AWWA Position Paper -- Water and Hydraulic Fracturing
During a recent discussion, hydrogeology was referred to as "junk science", because it appeared to present a viewpoint running counter to the school of thought that fracking natural gas wells provide jobs for poor people, and stimulate economic growth.
The American Water Works Association, (AWWA), is a national organization for water well professionals-- hydrogeologists, engineers, superintendents, suppliers, and for just about everyone that has anything to do with our drinking water supplies. The AWWA has written a position paper, on the problems associated with fracking.
The full article is here . I have excerpted the article below.
"Fracking facts: Hydraulic fracturing and its impact on water resources
Introduction
In recent years, there has been substantial public scrutiny of the process of hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking. Citizens groups, environmental advocates, municipal leaders, and others have expressed concern that the process and activities associated with fracking could result in the contamination of water resources. Media has elevated these concerns in many national and local stories, but the facts and risks surrounding hydraulic fracturing are not widely understood.
AWWA has produced this white paper in response to growing public awareness and concern about hydraulic fracturing and related activities. The paper provides water utilities with background, facts, and resources to help them understand and communicate fracking processes, risks, and regulations. Additionally, the paper considers both hydraulic fracturing itself and other components in the life cycle of oil and natural gas development that may present concerns to drinking water utilities.
Although this document primarily discusses drinking water utility risks and concernsand ways to mitigate themit is important to remember that any policy decisions regarding energy development must take both risks and benefits into account. Although summarized briefly, the benefits of energy developmentwhich can be substantialare not discussed in detail in this paper.
What are the risks of oil and natural gas development to drinking water?
Oil and gas development is an industrial activity, and like all industrial activities, it carries some degree of risk. AWWA believes these risks can be managed via prudent and reasonable protections implemented through a combination of state and federal regulations, best practices, and monitoring. A number of studies are currently under way to characterize and quantify risks associated with oil and gas activities, including fracking, well construction, the possibility of spills or accidents, and waste management issues. When completed, these studies will help fill knowledge gaps and inform future research. Given current knowledge, it is possible to qualitatively describe with a high degree of confidence the potential risks to drinking water supplies from oil and gas development activities, but it is not currently possible to quantify those risks with confidence.
Potential for groundwater contamination
A properly constructed and managed oil or natural gas well that complies with regulations and utilizes industry best practices is unlikely to directly cause groundwater contamination, although it cannot be said that such contamination is impossible. Although depths vary by the local geology, hydraulic fracturing generally takes place hundreds to thousands of feet below the deepest drinking water aquifer, and experts consider it unlikely that fissures stretching from the production zone into a drinking water aquifer could be accidentally created.
There are several technological, regulatory, and procedural safeguards commonly practiced throughout the oil and natural gas industry that are specifically designed to prevent such contamination. These safeguards include proper surface casing, deep-well casing, well construction techniques, and cementing processes. They serve to prevent the escape of fracturing fluids, waste materials, or oil and natural gas into drinking water aquifers. An escape of fluids and gases into drinking water aquifers is possible, although it would generally require the simultaneous failure of multiple safeguards. If leaks do occur as the result of defects in these practices, it is possible to seal them.
In some cases in which groundwater contamination has been linked to oil and gas development, the problem has been found to stem from a degradation of the well casing over time. Given technological advances, casing in modern wells is expected to be less likely to degrade. A study on this issue did not implicate the hydraulic fracturing process itself as a source of or contributor to contamination of drinking water aquifers, and the risks of this type of degradation can be reduced through monitoring and testing.
A type of methane contamination known as stray gas has been observed in drilling water wells in a few cases where casing and cementing problems of oil and natural gas wells, the water wells themselves, or both, has resulted in migration of gas from zones close to the drilling aquifer. These zones are much closer to the surface than the areas where the fracking takes place, and if stray gas issues arise they can result in safety problems and even explosion hazards if not detected and remedied.
Methane also exists naturally in some aquifers and is not automatically a sign of contamination. Improper closure or abandonment of a well could also provide a pathway through which contamination could occur if production zones, drinking water aquifers, and the surface are not properly isolated from one another. Fortunately, regulation and best practice make improper abandonment unlikely at modern wells,even though there may be many old wells that were improperly abandoned.
Water quantity/Water use issues
Drilling and fracturing of wells requires a substantial amount of water. The water required for hydraulic fracturing varies with the local geology, but typically totals from under a million to several million gallons for each fracturing event. Some wells are reported to have required as much as 13 million gallons.
Generally, wells are fractured in several phases, each creating fissures along a different segment of the production zone. All the fracturing events at a given oil or gas wellthe fracking phase of well developmentgenerally require a few days to complete. At some later point in the production process, the developer may fracture the well again to further increase the level of oil or gas production. In some areas, frack water is ultimately returned to the watershed, but in most cases it is not.
Although this consumptive use may only represent a small percentage of water demand in water rich areas of the country, in water-scarce areas and in times of drought, any added water use has the potential to divert needed supply away from water utilities. Intensity is another important consideration, as the need for water in the life cycle of a well tends to occur in short but intense bursts. These could temporarily put significant strain on water resources.
The oil and gas industry is researching improved water recycling techniques as well as methods to use high-salinity water that public water systems wouldnt usually use. These techniques are likely to reduce risks to waterquantity if they prove feasible and are fully implemented.
Although comprehensive statistics are not currently available, some oil and gas development companies have indicated that they will reach nearly 100% water recycling within a few years. Recycling rates are likely to vary by company, local geology, and water availability. Drinking water utilities and water resource managers may wish to determine how much water is likely to be used for the development of oil and gas wells in their area, and what sources will be used. They mayalso want to establish baselines to compare pre- and post drilling impacts across a watershed."
There is a lot more to the paper, and I have provided the link. It seems to be a well-balanced, non-political look at some of the concerns that the water industry has for fracking.
Apparently, I'm not the only one worried...
Tags
Who is online
49 visitors
No insults, please.
I have spent 35 years locating safe, reliable groundwater supplies for cities and industries, and this scares me. Of course, I live in a state where in many places, like most of Eastern KY, the salt water/fresh water interface is about 50' below ground surface-- all due to poor abandonment practices.
If the oil and gas industry had a better track record for environmental issues, I would be less concerned.
Thank you for posting this. People need to educate themselves.
I guess the truth hurts...
Excellent article Dowser. Like you, the track record for the oil and gas industry stinks. I have NO trust in anything that they say.
Thank you, so very much, Pat!
Most people have no idea what I did for a living, including many of the engineers and water superintendents I worked for! I guess if you can't see it, it doesn't exist...
Me either-- especially when I know better!
Their current PR campaign makes me ill...
I guess what bugs me the most is that no one considers the effects of lineaments or fractures, on the migration of natural gas/oil. Lineaments, or fractures, are up to miles in length, and 40'-60' wide. The effects of lineaments on fluid movement, can be noted when drilling at 4000'+. The larger the lineament, the more noticeable the effects.
NO ONE wants to seem to take this into consideration...
An informative and interesting article, with a balanced and objective few of the pluses and minuses of fracking and indeed all oil/gas drilling processes in relation to our drinking water.
Thanks for sharing this article and the link o the more detailed report.
No, you aren't the only one worried. Thanks for sharing this paper.Hope whoever, made the junk science comment reads it too.
I stopped thinking that bedrock was impenetrable and watertight,when I started reading about fracking. If they can fracture and hold open small fissures to extract gas and oil, then they surely affect the way the geology moves in others ways. Your insights are always welcome, if for nothing more than a profound love of the water.
My pleasure to do so!
Most people don't realize that bedrock aquifers can produce absolute boocoos of water. That's right, water out of rock. We can waste what little fresh water we have on fracking, or we can have a safe drinking water supply. In many states, it is as simple as that.
Thanks, very much, for your insights!
Thanks for coming by, Cerenkov!
Back in the day when I was the Safety Director for a large water utility (early 70's), I received the AWWA Safety person of the year for having reduced our lost time accidents by 82%. Part of the program I implemented was the inspection of all "mapped" lines to ensure they didn't impact the geological settings of the Birmingham area with the potential of causing a shifting of the plates producing unsafe conditions for that particular area of B'ham and its residents. At no time would i allow any crew to utilize any method of "clearing" through air forced pressure/water pressure/hydraulic pressure induction. Pissed a lot of the city council members off because it would slow down their projects - but - hey, we didn't have any earthquakes or contaminated waters either.
Being in a hurry is not taken into account in most studies about fracking problems . Thanks for bringing up that point .
Being in a hurry is what it's all about in the oil patch...
Thanks, 1st, for coming by! I never knew you worked in Birmingham!
Thanks for coming by, Petey!
Thanks, dear Raven Wing-- Your comments make it all worthwhile!
Dear Friend Dowser: At my age, the mina reasons I share your concern is that I don't have forever to fight for clean water, air and soil for my children, grand children etc.
It is up to us to make sure those who follow us have what they need in a clean safe way.
E.
Great article. Fair. Balanced. Just facts with no political agenda either way. I learned from it and that is always a good thing. Thanks!
I hope you are aware that every oil patch has someone whose job it is to insure that standards are followed so as to prevent too much haste in procedures . I'm sure that those checks and balances fail on occasion but not every time .
No, not every time, for sure. The trouble is that none of us know which fail and which don't. Who would have thought that the Deep Horizon well would blow? Who would know that the company refused to purchase the latest, greatest, grouting materials?
Schlumberger has developed a new bentonite/cement mix with an additive of some kind that renders the grout both hard and plastic, (which is good when trying to fill in the edges of the boring... The BP executives refused to buy it and use it-- even though it could certainly have prevented the blowout of the well and so much oil being spilled.
I think a catastrophic failure is always a surprise. No one plans to have an environmental disaster...
Dear friend Enoch-- you are certainly right! I don't feel that I have enough time to make a difference...
Take care, and many blessings for your beloved family!
My pleasure, Randy! I like articles that deal with facts, not political leanings!
In a really big job like that the cost overruns start to become a factor . That's my take on what happened . But thanks for adding that info about the new cement mix .
I have a really good friend at Schlumberger...
I would say that you are right-- cost-overruns have a lot to do with the cutting of corners. But in the Deep Horizon case, they had yet to begin to drill, when the decision was made. They seemed to ignore all cautions against drilling and grouting without some kind of special additives to increase viscosity and weight.