This page has been filled with letters saying fracking is bad for humans and the environment. But the question never asked, or answered, is: Compared to what?
Fracking is dangerous, but so are all energy technologies.
Remember BP's Gulf oil spill? Even worse is the air pollution from burning oil and coal, which not only aggravates global warming but also kills 20,000 Americans annually, according to a 2009 National Academy of Sciences report ordered by Congress. This is what the gas, from fracking, is replacing. In comparison, fracking's environmental and health effects are trivial. Substituting fracked gas for coal and oil is saving thousands of lives.
Anti-frackers seem oblivious that this technology, which they so fear, has been widely used throughout the world for years, transforming the energy landscape. Of course, inevitably, there have been some problems, but there's no such thing as total safety; it's always a trade-off of risks vs. benefits. That's an evaluation fracking opponents refuse to make. Green or renewable technologies like solar and wind might ideally be better still, but realistically can meet only a small fraction of our energy needs.
If fracking's risks justify a ban, then surely we should likewise ban another technology far more dangerous; but antifrackers are not willing to give up their cars or their use of energy, which fracking would actually make cleaner and safer than existing alternatives.
FRANK S. ROBINSON
Albany