Fracking’s Role in the Presidential Race: A Political Standoff

In a recent interview with CNN, Vice President Kamala Harris stated her opposition to banning fracking, marking a significant shift from her earlier stance during her initial presidential campaign. In 2019, Harris had expressed a strong desire to prohibit the practice, a viewpoint she later modified after joining President Biden‘s team.

Harris explained her change in position by emphasizing that it is possible to expand a clean energy economy without enforcing a fracking ban. This statement comes amid increased political discourse surrounding the issue as the presidential election approaches.

The fracking debate has resurfaced in national conversations, predominantly due to its critical implications for voters in Pennsylvania, where the industry plays a vital role in economic growth and job creation. Pennsylvania is a crucial battleground state, and politicians are keenly aware of the influence fracking has on local communities.

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, involves extracting oil or gas from deep underground using a high-pressure mixture of water, sand, and chemicals. Proponents highlight the economic benefits, including lowered energy prices and decreased reliance on foreign oil, while critics point to environmental concerns such as air and water quality issues.

Despite framing fracking as a solution to energy issues, it has not fully alleviated the country’s dependence on fossil fuels, which are linked to climate change. Furthermore, fracking has been associated with increased seismic activities and has raised alarm for its impact on local ecosystems.

Over the last decade, production through fracking has markedly increased in the United States. Recent data indicates a record high daily oil production average of 12.9 million barrels, with fracking accounting for a significant portion of this output.