Colorado oil and gas industry sues to kill Longmont fracking ban

Font ResizeEnvironmentBy Bruce Finley
The Denver Postdenverpost.comPosted: 12/17/2012 07:18:11 PM MSTDecember 18, 2012 2:19 AM GMTUpdated: 12/17/2012 07:18:12 PM MST

  The oil and gas industry on Monday hit Longmont with a lawsuit to kill voters' recent ban on fracking within city limits.

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association contends the ban is illegal because it denies mineral owners the right to develop their property and blocks operations that state laws allow.

COGA has asked Weld County district court to invalidate the resolution passed by Longmont voters.

"We recognize and understand that the citizens of Longmont are concerned about the safety of their environment," COGA president Tisha Schuller said in a written statement.

"We hope that the lawsuit can be quickly resolved," Schuller continued, so that industry and the city can cooperate "to address those concerns in a way that does not illegally preclude the safe and responsible development of oil and gas reserves."

Longmont leaders vowed to fight back.

"We will vigorously defend our charter and the will of the people," City Council woman Katie Witt said.

The voters on Nov. 6. changed the city charter to prohibit fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, and the storage of fracking waste in the city. Energy companies frack by blasting millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals deep underground to loosen oil and gas held in rock.

Colorado residents elsewhere along the Front Range also are pushing to ban oil and gas operations inside municipal limits. Local governments face intensifying pressures as drilling expands close to communities. They've tried to respond to constituents by toughening health and safety regulations that could withstand legal challenges.

However, when Longmont's council passed tougher regulations this year, Gov. John Hickenlooper directed state attorneys to sue the city, challenging local authority.

State lawmakers have established the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to simultaneously regulate and promote development of oil and gas resources. COGA's lawsuit aims to set a precedent.

Hickenlooper on Dec. 6 said the state will not sue Longmont again over the action of voters but that it will support any lawsuit by companies. On Monday, neither the governor's office nor state natural resources officials responded to queries.

Industry officials say the oil and gas under Longmont is worth $500 million.

"A ban on oil and gas development ignores our interdependence with oil and gas," Schuller said. That means "products we use, including electricity production, home heating, cooking and hot water, movement of goods and services, and our essential transportation needs."

Bruce Finley: 303-954-1700, twitter.com/finleybruce or bfinley

View the Original article

New York Fracking rules: taking public comments on revised regulators Gas Drilling regulations

Get Green alerts: Sign Up follow: Video, AP, Fracking, Fracking, Gas drilling, Fracking, public comments New York, Fracking New York Ny, Ny Gas Drilling Fracking rules, Fracking, Ny news_entries # ad_sharebox_260x60 hydraulic break, Green news # img

View the Original article

Will Logistics Solutions Software Help Fracking Go Worldwide?

Oil Field Trucking Logistics Software Benefits Many In O&GOilfield Truck Dispatch Software: The Lesson of the Guar BeanOilfield Logistics Solutions, More Than Just SoftwareOilfield Trucking Logistics Software: Service Is the Focus!Oil Field Logistics Software, Tracking Your Assets!Oilfield Logistics Software: Ramping Up Efficiency!Browse by Tagasset locating (1) asset tracking software (2) crude oil dispatching software (1) crude oil haulers (1) crude oil hauling (2) crude oil marketing companies (1) crude oil trucking software (3) Crude truck fleet system (7) dispatch software (1) dispatch software for trucking (22) dispatch software trucking (4) dispatch trucking (3) dispatching software (12) easy oil field truck dispatching (1) easy to learn truck dispatching software (1) efficient truck dispatch software (12) EOBR (1) fleet dispatch software (4) fleet dispatching software (14) fleet management (2) fleet management efficiency (1) fleet management software (13) fleet management software oil industry (1) fleet management solutions (3) fleet managment software (1) frac pad logistics (2) frac pads (1) frac sand (1) Frac Sand Hauling (6) frac sand truck dispatching software (4) Frac Sand Truckers (2) frac sand trucking (1) frac sand trucking software (1) frac tank asset tracking (3) frac tank location (1) frac tank tracking (1) free truck dispatch software (12) logistics solutions software (21) OFS (2) OFS fleet dispatching software (2) OFS software (2) OFS trucking dispatch software (2) OFS trucking software (3) OFS well drilling logistics (1) oil and gas dispatch software (2) oil and gas fleet management software (2) oil and gas trucking (2) oil and gas trucking software (1) oil company logistics (11) oil company logistics software (2) Oil field asset tracking software (2) oil field dispatching software (1) oil field fleet management software (3) oil field freight software (5) oil field logistics (8) oil field services trucking software (4) oil field software (15) oil field software for a trucking business (1) Oil field truck dispatching (3) oil field truck dispatching software (2) oil field truck management software (2) oil field trucking (2) oil field trucking dispatch software (1) oil field trucking dispatch systems (3) oil field trucking management (3) oil field trucking software (26) Oil field well drillers (1) oil field well drilling (1) Oil industry (2) oil industry fleet management software (1) oilfield asset tracking software (1) Oilfield fleet dispatch software (1) oilfield fleet management software (10) oilfield frac tank locating device (1) oilfield freight software (12) oilfield logistics software (5) oilfield logistics solutions (1) oilfield services trucking software solutions (1) oilfield software (1) oilfield software for a trucking business (12) oilfield software solutions (2) oilfield truck dispatch software (1) oilfield truck dispatching (1) Oilfield truck dispatching software (1) oilfield trucking (1) oilfield trucking dispatch software (10) oilfield trucking dispatching software (12) oilfield trucking logistics software (1) oilfield trucking software (11) petroleum dispatch software (2) proppants (1) reducing OFS trucking costs (1) remote asset tracking (4) remote asset tracking software (1) remote truck trailer tracking (1) run ticket reconciliation (2) run ticket reconciliation software (1) satellite tracking of assets (3) satellite tracking oil and gas assets (2) software for oil and gas field trucking and servic (1) software for oil companies (2) software for oil field trucking industry (1) software for transportation companies (31) software for trucking business (14) software for trucking companies (22) software for trucking industry (12) software trucking (4) tracking frac tanks (1) truck dispatch software (8) Truck Dispatch Solutions (1) truck dispatching (6) truck dispatching software (7) truck driving software (1) truck management software (2) truck service software (2) trucking dispatch programs (3) trucking dispatch software (25) trucking logistics software (32) trucking management softwares (28) trucking software (4) trucking software companies (2) trucking software solutions (14) unconventional drilling software (1) well drilling logistics (5) well site operations software (1) well site operators (1) Follow Me

View the Original article

Silica Dust Exposure During Fracking

has weighed the potential for environmental pollution versus the economic and energy independence benefits which fracking has unlocked. But recently, worker exposure to silica dust during fracking has been highlighted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

One commonly used method of fracking requires large volumes of sand and water to be pumped into wells at high pressures to break up tight formations, like shale, which have trapped oil and gas. Many truckloads of sand are off loaded and transferred by conveyor belts before being mixed with water and other chemicals and pumped downhole. The dust produced, which may contain up to 99% crystalline silica, is a health concern due to the risk of silicosis, a progressive and disabling lung disease.

Several oil and gas companies partnered with NIOSH in the collection of 116 personal air samples at 11 fracking sites in five states. Almost half of the air samples exceeded the enforceable OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), which is defined on a sliding scale depending on the amount of silica in the respirable fraction of dust collected. NIOSH has established a recommended silica exposure limit (REL) of 0.05 mg/m3. Almost 80% of the samples exceeded this REL.

Until a safe and economically viable substitute can be found or engineering controls such as exhaust ventilation are installed, personal protective equipment including respirators must be used. A NIOSH approved, properly fitted and worn half mask or filtering facepiece dust respirator provides protection only up to 10 times the relevant occupational exposure limit. Almost 10% of the samples were at least 10 times the OSHA PEL and 30% of the samples were at least 10 times the NIOSH REL. Dust respirators alone may not adequately protect workers from the risk of silicosis during fracking.  An OSHA NIOSH hazard alert may be downloaded at http://www.osha.gov/dts/hazardalerts/hydraulic_frac_hazard_alert.pdf  . This excellent document provides detailed information about the study and links to additional information.

Industry and government are continuing to cooperate on finding workable controls. Rick Ingram, S.G.E, BP North America Gas, and the Chairperson of the National STEPS network states that:

NIOSH, OSHA and the US Onshore E&P Industry have been working in a cooperative effort to ensure that we fully understand this issue and protect our workers. As part of this effort, a focus group has been formed to further explore respirable silica, share best practices and develop a unified plan forward. Our industry has much to be proud of. We have the privilege of helping to supply low cost domestic energy to our nation while providing high quality, good paying jobs. Through the efforts of industry associations, organizations and agencies such as API, AESC, IADC, IPAA, SafeLandUSA, National STEPS Network, NIOSH, OSHA, educational institutions and countless dedicated individuals and professionals, we are we are working diligently to make our industry segment the safest of all industries. The fact that this hazard was identified and is being mitigated though voluntary, cooperative efforts demonstrates how far we have progressed and the very positive future of health and safety in US Onshore Exploration and Production segment.  To learn more, visit www.nationalstepsnetwork.com.

To learn more about potential respiratory hazards during fracking, call us at 888.44.TOTAL.

crystalline silica, fracking, hydraulic fracturing, NIOSH, respiratory hazards

This entry was posted on September 17, 2012, 3:59 pm and is filed under Environment Health and Safety (EHS) Services, Industrial Hygiene, Occupational Health and Safety, Respiratory Service Solutions. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Comments (0) No comments yet. Cancel Reply Name (required) E-Mail (required) (will not be published) Website

Submit Comment Search Total Safety Subscribe to the Total Safety RSS Feed

View the Original article

Another Fracking Strawman, Up In Smoke

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, telling Reuters on Monday that state regulation of hydraulic fracturing isn’t enough:

"There are some who are saying that it's not something we ought to do, it should be left up to the states. That's not good enough for me because states are at very different level, some have zero, some have decent rules."

Bold, to be sure. So we wonder about the “some who are saying” in Salazar’s comment. Who’s he talking about? Perhaps EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, who said this in an interview last fall:

"The vast majority of oil and gas production is regulated at the state level. There are issues of whether or not the federal government can add to protection and also peace of mind for citizens by looking at large issues like air pollution impacts, which can be regional. ... So it's not to say that there isn't a federal role, but you can't start to talk about a federal role without acknowledging the very strong state role. We have no data right now that lead us to believe one way or the other that there needs to be specific federal regulation of the fracking process."

Worth repeating: The chief of the federal agency charged with protecting the environment says they’ve got nothing indicating that there needs to be “specific federal regulation of the fracking process.” More Jackson, a few days later on MSNBC:

“States are stepping up and doing a good job. I always say it doesn't have to be EPA that regulates the 10,000 wells that might go in."

Now, about the last part of Salazar’s comment, that some states have “zero” hydraulic fracturing regulation. We’ve checked around, and it looks like the secretary succumbed to a bit of Washington hyperbole there. A 2009 report by the Groundwater Protection Council, funded by the Energy Department for its National Energy Technology Laboratory, didn’t detect any oil and natural gas-producing states with ZERO rules.

Meanwhile, state officials sure sound deserving of Jackson’s confidence.

Oklahoma Corporation Commission Chairman Dana Murphy, before Congress last fall:

"My fundamental point would be to encourage that the states are the appropriate bodies to regulate the oil and gas drilling industry. Protection of water and the environment and the beneficial development of the nation's resources of oil and gas are not mutually exclusive goals. Oklahoma is proof of that."

And Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Michael Krancer:

“Simply put, because of our long history of oil and gas development and comprehensive regulatory structure, Pennsylvania does not need federal intervention to ensure an appropriate balance between resource development and environmental protection is struck.”

And Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper:

“I was personally involved with 50 or 60 (fracked) wells. There have been tens and thousands of wells in Colorado … and we can’t find anywhere in Colorado a single example of the process of fracking that has polluted groundwater. … There is a lot of anxiety out there certainly with hydraulic fracturing. But often times that anxiety is not directly connected to facts.”

If Secretary Salazar is dissatisfied with state-centered regulation of fracking – which is closest to and most responsive to individual industry operations – he should check with Administrator Jackson. And also with officials in the states, who clearly take the responsibility to oversee fracking within their borders seriously.

View the original article here

Graphically Speaking: Fracking and Injection Wells

Last week’s National Research Council report on hydraulic fracturing and earthquakes pretty much ends up where a number of scientists are on the correlation between fracking and quakes: that energy development from shale formations poses a low risk for tremors of significance. The report said more attention should be given to injection wells, which are used for waste disposal by a number of industrial enterprises, not just the oil and natural gas industry. AP science writer Seth Borenstein’s take on the report is here.

API, America’s Natural Gas Alliance and the American Exploration & Production Council have produced a couple of informational tools on hydraulic fracturing and seismic activity and underground injection control (UIC) wells that are especially timely with release of the council’s report. 

Highlights from the fracking document:

Hydraulic fracturing is done with a mixture of more than 99.5 percent water and sand. The other one-half of 1 percent is chemical – including anti-bacterials and lubricants. See the FracFocus.org site for more on fracking fluids.Fracturing that occurs thousands of feet below the surface (and below groundwater aquifers) is carefully mapped with sophisticated equipment to optimize recovery of the oil and/or natural gas and to monitor the well itself. In other words, microseismic activity associated with fracking is thoroughly understood.

One study of several thousand shale fracture treatments across North America showed the largest micro-quake measured about 0.8 or about 2,000 times less energy than a magnitude 3.0 earthquake. The chart below shows that most of the micro-quakes in this study were 10,000 to 1 million times smaller than a 3.0 earthquake, which is roughly equivalent to the passing of a nearby truck:

Highlights from the UIC document:

The U.S. has about 151,000 Class II UIC wells used by the oil and natural gas industry, of which only a handful are being studied for possible links to earthquakes. These wells are a subset of more than 800,000 injection wells nationwide used to dispose of a variety of industrial wastes and for development of various minerals and geothermal energy sources. Here’s a map that shows the state-by-state well distribution:

Injection wells are regulated by EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act. In many cases EPA has delegated authority for the UIC program to the states, with 39 states having primary authority over 95 percent of all UIC Class II wells.Literature published in the past five years shows that less than 40 incidents of seismic activity felt on the surface were associated with Class II injection wells.

Injection wells pump fluids into deep rock formations (see graphic). It’s unusual, but in some cases a quake can occur when a number of geological and operational factors come together – especially the presence of hard, dense and brittle crystalline “basement rock.”  These quakes are almost always small, below the level that would be felt on the surface.

For more information, check out the Energy From Shale website.

View the original article here

Friends of Fracking and Natural Gas

Perhaps as important as the president of the United States acknowledging the importance of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing to America’s energy present (and future) is a sense that such support is pretty far and wide. Here’s a quick roundup of some notable friends of natural gas – affordable, abundant and creating jobs all across the country – with a nod to Energy In Depth’s Steve Everley for help in corralling the links.

U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio:

“Shale development means economic development, and that’s exciting news for Ohio. It means tens of thousands of good-paying jobs across our state, all while helping to lower power costs for Ohio consumers. … We know that Ohio is home to countless innovative companies and a world-class workforce—now we need to ensure that energy companies arriving in the state are utilizing all that Ohio has to offer.”

Deputy Energy Secretary Daniel Poneman:

“The natural gas boom in the United States offers a tremendous opportunity to strengthen American energy security by drastically reducing our dependence on imported oil, while at the same time creating new U.S. jobs and industries. This is precisely why President Barack Obama is committed to safely and responsibly harnessing American oil and gas resources, and to developing the technologies that will unlock new domestic energy sources.”

U.S. Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark.:

“I’m a firm believer in natural gas. It already supplies almost one-fourth of all energy in the U.S. and we’re discovering more natural gas reserves every day thanks to newer, safer drilling techniques and technologies. Better yet, more than 98 percent of natural gas comes from right here in North America. … With the Fayetteville Shale in the northern part of (Arkansas) and the Haynesville Shale in the southern part, we have an abundant supply of clean, affordable energy to offer the world.”

Natural gas and fracking have support from strong environmentalists including …

U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.:

“This is what I tell environmental folks: Natural gas is really important to a lot of renewables, solar and wind, ensuring that option is out there. … Natural gas is the cleanest of the fossil fuels, so you start with that as your basic proposition.”

U.S. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass.:

“I think environmentalists should want natural gas on the table as an option. When coal is also going to be considered for new electrical generation or an extension of the life of an existing coal-fired power plant, I think it would be wise for us to not take natural gas off the table.”

Gov. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo.:

“Like any industrial process, fracking has some risks but, really, if done properly, certainly out in the West, there is literally no risk — certainly much less than many industrial processes. … I love open space and wilderness, but we all drive cars, right? And we all need energy. We recognize that, along with education, energy is the other necessary component to lifting people out of poverty.”

That last point is so important. Energy development is the difference between modern and primitive civilization – facilitating greater freedom, mobility and opportunity for better, healthier lives.

Candidly, the choice offered by some opponents of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing isn’t between more responsible development and less; it’s between responsible development and NO development. It’s an extreme choice. As energy blogger Steve Maley posted a few weeks ago, “If you’re not a fan of natural gas you’re a fan of mud huts.”

The right choice is to safely and responsibly develop a resource that can play a major role in securing America’s energy future.

View the original article here

Friends of Fracking and Natural Gas

Perhaps as important as the president of the United States acknowledging the importance of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing to America’s energy present (and future) is a sense that such support is pretty far and wide. Here’s a quick roundup of some notable friends of natural gas – affordable, abundant and creating jobs all across the country – with a nod to Energy In Depth’s Steve Everley for help in corralling the links.

U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio:

“Shale development means economic development, and that’s exciting news for Ohio. It means tens of thousands of good-paying jobs across our state, all while helping to lower power costs for Ohio consumers. … We know that Ohio is home to countless innovative companies and a world-class workforce—now we need to ensure that energy companies arriving in the state are utilizing all that Ohio has to offer.”

Deputy Energy Secretary Daniel Poneman:

“The natural gas boom in the United States offers a tremendous opportunity to strengthen American energy security by drastically reducing our dependence on imported oil, while at the same time creating new U.S. jobs and industries. This is precisely why President Barack Obama is committed to safely and responsibly harnessing American oil and gas resources, and to developing the technologies that will unlock new domestic energy sources.”

U.S. Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark.:

“I’m a firm believer in natural gas. It already supplies almost one-fourth of all energy in the U.S. and we’re discovering more natural gas reserves every day thanks to newer, safer drilling techniques and technologies. Better yet, more than 98 percent of natural gas comes from right here in North America. … With the Fayetteville Shale in the northern part of (Arkansas) and the Haynesville Shale in the southern part, we have an abundant supply of clean, affordable energy to offer the world.”

Natural gas and fracking have support from strong environmentalists including …

U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.:

“This is what I tell environmental folks: Natural gas is really important to a lot of renewables, solar and wind, ensuring that option is out there. … Natural gas is the cleanest of the fossil fuels, so you start with that as your basic proposition.”

U.S. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass.:

“I think environmentalists should want natural gas on the table as an option. When coal is also going to be considered for new electrical generation or an extension of the life of an existing coal-fired power plant, I think it would be wise for us to not take natural gas off the table.”

Gov. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo.:

“Like any industrial process, fracking has some risks but, really, if done properly, certainly out in the West, there is literally no risk — certainly much less than many industrial processes. … I love open space and wilderness, but we all drive cars, right? And we all need energy. We recognize that, along with education, energy is the other necessary component to lifting people out of poverty.”

That last point is so important. Energy development is the difference between modern and primitive civilization – facilitating greater freedom, mobility and opportunity for better, healthier lives.

Candidly, the choice offered by some opponents of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing isn’t between more responsible development and less; it’s between responsible development and NO development. It’s an extreme choice. As energy blogger Steve Maley posted a few weeks ago, “If you’re not a fan of natural gas you’re a fan of mud huts.”

The right choice is to safely and responsibly develop a resource that can play a major role in securing America’s energy future.

View the original article here

Hailing the Chief’s Support for Natural Gas Development, Fracking

President Obama deserves credit for standing fast in his support for natural gas development through hydraulic fracturing – especially given the no-to-natural gas approach taken by some of his supporters in the environmental community, including the Sierra Club. Here’s the president on Monday in Cincinnati:

“… We’re moving in the right direction in terms of energy independence. Now, part of that is this boom in natural gas.  And this is something we should welcome, because not only are we blessed with incredible natural gas resources that are now accessible because of new technologies, but natural gas actually burns cleaner than some other fossil fuels, and is an ideal fuel -- energy source that we potentially can use for the next 100 years.  So I want to encourage natural gas production.  The key is to make sure that we do it safely and in a way that is environmentally sound.”

The president is spot on – and as a response to a negative question about natural gas, his remarks were all the more remarkable. Because of abundant, affordable gas, made accessible through fracking, the global energy balance could be shifting. The president continued:

“Now, you always hear these arguments that somehow there’s this huge contradiction between the environment and economic development, or the environment and energy production.  And the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of folks right now that are engaging in hydraulic fracking who are doing it safely.”

This also is true. The oil and natural gas industry has focused on making hydraulic fracturing safer and more efficient through a set of standards that guide operators, and it has worked with states to develop regulatory regimes tailored for their specific conditions. The president went on:

“The problem is, is that we haven’t established clear guidelines for how to do it safely, and informed the public so that neighbors know what’s going on, and your family, you can make sure that any industry that’s operating in your area, that they’re being responsible.”

Well, OK. The president is mistaken or misinformed on that point. Industry has been clear and detailed in developing the standards mentioned above. It also has supported FracFocus.org to create transparency about fracking itself – a website community members can use to learn where wells are being drilled in their area, as well as the chemicals being used in the fracking fluids themselves. The industry takes community engagement and support seriously and is committed to getting shale development right.

Back to the president:

“What we’ve said is, look, we are going to work with industry to establish best practices.  We are going to invest in the basic research and science required to make sure this is done safely and in a way that protects the public health.  And for responsible companies, they should be able to operate, make a profit, and we can all benefit and put people back to work."

Best practices, we’re on it, Mr. President. Industry also is supportive of new technologies to improve operations, including those to reduce or even eliminate water use during the fracking process. Shale energy is creating jobs, thousands of them, and boosting the economy.

View the original article here

Another Study ‘Showing’ No Contamination from Fracking

Where to begin in a review of Pro Publica’s article on new research into the migration of subterranean brine to shallow water above? The inflammatory, overreaching headline? The leap from Duke University’s study to conclusions suggesting to the public that hydraulic fracturing is polluting drinking water?

Let’s start there. On that point the article is self-rebutting. See the fourth paragraph:

"No drilling chemicals were detected in the (shallow) water, and there was no correlation between where the natural brine was detected and where drilling takes place."

Then, near the end of the article:

"Nevertheless, (Robert) Jackson, one of the study's authors, said he still considers it unlikely that frack fluids and injected man-made waste are migrating into drinking water supplies. If that were happening, those contaminants would be more likely to appear in his groundwater samples, he said. His group is continuing its research into how the natural brine might have travelled, and how long it took to rise to the surface. 'There is a real time uncertainty,' he said. 'We don't know if this happens over a couple of years, or over millennia.'"

As for the study itself, Jackson and his team say they found that naturally occurring brine migrates upward to shallower depths. They say the risk of the migration could be greater in areas that have undergone hydraulic fracturing. Yet, there’s this from the study’s introductory summary:

“The occurrences of saline water do not correlate with the location of shale-gas wells and are consistent with reported data before rapid shale-gas development in the region …”

Energy In Depth has solid analysis on the study, here. Highlights:

The study fails (as Jackson notes above) to establish whether the migration occurs over 10 years or 10 million years. Without that, it’s impossible to determine whether the phenomenon is cause for concern.If brine is traveling up from thousands of feet below the surface, why haven’t the pathways Duke’s researchers identify allowed natural gas in the Marcellus region to leak out and disappear over time?There’s no discussion of whether the Marcellus Shale – which is largely a dry region with “virtually no free water,” according to Penn State’s Terry Engelder – even contains enough brinewater to leak.

Engelder, a Marcellus expert who was asked by the researchers to review their work, notes a number of questions the study leaves unanswered, reducing its usefulness. He writes:

"My review is predicated on the objective of your paper which is stated as a search for '...specific areas of shale-gas development in northeastern Pennsylvania that are at increased risk for contamination of shallow drinking water resources with deeper formation brines...' (the last sentence of your abstract). The term, risk, suggests that your paper veers from a conventional geology paper and enters into the realm of science-based advocacy or if you like, science policy."

Engelder is on target there. Unfortunately, the academics, wittingly or unwittingly, produced a study that is easily morphed into a siren call by opponents of natural gas production. Pro Publica’s article is Exhibit A. Exhibit B is a Bloomberg News story under this headline: “Pennsylvania Fracking Can Put Water at Risk, Study Finds” – despite the fact the study found no evidence of such a risk.

Words like “can,” “may” and “might” camouflage the point that the study didn’t find a correlation between the location of shale-gas wells and occurrences of saline water. To suggest otherwise in a news article is disingenuous and counterproductive in the national discussion of energy from shale.

As Engelder notes, the study is a platform from which advocates can mislead. On this story, The Associated Press got it right, focusing its report on what the study showed: “Gas drilling in northeastern Pennsylvania did not contaminate nearby drinking water wells with salty water, which is a byproduct of the drilling.”

View the original article here

Enter Innovation: Improving the Fracking Process

One of the factors involved in pulling energy from shale through hydraulic fracturing is how much water is needed – typically 2 to 4 million gallons per well. Though that’s not as much water as it sounds (electrical generation for the Susquehanna River Basin requires nearly 150 million gallons per day), it’s a public concern. More on water usage at the FracFocus website.

Water also is an industry concern. It isn’t free, and once the well has been stimulated with fracking, there’s waste water that has to be disposed of or recycled. Enter innovation. A number of companies are tackling the issue.

Schlumberger’s HiWAY flow-channel technology claims to use less water, with greater effectiveness:

“HiWAY technology fundamentally changes the way proppant fractures generate conductivity. The first technique of its kind, HiWAY fracturing creates open pathways inside the fracture, enabling hydrocarbons to flow through the stable channels rather than the proppant. This optimizes connectivity between the reservoir and the wellbore—resulting in infinite fracture conductivity.”

Other companies are marketing waterless alternatives, using other agents to apply pressure to the shale – producing microscopic fractures and introducing sand or other proppants to keep the cracks open so the oil or natural gas can drain from the shale and be collected.

Baker-Hughes has developed VaporFrac, combining a high-pressure nitrogen and/or carbon dioxide gas stream and an ultra-lightweight proppant slurry:

“This method safely creates a flow stream that is more than 90% gas, significantly reducing post-frac cleanup. The high energy of the gas phase makes for easy flowback. There’s a quicker tie into pipelines.”

GASFRAC Energy Services’ liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) gel is primarily propane, which the company says has a number of advantages in fracking:

“Since our gel regains permeability with the hydrocarbons we stimulate, we have the ability to recover 100% of the fracturing fluids within days of stimulation. This creates economic and environmental benefits reducing clean-up, waste disposal and post-job truck traffic, while creating higher initial production levels.”

No doubt, other companies, other energy innovators, are at work on this question. The point here is to show the kind of invention that’s being sparked by necessity surrounding water and fracking. Businesses are taking on this issue and others associated with energy development with the goal of making processes better, safer, more efficient and more environmentally friendly. When we hear about their stories, we’ll pass them along.

View the original article here

Graphically Speaking: Fracking and Injection Wells

Last week’s National Research Council report on hydraulic fracturing and earthquakes pretty much ends up where a number of scientists are on the correlation between fracking and quakes: that energy development from shale formations poses a low risk for tremors of significance. The report said more attention should be given to injection wells, which are used for waste disposal by a number of industrial enterprises, not just the oil and natural gas industry. AP science writer Seth Borenstein’s take on the report is here.

API, America’s Natural Gas Alliance and the American Exploration & Production Council have produced a couple of informational tools on hydraulic fracturing and seismic activity and underground injection control (UIC) wells that are especially timely with release of the council’s report. 

Highlights from the fracking document:

Hydraulic fracturing is done with a mixture of more than 99.5 percent water and sand. The other one-half of 1 percent is chemical – including anti-bacterials and lubricants. See the FracFocus.org site for more on fracking fluids.Fracturing that occurs thousands of feet below the surface (and below groundwater aquifers) is carefully mapped with sophisticated equipment to optimize recovery of the oil and/or natural gas and to monitor the well itself. In other words, microseismic activity associated with fracking is thoroughly understood.

One study of several thousand shale fracture treatments across North America showed the largest micro-quake measured about 0.8 or about 2,000 times less energy than a magnitude 3.0 earthquake. The chart below shows that most of the micro-quakes in this study were 10,000 to 1 million times smaller than a 3.0 earthquake, which is roughly equivalent to the passing of a nearby truck:

Highlights from the UIC document:

The U.S. has about 151,000 Class II UIC wells used by the oil and natural gas industry, of which only a handful are being studied for possible links to earthquakes. These wells are a subset of more than 800,000 injection wells nationwide used to dispose of a variety of industrial wastes and for development of various minerals and geothermal energy sources. Here’s a map that shows the state-by-state well distribution:

Injection wells are regulated by EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act. In many cases EPA has delegated authority for the UIC program to the states, with 39 states having primary authority over 95 percent of all UIC Class II wells.Literature published in the past five years shows that less than 40 incidents of seismic activity felt on the surface were associated with Class II injection wells.

Injection wells pump fluids into deep rock formations (see graphic). It’s unusual, but in some cases a quake can occur when a number of geological and operational factors come together – especially the presence of hard, dense and brittle crystalline “basement rock.”  These quakes are almost always small, below the level that would be felt on the surface.

For more information, check out the Energy From Shale website.

View the original article here

Hailing the Chief’s Support for Natural Gas Development, Fracking

President Obama deserves credit for standing fast in his support for natural gas development through hydraulic fracturing – especially given the no-to-natural gas approach taken by some of his supporters in the environmental community, including the Sierra Club. Here’s the president on Monday in Cincinnati:

“… We’re moving in the right direction in terms of energy independence. Now, part of that is this boom in natural gas.  And this is something we should welcome, because not only are we blessed with incredible natural gas resources that are now accessible because of new technologies, but natural gas actually burns cleaner than some other fossil fuels, and is an ideal fuel -- energy source that we potentially can use for the next 100 years.  So I want to encourage natural gas production.  The key is to make sure that we do it safely and in a way that is environmentally sound.”

The president is spot on – and as a response to a negative question about natural gas, his remarks were all the more remarkable. Because of abundant, affordable gas, made accessible through fracking, the global energy balance could be shifting. The president continued:

“Now, you always hear these arguments that somehow there’s this huge contradiction between the environment and economic development, or the environment and energy production.  And the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of folks right now that are engaging in hydraulic fracking who are doing it safely.”

This also is true. The oil and natural gas industry has focused on making hydraulic fracturing safer and more efficient through a set of standards that guide operators, and it has worked with states to develop regulatory regimes tailored for their specific conditions. The president went on:

“The problem is, is that we haven’t established clear guidelines for how to do it safely, and informed the public so that neighbors know what’s going on, and your family, you can make sure that any industry that’s operating in your area, that they’re being responsible.”

Well, OK. The president is mistaken or misinformed on that point. Industry has been clear and detailed in developing the standards mentioned above. It also has supported FracFocus.org to create transparency about fracking itself – a website community members can use to learn where wells are being drilled in their area, as well as the chemicals being used in the fracking fluids themselves. The industry takes community engagement and support seriously and is committed to getting shale development right.

Back to the president:

“What we’ve said is, look, we are going to work with industry to establish best practices.  We are going to invest in the basic research and science required to make sure this is done safely and in a way that protects the public health.  And for responsible companies, they should be able to operate, make a profit, and we can all benefit and put people back to work."

Best practices, we’re on it, Mr. President. Industry also is supportive of new technologies to improve operations, including those to reduce or even eliminate water use during the fracking process. Shale energy is creating jobs, thousands of them, and boosting the economy.

View the original article here