Posts Tagged ‘fracturing technology’

Agency convenes hearing in Canonsburg tomorrow to discuss scope of upcoming hydraulic fracturing study. But has EPA forgotten about its 2004 report?

Tomorrow night in Canonsburg, the EPA will convene its third public hearing on its upcoming study on hydraulic fracturing, a key technology that’s been used to produce energy in Pennsylvania for more than a half-century, but one that’s become especially important lately as efforts to convert the enormous potential of the Marcellus into jobs and revenues for Pennsylvanians move forward across the Commonwealth.

But for those keeping tally at home, this new study by EPA isn’t the first time the agency has looked into the safety and performance of fracturing technology. In a report released by EPA in June 2004, federal officials found the fracturing of coalbed methane formations “poses little or no threat” to underground sources of drinking water – despite that fact that coal seams generally reside close to formations carrying drinking water underground. In remarks set to be delivered at tomorrow’s hearing, MSC president and executive director Kathryn Klaber lays out some additional details (and context) associated with this landmark study:

In that report — the product of an intensive, four-year course of study first initiated under the Clinton administration — EPA found “no evidence” suggesting the fracturing of shallow coalbed methane reserves posed a threat to underground drinking water supplies. Certainly you’re aware that coalbed methane strata residethousands of feet closer to the water table than shale formations, and that the technology used today to access clean-burning natural gas from these formations is much more advanced and sophisticated than what was available in the past.

For their part, natural gas critics contend that EPA’s 2004 study on fracturing’s application to coalbed methane reserves somehow isn’t relevant to the current conversation about the Marcellus Shale. Come again? If the fracturing of shallow coalbeds near the water table was found to be safe by EPA, how is it that the fracturing of deep shale formations is any less so? After all, we’re talking about shale strata that reside thousands and thousands of feet below both the water table and the coal beds themselves.

Thursday’s forum in Canonsburg is expected to address some of these questions, and more generally lay out the direction that EPA will take in engaging in its second study on hydraulic fracturing in 70 months. And you know what? It’s an effort we support in full. With fracturing, we’re talking about a technology that’s been deployed more than 1.1 million times in the 60-plus years in which it’s been in commercial use. And in all that time, not a single government regulator – including the EPA – has made a single claim suggesting it’s a threat to groundwater. Assuming this new study is science-based and peer-reviewed, there’s no reason to believe its findings will diverge from what the agency has consistently found in the past.

So what will the latest installment of EPA’s hydraulic fracturing study series look like when it hits the shelves sometime in the next two or three years? Tough to say for sure, but if it ends up drawing on the testimony of regulators in the states, experts in the field, and everyday Americans whose lives are being made better and more prosperous thanks to the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of shale gas in America – it should be quite a page-turner indeed.

In the meantime, folks interested in coming out to tell EPA what they think of responsible shale gas development in Pennsylvania have a few outstanding tasks to complete before they arrive tomorrow night. First order of business: Register for the meeting, which is easily accomplished by navigating to this page. Second: Make sure to stock up on all the facts. MSC fact sheets have been developed on a range of topics likely to be addressed in some form – from the full disclosure of materials involved in the fracturing process, to the many ways in which natural gas can be used as a workhorse in PA to deliver a clean, secure and affordable energy future. The full arsenal can be accessed here.

So that should just about do it. Pre-registration for the event starts at 5:00 p.m. sharp, and the address for the Hilton Garden Inn is 1000 Corporate Drive in Canonsburg. Hope to see you out there.

Copyright: Marcelluscoalition.org

Study says millions of PA residents relying on private water wells that may contain contaminants – none of which are related to the Marcellus Shale

Nearly 20,000 new wells are drilled in Pennsylvania every year. And among these, not a single one of them has anything to do with oil or natural gas.

Instead, these wells are drilled for the purpose of accessing underground sources of water. In Pennsylvania, more than three million residents rely on private wells for essential sources of potable water – second most in the entire nation behind Michigan. So lots of wells must mean lots of good, high-quality drinking water, right? Not according to a report issued last year by researchers from Penn State.

The study, available here and commissioned by the Center for Rural Pennsylvania, was conducted over two years and drew on samples from more than 700 individual private water wells installed all across the state. What did the researchers find? For starters, a full 40 percent of tested wells failed to meet the state’s drinking water standards for safety. Keep in mind that Pennsylvania supports more than 1 million private water wells – which means it’s possible that more than 400,000 water wells, serving roughly 700,000 residents, are of a quality and nature of potential concern. And the worst thing about it? According to the survey, very few of these well owners even knew they had a problem.

With more than 1,300 Marcellus wells developed in Pennsylvania this year, it’s become a popular thing to assume that wells drilled for the purpose of tapping enormous and clean-burning reserves of natural gas 5,000 to 9,000 feet below the water table are having a deleterious impact on underground drinking water. The alleged culprit? A commonly deployed well stimulation technology known as hydraulic fracturing, a technique that’s been used more than a million times over the past 60 years not just for oil and natural gas, but forgeothermal production and even by EPA for Superfund clean-ups.

But as mentioned, the report on private water wells from Penn State was issued in 2009, roughly 50 years removed from the first-ever application of fracturing technology in the Commonwealth — and five years after the fracturing of the first-ever Marcellus Shale well. In other words, hydraulic fracturing has been around an awful long time in Pennsylvania, and so has the development of oil (1859) and natural gas (1881). So if the critics are right, those activities must have been identified by researchers as the greatest threats to the state’s underground water resources, right?

Take a look for yourself:

Of the 28 variables measured for each well, the results demonstrated that natural variables, such as the type of bedrock geology where the well was drilled, were important in explaining the occurrence of most pollutants in wells. Soil moisture conditions at the time of sampling were the single most important variable in explaining the occurrence of bacteria in private wells. … Inadequate well construction was strongly correlated with the occurrence of both coliform and E. coli bacteria in wells.

That’s right – we forgot to mention the fecal coliform (exactly what you think it is) and E. coli bacteria. According to the report, it turns out that 33 percent of private water wells in PA were found to be contaminated with the coliform, while a staggering 14 percent tested positive for E. coli. Another contaminant of concern is naturally occurring arsenic. Two percent of tested wells had increased levels of that, which potentially translates into 20,000 water wells across the state. According to the report, arsenic “most often occur[s] naturally from certain types of rocks but it can also come from treated lumber and pesticides.” Incidentally, Pennsylvania is among the only states in the nation without regulations governing the construction of private water wells or the periodic testing of the quality of water that comes from them.

This presentation prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey will take a minute or two to load, but take a look at slide 23 if you get the chance. Turns out Pennsylvania’s water wells are among the only ones in the nation with “high contaminant concentrations” for every one of the Big 3: arsenic, nitrates and radon. Again: Nothing in the report remotely related to Marcellus Shale activities. But don’t take our word for it – ask DEP (by way of Scott Perry, director of DEP’s Bureau of Oil and Gas Management):

“If there was fracturing of the producing formations that was having a direct communication with groundwater, the first thing you would notice is the salt content in the drinking water. It’s never happened. After a million times across the country, no one’s ever documented drinking water wells that have actually been shown to be impacted by fracking.”

Protecting underground sources of drinking water is and will always be our top priority – after all, we live here too. But if we expect the quality of our water to improve, first we’ll need to be honest about how it got where it is today, and then we’ll need to get serious about what needs to be done to improve it. That, we think, is what you’d do if you genuinely cared about the state and status of Pennsylvania’s private water wells. Unfortunately, too many folks seem all too willing to blame the entire phenomenon on the development of the Marcellus Shale – irrespective of the science, and blind to the history of the past 60 years.

Copyright: Marcelluscoalition.org