Last night's vice presidential debate highlighted opposing views of climate change: one wants to cast doubt on whether it's influenced by humans and another... wants to avoid banning fracking.
Is that all we've got? There are some good arguments for continuing fracking- basically that it's better than coal- but those arguments are losing ground as more methane emissions come to be associated with fracking.
This 2019 article, republished after today's debate, reflects this ambiguity. If fracking can be done well, limiting methane emissions, then it's a huge resource that shouldn't be overlooked, particularly in places that are near former coal mining areas. On the other hand if all of the emissions "saved" are in fact going up into the atmosphere, well, maybe we should use more wind or nuclear.
