By Mike Norman
mnorman@star-telegram.com
The natural gas industry understandably showed an "I told you so" pride last week when the Energy Institute at The University of Texas at Austin released initial results from a continuing study of shale gas development.
"New study shows no evidence of groundwater contamination from hydraulic fracturing," the institute's news release said. Industry representatives quickly spread that message across the Internet.
It was good news, because a lot of people have been worried, and some have loudly proclaimed their objection that "fracking" harms underground water supplies. It's good to have some respected researchers saying that's not the case.
Shale gas drilling has been a "game changer" for U.S. energy supplies, the report says. "Fact-based regulation and policies based on sound science are essential for achieving the twin objectives of shale gas resource availability and protection of human health and the environment."
Who could disagree? But, of course, the 414-page study report is more complicated than that. It says other worries remain.
The news release headline came from this part of the study: "No evidence of chemicals from hydraulic fracturing fluid has been found in aquifers as a result of fracturing operations."
There are other dangers, the study says:
"In spite of the much broader disclosure of the ingredients of the [fracturing] additives, there is not yet a clear understanding of what are the key chemicals of concern for environmental toxicity or their chemical concentration in the injected fluid."
"The greatest potential for impacts from a shale gas well appears to be from failure of the well integrity," meaning a poor job of cementing the well casing, allowing chemicals to leak into an aquifer by flowing upward between the casing and the borehole.
Negative publicity and a poor public perception have been significant problems for the shale gas industry despite its acknowledged contributions toward U.S. energy independence, the report shows. A survey of almost 1,500 respondents from 26 counties in and near the Barnett Shale in North Texas showed that about 40 percent felt that hydraulic fracturing is bad for the environment, with 44 percent neutral on the question and only 16 percent positive.
And the industry has not taken criticism well: "The response from the gas industry and its supporters has generally been denial -- not only that any such problems exist but also that if they did exist they are not real risks."
For many people, "hydraulic fracturing" (most just say "fracking") refers to more than forcing huge quantities of water, sand and a small portion of chemicals down a well to break up the deep shale rock. The study says, "The term has become such a lightning rod that it is equated in the eyes of many with the entire cycle of shale gas operations -- from drilling to fracturing, completion and production."
And there is other danger to water wells: "It appears that many of the water quality changes observed in water wells in a similar time frame as shale gas operations may be due to mobilization of constituents that were already present in the wells by energy [vibrations and pressure pulses] put into the ground during drilling and other operations rather than by hydraulic fracturing fluids or leakage from the well casing."
There is a risk of "blowouts," well ruptures at the surface or deep below:
"Blowouts are apparently the most common of all well control problems, and they appear to be under-reported."
"Surface blowouts at the wellhead are primarily a safety hazard to workers and may also result in escape of drilling fluid or formation water to nearby surface water sources."
"Subsurface blowouts may pose both safety hazards and environmental risks."
"Shale gas wells have the incremental risk of potential failures caused by the high pressures of fracturing fluid during hydraulic fracturing operations."
Finally, there are dangers involved with the water that comes back up from the well after fracturing, both the "flowback" from water pushed into the well and "produced water" coming from the deep shale formation: "Management of these wastes may be the greatest challenge of shale gas regulation by state agencies having the responsibility."
Regulators, the study says, spend too much time focusing on "procedural violations" like improper fencing or signage at well sites and not enough on high-risk issues like surface spills and subsurface well problems, the study concludes.
And there's another fault in the system: "Strong focus in the media on impacts on groundwater resources could pull attention away from potentially higher risks of surface incidents."
Mike Norman is editorial director of the Star-Telegram / Arlington and Northeast Tarrant County.817-390-7830 Twitter: @mnorman9
Looking for comments?
