Fracking consumes an enormous amount of fresh water, a precious resource.

Question

Answer

Pro: Water used for fracking is usually too expensive to treat for contamination, so it cannot rejoin the natural water cycle. Instead, it is disposed of in underground wells.

Answer

Con: Producing gasoline from fracking consumes far less water than producing corn ethanol.

Answer

Con: Electricity generated from fracked natural gas uses less water than electricity generated from nuclear or coal-fired power plants.

Answer

Pro: Solar and wind power use virtually no water resources at all, making them clearly preferable to fracking.

Should fracking be banned? (Complete Discussion)

Fracking consumes an enormous amount of fresh water, a precious resource.

Pros

Cons

Water used for fracking is usually too expensive to treat for contamination, so it cannot rejoin the natural water cycle. Instead, it is disposed of in underground wells.

Solar and wind power use virtually no water resources at all, making them clearly preferable to fracking.

Producing gasoline from fracking consumes far less water than producing corn ethanol.

Electricity generated from fracked natural gas uses less water than electricity generated from nuclear or coal-fired power plants.

Selected claim, supporting its parent

Fracking consumes an enormous amount of fresh water, a precious resource.

Pro claim 1

Water used for fracking is usually too expensive to treat for contamination, so it cannot rejoin the natural water cycle. Instead, it is disposed of in underground wells.

Pro claim 2

Solar and wind power use virtually no water resources at all, making them clearly preferable to fracking.

Con claim 1

Producing gasoline from fracking consumes far less water than producing corn ethanol.

Con claim 2

Electricity generated from fracked natural gas uses less water than electricity generated from nuclear or coal-fired power plants.