As a former oil field worker and a former scientist, reading articles on fracking is always confusing. Most writers on this topic do not adequately distinguish between drilling, fracking, extraction, maintenance or cleanup. When comparing fracked wells to non fracked wells, all of these processes are very similar except for the fracking itself and the cleanup.

Given that fracking usually happens 10,000 feet underground, and far below any water table, direct effects on the surface are rare. It took 60 years of fracking before we even discovered that it could cause surface earthquake detectable by humans. And even then, the last I checked the number of noticeable earthquakes caused by fracking can be counted on both hands.

Wastewater injection is a known issue. In certain areas, waste water injection can cause earthquakes. In other areas, waste water injection is fine. It's a matter of geological particulars, and a blanket ban doesn't make sense.

With the exception of these two processes, a fracked well is very similar to a non fracked well. On the other hand, the following statement doesn't seem to recognize the similarities between fracked and non fracked wells:

>“There’s really definitive evidence now that methane leaks at every stage of the fracking process” from drilling to storage, she says. And that’s contributing to a surge in methane, a potent greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere.

There's nothing in this statement, or in the surrounding context, that says this problem would be unique to fracked wells. Any well that emits methane (which is quite a few of them) would have the exact same issue. It appears that what organizations like Physicians for Social Responsibility and Concerned Health Professionals of New York (which doesn't seem terribly non partisan in the first place) are really concerned about is not fracking, but any hydrocarbon extraction.

The real issue at hand seems to be the expansion of oil wells into parts of the country that did not historically have that industry. Banning fracking may simply be the wrong approach. For example, as technology advances, non fracking methods may be discovered that would once again put oil wells in communities that don't want them. In addition, talking about fracked wells without comparing them against similar non fracked wells is sloppy science. Most of the research and white papers I've read on the topic do not adequately use traditional wells as controls, meaning it's impossible to tell if the deleterious health and environmental effects apply only to fracked wells or to every oil well.