Posts Tagged ‘ hydraulic fracturing ’

BP Spill, San Bruno Fire, Fracking…Time to Stop Blind Faith in Gas

September 12th, 2010. By AbiK

As I read the accounts of those living in the area affected by the San Bruno gas fire, one phrase keeps coming back to me: “I didn’t know…” While the specifics of each “I didn’t know” or “had I known” vary, they all stem from one thing—we—homeowners and residential gas consumers—don’t really know what the heck we’re sitting on top of when it comes to underground gas lines.

In an odd way, the BP oil spill has been our wake-call—albeit at a terrible price. But, thanks to BP, we now question how gas is obtained and distributed. Sure, the folks living in the heart of the Marcellus Shale region have long been sitting on pins and needles wondering what hydraulic fracking means to their water supply, for example, but that type of regional concern wouldn’t have gotten some of the more national press coverage it has recently received had it not been for BP.

Ditto the San Bruno gas fire. Sure, it would’ve made the headlines, but, as with other localized gas pipe explosions of years gone by, it would’ve been reported as a tragic explosion affecting a very small area in the scheme of things. There may have been a few localized investigative reports—but that would’ve been about it. Now, however, people are starting to question a few things about the US natural gas industry. Things like, just how safe is it? And things like, what happens to San Bruno in the aftermath of the gas line rupture—did any gas leak into the ground? are the remaining pipes in the area safe? what about those reports of a gas smell? and on and on…

I’ve posted about hydraulic fracturing—you can read more about that and the concerns folks have about it from upstate New York to West Virginia here on LawyersAndSettlements.com. It only took a few reports about livestock becoming sick from leaks coming out of nearby fracking operations to make me raise an eyebrow and join the anti-fracking side. Of course, the gas companies continue to tout its safety—and, I suppose when you look at aggregate numbers, it is relatively “safe”—but would you want your kids drinking water that potentially contained chemicals (or gas?) involved with the fracking process? Didn’t think so…

So, back to the “I didn’t know”.

A report the other day in the PressDemocrat.com talks about how we really don’t know Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: AGA, BP, fracking, hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic-fracturing-water-contamination-epa-fracking-hydrofracking, natural gas, San Bruno, San Bruno Gas Fire
Posted in Environment | 5 Comments »

With Focus on BP, Don’t Lose Sight of Fracking Issues

July 12th, 2010. By AbiK

I’m sure you’ve been hearing about the new oil well cap that’s—possibly—going on the BP well today in the Gulf. It’s been top news all weekend—that, and of course Spain and Lance Armstrong. But crawling around in the background has been a little news story that you most likely missed. About another fossil fuel: natural gas. About Fracking. And, about cattle.

Yes, cattle.

First, some background. I’ve been posting about hydraulic fracturing (aka “fracking“) in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania, New York and West Virginia and how not everyone is thrilled that they’re living on top of a veritable gold mine of natural gas. Most of those who oppose fracking are concerned about the possibility of contamination of underground sources of drinking water (usdw). The idea behind fracking is that once a well is drilled into reservoir rock, a mixture of water and high viscosity fluid additives (i.e., chemicals) is injected into the rock to force the rock to fracture. A propping agent, like sand, is then pumped into the fractures to keep them open. The fractures then allow the natural gas to flow more freely to the production well that can then bring the gas to the surface.

Sounds simple enough. But then, what about those fractures? The process Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: fracking, gas drilling, hydraulic fracking, hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic-fracturing-water-contamination-epa-fracking-hydrofracking, natural gas
Posted in Environment | No Comments »

BP Experience Should Have us Catching a Fracking Clue

June 21st, 2010. By AbiK

We’ve posted before about fracking—the hotly debated method of extracting natural gas from the ground, aka “hydraulic fracturing”. It’s a topic that shows up almost daily in newspapers of towns situated in the area of the Marcellus Shale—places in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and New York—where new sources of natural gas have been discovered. And it’s being debated because some folks aren’t completely convinced that there is no risk of contamination of underground drinking water sources.

So tuck that thought away for a moment and let’s just recap what’s dominated the news for close to two months now. That would be the BP Oil Spill.And that’s led to some reminiscing about the Exxon Valdez spill. And gee, everyone thought all that was safe, right? Who could’ve predicted any of this? Oh—of course, in hindsight you’ve got folks who say there were “issues” with the Deepwater Horizon and something was “bound to happen”—but clearly, those that voiced such concerns even three or six months ago were poo-pooed.

Fine, we’re a nation built on optimism. Capitalism itself could never thrive with a glass-is-half-empty world view. But, be that as it may, it’s always prudent to plan for the “what ifs”—what if, perchance, the proverbial glass Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: BP Oil Spill, fracking, hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic-fracturing-water-contamination-epa-fracking-hydrofracking
Posted in Emerging Issues, Environment | No Comments »

EPA Gets Fracking on Study

March 23rd, 2010. By AbiK

After growing concerns over the use of hydraulic fracturing to access natural gas, the EPA is now going to begin a “comprehensive research study” to investigate whatever the effects—potentially not good—the process may have on water quality and public health. According to the EPA’s press release (3/18/10), “There are concerns that hydraulic fracturing may impact ground water and surface water quality in ways that threaten human health and the environment.”

Hydraulic fracturing, aka “fracking”, has become a hotly debated extraction method in states like New York, Pennsylvania and West Virginia where there are shale formations—the Marcellus Formation stretches out through the Appalachian Basin. Over the last three years, the Marcellus Shale has become increasingly important as gas discoveries in the area point to a vastly undertapped energy source. Estimates put the amount of natural gas held within the Marcellus Formation at 168 trillion to 516 trillion cubic feet, which the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (dec.ny.gov/energy) puts into context by stating that NY state uses about 1.1 trillion cubic feet of  natural gas a year. That’s potentially a lot of years of gas supply…

To help put things in perspective further, according to an article in Business Week (3/10/10), shale gas currently accounts for 20 percent of the US gas supply—and is expected to jump to 50 percent of the supply by 2035.

But environmentalists—and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg—have been opposed to natural gas fracking. Bloomberg wants to ban drilling at the upstate New York Marcellus Shale area. Why? Two words: water supply.

So what exactly happens with hydraulic fracking?

According to the EPA site (epa.gov), first a well is drilled into reservoir rock that contains oil, natural gas, and water. Then, a fluid—usually water that contains “specialty high-viscosity fluid additives” —is injected under high pressure into the rock. Because of the immense pressure of the fluid being driven into the rock, the rock splits open further—i.e., it creates “fractures” (can’t help but have a flashback to Wile E. Coyote in free-fall off the side of a cliff resulting in “fractured” bedrock below).

Once the rock is fractured, a propping agent (such as sand) is pumped into the fractures to keep them from closing once the pumping pressure is released. The fractures allow the natural gas to move more freely to a production well so that it can be brought to the surface.

Sounds straightforward—and back in 2004, the EPA conducted a study to determine the potential for contamination of underground sources of drinking water (usdw) from the injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids by coalbed methane wells. At the time, the EPA concluded that the injection of fracturing fluids by coalbed methane wells posed little or no threat to underground drinking water sources.

According to the Business Week article, there haven’t been any documented cases of fluids injected into wells migrating from the wells into the groundwater. However…

Earlier this year, the PA Environmental Protection Dept. fined Talisman Energy, Inc. $3,500 for violations in 2009 that “included discharging drilling fluids into Sugar Creek in Troy Township.”

There are other concerns, too. In New York City, the water supply is the nation’s largest unfiltered system. According to Cas Holloway, NYC Environmental Protection Department commissioner, should the city lose a federal filtration waiver, it could cost between $10 – $20 billion to build a treatment plant.

The EPA is re-allocating $1.9 million for the peer-reviewed study for the full-year 2010 and is also requesting funds for full-year 2011 in the president’s budget proposal.

Tags: fracking, hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic-fracturing-water-contamination-epa-fracking-hydrofracking, Marcellus Shale, natural gas, New York, Pennsylvania
Posted in Environment | No Comments »