By: Justo Garcia
At the end of February, crude oil climbed past $109 per barrel. This renewed exchanges between the Obama Administration and many Republicans who are critical of his energy policies. Most of the attacks tied the rising cost of fuel to the President’s decision in January to reject an application by TransCanada Corporation to construct the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline. Supporters of the Pipeline, which would transport crude oil extracted from fields in Northern Canada to refineries along the Gulf Coast, believe that it is crucial to creating more American jobs and lessening American dependence on foreign oil. Yet the focus on the Pipeline issue largely overshadowed growing tensions between the Administration and many leaders in the energy industry over a rapidly expanding technology known as hydraulic fracturing.
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” is a method of drilling for oil and natural gas that causes the release of deposits found in dense shale rock formations. The practice itself has been around for 60 years, but expanded rapidly with relatively recent technology that allowed oil companies to evaluate the production potential of well formations at depths deeper than ever before. Fracking involves dispersing a mix of sand, water, and chemical fluid at high velocities into dense rock formations to increase permeability and enable the extraction of oil and natural gas from well bores that would otherwise be impossible or highly uneconomical. Some of the more recognizable formations where fracking takes place include the Marcellus shale formation in New York and Pennsylvania and the Eagle Ford shale in Texas.
Fracking is a highly complex process with many potential costs and benefits. In February 2012, domestic energy production reached its highest level in eight years. Many energy industry analysts credit fracking for this trend. But environmental groups remain suspicious of fracking as a source of groundwater contamination. For its part, the Obama Administration has remained attentive to both sides. The President, in his January 24 State of the Union Address, recognized the potential benefits of fracking but reiterated the need to safely develop America’s petroleum resources.
Nonetheless, many energy industry leaders remain critical of what they see as an overzealous scrutiny of fracking. Signs of this rift became clearer at the North American Prospect Expo’s 2012 Winter Conference, held on February 5 in Houston, TX. It was there that industry leaders voiced their belief that the Administration has done more to restrict the domestic production of oil and gas through delays in permitting and restrictive regulations. From their perspective, the current boom in the domestic production of oil and gas is occurring in spite of the Administration.
Perhaps the factor most responsible for this rift is the perceived damage done by recent EPA studies linking fracking to contaminated water supplies. One of the more damaging reports came last December when the EPA released the results of a three-year analysis of private drinking water sources near Pavillion, Wyoming. The Pavillion report commenced after residents reported objectionable tastes and odors in their drinking water. These complaints coincided with an increase in the number of natural gas wells drilled in the area by Encana Corporation between 2004 and 2007. The report ultimately found that ground water sources in the area did in fact contain synthetic chemicals, including glycols and alcohols that are commonly associated with fracking. Still, the EPA report was careful to acknowledge its limitations as specific to Pavillion, where fracking takes place in closer proximity to drinking water aquifers than most parts of the country.
The ripples from the Pavillion report could be felt immediately in industry-friendly regions. While efforts to expose the dangers of fracking were already becoming commonplace, the Pavillion report brought the industry into a new era of heightened sensitivity to public opinion. The energy industry appeared somewhat willing to acknowledge some concern about fracking following a report released by the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin which emphasized the environmental risks posed by surface spills of fracking chemicals. But many still remained committed to the position that such risks are shared by all oil and gas drilling operations and are not specific to fracking. Overall, the net result of the Pavillion report was to cast aside assurances of the infallibility of fracking, however plausible. Texas Railroad Commission Chairman, Elizabeth Ames Jones’ response to the Pavillion report stated, ”[T]he geology of Texas is different…[fracking] does not go on close to the surface here and it would be impossible to migrate up miles below the earth to a water table.” The door is now open for greater federal scrutiny and regulation of fracking, territory that the industry prefers to stay in the hands of state regulatory agencies.
By last December, conservation commissions in Texas and Colorado were already in the process of adopting rules requiring disclosure of chemicals in fracking fluids. The Texas rule, which went into effect this month, requires fracking operators to disclose their chemical ingredients on the public website FracFocus.org. The Texas rule also requires disclosure of water volumes used in fracking wells, also a growing concern in water-scarce states in the West. Most notably, the Texas Railroad Commission, the state’s oil and gas regulatory agency, touted the new rules as further proof that fracking is safe. Chairman Jones, again, said “Once again the Railroad Commission is taking a lead in helping the public understand the safety of hydraulic fracturing with this rule’s adoption…Texans will know more about what is going in the ground for energy production than about the ingredients that go into their sodas.”
Soon after the Texas and Colorado rules went into effect, the Administration showed signs that it would be implementing its own rules to regulate fracking. Media sources leaked a draft of proposed Department of Interior rules. Similar to the rules implemented by Texas and Colorado, the proposed Federal rules would require companies to disclose elements of fracking fluid in addition to the volumes being used. The proposed rules also contain exemptions for companies if such disclosure would implicate state or federal regulations protecting information deemed to be trade secrets. Praised by environmentalists as a good start, the proposed rules were painted by many in the energy industry as redundant and confusing because of their similarity to state laws already in place.
With the steep rise in the price of gas showing no signs of slowing down, domestic energy production will very likely be a key issue in the 2012 Presidential Election. It is undeniable that the domestic production of oil and gas is at an eight-year high largely because of fracking. But many questions remain unanswered about its costs and benefits. The difficulty for President Obama lies in countering arguments from the energy industry that the current rise in domestic production is happening in spite of his policies while also ensuring his environmentalist supporters that he is doing all that he can to ensure that the nation’s oil and gas resources are safely developed.
Sources:
- http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/mdc_commodities.html?mg=inert-wsj
- http://legislationandpolicybriefblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/pipeline-progress-stalled-by-inspector.html
- http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-01-18/obama-rejects-keystone-pipeline/52655762/1
- http://energy.utexas.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=150:how-and-why-republicans-killed-the-keystone-pipeline&catid=32:editorials&Itemid=47
- http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/23/us-usa-keystone-pipeline-idUSTRE7BM1A620111223
- http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/23/opinion/hoeven-keystone-pipeline-defense/index.html
- http://energy.utexas.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50&Itemid=160
- http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june12/gasprices_02-21.html
- http://www.chron.com/business/article/Oil-and-gas-leaders-slam-Obama-3354377.php
- http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/
- http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/EPA_ReportOnPavillion_Dec-8-2011.pdf
- http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2011/12/09/questions-emerge-on-epas-wyoming-fracking-study/
- http://www.mysanantonio.com/business/article/EPA-links-hydraulic-fracturing-with-pollution-2390112.php
- http://www.tmdailypost.com/article/energy/fracking-polluting-groundwater
- http://www.texastribune.org/texas-environmental-news/water-supply/fracking-disclosure-texas-includes-water-volumes/
- http://fracfocus.org/node/327
- http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/pressreleases/2011/121311.php
- http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/assets/2012-02/FrackingDisclosureLawsStatesandBLM_INSIDECLIMATENEWS.pdf
- http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-25/obama-backs-fracking-to-create-600-000-jobs-vows-safe-drilling.html
- http://blog.chron.com/lorensteffy/2012/02/how-new-fracking-dislosure-laws-stack-up/
- http://fuelfix.com/blog/2012/02/06/industry-attacks-leaked-draft-of-fracking-fluid-rule/
- http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/energy/article/Fracking-passes-one-test-by-UT-2259505.php
- http://fuelfix.com/blog/2012/02/16/ut-study-fracturing-itself-not-connected-to-water-pollution/
- http://www.energyindepth.org/ut-study-no-evidence-of-groundwater-contamination-from-hf/
I reckon something really interesting about your site so I saved to my bookmarks .
Cement CAN and does break. And these royalties that’ll make these peolpe rich aren’t as large as you think. Think of it like being paid less than a teacher’s salary; otherwise they’d up and move to somewhere with clean water. Unfortunately, most of these peolpe are very poor, so leasing their land seems like a great idea they don’t know about the fresh water they’ll have to bring in, the increase in doctors fees, etc.That’s all the space I got, but in short Fracking bad.
Wow, this is in every rsecpet what I needed to know.
I bear in mind watching the Twitter town hall meeting Obama held. I recall him laughing in the question and passing it over, and I thought to myself “Great, we’ve a further spineless leader in office.” No leader can take among the highest rated questions and act as although it does not deserve an answer. How extended till we have someone with all the common sense and courage to stand against the stigma the government has designed? History is going to appear back on all of this and scratch its head. “Why did it take them so extended to figure out prohibition fails? They had currently learned that lesson the moment.”
I just couldn’t depart your web site before suggesting that I actually enjoyed the usual information an individual supply in your visitors? Is going to be back ceaselessly to investigate cross-check new posts.
Really interesting info !Perfect just what I was looking for!
I found what I used to be searching for. excellent write-up, thank you
It’s actually a great and helpful piece of information. I am glad that you shared this helpful information with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.
I’ve been browsing on-line more than 3 hours lately, yet I by no means found any interesting article like yours. It’s pretty value sufficient for me. In my opinion, if all site owners and bloggers made good content material as you probably did, the web might be a lot more useful than ever before. “When the heart speaks, the mind finds it indecent to object.” by Milan Kundera.
I simply want to mention I’m beginner to blogging and site-building and certainly savored you’re web-site. More than likely I’m planning to bookmark your blog post . You surely have wonderful article content. Appreciate it for sharing with us your webpage.
Without hesitation I say, this page has a lot better content than the average I come across. I greatly had fun reading everything you shared, and I will surely bring into my life your knowledge. Thanks.
I do believe all the ideas you’ve presented on your post. They are really convincing and can certainly work. Nonetheless, the posts are too quick for newbies. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post.
This site won’t exhibit appropriately about my iphone4 you may wanna try and repair which
Very interesting subject, thanks for putting up.
I also live in PA and know full well how bad we already are. Add in natuarl gas drilling and then we screw ourselves even more.Simply put, it’s too much of a risk. If one thing goes wrong -just one- and anyone within a five mile radius is gonna feel that effect; whether it be pollution in the air, the water or the occasional explosion.And while our water ain’t the cleanest in the world I can still drink from the tap and not worry about dying in the next two weeks.
Such an impressive answer! You’ve betean us all with that!
You people rellay need to get a clue fracking wells has been going on in this country for over 10 years already. Only now people want to blame their poor water supply on a gas company that will make them rich over night from royalties. Also please explain to me how fracking is getting into water supplys when they are drilling 7,000ft deep, and most water wells are 300ft, and the top 300ft the companies cement the well so not even the surrounding water can infiltrate the well.
Alkaaazam-information found, problem solved, thanks!
I hear that people will work from home when no logner able to drive gas cars. Doing what work? Eating what food? The only way they could possibly survive is if the governments also turn into large scale free food distributors. Still, a large portion of human beings will have to turn to hereto unknown ways of occupying their time. The largest welfare project in the history of man will have begun. We need to get a clear view on our future and take steps now.
I love reading these articles bcaeuse they’re short but informative.
I’m asking you what YOU are tkialng about don’t be a disingenuous intellectually dishonest dipsquat.It’s obvious since you didn’t really say anything, that it seems I know more about this than you so maybe you should actually say something besides vague nonsense. And keep your own acting and faux indignation to somewhere else.And as for your blithering non sequiturs: Just how are we activists lining his pocket? And just what does that have to do with his activism?
Pennsylvania is fracking contury! Well, we pale in comparison to Texas volume-wise, but PA is the fastest growing fracking operation in the contury I think. There are a lot of fracking talks at CMU. I should watch that movie. The impression I have of shale gas is that developers are moving too quickly for government to regulate safety and environmental issues, but state government in PA is getting such a boost in commerce that its sort of in their interest to encourage the fast growth. I saw a talk from Tom Ridge in the fall just on shale gas and he is all for it but there were lots of people with different (and vocal) opinions in the room.
Our guv isn’t going to like that one bit. Let me guess, he’ll join a multi-GOP led-state lawsuit cagrhing the federal gov’t doesn’t have any constitutional right to tell the states what they can or can’t do with their own natural resources.
Actually Mark, Canadian governments ARE susibdising alternative energy:- Canada gives a Fast write-off of depreciation for Renewable Energy installations, which is faster than that given to the fossil-fuel industry. – Canada gives large grants to research new Sustainable Development technologies. – Canada has ecoENERGY grants to retrofit Solar Hot Water and various energy-saving equipment on homes. – Canada & Ontario have grants for people to retrofit vehicles to burn natural gas, as well as gasoline (it saved me $1000/yr for 20 years! but most people didn’t install it, or tore it out of re-sale vehicles. Why?). – Alberta is susibdising Carbon Capture research & development, including pumping CO2 into old oil wells, which helps to increase production so that we can keep driving. – Ontario and Que9bec are both susibdising development of electric cars, which will create huge problems for finding future pollution-free sources of electricity. – Ontario has created the Green Energy Act [GEA] to give much higher payments for people to install Solar and Wind generators (currently $.802 and $.135 per kiloWatt hour of electricity versus the current Average of $.08/kWhr). This higher rate is given in exchange for Ontario not needing to borrow to install the generators (the Stranded Debt on our hydro bills still pays for Ontario Hydro’s past construction of Nuclear plants), and to encourage renewable energy companies to locate in Ontario.However, the GEA results in all of us paying higher hydro rates, making it harder for Ontarians to compete with our largest trading partner (USA), and causing more unemployment as corporations move away to compete. (I’ve already heard of a Northern Ontario mine that ships its ore to Tennessee for smelting & refining because Ontario’s hydro rates are too high.)- Ontario has NOT taken the much cheaper method of properly filtering coal smoke to completely clean it, and is instead abandoning coal-fired electricity in favour of natural-gas plants, which means cleaner air, but more ground and water pollution from fracking. Why? – various municipalities across Canada subsidise projects to reduce or produce energy (Welland, Port Colborne & Niagara Falls’ LED streetlighting; Edmonton’s revolving green fund; solar & wind turbines, etc.)