Category Archives: Hydraulic Fracturing

Fracking Earthquakes … Fracking Causes Earthquakes

frackingmap

This map shows the intensity of shaking in the area of a magnitude-3.9 earthquake that struck near Youngstown, Ohio, on Dec. 31, 2011. Research has linked this earthquake to the underground injection of wastewater from fracking. Courtesy USGS

As reported on Live Science, here, and NBC News, here, disposal of wastewater from Hydraulic Fracturing, “Fracking,” has been linked to earthquakes in Ohio. As reported in Green, a the NY Times blog, here, fracking has also been linked to increased seismic activity in Oklahoma, altho scientists are uncertain whether the earthquakes are because of the injection of wastewater underground or the extraction of oil and methane via fracking.

This makes perfect sense. Fracking is, after all, injecting explosives under tremendous pressure into underground rock formations, then exploding the rock formations. To expect that not to have other effects – such as earthquakes – would be naive.

Continue reading

 

Frank Pallone, D. NJ

Frank Pallone, D. NJ

Sea Bright, New Jersey, July 11, 2013. I joined Cindy Zipf of Clean Ocean Action, (fact sheetU.S, Rep Frank Pallone, campaign, and many citizens, including two children, one about 6, the other about 9. We spoke with eloquence, passion, and wisdom of the need to protect the shore, the biosphere, the bio-human-sphere.

“We need to build a clean and sustainable energy infrastructure,” I concluded, “one based on solar, wind, wave, geothermal and sustainable biofuels; an infrastructure for the future.  These distributed systems can be designed to withstand natural disasters, human error and terrorist attack. Our future is at stake, and our children’s future.”

I spoke for about 3 minutes, cutting my prepared remarks about in half.

This is not a partisan issue. Rep Pallone and I are Democrats. Governor Christie is a Republican. The Governor wisely vetoed an identical project in 2011 has promised to veto new deepwater LNG transfer ports.  Senator Buono and environmental / citizens groups should hold the governor to his promises. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

We need to look to the rooftops for solar, the oceans for wind and wave power, to geothermal differentials for heat and electricity, to build an infrastructure for the 21st Century.

Fracking – As Clean As Chlorine & Benzene

Benzene Ring Currents, Quantum chemically calculated magnetically induced probability current density vectors in benzene. The magnetic field is pointing out of the molecular plane upwards. Displayed are vectors with modulus between 0.01 and 0.1 nA/T. Left subfigure is in the molecular plane, right subfigure is 1.0 a.u. above the molecular plane. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Benzene_ring_currents.png

Quantum chemically calculated magnetically induced probability current density vectors in benzene. Wikimedia Commons

As noted in my post March 24, here, the petrochemical industry says,

“Trust us. The Fracking fluids are water mixed with sand, a few other chemicals, and 5% is household chemicals, like chlorine and benzine.”

The thing is, chlorine and benzene are hazardous.  So when the people in the petrochemical industry imply, “This is safe,” because it is household chemicals, I don’t know what they mean. And as documented elsewhere in the series, here, pollution from Fracking is not regulated at the Federal level.

Continue reading

Fracking: Scientifically Proven Clean – But Is It ‘Junk Science’?

 

President Reagan against the US Flag

Ronald Reagan, Courtesy Google Images

The petrochemical industry says “Trust us. The Fracking fluids are water mixed with sand, and a few – 0.5% – other chemicals, household chemicals, like chlorine and benzine.”

According to SourceWatch,

There were more than 493,000 active natural-gas wells across 31 states in the U.S. in 2009, almost double the number in 1990. Around 90 percent have used fracking … according to the drilling industry.[2] Nationwide, residents living near fracked gas wells have filed over 1,000 complaints regarding tainted water, severe illnesses, livestock deaths, and fish kills.

While 1000 complaints on 493,000 wells is a low percentage, if fracking was safe and clean, why the complaints and controversy? President Reagan used to say “Trust people, but check.” Well,

  • If the speed limit was 350 miles per hour; then no one would get a speeding ticket.
  • If the tax code was “Whatever you feel like paying;” then I certainly would pay less taxes.
  • So if fracking was safe and clean; then why the complaints?

The industry says “Trust us, fracking is clean…. We adhere to all regulations…. ” But what are the regulations?

Continue reading

Fracking – Above the Law

Former Vice President & former CEO of Halliburton, Richard B. Cheney

Former Vice President & former CEO of Halliburton, Richard B. Cheney

Energy From Shale says,

“Spent or used fracturing fluids are normally recovered at the initial stage of well production and recycled in a closed system for future use or disposed of under regulation, either by surface discharge where authorized under the Clean Water Act or by injection into Class II wells

as authorized under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Regulation may also allow recovered fracturing fluids to be disposed of at appropriate commercial facilities. Not all fracturing fluid returns to the surface. Over the life of the well, some is left behind and confined by thousands of feet of rock layers.”

This is a very misleading statement, given that Congress, in 2005, passed the “Halliburton Rule,” which exempted Fracking from regulation by the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act.

As noted by the Environmental Defense Center, here, and Source Watch, here, Fracking is actually exempt from Eight (8) major federal regulations.

  1. The Clean Water Act , due to the “Halliburton loophole” pushed through by former Vice-President/former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney, exempting corporations from revealing the chemicals used in fracking fluid;
  2. The Safe Drinking Water Act, also due  to the “Halliburton loophole”.
  3. The Toxic Release Inventory under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
  4. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which exempts fracking from federal regulations pertaining to hazardous waste;
  5. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act;
  6. The Clean Air Act,
  7. The National Environmental Policy Act; and
  8. The Superfund law, which requires that polluters remediate for carcinogens like benzene released into the environment, except if they come from oil or gas;

As noted here, Bill McKibben, of 350.org, R. P. Siegel, who co-wrote Vapor Trails and writes for Triple Pundit, Al Gore, and many others, including myself, who think about global warming and climate change and see the challenges presented by our need for energy and the potential of sustainable energy suggest that it would be better to use wind, solar, geothermal, and other fuel free systems, and to manufacture fuel from sewage, garbage, agricultural waste and algae than to dig fossil fuels – and heavy metals – out of the ground – and in so doing severely damage the biosphere.

But I think McKibben, Siegel, Gore, and Cheney would agree with me that “Fracking” is aptly named.

Part 3 in a Series.

  1. L. Furman, 3/12/13, Hydro Fracturing, aka Fracking, Dirty & Ugly, but What Choice do we Have?
  2. L. Furman, 3/14/13, Fracking,Best Practices versus Current Practice
  3. L. Furman, 3/18/13, Fracking – Above the Law

An analyst with Popular Logistics, Lawrence J. Furman holds a Bachelor’s in Biology, and an MBA in “Managing for Sustainability” from Marlboro College, Vermont. He also has experience in information technology. He can be reached at ‘L Furman 97” at G Mail.

Fracking, Best Practices versus Current Practice

 

Gas Flare in North Dakota, Courtesy National Geographic

Gas Flare in North Dakota, Courtesy National Geographic

EnergyFromShale.org, the industry website, says,

“The oil and natural gas production industry uses these lessons to develop best practices to minimize the environmental and societal impacts associated with development.”

The image above from National Geographic, The New Oil Landscape, March, 2013, suggests that the ideal is far from the reality. And even if the “Frackers” used “Best Practices”, “Best Practices” for a carbon source of energy is not “Best Practice” for an sustainable economy. Efficient use of energy obtained via solar, wind, geothermal, marine hydro and in stream hydro are best practices. Fracking doesn’t even come close.

But even if extraction was done in such as manner as to isolate all heavy metals, carcinogens, radioisotopes and other pollutants from the biosphere, the whole point of hydro-fracturing is to extract carbon from beneath the earth, in order to burn it and transfer carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas – into the atmosphere.

Bill McKibben, of 350.org, R. P. Siegel, who co-wrote Vapor Trails and writes for Triple Pundit, Al Gore, who won the popular vote for US President in 2000, and many others, including myself, who think about global warming and climate change and see the challenges presented by our need for energy and the potential of clean, renewable, sustainable energy suggest that it would be better to use wind, solar, geothermal, and other fuel free systems, and to manufacture fuel from sewage, garbage, agricultural waste and algae than to dig fossil fuels – and heavy metals – out of the ground – and in so doing severely damage the biosphere.

But I think we agree that “Fracking” is aptly named.

Part 2 in a Series.

  1. L. Furman, 3/12/13, Hydro Fracturing, aka Fracking, Dirty & Ugly, but What Choice do we Have?
  2. L. Furman, 3/14/13, Fracking, Best Practices versus Current Practice

An analyst with Popular Logistics, Lawrence J. Furman holds a Bachelor’s in Biology, an MBA in “Managing for Sustainability” from Marlboro College, experience with information technology. He can be reached at ‘L Furman 97” @ G Mail.

 

Hydro Fracturing, aka Fracking, Dirty & Ugly, but What Choice do we Have?

Satellite photo of US at night. Flares from Bakken shale wells in North Dakota

Satellite photo of US at night. Flares from Bakken shale wells in North Dakota

We have large deposits of shale oil – in the Marcellus shale in Pennsylvania, and in the Bakken formation in North Dakota and Canada.  Estimates vary. USGS, 2008 estimated 3.0 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of recoverable oil.  Today, the North Dakota Geological Survey (PDF) estimates 18 Billions Barrels of recoverable oil.  It also states

“the Bakken play on the North Dakota side of the basin is still early in the learning curve. Technology and the price of oil will dictate what is recoverable from this formation.”

Here in the US, according to the US Energy Information Agency, we consumed about 7.0 Billion barrels of refined petroleum products in 2010, slightly less, 6.7 Billion barrels, in 2011.  This is roughly 22% of world demand.  (here)

The Bakken formation holds Five Months to Two and One Half Years of US Oil needs.

Continue reading

NY Times: Hydraulic Fracturing: “Cleaner than Coal”

Helicopter Cruising Greenland Ice Sheet

Helicopter Cruising Greenland Ice Sheet

To Make Fracturing Safer,” editorial, in May 11, 2012, begins “Gas … is cleaner than coal” and concludes “Oil and and gas drilling will always be a risky business; the administration cannot let pass this opportunity to make it safer.”

Clean and Green within 18 is the opportunity the Administration should not let pass. We should – MUST – shift to 100% sustainable energy in 18 years! Solar, wind and other sustainable energy systems do not require fuel and day-to-day operations do not create waste. Thus these “negafuelwatt” systems are clean; not just “cleaner than coal.” And they are also cleaner than oil, gas, and nuclear power.

Continue reading

Hydraulic Fracturing – accumulating record not particularly reassuring

Recent reports about the effects of hydraulic fracturing. Note that a critical aspect of this issue is the pressurized disposal of wastewater, which is injected (or perhaps more accurately re-injected) rather than the initial energy (gas) collection.

Mark Drajem, correspondent for Bloomberg News, reporting Fracking Tied to Unusual Rise in Earthquakes in U.S.

A spate of earthquakes across the middle of the U.S. is “almost certainly” man-made, and may be caused by wastewater from oil or gas drilling injected into the ground, U.S. government scientists said in a study.

Researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey said that for the three decades until 2000, seismic events in the nation’s midsection averaged 21 a year. They jumped to 50 in 2009, 87 in 2010 and 134 in 2011.

Those statistics, included in the abstract of a research paper to be discussed at the Seismological Society of America conference next week in San Diego, will add pressure on an energy industry already confronting more regulation of the process of hydraulic fracturing.

“Our scientists cite a series of examples for which an uptick in seismic activity is observed in areas where the disposal of wastewater through deep-well injection increased significantly,” David Hayes, the deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior, said in a blog post yesterday, describing research by scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey.

‘Fairly Small’ Quakes

The earthquakes were “fairly small,” and rarely caused damage, Hayes said.

He said not all wastewater disposal wells induce earthquakes, and there is no way of knowing if a disposal well will cause a temblor.

Last month, Ohio officials concluded that earthquakes there last year probably were caused by wastewater from hydraulic fracturing for natural gas injected into a disposal well.

In hydraulic fracturing — or fracking — water, sand and chemicals are injected into deep shale formations to break apart underground rock and free natural gas trapped deep underground. Much of that water comes back up to the surface and must then be disposed of.

There’s “a difference between disposal injection wells and hydraulically fractured wells,” Daniel Whitten, a spokesman for the America’s Natural Gas Alliance, which represents companies such as Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK) and Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. (COG), said in an e-mail. “There are over 140,000 disposal wells in America, with only a handful potentially linked to seismic activity.”

Let’s assume for the moment that seismic activity is linked to disposal wells, infrequently, as Mr. Whitten claims, at a rate of “a handful” for every 140,000 wells. To use round numbers, and use conservative estimates, let’s say “a handful” is five, out of a set of 100,000 (rounding 140,000 down by nearly one-third). That’s fifty seismic events per 1 million disposal wells. The United States “natural gas” ((It’s our understanding that we are, for the most part, talking about methane.)) industry is planning to rapidly and widely expand domestic exploration.

What’s the acceptable safety rate for seismic events caused by methane extraction? If we embark upon an ambitious program, and create one million new disposal wells (and fifty seismic events) per year, how long will it take for us to yield a catastrophic event?

For the moment, we will set aside the other risks: the toxic nature of methane, which is odorless, flammable, and can easily reach 2000°F (1093°C).

CDC: Health Implications of Hydraulic Fracturing: Unknown

Schematic Drawing of Hydrofracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing 1, Schematic Drawing

The Centers for Disease Control, CDC, on May 3, 2012 issued a brief but unequivocal statement regarding the health implications of hydraulic fracturing here, and reproduced in it’s entirety below.

CDC / ATSDR Hydraulic Fracturing Statement:

CDC and ATSDR do not have enough information to say with certainty whether natural gas extraction and production activities including hydraulic fracturing pose a threat to public health. We believe that further study is warranted to fully understand potential public health impacts.

Image of fire from tap water with various flammable impurities

Frakking 2, Tap Water with Various Impurities

The CDC, in its 47-word statement said, “We don’t know the public health implications of hydraulic fracturing, aka ‘fracking’ or ‘frakking.’ We need to study the issue.” Perhaps the decision makers at the CDC should watch Gasland. But consider the CDC statement on hydraulic fracturing in light of picture 2 and the “Precautionary Principle,”

The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking the action.

The Precautionary Principle is described in more detail on Commonweal (here) and Science & Environmental Health Network, SEHN (here).  Burning fuel for heat requires obtaining the fuel and releases various materials into the biosphere. We must understand the consequences and side-effects before we embark on any project. The questions in re hydraulic fracturing are:

  • Are these pictures real or imagined?
  • What are the implications for the water supply and the biosphere?
  • What are the liability insurance requirements? and
  • What are the alternatives?

Continue reading

In Upstate NY, Gas Drilling Debate Gets Local

Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet Maria Scarvalone’s  coverage illustrates how rapidly and intensely opposition to “fracking” has spread in communities in Upstate New York. Her coverage suggest that the fracking question

“It’s like playing Russian roulette with your water supply.”

has energized voters – against the “fracking” scheme. Scarvalone’s piece makes the probability of “fracking” coming to pass seem unlikely. Add to that other constituencies who are likely to oppose fracking:  banks, property owners, title insurance companies, attorneys and  real estate professionals will influence the ongoing debate over “Fracking.” Continue reading