Hydrofracturing – The Update

Hydrofracturing is not a new concept; in fact, it has been utilized in the stimulation of gas and oil in the United States since the 1940s. Thanks to the extreme media attention, many are led to believe that this is a new technology developed specifically for the extraction of natural gas. What has greatly expanded the profitability and commercialization of natural gas drilling is the use of hydrofracturing in combination with horizontal drilling. This has made shale gas drilling more accessible and deeper shale deposits economically feasible. For example in 2009, Pennsylvania only produced one percent of the total dry gas production; but is currently one of the most active areas of new development. Today, natural gas provides approximately 30% of the total U.S. energy as compared to less than 2% in 2001. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, shale gas drilling is expected to rapidly increase its current production rates.

Recently, the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board formed a Shale Gas Subcommittee to help identify ways to reduce the environmental impacts and improve safety in shale gas production operations. On August 11, 2011, the subcommittee released its 90-day report for public comment. The committee focused their findings and recommendations to four major areas: public information; reduction of environmental impact and increased safety; creation of a national organization to drive continuous improvement of best operation practices and research and development.

There are significant differences in public perception of the shale gas drilling industry. Advocates of drilling, point to the creation of new jobs, economic stimulation and the excellent safety record associated with fracturing. Opponents have been critical about violations, failures and accidents, as well as long term environmental impacts. The difference in these views can be attributed to lack of communication and information. The Subcommittee is recommending that a national database be created to link all the information available on shale gas development to include both state and federal information. This of course would come with a pretty hefty price tag of $20 million to create the database and $5 million annually to maintain.

In addition to widely covered concerns about contamination of drinking water, there are many other environmental impacts that are being looked at. These environmental concerns include: air quality, noise pollution, visual pollution, community disruption and other adverse impacts on ecosystems.

As shale gas drilling continues to expand across the country, air emissions are becoming a greater concern. There are documented air quality problems in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and Texas and is becoming an increasing concern in the Marcellus region. Air quality emissions are not just results of the drilling, but can occur in exploration and also be due to venting/flaring, equipment operation and increased vehicle traffic. Typical air emission contaminants are volatile organic compounds, particulate from diesel exhaust and greenhouse gases such as methane. In July 2011, the EPA proposed amendments to air emission regulations to include oil & gas operations and is under court order to take final action in 2012. Another initiative with reducing air emission is to reduce the use of diesel in shale development. The Subcommittee is recommending that diesel equipment be replaced with natural gas or electric equipment if available. This alone would significantly reduce air emissions.

The most publicized concern with hydrofracturing is water quality and quantity in some cases. Hydrofracturing a single well will use anywhere from 1 – 5 million gallons of water per fracturing; this water usage in areas like Texas is causing excessive strains on an already limited resource. One of the concerns with water quality is that the fracturing fluid would migrate into the aquifer. There are very few cases documented on this migration. Most if the water contamination issues are a result of surface spills and leakage into the surrounding shallow water formation, poorly cemented casing which may leak and methane migration. The Subcommittee is recommending the use of mats and other catchment devices to help address spills. They also recommend regularly monitoring groundwater and the establishment of buffers around surface water resources. As for the methane migration, not all methane contamination is a result of hydrofracturing, it can be present as a result of past conventional drilling practices. A recent study, focusing on Northern Pennsylvania indicated that higher levels of methane are being found in wells surrounding a shale production site. The Subcommittee is recommending further studies be commissioned to determine the extent of methane migration in all regions where shale gas operations are present. The subcommittee is recommending states and localities implement systems to measure and report background water quality prior to any shale production activity and make this information publically available.

The water used in the fracturing process will return back to the surface as what is referred to as "return water". This return water is initially processed to remove the gas, but the remaining waste stream is of significant volume. There are four ways in which the waste stream is disposed of; first, by reusing the return water as fracturing fluid in a new well. Several drilling companies in the Marcellus region are reusing over 90 percent of the return water. A second popular alternative is deep injection disposal wells, which is regulated by the EPA. Next is waste water treatment, but most waste water treatment plants are not designed to treat the volume of this highly contaminated water effectively. Finally there is runoff, which is not a legal option as it is illegal to allow this waste stream to runoff into other surface water. The subcommittee is recommending the development an integrated water management system regionally with the help of industry and other stakeholders to track all use and quality of water being used in the process.

While air and water quality are extremely important there are other environmental impacts to consider. Drilling operations will obviously disturb the land and ecosystem of the area and increased traffic and equipment can have a detrimental effect on the surrounding environment. The subcommittee is looking at the following for further consideration:

• Optimize use of multi well drilling pads to reduce traffic and the need for road construction.
• Evaluate the use of water based on the scale of the affected watershed.
• Regulators to provide formal notification of potential environmental and community impacts.
• Protect unique and sensitive areas by designating them as off-limits for drilling activities.
• Provide science based characterization of important landscapes and habitats in order to plan and prevent the surface impacts of drilling.
• Determine effective field monitoring and how it should be enforced.
• Mitigation of noise, air and visual pollution.

The subcommittee also recommends the development of a “best practice” by the creation of a shale gas industry production organization dedicated to continuous improvement through the development of standards. With the development of new standards there should be a way to measure and track the progress in shale gas operation performance and its impact on the environment. Finally the report addressed research and development needs to improve performance and lower product costs.

The pursuit of domestic energy resources means that the shale gas industry is not going away anytime soon. As a matter of fact, technology improvements have made drilling and deep shale drilling easier and more affordable thus making the industry more appealing to companies looking to enter the market. This gas drilling industry is bringing about employment opportunities and bolstering businesses that indirectly support those working in the industry. The concerns are valid in regards to the potential environmental impacts that can result from drilling. Water usage, water contamination and air emissions all pose real threats in this industry. However, public awareness is helping to bring about a change to this industry and the need for closer evaluation and regulation of all aspects of the industry. The 90-day report is a great building block in developing regulations needed to help protect our environment moving forward in this industry.