Prewriting Essay 2

In Thomas Kurth's article "In support of fracking: the facts and the science," he makes a very weak claim that fracking does not cause a whole heap of environmental problems and poses and economic benefit.  On top of that, he never even addresses the science part that he includes in his title.  There is no mention of any scientific evidence that would support hydraulic fracturing, which I thought was very interesting given the title Kurth gave to his editorial.  Overall, I thought the author's argument was very weak, and disorganized with very little evidence to back it up.  I wanted to rebut this argument because it is something that I feel strongly about, and I have familiarized myself with the topic.  The main strategies I will be using are to refute the author's weak claims about the EPA, and just make my own counter argument against fracking.  The claim that I will be making is that fracking does pollute drinking water and poses numerous other hazards that make it more of a potential problem than a benefit.  Some initial thoughts that I had regarding refutation was to argue against his statement that the EPA's regulatory activities have been based off of "headlines and populist noise," which I think is completely ridiculous.