Tag Archives: fracking

Pennsylvania blowout fuels fracking fears

Share

From UPI.com – April 22, 2011

PITTSBURGH, April 22 (UPI) — A blowout at a Pennsylvania natural gas
well has fueled increased concerns about the already controversial
practice of hydraulic fracking.

The well, owned by Chesapeake Energy Corp., experienced an equipment
failure Tuesday, sending chemical-laced water over the drilling site in
Bradford County, Pa. and into nearby waterways, including Towanda Creek,
which feeds into the Susquehanna River.

“There have been no injuries and there continues to be no danger to
the public,” Brian Grove, senior director for corporate development at
Chesapeake, said in a statement.

The company stopped all operations in the state and said Thursday that it had successfully sealed the leaking gas well.

The accident comes one year after an explosion sunk the Deepwater
Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in 11 deaths and the
worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history, and at a time when hydraulic
fracturing, or “fracking,” is coming under increased scrutiny from state
and federal officials.

The technique, used to release vast reserves of natural gas buried
underground, involves massive amounts of water, sand and chemicals
injected at high pressures to fracture rock and release the stored gas.

A report released by Democratic members of Congress last week said
that more than 650 of the chemicals used in fracking were carcinogens.

In the fracking process, anywhere from 10 to 40 percent of the water
injected into the well returns to the surface carrying drilling
chemicals, high levels of salts and sometimes naturally occurring
radioactive material. The state of Pennsylvania has allowed drillers to
discharge much of the waste through sewage treatment plants into
rivers, The New York Times reports.

An investigation by the Times found that more than 1.3 billion
gallons of wastewater was produced by Pennsylvania wells over the past
three years. But treatment plants to which the wastewater was sent
weren’t equipped to remove many of the toxic materials contained in the
drilling waste.

Environmental group American Rivers has called on Congress to push
for the restoration of the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to
regulate hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act, removed
in a 2005 energy bill referred to as the “Halliburton loophole.”

“In case last year’s BP oil spill wasn’t enough of a wake-up call,
now we have another disaster, this time in Pennsylvania. The American
people have had it with the industry’s false assurances,” said Andrew
Fahlund, senior vice president for conservation at American Rivers.

Pennsylvania’s massive Marcellus Shale reserve is believed to hold
enough gas to supply the country’s energy needs for heat and
electricity, at current consumption rates, for more than 15 years. Some
3,300 Marcellus gas-well permits were issued to drilling companies last
year, compared to 117 in 2007.

Read original article and watch video

Share

New York Times: Fracking Chemicals Were Injected Into Wells, Report Says

Share

From the New York Times – April 16, 2011

by Ian Urbina

WASHINGTON — Oil and gas companies injected hundreds of millions of
gallons of hazardous or carcinogenic chemicals into wells in more than
13 states from 2005 to 2009, according to an investigation by
Congressional Democrats.

 The chemicals were used by companies during a drilling process known as
hydraulic fracturing, or hydrofracking, which involves the high-pressure
injection of a mixture of water, sand and chemical additives into rock
formations deep underground. The process, which is being used to tap
into large reserves of natural gas around the country, opens fissures in the rock to stimulate the release of oil and gas.

Hydrofracking has attracted increased scrutiny from lawmakers and
environmentalists in part because of fears that the chemicals used
during the process can contaminate underground sources of drinking
water.

“Questions about the safety of hydraulic fracturing persist, which are
compounded by the secrecy surrounding the chemicals used in hydraulic
fracturing fluids,” said the report, which was written by
Representatives Henry A. Waxman of California, Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts and Diana DeGette of Colorado.

The report, released late Saturday, also faulted companies for at times
“injecting fluids containing chemicals that they themselves cannot
identify.”

The inquiry over hydrofracking, which was initiated by the House Energy and Commerce Committee
when Mr. Waxman led it last year, also found that 14 of the nation’s
most active hydraulic fracturing companies used 866 million gallons of
hydraulic fracturing products — not including water. More than 650 of
these products contained chemicals that are known or possible human
carcinogens, regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, or are listed
as hazardous air pollutants, the report said.

A request for comment from the American Petroleum Institute about the report received no reply.

Matt Armstrong, an energy attorney from Bracewell & Giuliani that
represents several companies involved in natural gas drilling, faulted
the methodology of the congressional report released Saturday and an
earlier report by the same lawmakers.

“This report uses the same sleight of hand deployed in the last report
on diesel use — it compiles overall product volumes, not the volumes of
the hazardous chemicals contained within those products,” he said.
“This generates big numbers but provides no context for the use of these
chemicals over the many thousands of frac jobs that were conducted
within the timeframe of the report.”

Some ingredients mixed into the hydraulic fracturing fluids were common
and generally harmless, like salt and citric acid. Others were
unexpected, like instant coffee and walnut hulls, the report said. Many
ingredients were “extremely toxic,” including benzene, a known human
carcinogen, and lead.

Companies injected large amounts of other hazardous chemicals, including
11.4 million gallons of fluids containing at least one of the toxic or
carcinogenic B.T.E.X. chemicals — benzene, toluene, xylene and
ethylbenzene. The companies used the highest volume of fluids containing
one or more carcinogens in Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas.

The report comes two and a half months after an initial report by the
same three lawmakers that found that 32.2 millions of gallons of fluids
containing diesel, considered an especially hazardous pollutant because
it contains benzene, were injected into the ground during hydrofracking
by a dozen companies from 2005 to 2009, in possible violation of the
drinking water act.

A 2010 report by Environmental Working Group,
a research and advocacy organization, found that benzene levels in
other hydrofracking ingredients were as much as 93 times higher than
those found in diesel.

The use of these chemicals has been a source of concern to regulators
and environmentalists who worry that some of them could find their way
out of a well bore — because of above-ground spills, underground
failures of well casing or migration through layers of rock — and into
nearby sources of drinking water.

These contaminants also remain in the fluid that returns to the surface after a well is hydrofracked. A recent investigation
by The New York Times found high levels of contaminants, including
benzene and radioactive materials, in wastewater that is being sent to
treatment plants not designed to fully treat the waste before it is
discharged into rivers. At one plant in Pennsylvania, documents from the Environmental Protection Agency
revealed levels of benzene roughly 28 times the federal drinking water
standard in wastewater as it was discharged, after treatment, into the
Allegheny River in May 2008.

The E.P.A.
is conducting a national study on the drinking water risks associated
with hydrofracking, but assessing these risks has been made more
difficult by companies’ unwillingness to publicly disclose which
chemicals and in what concentrations they are used, according to
internal e-mails and draft notes of the study plan.

Some companies are moving toward more disclosure, and the industry will
soon start a public database of these chemicals. But the Congressional
report said that reporting to this database is strictly voluntary, that
disclosure will not include the chemical identity of products labeled as
proprietary, and that there is no way to determine if companies are
accurately reporting information for all wells. In Pennsylvania, the
lack of disclosure of drilling ingredients has also incited a heated
debate among E.P.A. lawyers about the threat and legality of treatment
plants accepting the wastewater and discharging it into rivers.       

Read original article

Share

New Cartoon: The Unforeseen Consequenses of Natural Gas Fracking

Share

Check out the latest from our cartoonist Gerry Hummel. Hydraulic Fracturing, or “fracking” – a relatively new method for extracting natural gas – involves shooting a mixture of highly pressurized water, sand, and unknown chemicals deep underground in order to crack open shale formations to release gas. The value of the resource in BC has been pegged at $750 Billion – and while we’re going gangbusters to develop our local industry, concentrated in northeast BC, other jurisdictions throughout the US and Canada are putting the brakes on fracking until we have a better grasp of its ecological and geological consequences, and how to better manage the enormous volumes of water currently being used in the process.

Share

Reuters: City of Buffalo Bans Hydraulic Fracturing

Share

Feb 8, 2011

(Reuters) – The
city of Buffalo banned the natural gas drilling technique of hydraulic
fracturing on Tuesday in a largely symbolic vote that fuels debate over
the potential harm to ground water from mining an abundant energy
source.

The city council voted 9-0 to
prohibit natural gas extraction including the process known as
“fracking” in which chemicals, sand and water are blasted deep into the
earth to fracture shale formations and allow gas to escape.

The ordinance also bans storing, transferring, treating or disposing fracking waste within the city.

No
such drilling projects had been planned in Buffalo, though city
officials were concerned that fracking waste water from nearby
operations was reaching the city sewer system.

Backers
of the measure hope it will help build pressure against fracking, which
environmentalists claim endangers ground water from leaking chemicals.

Pittsburgh, Penn., has enacted a similar ban.

Industry
supporters say fracking is proven safe and natural gas from sources can
provide a much-needed domestic energy source. For an index of shale gas
companies, double-click on.

The
Marcellus Shale formation underlies much of Pennsylvania and parts of
surrounding states including western New York. Geologists estimate it
could supply U.S. natural gas demand for 20 years or more.

The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is studying the impact of
fracking and on Tuesday submitted a draft of its study to the agency’s
Science Advisory Board for review.

Initial Findings from the study are expected to be made public by the end of 2012.

Read original article

Share

BBC Video & Report: Shale Gas Moratorium Urged in UK

Share

From the BBC.co.uk – Jan 16, 2011

by Roger Harrabin

The UK government should
put a moratorium on shale gas operations until the environmental
implications are fully understood, a report says.

The Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research report comes amid reports a firm has found reserves in Lancashire.

In the US, officials are investigating claims that shale gas drilling has polluted water supplies.

However, UK ministers have rejected a moratorium, saying that drilling for shale gas does not pose a threat.

“We are aware that there have been reports from US of issues
linked to some shale gas projects,” a spokesman for the Department of
Energy and Climate Change (Decc) told BBC News.

“However, we understand that these are only in a few cases
and that Cuadrilla (the firm testing for shale gas in Lancashire) has
made it clear that there is no likelihood of environmental damage and
that it is applying technical expertise and exercising the utmost care
as it takes drilling and testing forward.”

Watch video and read full article here

Share