Alec Krosser: Background and Overview

Looking into the positive effects is important in making a fair judgment about an issue. Hydraulic fracturing does have some negative side effects that will be discussed in other papers, but the U.S. obtaining its own natural gas also has many benefits. Economic factors are also longer lasting than environmental factors because companies can easily change environmental factors by ceasing to use harmful chemicals, but cannot easily change industry-wide economic factors. Nationwide economic issues will always be an important part of hydraulic fracturing.
This paper will discuss the economic impact of hydraulic fracturing on the United States, including the number of jobs created by the industry, taxes being paid by these companies, and amount of gas profits currently being made. It will draw conclusions about the economic impacts of hydraulic fracturing, and evaluate whether more natural gas companies will help the U.S., and whether current regulations are good for the country.
Hydraulic fracturing companies also pay the individual landowners to lease their land, and pay the state government money, which in some states gets handed to the affected towns. These points are all examples of short-term economic effects on towns and states. People often neglect to think about the larger picture.
Many of the problems people currently have with the natural gas industry are the short-term economic effects and the negative environmental effects. Natural gas companies tend to come into towns with many people leading to a booming economy, then leave and cause the town to “bust.” These are the simplest problems to fix. To make an educated decision as to whether an increase in natural gas extraction and natural gas companies should occur, one must look at long-term effects and decide the potential benefits of hydraulic fracturing.