New Report Finds that Hydraulic Fracturing Itself Poses Little Risk to Groundwater
The University of Texas Energy Institute released a report on hydraulic fracturing yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The report concludes that there have been no confirmed cases of groundwater contamination caused by the hydraulic fracturing process, and that hydraulic fracturing itself poses little risk to groundwater. The report's conclusions include the following:
- allegations of groundwater contamination frequently result from the presence of methane that is found naturally in the groundwater in many places, and the presence of methane in those circumstances is unrelated to oil and gas activity
- there have been no documented cases of the hydraulic fracturing process itself causing groundwater contamination
- aspects of oil and gas activity other than hydraulic fracturing sometimes lead to contamination
- the aspects of oil and gas activity that sometimes cause contamination include poor well construction (including the casing and cementing of wells), surface spills, and blowouts
- the oil and gas regulations of most states were written before shale gas development became common, and many of those regulations could use updating, and
- improvements could be made in casing and cementing regulations.
Yesterday, Scott Anderson of the Environmental Defense Fund wrote a blog post that discussed the report. He began by acknowledging that the Environmental Defense Fund had been involved with shaping the Energy Institute's study.
The report’s conclusions are those of the authors, though Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) helped the University of Texas at Austin define its scope of work and reviewed drafts during the course of the project."
He also acknowledged that prior inquires also have failed to find any confirmed examples of groundwater contamination that was caused by fracturing: "As has been the case in other inquiries, the University of Texas study did not find any confirmed cases of drinking water contamination due to pathways created by hydraulic fracturing."
Mr. Anderson noted, however, that this does not mean that it is impossible for hydraulic fracturing to cause contamination. He also discussed the report's conclusions that aspects of oil and gas activity other than hydraulic fracturing sometimes cause contamination, that "gaps" exist in the oil and gas regulations of some states, and that the regulations in many states should be updated.
The Energy Institute's report is called "Fact-Based Regulation for Environmental Protection in Shale Gas Development."
Comments (1)
Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the endStan Scobie - February 18, 2012 1:27 PM
I have a few observations:
1. In the first 55 pages there is not one formal reference, despite a lot of factual and conceptual assertions. The reader is told that the details will be found further on - with no useful guidance as to just where.
2. The 414 pg copy I downloaded yesterday from the U.T. site is a draft, yet the general media buzz and the presentation on the U.T. website is that it is a "report" implying carefully honed and finished and complete.
3. The detailed section that I read very carefully, "Section 4 Environmental Impacts of Shale Gas Development" is labeled clearly "draft."
In a part I was particularly interested in about substance migration related to drilling and fracking, only two of the seven references I marked for follow up were listed in the reference section.
In an interesting instance the Boyer et al (2011) study of substance migration, published in Center for Rural Pennsylvania and subsequently withdrawn by the authors for further review, is cited without qualification as a fully fledged piece of science.
There are very many other errors, citations incompletely described, obsolete and/or incomplete sets or related and appropriate references, etc.
Overall, I was extremely disappointed in the quality of the work as a useful piece of "science" despite the tantalizng title: "Fact-Based Regulation for Environmental Protection...." It is just not ready for prime time.
Stanley R Scobie, Ph.D., Binghamton, NY