iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

EPA Fracking Study To Focus On 5 States, But Not Wyoming

Epa Fracking Study 2011 States

First Posted: 06/26/11 11:17 PM ET Updated: 08/26/11 06:12 AM ET

By ProPublica's Abrahm Lustgarten

The Environmental Protection Agency will focus its national study of hydraulic fracturing on seven areas in five states, but will exclude the two Wyoming gas fields where agency researchers have already collected some of the most in-depth data on drilling's environmental impacts.

The study – which was announced last March, without specifics on research sites – will investigate alleged water contamination from drilling in five areas in Texas, Colorado, North Dakota and Pennsylvania. It also will encompass cradle-to-grave research projects in Pennsylvania and Louisiana, where the agency will track drilling's effects on water quality from before the drill bit hits the ground to after hydraulic fracturing has been performed.

"This is about using the best possible science to do what the American people expect the EPA to do – ensure that the health of their communities and families are protected," said Paul Anastas, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Research and Development, in a statement.

Conspicuously absent from the list are sites in Sublette County and Pavillion, Wyo., where EPA scientists began testing water and collecting data three years ago in response to allegations of drilling-related contamination. In Sublette County, one of the most active drilling fields in the country, researchers discovered benzene in 88 water wells in 2008 and have been testing ever since. In Pavillion, the EPA found metals, methane, hydrocarbons and traces of compounds related to fracking chemicals in residential water wells in 2009.

Research in both areas is ongoing and may still inform the EPA's work, but it will not play a central role in the nationwide investigation into whether hydraulic fracturing is safe, or presents a risk to drinking water. The EPA did not immediately respond to questions about the role of the Wyoming research.

Fracturing is a process used to extract trapped oil and gas from thousands of feet below ground by injecting a mixture of water, sand and chemicals under enough force to shatter the rock and allow the oil and gas to flow out. Advancements in the technology have made large, deeply buried natural gas deposits in the Marcellus Shale and elsewhere accessible for the first time. But the process is exempt from federal regulation and there is little research showing where the chemicals wind up after they are pumped underground, or how they can be safely disposed of after the drilling is finished.

A series of articles by ProPublica beginning in 2008 found a pattern of groundwater water pollution across states where fracturing is used to tap natural gas. Residents in these areas complained they could light their faucets on fire and had suffered health effects they worried were caused by the drilling processes.

Now Congress is weighing bills that would lead to regulation of fracturing and the EPA is undertaking the first national study to evaluate the effects of fracturing on drinking water.

On Thursday, the EPA said it had narrowed down more than 40 prospective research sites to seven based on factors ranging from the size of the population and the proximity of drinking water supplies to drilling, to health complaints and the extent of alleged contamination.

Five research projects will take a forensic approach, retroactively investigating places where drilling has already occurred and where contamination has been alleged. The sites for these projects are:

● Kildeer and Dunn Counties in North Dakota's Bakken Shale ● Wise and Denton Counties in Texas' Barnett Shale ● Bradford and Susquehanna Counties- in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale ● Washington County, also in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale ● Las Animas County in Colorado's Raton Basin

At two additional sites – in DeSoto Parish, La., in the Haynesville Shale and a separate site in Washington County, Pa. – the EPA will attempt to observe and measure the changes drilling brings to an area as it happens.

These prospective studies could prove the most interesting, and the most challenging. To gain access to drilling sites, EPA researchers have partnered with two companies that have agreed to allow agency scientists to be present before a drill pad is cleared, as it is drilled, and as it is hydraulically fractured. In a public conference call Thursday, EPA officials mentioned Chesapeake Energy and Range Resources as possible partners, but did not confirm these were the companies it had begun working with. Chesapeake is the predominant drilling company in the Haynesville Shale and Range is active in central and western Pennsylvania.

The lifecycle study will allow the EPA to test water quality near the drilling sites before any activity takes place, and then monitor for changes as the companies drill their wells. It also will allow the EPA to collect and test fracturing fluids and other waste that flows back out of the well, providing an exact chemical portrait that can be compared to water contaminants if they are discovered. According to an EPA official, the agency is considering "tagging" the hydraulic fracturing fluids with a benign tracer, a technique that could finally make it possible to see exactly where the injected fracturing fluids wind up.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

By ProPublica's Abrahm Lustgarten The Environmental Protection Agency will focus its national study of hydraulic fracturing on seven areas in five...
By ProPublica's Abrahm Lustgarten The Environmental Protection Agency will focus its national study of hydraulic fracturing on seven areas in five...
Filed by Travis Donovan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 51
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
06:10 PM on 07/05/2011
It is not surprising that they will not do their study in W. Wyoming. Wyoming gas is not considered an "unconventional resource" like the haynesville, marcellus, barnett, etc. I am a little surprised that they are studying the bakken, but then it is a tight dolomite, closer to tight shale from a production aspect than the mesa verde, almond and other mainly sandstone reservoirs in WY.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vexed weasel
11:05 AM on 06/28/2011
Fracking is an act of extreme desperation. The lifespan of these wells is low, 1 to 5 years. The EROEI is very low. The damage to the water supply is permanent in human terms.

We have burned through nearly all the oil and easy to get gas. We are down to trading our drinking water for the last few BTU's we can get our hands on.

The energy companies are our government.

We must keep the party going until it stops. It stops soon. We will all be living on a vast waste heap slaving for filtered "produced" water.

There will be plenty of parking.
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
06:32 PM on 07/05/2011
Almost all wells in the world are fracced or hi-pressure stimulated in some way. As for well life, that depends on the cost of gas and the extraction costs, but overall:

Barnett well life: 7.5 years
Haynesville: 5 years and counting
Marcellus: 20+ years (this is a naturally-fractured play, which means that the rock is already fractured, it needs to be hydraulically fractured to open those fractures larger to allow the gas to flow from additional interconnected fractures. This should not be confused for what is termed and "open-fracture" reservoir. That type of reservoir is not usually hydraulically fractured, since it will one push fluid back into the open fractures, create discrete "blocks" of rock that are isolated and can not produce, and may in fact hurt production, not help it).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jenn May
"insert clever quote here"
12:52 AM on 06/28/2011
I'm glad. This will answer a lot of questions, and we need to see the before/after effect before continuing, especially when there are two sides heavily invested in this debate. I'm sure though, either way there will be those on both sides who will not be happy in the end no matter what the results.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:13 PM on 06/27/2011
not Wyoming ?...the home of darthvader ?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:08 PM on 06/27/2011
i think we should make fracking the new "f-word". Every time we want to insult people we should say "My boss is a fracking numskull" or "My fracking boyfriend ran out on me." It would get people's attention.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jenn May
"insert clever quote here"
12:50 AM on 06/28/2011
It is so addicting to say... those fracking mother frackers! What the frack is wrong with their fracking brains!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:57 PM on 06/28/2011
Our fracking politicians have sold out to the fracking oil companies, I don't know what this fracking country is coming to!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:15 PM on 06/27/2011
We said no to Qutar natural gas. They can supply us with a hundred years of natural gas with no drilling in the US.
We can import all of our oil. No need to drill in the US.
We can import all of our ethanol. No reason to destroy our forests and rivers and the Gulf of Mexico.
10:14 PM on 06/27/2011
YES! and we can live as a slave race……….Not!
01:10 PM on 06/27/2011
"This is about using the best possible science to do what the American people expect the EPA to do – ensure that the health of their communities and families are protected," said Paul Anastas, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Research and Development
Yes this is what we expect.... so why did the EPA allow this to happen in the first place... they used studies supplied by the fracking companies that stated it was safe, yet those same companies never disclosed to the EPA what they were pumping into the ground. This study is a joke and the EPA is a joke, its just an arm of the companies destroying our environment. I feel very sorry for future generations and the mess we are leaving them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:17 PM on 06/27/2011
It is not the EPAs job to study fracking. It is each individual State.
Before we ask the EPA to do the job that the States were suppose to be doing these last 100 years, we need to change the laws.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:04 PM on 06/27/2011
Why don't We The People study about fracking?
It's all on the Internet.
I don't mean politically motivated web site.
Let's take the politics out of the process.
Let's use science for a change.
We have so many science deniers that believe politicians know better.
Let's find out what our politicians are doing to ensure that our environment is pretected.
If they are taking bribes. Let's find out and fire them.
Or we could just sit around on our computers calling each other names and pointing fingers.
That really accomplishes a lot, doesn't it?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:38 PM on 06/27/2011
Actually, unless we are texting while driving, at least we aren't poisoning the Earth with our foul gasoline-powered vehicles.
12:16 PM on 06/27/2011
While I am grateful for the EPA's targeted study regions, it is outrageous that Wyoming has been excluded - as outrageous as excluding West Divide Creek, CO which experienced a massive (115 million cubic feet) gas blowout in 2004, and meets every criterion for field study. But, gosh, at least Wyoming has gotten the EPA to sample at least some of their region. EPA won't touch West Divide Creek, despite another massive seep erupting in 2008. To this day, despite re-cementing well bores, hydrocarbons, including benzene, continue to seep to the surface. To my knowledge, the 2004 event is the only one in the entire world where fracing was directly implicated in official state hearing documents finding fault. But the state of Colorado continues to deny impacts and even discredits my claim of a second seep in 2008 despite the operator's own documented evidence (journeyoftheforsaken.com). It doesn't take a genius to recognize the purpose behind this minimized level of inquiry. The study appears to be a genuine effort, but influenced unduly by commercial/political interests acting to shape its conclusions. This really isn't surprising, but if the intent is to determine once and for all whether fracing can be done safely, why curtail telling evidence? Well... I guess that doesn't take a genius either.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:20 PM on 06/27/2011
Wyoming used to sell their CO2 for great profit.
Benzene comes from animals. Your body makes benzene compounds every day.
Many people take them in pill form once a day to feel better,
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
06:47 PM on 07/05/2011
1. W. Wyoming is not considered "unconventional shale". Neither is Colorado. They just want apples-apples.
2. A blowout is the opposite of a frac job, literally.
3. The investigation showed that there was a well that was improperly completed. I bet you have more than one in the area if you continue to have contamination. That should be more disconcerting to the locals than focusing on hydraulic fracturing - the wells are not being drilled correctly in the first place, let alone having any type of secondary stimulation done to them.
4. Were the wells fractured with Benzene? that has been a real stumbling block in court cases where fraccing has been blamed for contamination - no trace of the frac fluids have been found in the water. other chemicals, yes, but not frac fluid.
5. Benzene, unfortunately, is found naturally in natural gas.
www.gasliquids.com/papers/benzene99.pdf

that is an interesting paper from a process engineering outfit unassociated with the drilling business. Not peer reviewed, but seems straightforward. What concentration of benzene is in your water?
janereally
My micro bio is empty.
10:02 AM on 06/27/2011
ha yeah keep testing for the next three years, while Halliburton will get their profits out in two.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:05 PM on 06/27/2011
Why don't we just compile the research from the last 60 years on well fracturing?
09:39 AM on 06/27/2011
How dare they hurt the poor Earth. People are the problem. Don't you know nothing made everything, and it has evolved forever. We are so smart that we realize we are responsible to keep everything exactly how it is right now. In other words, we must stop all evolution or any change regarding Earth. We must protect it from evil people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:35 PM on 06/27/2011
Key words: "People are the problem." It is not them, it is us that is abusing the environment with just about every activity we do. Industry works for us and us alone. Without us they go out of business.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PAGasDriller
07:50 AM on 06/27/2011
I have a feeling this study will fall on deaf ears. Those against it will claim corruption and bias when it shows that fracking is perfectly safe
12:18 PM on 06/27/2011
after seeing Gasland "perfectly safe " is a stretch driller
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:22 PM on 06/27/2011
After seeing Gasland, I want to start a business selling these people gas/liquid separators. Who wouldn't want a free source of energy to run an electric generator and say good bye to the utility company.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Retrofuturistic
see things as they really are
02:29 AM on 06/27/2011
If any institutions in our government were immune to monetary corporate influence, fracking would not have been permitted in the first place.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
10:43 AM on 06/27/2011
and I guess neither would the building of refineries, or coal fired power plants, or nuclear power plants, or hydro electric dams, or modern America.

You have a point.

If hydro fracking is so bad why is it the darling of geothermal energy?

http://geothermal.inel.gov/publications/future_of_geothermal_energy.pdf

If solar is so perfect what about NF3 17,000 times stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 long lived 500+ years and has quadrupled in the atmosphere since Kyoto was negotiated.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_greenhouse_gas_that_nobody_knew/2085/

Even the human cost of wind!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/business/global/30smuggle.html

energy solutions all have their pit falls!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:26 PM on 06/27/2011
All energy is solar power. All energy use produces waste and pollution.
The only real solution is technology and energy efficiency.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:53 PM on 06/27/2011
Companies like Halliburton use to fracture oil wells all of the time because they were in a hurry to move on to the next job. The oil companies would be piussed because the supposed stimulation job would end up damaging the formation. Now where the are purposely fracturing potential gas wells, the formation is so dense that gases can't even flow through them. Does anyone realize that water, oil and gas is in solid rock. They are in underground lakes and rivers like on the surface. The oil business is just like the Beverly Hillbillies, the owners of the oil live in Beverly Hills and the oil company representatives live in rundown motels. The US Government owns the vast majority of the oil and gas in the US. What are they doing with our profits? Don't we need a transparent government like McCain and Obama both promised. Congress doesn't want a transparent government.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
skyslimit
01:47 AM on 06/27/2011
Fracking frackers
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
01:11 AM on 06/27/2011
Excellent! Let's do the studies and find out the truth. Maybe in the process we can find better ways to do it as well. Since wind and solar aren't stepping up and repowering America anytime soon (I'm 40, and hope to see it in my lifetime, but...) we need to start using the gas resources we have here in the US as a "stepping stone", an interim way of getting off of oil while, at the same time, generating the revenues needed to fund and expand green energy research.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PatrickforO
America needs a Labor Party
02:39 AM on 06/27/2011
There you go! Piggybacking on your post, I sincerely hope that the EPA doesn't forget objectivity in the face of political ideology. I'm a fervent Democrat, but I'd hate to think that there are actually people in agencies like this who develop and foist off regulations that are actually punitive instead of sensible. I'm not thrilled about fracking, but it is a technology that has been around awhile, and now, with the new horizontal drilling methods that allow wells to produce more for longer, things are looking good for both oil and gas. Concerning the oil and gas industry, I believe we'd be best served by a) ending subsidies, particularly the ethanol subsidy, which would save billions, b) by streamlining regulation and c) by subsidizing innovation in renewables. In fact, wouldn't it be cool if we actually had a coherent energy policy that gave us a timeline for energy independence from politically troubled regions?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
10:45 AM on 06/27/2011
that would be cool.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
01:31 PM on 06/27/2011
We had a coherent energy policy back in the 1970s. We had wind and solar. We had alternative energy. We had electric vehicles. We had Gasohol. We had hybrids. We had every green energy we have available today. Today as in the 1980s, no one is interested. No one wants to buy these products. The green industry of the 70-80s went out of business due to lack of customers. (millions of people lost their jobs and homes). We can subsidize all that we want. It will do no good.
janereally
My micro bio is empty.
10:04 AM on 06/27/2011
There is no "stepping stone" - you seriously think coal mining and oil drilling will stop or slow? no, just add all the gas emissions onto the existing coal and oil. don't be fooled.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
10:48 AM on 06/27/2011
with the average age of a car before it finally makes its way to a junk yard about 22 years old, how do you propose getting their in less than 20 years?

You want to Restrict the movement of the poor? You want to Make it more difficult for them to get to work?

I think I'd have to be opposed to those solutions.
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
01:55 AM on 06/28/2011
They have to be competitive, Jane. We no longer use wood for heating, coal for direct industrial boiler applications and home heating, kerosene, tar oil, even whale oil - believe it or not, these were actually energy mainstays of the Industrial Revolution BEFORE oil and natural gas came on the scene in the late 1800's - early 1900's. Oil and gas displaced them, and I do believe wind, solar and other sources can displace oil and gas. But it takes money we don't have to just throw the switch on every plant and vehicle and aircraft etc. in the US and say, "Okay, it's off. Gimme my solar power". It doesn't work like that. It may take 50+ years to get 100% of electric power generation to be 100% "green", let alone finding a replacement motor fuel for oil and gas and then there is the petrochemical feedstock problem - you can't make plastic out of wind! You need oil and gas to make plastics, so, yep, still drilling to feed those plants once the last gaspowered vehicle goes into the museum. We just aren't there yet, and we need money from our present energy sources to help fund our future energy sources.