Sorry, poor choice of word. I meant short term, will it even be a stable source until it is finished being tapped or will it increase in instability to communities around it.
We are talking about injecting heavy metals to aquifers and at the same time surface radon patches from deep areas. Mercury in water that somebody will drink later and Radon that kills silently people when accumulates in basements.
And is known that had caused earthquakes in dense populated areas from Mediterranean coasts (see Castor Project) or US, so is a danger for infrastructures also
All for a source of gas that could last one or two years in many cases, and then is exhausted and left contaminated. But is heavily subsidised by taxes in many cases
Fracking is greedy monkey stuff. Is a nonsense from any human point of view in any historical period (past or future) to pay for deliberately allowing a few people poison your own drink water.
Excellent response, thank you for all that information. I wanted to try and see a positive side to it as energy independence is a good thing for a nation. But it doesn't look like it's worth it. Hopefully renewables make it unprofitable sooner rather than later.
Is that an honest question?
It's used to extract a fossil fuel. That should answer your question in case you know the definition of "sustainable".