Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘hydraulic fracturing’

Somewhere between Pecos and Odessa in southwestern Texas, Halliburton has lost a seven inch radioactive rod used in natural gas fracking.

Workers discovered the rod was missing on September 11th.  A lock on the container used to transport the radioactive rod was missing, along with the rod inside. Trucks have retraced the route of the vehicle, but have had no luck tracking it down so far.

This rod contains americium-241/beryllium which the health department says is not something that produces radiation in an extremely dangerous form. (Not sure what that means – I mean who even knew they used radioactive rods for fracking) But it’s best for people to stay back, 20 or 25 feet. (Seriously, what does this mean?)  Apparently you would have to have it in your possession for several hours before it is considered dangerous.

The National Guard has been asked to step in and help search for the missing rod, so if you are out driving in that 130 mile area and find a seven inch stainless steel cylinder about an inch in diameter, marked with the radiation warning symbol and the words ‘Do Not Handle’, well . . . DO NOT HANDLE, stay back at least 20 feet, and call the National Guard.

Read Full Post »

Are small earthquakes associated with hydraulic fracturing for gas?  Recent quakes in Ohio and Arkansas have taken many people by surprise, including a 2.7-magnitude earthquake that rocked Ohio on Christmas Eve, followed by a  4.0-magnitude quake on New Year’s Eve bringing the total to nine last year.  All of the quakes were recorded within a 5-mile radius of a hydrolic fracturing wastewater injection well.

Fracking and EarthquakeGas industry executives say there’s no hard evidence that their activities are causing these quakes. But some scientists say it’s certainly possible and have found that pumping water away from underground mines (to keep them from flooding) changes the dynamics of stress in rock formations enough to trigger a quake.

Some rock is saturated with water — the water occupies pores between rock particles. This creates what’s called “pore pressure” and keeps the formation in a sort of equilibrium. If you suck the water out, particles tend to collapse in on themselves: the rock compresses. Add water, and you push particles apart. So moving water around underground can affect the stresses on those formations.

Hydraulic fracturing pumps a lot of water underground, where it’s used to crack the rock and liberate gas. This may cause tiny quakes, but fracking goes on for a day or two, and the quakes are small.  But the recent quakes reported in Ohio and Arkansas are associated with the waste-water wells used to dispose of the fracking water, not the fracking wells. The water first used in fracturing rock is retrieved and pumped into these waste wells under high pressure and as much as 9,000 feet deep. It’s this pressure that can actually create earthquakes.

A few geologists are familiar with these induced or triggered quakes. They’re rare and usually small, but now fracking is creating thousands of waste-water wells, often in heavily populated areas that historically have not been seismically active. That means even small quakes get noticed.

We could avoid creating earthquakes by recycling the fracking waste-water rather than injecting into waste wells, however when the state of Pennsylvania tried it they found that waste-water treatment plants couldn’t get all the toxic material out of fracking water, and the “cleaned up” water returned to rivers wasn’t clean enough. So now they ship it to to Ohio, where there is a more relaxed regulatory environment.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is working on ways to head off quakes from waste-water wells by performing seismic surveys before drilling the wells or limiting the amount of water going into wells.  USGS geologists have learned that the more water injected, the bigger an ensuing quake.

Flamable tap water, earthquakes – this fracking business just keeps getting better and better . . .

Read Full Post »

A draft finding by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could have a chilling effect on states trying to determine how to regulate the process.

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, involves pumping pressurised water, sand and chemicals underground to open fissures and improve the flow of oil or gas to the surface.

The EPA found that compounds likely associated with fracking chemicals had been detected in the groundwater beneath the Wyoming community of Pavillion where residents say their well water reeks of chemicals.

Health officials advised them not to drink their water after the EPA found hydrocarbons in their wells.

The EPA announcement has major implications for the vast increase in gas drilling in the US in recent years. Fracking has played a large role in opening up many reserves.

The industry has long contended that fracking is safe, but environmentalists and some residents who live near drilling sites say it has poisoned groundwater.

The EPA said its announcement is the first step in a process of opening up its findings for review by the public and other scientists.

“EPA’s highest priority remains ensuring that Pavillion residents have access to safe drinking water,” said Jim Martin, EPA regional administrator in Denver. “We look forward to having these findings in the draft report informed by a transparent and public review process.”

At this time, the EPA is emphasising that the findings are specific to the Pavillion area. The agency said the fracking that occurred in Pavillion differed from fracking methods used elsewhere in regions with different geological characteristics.  Further studies need to be done in specific areas and the finding of this report should not be extrapolated to other areas of high activity.

This feels a bit like the EPA is hedging their bets and is scant consolation to those folks in other parts of the country who have the sideshow ability to light their water taps on fire.  Nevertheless, this finding may make it easier for other communities to have their voices heard when they express concerns about pollution of their water supplies.  This will be particularly important in Texas which is looking at a multi-year, record breaking drought in their future.

The fracking occurred below the level of the drinking water aquifer and close to water wells, the EPA said. Elsewhere, drilling is more remote and fracking occurs much deeper than the level of groundwater that anybody would use.

In Colorado, regulators are considering requiring oil and gas companies to publicly disclose the chemicals used in fracking

The public and industry representatives packed an 11-hour hearing on the issue on Monday. They all generally supported the proposal but the sticking point is whether trade secrets would have to be disclosed and how quickly the information would have be turned over.

Industry representatives say Colorado and Texas are the only states to have moved to consider disclosing all fracking chemicals, not just those considered hazardous by workplace regulators.

Read Full Post »

In recent months, the oil and gas industry has been vigorously denying that hydraulic fracturing (fracking), a technique of extracting natural gas from shale formations, is in anyway responsible for small earthquakes in areas where fracking activities have been taking place.  However, (according to Bloomberg) U.K.-based shale explorer Cuadrilla Resources Ltd. said in a report published Thursday, November 3rd it is “highly probably” that fracking caused two small earthquakes near Blackpool in northwest England earlier this year.

Of course they went on to minimize the event saying the geological circumstances were “rare” and the strongest possible tremor, of a magnitude of 3, wouldn’t be a risk to safety or property on the surface.

That being said, the findings may add to concern that fracturing is harmful to the environment.  France has already halted the practice for fear it may pollute drinking water and a small earthquake near Dallas caused concern for local residents who feared fracking in the area might have contributed to the event, even while the industry decried that possibility.

Cuadrilla halted operations earlier this year after two tremors were felt on the surface. The first, on April 1, measured 2.3 on the Richter scale and another on May 27 measured 1.5. Homeowners in the English seaside resort of Blackpool called the police after feeling their houses shake, the British Broadcasting Corp. reported.

Pressure from fluids on a so-called stressed fault zone probably caused the quakes, the report showed.  This should be of concern for other areas around the world where fracking activity is occurring near faults (for instance the Eagle Shale area near San Antonio).

Read Full Post »

Seal of the United States Department of Energy.

Image via Wikipedia

Public Citizen today urged a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) task force to prioritize the safety of water resources at contamination risk from hydraulic fracturing. Among the solutions Public Citizen proposed is repeal of the various exemptions the natural gas industry has received from federal environmental laws; the denial of drilling companies’ “proprietary” right to keep secret the identity of toxic materials they inject underground and an emphasis on improved outreach to affected communities.

The DOE’s Natural Gas Subcommittee should enact procedures to prevent water contamination around abandoned fracking wells, which has happened as fracking fluid and other contaminants have seeped into the groundwater. The public needs to be protected from chemically compromised water.

Just as worrisome, the hydraulic fracturing industry is exempted from elements of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act. The subcommittee should persuade Congress to repeal these special exemptions, which limit the federal government’s ability to ensure that protection of water resources is prioritized.

The subcommittee also should make every effort to include the input of the people whose lives will be affected by fracking policies, instead of holding 75 percent of the public meetings in Washington, D.C. The public needs a voice in policies that will have an enormous impact on their homes, their water and their safety.

The DOE subcommittee and Congress should work together to ensure the health and safety of the public and the environment.

To read the comments sent to the DOE, visit: http://www.citizen.org/documents/DOEfrackingComments8.15.2011.pdf.

This is a reprint of a Statement from Tyson Slocum, Director, Public Citizen’s Energy Program

Read Full Post »

Yesterday, Public Citizen spoke before the Department of Energy subcommittee tasked with natural gas drilling and outlined the key steps needed to properly oversee the process of fracking. We are calling on the subcommittee to recommend closure of many loopholes that create regulatory exemptions for fracking.

Please join us in urging the DOE to regulate this risky process by signing on to our public comments.

Click here to read our earlier post about environmental advocacy around “fracking” at the national level

Read Full Post »

Oh no . . . we're fracked!

What happens when you let Big Business regulate itself? – You get fracked.

Hydraulic fracturing — also known as fracking — is a controversial method of natural gas extraction that involves injecting a toxic chemical sludge into the surface of the earth until it rips open.

And it’s a case study in the dangers of letting giant corporations sidestep laws that protect our health, our investments and our environment.

Learn more about the risks of fracking, including how it could threaten your drinking water:

www.citizen.org/fracking-unsafe-unregulated

In 2005, then-Vice President Dick Cheney got fracking exempted from laws that keep our air and water clean. That exemption — known as the “Halliburton loophole” — allows oil and gas companies to force hazardous chemicals into underground water supplies.

As if that’s not enough, the Halliburton loophole is only one of seven exemptions for the oil and gas industries from major federal environmental laws like the Clean Air Act and National Environmental Policy Act.

The wholesale lack of federal tools to protect the public from fracking has created an inadequate patchwork of state regulations. As a result, companies are assaulting the environment and polluting drinking water supplies all over the country.

In Pennsylvania, a state with some of the most robust fracking regulations, one company — Chesapeake Appalachia LLC — racked up 149 environmental violations in just two and a half years.

While fracking is currently a hot-button issue, it is not a new practice. It was developed by Halliburton in the 1940s and has primarily been the scourge of communities in the Southwest.

The huge bump in fracking has been based on speculation that shale reserves in the Northeast could be the Saudi Arabia of natural gas. But even this is being challenged. The New York Times has recently reported that natural gas companies may be vastly overstating their reserves in what could be a giant Ponzi scheme.

To the credit of activists all over the country, the federal government has been forced to address fracking.

  • A number of lawmakers have sent letters to the Securities and Exchange Commission asking it to investigate whether the industry has provided accurate information about the productivity of natural gas wells, particularly those involved in fracking.
  • As part of President Obama’s “Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future,” the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) is exploring recommendations to better protect public health and the environment from fracking.

Public Citizen will be giving public comment with a list of recommendations at a SEAB meeting later this week. We will be giving you an opportunity to contribute to the dialogue, too, so stay tuned!

But investigations are only the first step toward curbing this unsafe practice. In the near term, legislative action to close loopholes that exempt fracking from federal law is needed. Meanwhile, all fracking activity should be suspended. Moving forward, shifting away from dangerous and dirty fuels is the only solution.

Read Full Post »

A new study from Cornell Professor Robert Howarth shows that natural gas from shale beds extracted through hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” has the same effect on the climate as burning coal, tarnishing one of the natural gas industry’s major claims of being a less polluting and more climate friendly fossil fuel.

A megawatt of electricity from a natural gas power plant will generally produce anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of the greenhouse gas emissions, specifically CO2, compared to a megawatt from a coal plant.  And since coal plants have rightfully been targeted as the biggest climate polluters the natural gas folks have been positioning themselves as the cheaper, cleaner alternative.

Not so fast, since methane, the main component of natural gas, is also a greenhouse gas that the EPA rates as having 20 times the heat-trapping capacity of CO2.  Since so much methane is released into the atmosphere during the fracking and drilling process, Howarth’s study questions that assumption, implying the climate benefits are minimal, if they even exist.  From The Hill:

More broadly, many gas supporters see domestic reserves as a “bridge” fuel while alternative energy sources are brought into wider use.

Howarth’s study questions this idea.

“The large GHG footprint of shale gas undercuts the logic of its use as a bridging fuel over coming decades, if the goal is to reduce global warming,” the study states.

But [natural gas industry spokesmen] also note that gas has other advantages over coal as an energy source, due to its lower emissions of conventional pollutants including nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide.

The study cautions that the research is not meant to justify continued use of oil and coal, but rather to show that using shale gas as a substitute might not provide the desired checks on global warming.

Howarth and Cornell engineering Prof. Anthony Ingraffea, who also worked on the study, acknowledged uncertainties in the nexus between shale gas and global warming in a presentation last month.

“We do not intend for you to accept what we reported on today as the definitive scientific study with regard to this question. It is clearly not. We have pointed out as many times as we could that we are basing this study on in some cases questionable data,” Ingraffea said at a mid-March seminar, which is available for viewing on Howarth’s website.

“What we are hoping to do by this study is to stimulate the science that should have been done before, in my opinion, corporate business plans superceded national energy strategy,” he added.

This is an incredibly important discussion to have, especially given the impacts that fracking is having on our air, water, health, and our state budget.

UPDATE: The Texas Energy Report got some good response from around the Capitol and we couldn’t help include it:

“Sounds like the coal industry may have funded it,” joked Sen. Troy Fraser (R-Horseshoe Bay), author of Senate Bill 15, which would create a 20-year energy and environmental policy council for Texas.

“The direction they’re going is exactly opposite of what we hear that natural gas is cleaner with less greenhouse emissions. We’ve always worked under that premise,” said Fraser who is also chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committee.

***“I would like to see it. I don’t know what they’re drawing their conclusions on. I would say it’s interesting – significant I don’t know,” said Rep. Jim Keffer, chairman of the House Energy Resources Committee.  “We’ll have to take a look at it. I’m sure there’ll be another side.”

Keffer is the author of a bill to require oil and gas companies drilling for shale gas to disclose the contents of chemicals they inject into the ground with water and sand during fracking. Fracking involves high-pressure injections of water into the ground to fracture rock formations and release gas.

The Environmental Defense Fund of Texas, which has embraced Keffer’s bill as the most significant fracking disclosure measure in the nation, said more work is needed to determine the air quality implications of fracking.

“Though we have questions about the study’s emissions estimates, it nevertheless highlights the importance of getting better data,” said Ramon Alvarez of the EDF.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Map of Texas highlighting counties served by t...

Texas counties served by AACOG

San Antonio, which sits just north of what many say is one of the largest oil and gas reserves in the country known as the Eagle Ford, is a heart beat away from violating federal air quality standards for ground-level ozone. It seems it is only a matter of time before the increased emissions from the Eagle Ford could drift up on prevailing winds, pushing the area out of compliance.

With drilling expected to increase over the next decade, those responsible for this region’s air quality say the increased pollution could make it difficult to remain under federal limits.  In the past decade, San Antonio’s ozone levels have decreased by 13 percent while its population has increased 13 percent, managing to stay just ahead of federal standards.  However, once a region falls out of compliance, efforts to get back in are time-consuming, politically unpopular and expensive.

It is going to be a tough contest for the environment to compete with the hype about the economic benefits (which always fail to take into account the economic costs to the region for these types of activities – increased health care costs, decreased quality of life costs, and the cost of coming back into compliance with federal air quality standards).

According to a study by the Center for Business Research at the University of Texas at San Antonio and commissioned by America’s Natural Gas Association:

Activity in the Eagle Ford in 2010 alone generated more than $2.9 billion in total revenue, supported roughly 12,600 full-time jobs and provided nearly $47.6 million in local government revenue.

Last year there were 72 active oil leases, some of which may have more than one well, and 158 producing gas wells.

However, the number of drilling permits issued by the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates the state’s oil and gas industry, has reached 1,132 as of February. In just one year, the output of crude oil, condensate and other liquids nearly quadrupled to 3.9 million barrels.

And the boom has just begun; the UTSA study forecasts that 5,000 more wells could be drilled by 2020.

So far, no regulatory agency has begun comprehensive air monitoring in the Eagle Ford area, meaning there’s no baseline to measure any increased pollution.

Models for other regions of the country show drilling and related emissions can increase ground-level ozone significantly and the sheer volume of drilling that’s expected over the next decade, will require Alamo Area Council of Governments (AACOG) to add a new category, for drilling and recovery, into its air pollution forecasting models.

The San Antonio Express News writes about the area:

The Eagle Ford shale covers a swath roughly 50 miles wide and 400 miles long, from Maverick and Webb counties sweeping north and east up to Leon and Houston counties, but not including Bexar County. Unlike other large shale formations that have recently been tapped, the Eagle Ford includes a good deal of oil, mostly along the northern reach.

Because oil prices are high and natural gas prices low at the moment, there’s more activity in the oil region at this time, industry analysts say.

Drilling has occurred in South Texas for decades, but the oil and gas trapped in the deeper, dense rock layers once were too expensive to reach. Advances in drilling technology, most notably hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, have allowed an unprecedented amount of hydrocarbons to be extracted.

“Fracking,” as it’s known, forces millions of gallons of water, mixed with sand and a variety of chemicals, into shale formations, forcing open fissures to allow the natural gas and oil to escape. Horizontal drilling allows for one hole to be drilled vertically, then one or more pipes to branch out into the shale.

Together, these techniques have spawned a natural gas boom in the country, with some industry experts estimating a 100-year supply of a fuel that burns more cleanly than coal and could help push the country toward energy independence.

In other parts of the country the boom is well under way, and as drilling has increased, so have complaints about its environmental impacts, most notably drinking water contamination.  While it remains unclear whether fracturing has contaminated drinking water, the EPA last month agreed to study the entire life cycle of the gas production process, to determine how it can affect drinking water supplies.

While water has gotten the lion’s share of the attention thus far, air quality concerns also are increasing and seem to be the area of most concern to San Antonio as they look toward increased drilling activities in the region.  Let’s hope they can stay ahead of this new boom.

Read Full Post »

The long-awaited Sunset Bill of the Railroad Commission was released late yesterday, and it’s mostly what we’d expected, but not everything we’d hoped for.

Highlights:

  • The Railroad Commission will be renamed the Texas Oil and Gas Commission
  • It will be headed by one commissioner  (down from 3) who will be elected every four years on the same cycle as Governor, Comptrollerm, Ag Commissioner, etc.
  • Campaign finance reform: Commissioners and candidates for the commission can only raise money one year before an election and 30 days after.
  • Moving contested hearings to the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH).

These are needed reforms and the problems they attempt to correct are huge. For instance, the large influence campaign money has in the election of the Railroad Commission historically, as detailed in our report Drilling for Dollars. Among our findings was that nearly half of all campaign donations were being solicited and received in non-election years. Creating this fund-raising window will help keep at least the appearance of impropriety away from the new Oil and Gas Commissioner for at least 3 out of every 4 years, though we’re fairly certain the money will gush in all the same. This is why we proposed public financing for this important new office, but barring that, at least better disclosure of who is giving the money (specifically the occupation and employer of donors) and putting a cap on how much someone can give.

Unfortunately, this bill also does not offer any new guidance on regulation of fracking and natural gas drilling. Currently fracking regulation is in somewhat of a no man’s land, as Railroad Commission says they do not enforce our environmental laws, but TCEQ says they don’t regulate the operations of drillers. While it’s possible some of these reforms will come from the TCEQ sunset or from separate legislation, the bottom line is that we cannot allow our agencies to play hot potato with this issue.

So, what does this mean that we would get one new oil and gas commissioner from three current railroad commissioners? If passed in its current form, the railroad commission would be abolished- the railroad commissioners would be out of a job. Not a big deal for those like Michael Williams, who has said he will resign next month in order to pursue a run for Senate. Elizabeth Ames Jones has hinted she would do the same.  Upon creation of the new Oil and Gas Commission, the first commissioner would be appointed by Governor Perry, but s/he would only serve until 2012, when the first Oil and Gas Commissioner race in the history of Texas would take place. Whoever wins that race would serve for only two years, then be up for re-election in 2014, and then elections would take place every four years after that.

This is many steps forward from where we began, and we’re grateful that both the Sunset Commission staff and Committee members listened to our (the environmental and good government community’s) thoughtful proposals and adopted some of them into this reform package. It’s a testament to the power of people showing up and making their voices heard. But this is the beginning, not the end. So in the spirit of making our voices heard, please remember to join us Tuesday for ACT Lobby Day. This will be an opportunity for you and us to ask for even more needed reforms both at RRC and TCEQ.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

 

Read Full Post »

Texas Barnett Shale gas drilling rig near Alva...

Image via Wikipedia

I hope you’re going to have a great Oscar night, and while we may all have our favorites for best picture (True Grit was my favorite, but I think The Social Network and The King’s Speech are also very deserving), this year we have one of the most important issues of our time as the subject of one of the nominees for best documentary.

In Gasland, director Josh Fox travels across America to learn about the effects of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, as a method to drill for natural gas. Despite the rhetoric about how clean natural gas is compared to other fossil fuels (kind of like saying it’s the least ugly stepsister), fracking is causing major problems across the US.

One of our favorite local bloggers in Texas, TXSharon, has been documenting these same problems living on top of the Barnett Shale. We don’t have a clip we can embed from Gasland, but I’ll use this as a placeholder:

Fox’s filmmaking is beautiful, frightening, humorous where possible, wry, and dismally depressing all at the same time. But he educates you on this terrible problem seeping up from the ground, and he makes you a little bit hopeful that we can find ways to get energy that don’t destroy our water supplies. That don’t ruin suburban neighborhoods or productive farmland.

And ultimately why it should win is because it’s fairly obvious the truth it is telling is far too dangerous to those who profit from fracking with our water. The natural gas industry has been on a months-long crusade to try to discredit Gasland, even going so far as to try to get it declared ineligible to receive the award, and if Hollywood bows to the pressure it will be an even worse tragedy than allowing them to censor The King’s Speech so it can get a PG-13 rating.

Also, Id like to see it win because it features my favorite EPA Regional Administrator, Dr. Al Armendariz, talking about his research about how the drilling from the Barnett Shale in suburban Ft Worth is creating more pollution than all of the cars and trucks in the Dallas/Ft Worth area combined. It also features Cal Tillman, the mayor of the little town of Dish, TX, who recently sold his home in Dish because of health problems his family was having from the drilling. He made the new buyer watch Gasland before they bought the house. These real, but amazing, subjects in the documentary are folks I’m proud to rub shoulders with here in Texas.

Enjoy the Academy Awards, hopefully surrounded by some good, geeky friends and family. And even if “Exit Through the Gift Shop” wins for best documentary, make sure you see Gasland as soon as possible.

Cross-posted at BigShinyRobot.com where I occasionally blog about geeky stuff under the pseudonym CitizenBot

Read Full Post »

Senator Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth) filed Senate Bill 772, which, if passed, would require companies using hydraulic fracturing to mine natural gas in Texas to include a unique tracer compound enabling regulators to determine which party is or is not responsible in the event that the fluids find their way into drinking water supplies.

Sen. Davis compared the tracing compound to “DNA” for gas drilling companies. She said the measure would protect both landowners and the operators in the state’s growing shale plays and resolve questions regarding groundwater contamination allegations.

If an effective tracer compound had been used by Range Resources, it might have gone a long way toward settling a dispute between the Fort Worth company and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over two contaminated wells in Parker County containing methane, benzene and other compounds found in natural gas fracking operations.

To see a copy of Davis’ bill, click here.

Read Full Post »

Industry groups began raising objections to the movie “Gasland” when the documentary first aired on HBO last June.  However, they recently stepped up their attacks when Gasland was nominated for an academy award. 

Energy in Depth, a group representing a coalition of industry groups including the Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Assn. and the Texas Alliance of Energy Producers. sent a letter to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences arguing that “Gasland” should be ineligible for best documentary feature because, in their opinion,  it contains inaccuracies.

While other industries have launched public relations campaigns to discredit documentaries — health insurers targeted Michael Moore‘s “Sicko” in 2007,  and Dole challenged a 2009 documentary called “Bananas!” — this is the first time an industry group has appealed directly to the academy.

Compared with documentaries like “Sicko” or the environmental film “An Inconvenient Truth,” “Gasland” has been seen by relatively few people.  The film took in only $30,000 in a small theatrical release in the fall.  But in recent months Fox has shown “Gasland” to members of Congress and at the Environmental Protection Agency, and held community screenings in 100 cities.  But that is the prerogative  of the filmmaker. 

What the industry has done in writing the letter to the academy was to draw more attention to the movie than it otherwise would have gotten.  This kind of action might actually result in more members of the academy voting for it. They’ve revitalized the life of this labour of love documentary.

In “Gasland,” director Josh Fox learns that the land near his Pennsylvania home has been designated for hydraulic fracturing or fracking, a process that involves blasting water, sand and chemicals into underground rock to extract oil or gas. Fox, whose previous film “Memorial Day” was about the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq, sets out on a road trip to fracking sites around the U.S. to learn more about the process.

The academy understands its role does not include that of an investigatory agency, and the members will make their decisions on this year’s documentary category as they have done in the past.  Whether or not the film wins an Oscar, the past months have done more to increase public awareness of this industry practice (a December poll conducted for the nonprofit Civil Society Institute found that 45% of Americans very or somewhat aware of the controversy about fracking.) than the many news stories about the problems communities have experienced, and we hope that the state and federal regulatory agencies will work to ensure the industry applies this process in a way that is not hurtful to citizens who live around fracking sites.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Even CSI is talking about fracking

According to the Fort Worth Star Telegram, the Barnett Shale natural gas fields of Denton and Wise counties are one of five finalists to be considered for a case study as part of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) examination of hydraulic fracturing.  

That is not a competition I would want to win, but if I were facing possible contamination of drinking-water supplies from oil and gas industry operations in areas where drilling and hydraulic fracturing have already occurred, I’d want to know what the extent of that pollution was.

Nevertheless. a Texas organizer for the Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project, expressed concern Wednesday about the study, stating she felt EPA would be using “people as guinea pigs.”  She called for the leaders in those Texas communities to consider placing a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing until after the study is complete (like that is going to happen–sadly probably not) and use some other community for the study. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Drilling companies injected more than 32 million gallons of fluids containing diesel into the ground during hydraulic fracturing operations from 2005 to 2009, according to federal lawmakers.  About a third of the 32 million gallons was straight diesel fuel, with 49.8% of the 32.2 million gallons of fluid containing diesel injected into Texas wells.  Texas lead the 19 states using diesel as a fracking fluid, followed by Oklahoma at 10% of the 32.2 million gallons.

Hydraulic fracturing is a drilling technique that involves pumping millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals into underground formations to release greater quantities of gas and oil. The technique dates back several decades, but it has drawn new scrutiny from the public and regulators as its use has grown in recent years.

Concerns include the potential for the chemicals to get into drinking water or for natural gas to migrate into water wells.  While the industry says that such an incident rarely happens and can easily be avoided, some homeowners near Fort Worth would probably wouldn’t buy that claim.

Most hydraulic fracturing fluid uses water as its primary component, but in formations where water is absorbed too easily – such as in certain kinds of clay – diesel is used as an additive.

The EPA and industry agreed in 2003 that diesel wouldn’t be used in hydraulic fracturing jobs in coal bed methane formations, because drilling in those formations tends to be closer to drinking water sources.  At this time, none of the companies that used diesel as a fracking fluid could provide data on whether they performed hydraulic fracturing in or near underground sources of drinking water.

Lawmakers are asking the EPA to look at diesel use in its study into the safety of hydraulic fracturing.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »