say that solar and wind are the energy of the future.

But while consumers wait for

the future expansion of alternative energy,

the fossil fuel industry is pushing for natural gas

to be a bridge to that future.

In the US, drillers are busily tapping gas

as well as oil, from underground rocks known as shale

in a process called hydraulic fracturing,

more commonly known as fracking.

But not everyone is convinced the transitional fossil fuel

is all it's cracked up to be.

Despite its benefits, fracking remains unpopular

in many parts of the world,

especially among climate activists

and locals most affected by the process

and with plummeting oil prices triggered by the coronavirus

and Saudi Arabia's stand-off with Russia,

the financial viability of shale is in jeopardy.

Fracking is a fairly new process of natural gas extraction.

First commercially introduced in 1949,

it involves forcing water mixed with sand and chemicals

into a well to create fissures in shale rock,

so oil and gas trapped inside can escape.

Advances in the 1980s

in a technique called horizontal drilling

opened up access to thin layers of shale

even deeper underground.

Over the past decade, US oil and gas output

has surged 57%, mostly due to shale-rich areas,

such as the Permian Basin,

which stretches from Texas to New Mexico.

America's recent energy dominance

was meant to undercut Opex ability to manipulate the market,

but in March of 2020, Russia triggered an oil war

with Saudi Arabia, cratering global prices.

The shale industry, which has higher production costs

in places like Saudi Arabia and Russia

and relies heavily on debt finance, was hit the hardest.

Major shale operations,

like Whiting Petroleum Corp and Diamondback,

all but promised major job cuts and production halts

after shares dropped 40 to 45% respectively.

Adding to the recent woes,

fracking remains highly controversial.

It has become a huge target for climate activists

who point to its damaging effects on the environment.

A handful of European countries

have effectively banned the practice

due to its environmental impacts.

Opponents cite an enormous amount

of water needed in fracking.

Depending on the shale deposits, it can take anywhere

between 1.5 and 16 millions gallons to frack a well.

Large though those numbers seem,

a study by Duke University calculated that

the water used in fracking makes up less than 1%

of total industrial water use nationwide.

There's also evidence that fracking, and more commonly,

the pumping of resulting waste water into wells,

triggers earthquakes.

They've mostly been small,

but one in 2016 in the oil rich state of Oklahoma

shook homes and buildings across the state

for almost an minute

and measured 5.8 on the Richter Scale.

Having an earthquake right now,

our light's shaking quite a bit here

and it's now calming down

as another earthquake has just hit.

Tremors in China's shale hub

in Sichuan Province killed two people

and damaged 11000 homes in February of 2019.

There's no easy answer on fracking.

No one can deny that shale

has benefited the US economically,

but now there are very real concerns about

whether the fracking revolution is coming to a close.

Defenders who continue to point to big-picture benefits,

like job creation and energy independence,

are now staring down the barrel of job cuts,

scale backs and bankruptcies.

Fracking opponents point to

the climate warming methane in natural gas that

sometimes escapes into the atmosphere before it gets burned,

and reject industry claims that shale

is a bridge fuel to a renewable future.

Now faced with an increasingly hostile economic environment,

in addition to longstanding opposition

from environmental groups,

the US shale industry faces a very uncertain future.