I admit to extreme prejudice concerning the multiple dangers of fracking.
What’s not to like about fracking? You could like the danger
to human health and all life forms. You could like the environmental threat to
water, air and soil. You could like the earthquakes. You could enjoy the cost in money and disruption to local
communities. Of the cost to the
states .You could like the media hype or the credit bubble. Or you could like the actual energy drain
because it has poor Energy Return on Energy Invested. So much to enjoy, so
little time.
For those who support fracking, oil sands and the northern
pipeline or for those who encourage investing in fracking, oil sands or the
northern pipeline, I have this suggestion.
Move your home next to a fracking well and put down your water well
along side. Or better yet move your
children there or better yet move your grandchildren there. Let the pipeline filled with toxic fluid
come along the boundaries of your land here in lovely Northern Minnesota. The same for the oil sand works in
Canada. Move your grandchildren up
there in the poisonous air and next to the polluted rivers and environmental
degradation.
EARTHJUSTICE
“Earthjustice was created by a small group of attorneys with
a passionate belief that the power of the law could be used to preserve the
environment. They helped establish the right of citizens to go to court to
enforce environmental laws when the government couldn’t or wouldn’t.”– Trip Van
Noppen, Earthjustice President
The
United States is in the midst of an unprecedented oil and gas drilling
rush—brought on by a controversial technology called hydraulic fracturing, or
fracking. Along with this fracking-enabled rush have come troubling reports of
poisoned drinking water, polluted air, mysterious animal deaths, industrial
disasters and explosions. We call them Fraccidents.
I am not a member of earthjustice but like what they are doing. Check out there website.
Here are more sources of information about the dangers of fracking.
HEALTH
“SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF SHALE AND TIGHT GAS DEVELOPMENT
(FRACKING) REVEALS PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS AND DATA GAPS” by Seth B. Shonkoff,
PhD, MPH
Physicians Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy
There is evidence that shale and tight gas development is
associated with pollution that is known to increase public health risks.
Additionally, there is much more that we don't know. Scientific investigations
are hampered by limitations on monitoring, reporting, and disclosure
requirements of compounds and processes associated with oil and gas
development.
Third Report in Three Days Shows Scale of Fracking Perils
'We can conclude that this process has not been shown to be
safe'
Jacob Chamberlain
Shale gas development uses organic and inorganic chemicals
known to be health damaging in fracturing fluids (Aminto and Olson 2012; US HOR
2011). These fluids can move through the environment and come into contact with
humans in a number of ways, including surface leaks, spills, releases from
holding tanks, poor well construction, leaks and accidents during
transportation of fluids, flowback and produced water to and from the well pad,
and in the form of run-off during blowouts, storms, and flooding events (Rozell
and Reaven 2012 - http://commcgi.cc.stonybrook.edu/am2/publish/General_University_News_2/Researchers_Find_Substantial_Water_Pollution_Risks_From_Fracking_To_Recover_Natural_Gas.shtml).
(see more)
Geology and Human Health
Potential Health and Environmental Effects of Hydrofracking in
the Williston Basin, Montana by Joe Hoffman
FRACKING
CONTAMINATION
Water Pollution:
Chemical additives are used in the drilling mud, slurries and
fluids required for the fracking process. Each well produces millions of gallons
of toxic fluid containing not only the added chemicals, but other naturally occurring
radioactive material, liquid hydrocarbons, brine water and heavy metals.
Groundwater Contamination May End the Gas-Fracking Boom
Well water in Pennsylvania homes within a mile of fracking
sites is found to be high in methane.
Aug 20, 2013 |By Mark Fischetti
In Pennsylvania, the closer you live to a well used to
hydraulically fracture underground shale for natural gas, the more likely it is
that your drinking water is contaminated with methane. This conclusion, in a
study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA in
July, is a first step in determining whether fracking in the Marcellus Shale
underlying much of Pennsylvania is responsible for tainted drinking water in
that region.
http://www.salon.com/2014/01/06/water_pollution_from_fracking_confirmed_in_multiple_states/
(see more)
Monday, Jan 6, 2014 08:18 AM CST
Water pollution from fracking confirmed in multiple states
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and Texas have received
hundreds of complaints, an AP investigation revealed
Lindsay Abrams
It is the unknown future contaminations of water resulting
from fracking that cannot be answered but ABSOLUTELY must be considered. It is not just the contamination of
water today or tomorrow but in a decade or even decades down the line. These unintended consequences are
unknown but critical. It cannot be
“we need the energy”. It cannot be
“make the money and run”. You can
live without oil. You cannot eat
or drink dollar bills. Try living
without drinkable water.
Air Pollution:
Some of the pollutants released by drilling include: benzene,
toluene, xylene and ethyl benzene (BTEX), particulate matter and dust, ground level
ozone, or smog, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde and metals contained
in diesel fuel combustion---with exposure to these pollutants known to cause short-term
illness, cancer, organ damage, nervous system disorders and birth defects or even
death .
Fracking Boom Spews Toxic Air Emissions on Texas Residents
by Lisa Song, Jim Morris and David Hasemyer
Eight-month investigation reveals that the Texas State Legislature
is more intent on protecting the industry than protecting residents' health.
Earthquakes:
Earthquakes constitute another problem associated with deep-well
oil and gas drilling. Scientists refer to the earthquakes caused by the injection
of fracking wastewater underground as "induced seismic events." Although
most of the earthquakes are small in magnitude (the strongest measured 5.2), their
relationship with the storage of millions of gallons of toxic wastewater does little
to ease the fears over fossil energy's long list of externalities.
“Wastewater disposal may trigger quakes at greater distance
than previously thought”
Date: May 1, 2014
Source: Seismological Society of America
Summary:
Oil and gas development activities, including underground
disposal of wastewater and hydraulic fracturing, may induce earthquakes by
changing the state of stress on existing faults to the point of failure.
Earthquakes from wastewater disposal may be triggered at tens of kilometers
from the wellbore, which is a greater range than previously thought, according
to research.
And adding injury to injury:
Published on Monday, May 12, 2014 by OnEarth
Magazine
Why the U.S. Plastics Industry Loves the Fracking Boom
Looking for another reason to worry about fracking? We're
going to bubble-wrap the entire planet with the overabundance of plastic it
produces.
by Susan
Freinkel
ERoEI
“Oil Shale's Energy Return on Energy Investment”
In simple terms, EROI is a commonly-used calculation of how
much energy is needed to locate, extract, and refine an output of energy - in
this case, oil from shale. In more technical terms, EROI is the ratio of the
energy delivered by a process to the energy used directly and indirectly for
that process. An EROI of 1:1 means no energy is gained from producing the
energy resource.
The EROEI for shale oil is ~3.
The Energy Return on Investment threshold
Oil shale is
not a viable fuel source, study says
“The most comprehensive study indicates an EROI of 2 to
produce oil shale, meaning that 2 units of energy are produced for every unit
consumed. This is very low compared to the EROI for conventional crude oil of
around 20. Including the refining step, the EROI of producing gasoline from
crude oil is around 4.7 compared to 1.4 for producing liquid fuel from oil
shale.
Other studies have calculated an oil shale EROI of up to 8.
However, this is largely because they only represent direct energy costs, such
as energy to heat the shale, and under-represent indirect energy costs, such as
energy used to produce drilling rigs and transportation. Studies that do
include indirect energy inputs also vary in the methods used.”
Cleveland, C.J.
& O’Connor, P. A. (2011). Energy Return on Investment (EROI) of oil shale.
Sustainability. 3; 2307-2322. (see more)
Also - European Commission DG ENV News Alert Issue 276 8
March 2012
This was posted at this essay to clarify. I much appreciate his insight and knowledge:
This was posted at this essay to clarify. I much appreciate his insight and knowledge:
Steve CarrowMay 30, 2014
John: Thanks for the effort to collect this information all in one spot. Keep up the fight, and keep trying to get people pissed. I do want to point out one unfortunate terminology issue that might confuse your readers. Shale oill is resultant from fracking shale formations, and indeed has poor EROEI, but oil shale, which is actually a shale/kerogen matrix, is even worse, and is not fracked, but either mined or heat in situ to cook out the oil like kerogen for refining. One of your links above is referencing oil shale. It is in different locations than shale oil, but has an even worse environmental footprint. Curse whoever called it oil shale, but we are stuck with the confusing terms now. I reluctantly admit I was involved with the 1970s-80s effort to extract and produce this stuff. Now that oil is up at $100, the majors are sniffing around western Colorado again, Many locals still remember the prior boom bust disaster, but the siren song or royalties are swaying local officials, so not sure what might happen this time around. I will most certainly not be a part of it.
OIL SHALE WELL DECLINE
The average flow from a shale gas well drops by about 50
percent to 75 percent in the first year, and up to 78 percent for oil, said
Pete Stark, senior research director at IHS Inc.
"The decline rate is a potential show stopper after a
while," said Stark, a geologist with almost six decades in the oil patch.
"You just can’t keep up with it."
In 2008, the Bakken in North Dakota only had 479 producing
well; however, at last count in September when the Bakken was producing 867,123
barrels of oil a day, it took 6,447 wells to do so. Thus, the energy
companies drilling and producing oil in the Bakken have to keep increasing
wells each month (and year) to offset the huge 63,000 bd decline.
As with all oil fields, there are only so many sweet spots
and areas to drill. The 63,000 bd decline rate at the Bakken only has one
way to go — and that’s higher. If the present trend continues
(highly likely) then we are going to see a daily decline rate of 75-85,000
barrels a day by the end of 2014.
Thus, the shale oil players are going to have to make those
drilling hamsters work even harder as they will need to increase more wells
each month just to grow production. At some point in time (sooner rather
than later), the daily decline rate will reach a figure that these companies
will be unable to offset.
ECONOMICS
LOCAL EFFECT
Local Costs of Fracking
The impact of natural gas extraction and fracking on state
and local roadways
(Andrew
Maykuth, Philadelphia Inquirer)
As of March 2014 there were approximately 1.1 million
oil and gas wells in the United States, a direct consequence of
technological advances that have increased domestic energy production to levels
unseen since
the 1970s. Much of the growth has been in natural gas obtained
through hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” which involves injecting immense
quantities of water and chemicals into the ground to fracture the rock and
release deposits that would otherwise be inaccessible.
THE BIG QUESTION
“Who Pays the Costs of Fracking?”
by: Tony Dutzik, Benjamin Davis and Tom Van Heeke
Frontier Group 2013
John Rumpler
Environment America Research & Policy Center
Weak Bonding Rules for Oil and Gas Drilling Leave the Public
at Risk
Fracking” operations pose a staggering array of threats to
our environment and health – contaminating drinking water, harming the health
of nearby residents, marring forests and landscapes, and contributing to global
warming. Many of thesedamages from drilling have significant “dollars and
cents” costs.
THE HYPE
Not a new Saudi Arabia. Ghawar was discovered in 1948, put
on stream in 1951 and has been producing ever since.
http://www.theenergylibrary.com/node/13221
(see more)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghawar_Field
(see more)
The shale phenomenon: fabulous miracle with a fatal flaw
Randy Udall, Guest blogger / February 22, 2013
Shale gas and tight oil are giving the US its biggest, most
rapid boost in energy production in history. But it will probably prove
fleeting.
But when you look more closely, comparing North Dakota with
Kuwait is ludicrous. Kuwait claims about 100 billion barrels of reserves; North
Dakota may have 10 billion, if that. An average Kuwaiti well produces 1,600
barrels a day, 10 times the output of a typical Dakota well. Kuwait has
produced 2 million barrels a day for decades, and will do so for decades to
come. North Dakota will be lucky to hit 1 million barrels a day by 2017, before
its production tapers off.
“Why America's Shale Oil Boom Could End Sooner Than You
Think”
By Christopher Helman
“America’s oil producers are nervous. .
. . . It’s bad enough to be spending more
and more to generate ever less growth. It’s worse when that growth doesn’t even
translate into profits.”
“Are Shales a Bubble?” by Deborah
Lawrence
“Hype works. Particularly when monetary and economic
benefits are promised. Hype has been the primary tool used by the oil and gas
industry with regard to shales and it has worked brilliantly. There is just one
problem. When considering shale economic viability, hype was the only aspect
that actually existed.”
“Interestingly, the past year has brought massive write
downs in shale assets and a frenzy of asset sales. Some companies, such as
Shell, admitted that their divestment of North American shale properties was to
stem the financial hemorrhaging and to distance themselves from disappointing
well results. Others, like Exxon Mobil, claim to still be true believers in
spite of their losses.”
“Shale Drillers Feast on Junk Debt to Stay on Treadmill”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-30/shale-drillers-feast-on-junk-debt-to-say-on-treadmill.html (see more)
And the irony.
We, each of us, continue to use oil and natural gas to
maintain our ways of life which supports these extreme assaults.
Fracking and pipelines are supported by :
- higher
oil prices because the techniques of fracking and other extreme measures
and location take more and more energy to get less and less oil.
- fracking
wells deplete very quickly so that drilling must keep pace with depletion.
- our
willingness to use and waste massive amounts of water.
- our
willingness to disregard our children and grandchildren’s future by the
real possibility that we are making their environment unlivable.
- how
addicted we are to maintaining our high horse-powered lifestyle -
snowmobiles, wave runners, leaf blowers and all the sundry gasoline tools
and toys.
Standing separate and almost always hidden by
self-righteousness is being unwilling because of belief - religious or
otherwise - to face population growth as underlying most if not all the major
problems humanity is facing.
It is important to be irate and act like each of us is not
the problem. Or ignore the dilemma
and the irony as the first form of denial.
As I have written elsewhere: For those who support fracking,
oil sands and the northern pipeline or for those who encourage investing in
fracking, oil sands or the northern pipeline, I have this suggestion. Move your home next to a fracking well
and put down your water well along side.
Or better yet move your children there or better yet move your grandchildren
there. Let the pipeline
filled with toxic fluid come along the boundaries of your land here in lovely
Northern Minnesota. The same for
the oil sand works in Canada.
Move your grandchildren up there in the poisonous air and next to the
polluted rivers and environmental degradation.
It is sad how trapped we are.
