biden’s climate plan is only an acknowledgment of the Green New Deal, not a full embrace. And while both Trump and Pence try to portray it as a radical leftist overhaul, it has a long way to go to catch up with the most progressive climate change action plans out there.