Fracturing Safe, Say University Studies
Washington PA Observer Reporter
18 March 2012
By Christie Campbell, Staff writer
chriscam@observer-reporter.com
Two recently released university studies have concluded the
hydraulic fracturing method of extracting natural gas from shale
formations such as the Marcellus is safe.
The findings, one from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's
Energy Initiative and the other from the Energy Institute at the
University of Texas in Austin, also point out numerous
environmental challenges facing the gas-drilling industry.
The Energy Institute's "Fact Based Regulation for Environmental
Protection in Shale Gas Development" estimates U.S. shale gas
reserves at 862 trillion cubic feet, with 63 percent of that in
the Marcellus. These abundant supplies of shale gas will provide a
suitable bridge to a low-carbon future, concluded MIT's "The
Future of Natural Gas."
The MIT study's major sponsor was the American Clean Skies
Foundation. Aubrey K. McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy Corp.,
chairs its foundation board. The UT's Energy Institute team is
made up of energy experts from the university, some of them
industry retirees. The Environmental Defense Fund, an advocacy
group, reviewed the study.
The UT study noted horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing
have been used since the 1940s, but new technology led to its
broad application in the 1980s in the Barnett Shale in Texas. In
the 50 years since it was first used, more than 1 million wells
have been stimulated by hydraulic fracturing. Yet, the study notes
there is "little or no evidence" of groundwater contamination in
shale formations at normal depths, nor has evidence of chemicals
been found in aquifers from fracturing operations.
Both studies say the greatest potential for water contamination
would likely come from a well's integrity failure or leaks and
spills at the drill pad.
That conclusion did not surprise Myron Arnowitt, state director of
Clean Water Action, who agreed there are numerous ways gas
extraction can cause water contamination, not just during
hydraulic fracturing.
"In my mind, if you spill fracking fluid around the well, that
causes as much contamination as the fluid getting into the water
does," he said. "The frack fluid wouldn't have been on the site if
you weren't fracking the well."
The Ground Water Protection Council, made up of state groundwater
regulatory agencies, found that groundwater contamination in two
states - Texas and Ohio - was related to surface mistakes in 70
percent of the cases.
Scott Anderson, senior policy adviser for EDF's energy program,
noted the UT study points to a number of ways in which current
regulatory oversight is inadequate.
In addition to surface spills and well failure, contamination can
come from blowouts, and he noted subsurface blowouts appear to be
under-reported. Also, most states do not have the staff for
adequate enforcement. Gaps remain in areas such as well casing,
water withdrawal and waste disposal.
Anderson called on regulators to more closely assess hydraulic
fracturing operations, with more oversight on well cementing.
The MIT study noted that water disposal infrastructure is needed
to minimize environmental impacts. Noting that water disposal
options in the Marcellus are limited, the study says the gas
industry needs to find ways to minimize flowback water, be able to
undertake on-site water treatment, and recycle water. The region
also needs new water-treatment facilities, it said.
The Energy Institute noted that public suspicion of the industry
likely came about from its reluctance to disclose chemicals used
in the extraction process, even though information on those
chemicals is now available and some chemicals have been removed.
While recognizing that some chemicals used in the gas-extraction
activity such as benzene and other volatile organic compounds can
have a negative effect on human health, the study notes most
people are subjected to benzene and VOCs through exposures such as
tobacco smoke, highway driving, time spent in gas stations and
being in urban environments.
Speaking about the UT study, Kathryn Klaber, president of the
Marcellus Shale Coalition, said, "Entirely too often, the debate
surrounding the responsible development of shale gas is clouded by
rhetoric that is unsupported by the facts, proven data and
substantiated science. This new study, however, aims to
objectively separate fact from fiction, and does so effectively.
"Not surprisingly, though disappointingly, the study also captures
the negative and one-sided nature of the media coverage
surrounding shale gas development.'"
Klaber was referring to the report's assessment of media articles
and broadcasts that finds they are overwhelmingly negative on
hydraulic fracturing. Public perception of hydraulic fracturing -
as it pertains to the environment - is generally negative, with
the majority of respondents overestimating water usage for
extraction of shale gas and underestimating the amount of
electricity generated from natural gas, the report said.
Deb Nardone, director of Sierra Club's Natural Gas Reform
Campaign, had a different take on the studies.
"The natural gas industry continues to claim that fracking is the
best thing since sliced bread, but every day we hear about a new
set of problems associated with this dangerous and dirty
practice," she said. "The MIT and University of Texas studies
paint a rosy picture of natural gas fracking as safe and clean,
but the gas industry's exploitation of significant loopholes in
public health protections like the Clean Water, Clean Air and Safe
Drinking Water Act provide evidence to the contrary."
The studies can be viewed in their entirety at: http://energy.utexas.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151&Itemid=71
and http://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/studies/documents/natural-gas-2011/NaturalGas_Report.pdf