An article came out in October 2015 with yet another health
impact of hydraulic fracturing. Studies previously linked it to increasedinfant mortality and low birth weights but now Casey et al. (2015) has suggested that fracking can cause premature births in Pennsylvania. The
study found that 40% of expecting mothers living in active fracking zones are
likely to give birth prematurely and 30% are more likely to have a high-risk
pregnancy (excessive weight gain, high blood pressure etc.). Although the study
does not state any causal explanations why living near a fracking site could
lead to these maternal problems but it is possible that increased noise and
traffic to poor air quality can all increase maternal stress which is known to
have adverse effects on unborn babies.
There has been claim recently that women don’t agree with fracking because they ‘don’t understand’ it. Are you fracking kidding me? Apparently we ‘lack scientific understanding’ according to Averil Macdonald, the chairwoman of UK Onshore Oil and Gas. She states that women are more likely to make decisions based on ‘gut feeling’ and ‘emotional fears’ instead of facts. The article argued that explaining to women that fracking is safe still wouldn’t change their minds but I don’t understand this point because fracking has not yet be proven to be safe by the DECC, hence no active fracking sites in the UK yet. This statement is offensive and sexist to say the least and it is safe to say that the science behind fracking is well understand. Besides the basics needed to make a decision are not hard to understand, we don’t need to know all the chemistry and physics behind the method to be able to form an opinion.
Maybe we could turn this around on men and argue that it proves women are more sensible and take into account all aspects including impacts rather than just seeing economic benefits and agreeing like men who are easily persuaded by ‘facts’.
A
recent article published by Audubon highlighting another ecological impact of fracking, this
time its effecting birds in north-west North Dakota. An increase in fracking
wells has converted much of the landscape from grass to gravel causing birds to
leave the area. They are not only avoiding the infrastructure sites themselves
but also surrounding areas. Bird density has dropped by 33% within 800 feet of
fracking sites in the region with some birds staying as far as 1800 feet away.
It is thought to be due to too much dust and lack of food but it is still
unclear what effects this will have on local ecology.
No comments:
Post a Comment