Hydraulic fracturing has significantly increased in the United States over the last ten years. However, if you do not live nearby, you might not be aware of how close fracking wells can be to residential areas and schools. For instance, in Colorado, the wellbore, which is the drilled hole for oil or gas extraction, can be just 500 feet away from a house according to the current state regulations. In some places like Texas, the drilling can occur even closer to homes. For residents in these regions, this proximity means dealing with noise, pollution, and other factors that can negatively affect both physical and mental health. People living near fracking sites often experience vibrations that interfere with sleep and disturb pets. Additionally, the heavy truck traffic around wellpads generates more noise, dust, and air pollutants, leading to further industrial disruption. One woman I interviewed had a 30-foot-high sound barrier erected around her property, but the constant stream of semitrucks still caused her home to shake, and the barrier did not block out the noise. Instead of mountain views, she saw a brown wall when she opened her bedroom curtains.
As a social scientist researching the environmental justice and health effects of extractive industries, I have spent a lot of time in communities affected by unconventional oil and gas activities, visiting homes and well sites. My research indicates that living near fracking sites often leads to chronic stress and self-reported depression, often due to systemic issues within the industry. Hydraulic fracturing began booming around 2010, making the U.S. the leading producer of hydrocarbons worldwide. In Colorado, fracking has since quadrupled oil production and significantly increased natural gas production. However, this growth has had negative repercussions.
By 2017, estimates showed that 4.7 million people lived within one mile of an unconventional oil or gas well in the U.S. Health studies have linked respiratory issues, such as coughing and wheezing, to living and working near fracking sites. Additional studies have shown increases in endocrine-disrupting chemicals, which pose risks to pregnant women and children, raising the likelihood of birth defects and childhood cancers. Methane emissions, a potent greenhouse gas contributing to climate change, have also risen around oil and gas activities. The impacts on mental health are less understood. In a recent study on mental health effects, I examined multiple communities across northern Colorado, conducted surveys with hundreds of households, and visited homes, schools, and wellpads. Two main sources of stress and mental health issues emerged:
First, individuals report chronic stress and depression related to uncertainties about environmental and public health risks, along with inadequate access to reliable information about these risks. Second, stress and depression are also associated with feelings of political powerlessness, particularly the lack of control over where and how such activities occur and are regulated. Previous studies have suggested links between fracking and depression, reduced quality of life, and increased community tensions, though these typically rely on surveys or government data. My new research digs deeper into personal experiences.
Consider living in northern Colorado and being informed that a company will start drilling in the open space visible from your backyard. Attempting to obtain information on health and environmental risks, you find it hidden behind paywalls or buried in overly technical documents. A 45-year-old teacher I spoke with, who has lived in his community all his life, talked about the stress caused by the uncertainties of living near fracking: “What’s stressful is the unknowns and how this industry is operating behind a curtain all the time. … When you don’t know the chemicals they’re pumping down. You don’t know where they’re getting the water. You don’t know how much these tanks are leaking. … To me, that is stressful, the not knowing.” Others mentioned stress from uncertainty about long-term impacts. A retired former city worker said: “We’re lab rats right now. They’re learning about it as they’re going. … We don’t know what the impacts are going to be 20 years down the line.” Many feel powerless to change these circumstances. In Colorado, public speaking time is often limited to three minutes, while companies have more time for their presentations. A middle-aged woman living near a wellpad 1,000 feet from her home explained feeling excluded from public meetings: “This was a public hearing … and they turned it over to [an oil company] to give their slideshow. … [The oil company] proceeded to do about a two-hour presentation, so there was no time for public input. So four or five people out of a hundred people who wanted to protest got a chance to talk. It’s very hard to be heard.”
These themes were consistent across my findings. About 90% of those I interviewed reported increased chronic stress due to nearby fracking operations, and 75% reported long-term depression, mainly because of uncertainty about the impacts and a lack of power to prevent them. Governments could address some of these systemic problems quickly. The first step is providing clear, understandable information about environmental, public health, and economic risks and benefits. Also, governments could offer more meaningful opportunities for public participation in zoning and other decisions regarding hydraulic fracturing. Addressing the foundational health and environmental risks causing such stress is more complex. In early November, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is set to finalize new drilling rules, including a 2,000-foot setback from homes, the most extensive statewide rule in the country, although wells could still be built closer.