Fracking Panel Nov 2011

X-Fracking Panel Nov 2011

The two-hour video is online.

Panel on hydraulic fracturing or "fracking," presented by IAPE with support from the OU Environmental Studies Program.

The speakers included:

  1. Elizabeth Paranhos (consulting attorney with the Environmental Defense Fund and Environmental Law Consultant at Delone Law, Inc., in Boulder, Colorado).

  2. Debbie Phillips (member of Ohio State House of Representatives).

  3. Dina Lopez (professor of Geology, Ohio University; expertise in environmental geology, contaminant geochemistry, and transport processes in groundwater).

  4. Ariaster Chimeli (professor of Economics, Ohio University; expertise in environmental economics, climate, development, and the economics of energy).

Members of both major political parties in the Ohio State House of Representatives were invited to take part in this panel, but only one accepted the invitation.

The informational handout referred to is copied here below.

Fracking’s Threats to Health and the Environment

Environmental concerns about hydraulic fracturing include potential contamination of ground water, potential migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, potential air pollution, and potential mishandling of waste.

As development of natural gas wells in the U.S. since the year 2000 has increased, so too have claims by private well owners of water contamination, as well as claims of air pollution and harms to livestock as well as to humans.

In 2009, a Propublica (www.propublica.org) investigation revealed that methane contamination is widespread, "methane related to the natural gas industry has contaminated water wells in at least seven Pennsylvania counties since 2004". Because of this contamination, several homes have blown up after gas seeped into their water supplies; there have been reports of house explosions in Pennsylvania and Ohio. In one case in 2004, a methane leak caused an explosion that killed a couple and their 17 month old grandson.

See:

Lustgarten, Abrahm. "Water Problems From Drilling Are More Frequent Than PA Officials Said". Propublica.

Lustgarten, Abrahm. "Scientific Study Links Flammable Drinking Water to Fracking". Propublica.

Lustgarten, Abrahm. "Officials in Three States Pin Water Woes on Gas Drilling". Propublica. Retrieved 11 May 2011.

Environmental group Riverkeeper presented a report to the EPA of over 100 cases of contamination. It has published a report of various environmental impacts using reports from federal and state regulators.

See: Rubinkam M, Esch M. (Sept 10, 2010). Lawsuit: Gas drilling fluid ruined Pennsylavania water wells. AP.

See also: Michaels C, Simpson JL, Wegner W. (2010). Fractured Communities: Case Studies of the Environmental Impacts of Gas Drilling. Riverkeeper.

See also: Richard A. Kerr (13 May 2011). "Study: High-Tech Gas Drilling Is Fouling Drinking Water". Science Now 332: 775. Retrieved 2011-06-27.

A Duke University study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2011 examined methane in groundwater in Pennsylvania and New York states overlying the Marcellus Shale and the Utica Shale. It determined that groundwater tended to contain much higher concentrations of methane near fracking wells, with potential explosion hazard.

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) reports that "Earthquakes induced by human activity have been documented in a few locations" in the United States, Japan, and Canada; "the cause was injection of fluids into deep wells for waste disposal and secondary recovery of oil, and the use of reservoirs for water supplies." The disposal and injection wells referenced are regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act and UIC laws and are not wells where hydraulic fracturing is generally performed.

See: "FAQs - Earthquakes, Faults, Plate Tectonics, Earth Structure: Can we cause earthquakes? Is there any way to prevent earthquakes?" USGS. October 27, 2009.

Global Climate Change and Shale Gas

The use of natural gas rather than oil or coal is sometimes touted as a way of alleviating global warming: natural gas burns more cleanly, and gas power stations can produce up to 50% less greenhouse gases than coal stations. However, an analysis of the well-to-consumer lifecycle of fracked natural gas concluded that 3.6–7.9% of the methane produced by a well will be leaked into the atmosphere during the well's lifetime. Because methane is such a potent greenhouse gas, this means that over short timescales, shale gas is actually worse than coal or oil. Methane gradually breaks down in the atmosphere, so that over long periods it is not as problematic as carbon dioxide; yet even if shale gas is burnt in efficient gas power stations, its greenhouse-gas footprint is still worse than coal or oil for timescales of less than fifty years.

See: Nature (477): 271–275 (15 September 2011): Howarth, Robert W. and Ingraffea, Anthony "Should Fracking Stop? Extracting gas from shale increases the availability of this resource, but the health and environmental effects may be too high. Point: Yes, it's too high risk"; Engelder, Terry "Should Fracking Stop? Extracting gas from shale increases the availability of this resource, but the health and environmental effects may be too high. Counterpoint: No, It's Too Valuable."

Professors Don Siegel and Anthony Ingraffea discuss hydrofracking:

http://shaleshockmedia.org/2011/04/11/professors-siegel-and-ingraffea-debate-on-hydrofracking/

*****
New York State Bar Association Journal (Nov.-Dec., 2011):

“Even before the drilling commences, many upstate New York homeowners with gas leases cannot obtain mortgages. Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Provident Funding, GMAC, FNCB, Fidelity and First Liberty, First Place Bank, Solvay Bank, Tompkins Trust Company, CFCU Community Credit Union and others are either imposing large buffer zones (too large for many borrowers) around the home as a condition to the loan or not granting a mortgage at all. Once lenders connect the “no hazardous activity” clause in the mortgage with the mounting uptick in uninsurable events from residential fracking, this policy can be expected to expand. Originating lenders with gas industry business relationships may decide to assume the risk, make mortgage loans to homeowners with gas leases and keep the non-conforming loans in their own loan portfolio. However, there is a limit to what an originating bank can keep in its own loan portfolio. Eventually, cash infusions from the secondary mortgage market will become a necessity; and secondary mortgage market lending guidelines will be a reality. If homeowners with gas leases can’t mortgage their property, they probably can’t sell their property either (this assumes the purchaser will need mortgage financing to fund the purchase). The inability to sell one’s home may represent the most pervasive adverse impact of residential fracking.” (p. 21)