-
WAR OF IDEAS
Has the U.S. Reached Peak Car?
-
KILLER APPS
Cyberspies Are Using PRISM for Spearphishing
-
PASSPORT
Remembering Michael Hastings
Posted By Steve LeVine
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 - 3:02 AM
Share
Over the past week, I've heard from serious observers of the U.S. shale gas industry -- from investment analysts, think-tank scholars and others -- that we seem near a tipping point in the heated debate over the companies' drilling methods: If there is another serious accident or two in which shale gas drillers appear to have polluted a water aquifer, look for significant regulatory curtailment of the industry, as one investment analyst put it.
If such a backlash occurs, it would be a significant turnaround for an industry that has been widely embraced as a savior, particularly for the possible role it could play in curtailing the emission of heat-trapping gases by allowing for a reduction of coal consumption.
We are talking about the practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in which millions of gallons of chemically laced water are injected at great force into hard underground shale, breaking it up and allowing trapped gas to be extracted. In recent years, this new technology has turned the U.S. gas supply from deficit to significant surplus -- accepted forecasts are that the country has a 100-year supply of gas at current consumption levels.
Only, fracking has frightened many communities where it is conducted. The main apprehension is that the practice can poison water supplies, such as a Duke University report disclosed last month. The industry denies fracking has caused any such pollution, yet numerous communities in Pennsylvania have already risen up and banned the practice, writes Kris Maher of the Wall Street Journal. Tisha Conoly-Schuller, CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, told an industry conference yesterday that "the public is skeptical of anything we say. ... The public does not believe us," reports Natural Gas Watch.
A federal regulatory clampdown could have geopolitical consequences -- political and economic decision-makers around the world have begun to figure the shale gas revolution into their calculus. Among other impacts, shale gas has appeared likely to keep Russia back on its heels in Europe; to help make China cleaner; and to help curtail the global emission of heat-trapping carbon.
But such a development would also come as no surprise: It has been clear for at least a year that the industry confronts a conspicuously moving anti-shale gas train, and that if it failed to get in front and lead the charge for environmentally safe drilling, it risked a hostile response. Now, according to the observers with whom I've been speaking -- many of whom are pro-industry -- the drillers appear to have waited too long.
Of course, these observers could be over-thinking -- at least one of them in fact dissented from the rest. He reminded me that oil and natural gas producers are aggressively resistant to regulation because generally they get away with it: Americans want to drive their cars and fly to Hawaii, and only in rare cases have strangled the industry's ability to operate. What comes immediately to mind is the continued moratorium on oil drilling off the coast of California since the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill.
Even so -- even if he turns out to be right -- I have still found it mystifying why the industry hasn't played it safer and guarded against the risk that it could be wrong-footed. And indeed the investment analyst to whom I refer in the first paragraph of this post thinks that shale gas will turn out to be treated fundamentally differently from oil. Why? Because while large swaths of the public don't believe in global warming, they by and large do passionately care about clean water. And that's what the debate will pivot on -- a public uncertainty that water supplies are safe in proximity to shale gas drilling.
Until now, the industry has engaged in group behavior -- large companies including ExxonMobil and Chevron have persuasively vowed to disclose the chemical content of their fracking fluid, and adhere to ultra-safe methods of installing well-casing so as to protect drinking water. But neither Exxon nor Chevron has unilaterally released this data, nor brow-beat the industry's bad actors -- generally much smaller independent companies -- into cleaning up their act.
This refusal to break ranks is typical of groups. It's what John Forbes Nash of "A Beautiful Mind" fame (pictured above) won his Nobel for -- the Nash Equilibrium, which says that individuals within a group pursue their best interest while also weighing how others in the same group will act; they will stay with that decision -- or equilibrium -- even if another way would result in a better outcome for all group members. So even though big industry players do feel they might stave off the growing public backlash if they went pro-actively environmental, they won't do so unless they are convinced most or all their rivals will at the same time or soon after. They think that the knowledge of the chemical content of their fracking fluid is too precious.
You guys need to wake up and see these events for what they really are. It would take me writing an article here to explain which I do not have time for so I will keep it as brief as possible.
If I recall correctly the Duke report actually did not find ANY fracking chemicals in its study (or maybe it was the Cornell study as both were sponsored by anti fracking groups.) This in itself proved that fracking fluids were not mixing with aquifers. Yes in these "studies" natural gas was reaching the aquifiers-BUT this same natural gas was reaching these aquifers long before drilling started in those particular areas studied (since the 1st waterwell was drilled hundreds of years ago) This is caused in this particular area by what has long been known as Coalbed methane-shallow methane gas slowly migrating to the surface through naturally occuring fractures in the ground. No serious study can discount this and a single case otherwise has never been proven.
We have been fracking wells here in the USA for over 60 years without a single case of ground water contamination! Now Democrats (both the President and Congress) want you to believe that it's something new and dangerous even though they HAVE KNOWN its been done safely for all these years.
I could go on and on showing the bias of these studies and the agenda behind them but many others before me have already done so and individual minds seem to already be made up on this(despite well documented facts) so I will just leave it at that.
For those of you that are new to being anti fracking activist I will share some information with you that you may not already understand-We elected a President this go around that took HUGE campaign contributions from Goldman Zacs (which stood to make billions off a free 10% cut of the new to be created Carbon Credit Trading Exchange that Obama tried to create (his 1st major failure as President) Republicans and a handful of Democrats were able to block this legislation. Other heavy hitters on the Obama campaign donor roster were University of California-Berkley (which received 150 million in grants to study how to make houes more efficent) and General Electric (who despite making billions last year never paid a cent in Federal income Tax) Now GE also is heavily invested in wind and solar as alternative energy.There are also many others.
Why did they back Obama with so much money?
So they could profit of course! To make alternative energy a profitable business the cost of energy has to be much higher (oil and natural gas) The whole "Carbon Cap" thing was about raising the price of energy by taxing the producers for carbon-which of course in turn the increased cost would be passed onto you the consumer.You have to raise the current price of energy for alternative energy to be profitable-otherwise it can only survive on taxpayer subsidies. This was working great and alternative energy stocks were soaring until the market crash (when natural gas fell from $13mmcf to just $3 MMCF-since then you have seen the alternative energy stocks not only crash but many are bankrupt.
A great example is in this headline
"Obama Team Backed Solyndra Aid As Auditors Were Wary"
This is where Obama gave a company that he knew could not stand-OVER 1/2 BILLION DOLLARS OF YOUR MONEY! (google the headline for more reading)
Still Obama works to raise energy prices (Hydrocarbon Energy) with banning the new drilling lands just opened up by the Bush Administration as soon as Obama took office-THEN Obama threw out 2 recent previous studies done by the EPA that stated fracking done according to industry standards does not pose a threat to groundwater!
He then stacked the EPA upper staff with his own people and ordered the same previous studies be done again!
Then there was unconstitutional offshore drilling bans and his constant badgering of "Taxing Oil Companies More" in EVERY PLAN he proposes over anything! (why does he not tax GE more who paid ZERO in federal Income Taxes last year despite billions in profits?-Because they donated a million dollars to his campaign of course.)
Anyway he has done everything possible to raise YOUR energy prices at the pump and at the wall furnace AND his attack on fracking is just part of that plan.
He and fellow democrats have purposely created a fear in the minds of innocent folks despie a 60 year safety record in the industry. (Yes this is a Democrat vs Republican issue as its drwan cleasrly along party lines)
Anyway-believe what you want or need to but those are the facts-you that protest fracking have been duped by your elected officials.
Want to know what opened the door for all this to start with?
Well back around 2007-2008 the Barnett Shale was discovered in the Dallas/Ft Worth area-where horizontal drilling techniques were being deployed and the industry discovered that drilling horizontal through a formation they could encounter hundereds of feet of payzone in areas that vertical drilling could only expose a few feet of. This made areas that were once not profitable to drill now suddeenly VERY profitable! (keep in muind that hydrofracking was also used on all vertical wells prior to this for 60 years in the area) Only thing different was now they were drilling sideways.
Anyways, Aubrey McClendon of Chesapeake Energy was the first to publically realize the potential of all this new natural gas production (Back in 2007-2008 I believe) At that time natural gas was over $13 and I think he knew he had to start creating more demand for the product or the prices would plumment with all the new production that was coming on line so he needed to create a market for it.
At that time most electricity was being produced burning coal-I think natural gas share of that market was around 30%...So Aubrey McClendon started this campaign against coal...took out HUGE ads in national newspapers saying "COAL IS FILTHY" and spent MILLIONS on this campaign!
To me this campaign backfired terribly on the industry (Oil and Gas) because BIG COAL was lining the pockets of Democrats everywhere! Then, after 60 years of safe fracking here in the USA, Democrats and Obama started with fearmongering to the general public over fracking.
Anyways there you have it-many more details could be shared but I think you see where this is going.
If fracking is the only concern then ask yourself "why are Democrats so opposed to all aspects of drilling for energy now" They are against ALL the small businesses that support drilling-trucking-housing-EVERYTHING!
Check This Democrat out!
Pennsylvania Democrat and Congressman Mike Sturla even claims that oilfield workers are directly responsible for spreading veneral diseases among the "womenfolk" of Pennsylvania!
Thay started with attacking fracking and now that its been or will be once again proven safe-so they now attack all other aspects of the drilling industry.
We should ALWAYS be concerned about our groundwater AND our entire environment-I do not argue that 1 bit but I will be damned if i am going to let a bunch of lying Democrats try to blow smoke over the issues as they persue there hidden agenda of fearmongering and greed.
The Duke report that sampled the wells in Dimick Pa. verified that the migrating methane from the fracking process was getting into the well water. The naturally occurring methane in quantity's of .003 and are not lethal have a much different structure then the methane that was released in the fracking process. The methane contamination was much stronger and showed the different methane footprint then the naturally occurring methane. The closer the wells were located to the drilling site the stronger the contamination. The contamination is real and can be defined because of the difference in how it was released from the shale. read the study this will be the gas industry's downfall when the people that have been violated get to court. There property values are non existent with out a water supply. I also know that banks are not issuing mortgages to property's that have shale gas wells on them. While the land owners that did cash in on leases may not be able to sell those property's. The devastation doesn't end there because everyone in that area will suffer with lowered property values. These are just a few of the undisclosed costs of fracking that people were not told about.
The EPA report that made its way into Congress in th 2005 energy bill was misleading this fracking was shown to be safe in a coal region the report showing the real dangers of fracking was pulled and not sent out to congress this was a deliberate attempt to mislead congress and someone should be brought up on charges. This is why Obama ordered a new study it was a stalling tactic to avoid making the decision that will eventually be made to develop a safer fracking method.
Shale fracking has a larger carbon footprint and is more ecologically damaging then burning coal. The cost in carbon to get the natural gas out of the ground is much more costly and Pennsylvania will be another love canal after another industry ruins our water and air. Look at the Barnett shale in Texas I could give you link upon links of people that are devastated by this Its been a dirty little industry secret that's now starting to show its ugly head the closer it gets to the public eye and its going to devastating to all those backers. gas shale is a ponzi scheme they have to drill new wells so they can pay royalties on the old wells and Chesapeake seems to be having issues paying those royalties. The only way they can make money is to artifically drive the price of gas up or sell it over seas which is what they said they would not do. But then they sold 5 Billion dollars in leases to the Chinese. Who is going to own the American gas ???
These are the same lies and scare tactics that democrats have been using over and over..
1st the Duke study is biased and cannot tell where the methane came from
2nd-this region has been fracking wells over 60 years also...not something new my friend! With 10 of thousands of fracked wells in the area over 60 years-why do you suppose its just now happening on well drilled lately?-Because its not-The EPA has done study after study for years and years over this and you act like they just recently conducted a single study. Thats what is misleading and should get people brought up on charges.
3 You seem to think that now because we are drilling horizontal wells instead of verticals wells that fracking is something new?
4th and this is just common sense in the industry. If frack fluids are reaching the groundwater then where is all the oil and gas that should be mixed in? When a frack is done the fluid that is used to frack is intermingled with the oil and gas from the formation-IF THE FRACK FLUID ESCAPES INTO THE WATERT THEN YOU SHOULD NOT ONLY HAVE METHANE BUT OIL AND THIS IS A LIQUIDS RICH PLAY! Sorry you canot have it both ways! its like mixing oxygen and Helium in a jar with a lid on it-then you open it and say "Only The Oxygen Escaped"-its just not happening.
5th You cannot name a single government study after 60 years of fracking that can prove that fracking contaminated the groundwater. IF YOU EVEN UNDERSTOOD FRACKING YOU WOULD KNOW ITS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE.
6TH Lastly here in America we no longer have these 15th century witchhunts like the days of Salem. You can repeat the lies of democrats on this issue over and over, you can even make up a few lies yourself-but 2 things will not change in the end. Fracking will continue and will be done safely BECAUSE it is safe and EPA regulations will always allow it.
If you stop fracking in America then you stop 99% of all drilling in this country that has been done for over 60 years-Then you can import all your oil AND natural gas from overseas-then you can blame the high prices on the teaparty (seems to be the liberal thing to do these days)
If I were you and Obama I would be much more concerned about the thousands of tons of nuclear waste that is stored deep underground in salt caverns in this country! ( a much more clear and present danger than made up tales about fracking)
If hydraulic fracturing is so safe why is it necessary that the fluids being used in the process be kept a deep dark secret and at the same time be exempt from the clean water act?
Whats the difference between a "deep dark" secret and just a normal trade secret? Whats in Kentucky Fried Chickens secret recipe of 100 herbs and spices?-Seems most people should be more concerned about what they ingest than what they don't.
The ingredients are kept secret as "Trade Secrets"- fracking companies develop their processes to outperform their competition and they want to keep it "Secret" . Every fracking location has a list of MSDS data information on EVERY CHEMICAL on that location and anyone on that location can view it.-so it;s not as "Deep Dark Secret" asd you thinks.
The reason fracking is exempt from the clean water act is because fracking fluids never come into contact with clean water.....no conspiracy there.
Texas Railroad Commission knows best
Those poor folks in the northeast with their shallow shale formation and their shallow drinking wells than the Barnett (where fracking was born)...one case the EPA had of fracking chemicals showing up related to a old horizontal well (whose aged casing was bad-nothing unusual about that). This old well was by the new horizontal well (whose fractures now are vertical-the old vertical wells had horizontal fractures and had a pay zone of 100ft worth of pulverized rocks). The old well was the conduit from the new horizontal well that entered the old wells casing and rose up to contaminate a resident's water well. Since they were paid off by the drillers...it's unknown how many others are like this and that is why the RRC does not allow new horizontal wells by the old vertical wells. Now I understand why URBAN drilling came to our cities here in north Texas....1) rural areas are riddled with old wells with bad aged casing...cement doesn't last forever ya'll. 2) why truck the water when you can hook up to a hydrant?..more cost effective$$$.
Yep those horizontal wells have a pay zone now of 5,000ft of vertical pulverized rock, and since 20% of the gas is captured..the other 80% is looking for conduits to migrate into our ground water supplies. How dare those fear mongers who need clean water to survive as a species be concerned about this!
You're likely right. The industry would be best served by forthrightly addressing the environmental concerns--the TX Railroad Commission whitewash isn't gonna fly with anyone who's seen Gasland. That's one key reason why noone believes the industry when it demurs.
Best practices should be drawn up. Chemical formulas can be patented--even with the three year backlog--and royalties collected for those who use the ideas; as far as I can tell the productivity of the different wells ain't all that much to shake a stick at anyways--it will be the environmentally secure fluid combination which will have everyone banging down the door.
But, you're likely right, the industry will continue on as is until it gets itself shut down.
The contamination is real and can be defined because of the difference in how it was released from the shale. read the study this will be best microwave oven the gas industry's downfall when the people that have been violated get to court. There property values are non existent with out a water supply.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(8)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE