Hydraulic Fracking:
Multimedia Environmental
Assessment
Southeast Symposium on Contemporary Engineering Topics
August 31, 2012
Outline
Emergence
 Hydraulic Fracturing
 Process Overview
 U.S. geographical distribution
 Environmental Risks
 U.S. Energy Supply
 Regulations
 Economics

Emergence of Hydraulic Fracturing





1860s: Fracturing as a method to stimulate
shallow, hard rock oil wells. Applied by oil
producers in Pennsylvania, New York, Kentucky,
and West Virginia by using liquid and later also
solidified nitroglycerin.
1970s: United States government initiated
the Eastern Gas Shales Project.
1977: Department of Energy pioneered massive
hydraulic fracturing in tight sandstone formations.
Between 2005 and 2010: Shale-gas industry in
the United States grew by 45% a year.
Between 2005 and 2012: Shale gas increased
from 4% to 24%.
What is hydraulic fracturing?
Also called “fracking”
 A process of initiating, and subsequently
propagating a fracture in a rock layer, by
injecting the pressurized fluid
 The fracturing is done from a wellbore
drilled into reservoir rock formations, in
order to increase the extraction and
ultimate recovery rates of oil and natural
gas

4
What is shale?
•
•
•
•
Fine-grained sedimentary rock composed of
mud and tiny fragments of other minerals
Deposited in very slow moving water, lakes
and lagoonal deposits, in river deltas, on flood
plains and offshore from beach sands.
Characterized by breaks along thin laminae
or parallel layering
Usually has low permeability
5
Role of Hydraulic Fracturing in
America’s Energy Supply
90% of oil and gas wells in the United States
undergo fracturing to stimulate production.
 The use of hydraulic fracturing is estimated
to account for 30% of U.S. recoverable oil
and gas reserves, and is responsible for the
addition of 7 billion barrels of oil and 600
trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
 Without hydraulic fracturing, we would be
producing much less oil and gas in America,
relying more on foreign imports to meet the
energy demands of our nation.

How does hydraulic fracturing
work?
Pump the fracturing
fluid into the wellbore
to increase the
pressure downhole.
Formation begins to
crack; fracturing fluid
enters the crack farther
into the formation. A
solid proppant keeps
this fracture open after
the injection stops.
Injected fluid: water, gels, foams,
and compressed gases, including
nitrogen, carbon dioxide and air
Proppant: sand, resin-coated sand,
and man-made ceramics
The propped hydraulic
fracture then becomes
a high permeability
conduit through which
the formation fluids can
flow to the well.
8
Different shale gas deposits across the country
US Shale Gas resources (tcf)
6% 0%
North-East
10%
8%
Gulf Coast
13%
Mid-continent
63%
South-west
0%
US Shale oil resources (billion
barrels)
12%
63%
0%
17%
North-East
8%
Gulf Coast
Mid-continent
South-west
1. 86% of the total 750
trillion cubic feet of
recoverable shale gas are
located in the Northeast,
Gulf Coast, and
Southwest regions.
2. In the three regions, the
largest shale gas plays are
the Marcellus (410.3
trillion cubic feet, 55
percent of the total),
Haynesville (74.7 trillion
cubic feet, 10 percent of
the total), and Barnett
(43.4 trillion cubic feet, 6
percent of the total).
Shale Natural Gas Reserves
Source: EIA, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/natural_gas/data_publications/crude_oil_natural_gas_reserves/cr.html.
12
1. EIA projects 827 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of recoverable natural gas
from U.S. shales using currently available technology.
2. US current consumption: 23 Tcf per year, 20 Tcf is produces and rest
is imported
3. Shale gas resources represent 36 years of current consumption.
4. One Tcf of natural gas = Heat 15 million homes for 1 year = 100
billion kilowatt-hours of electricity = 12 million natural-gas-fired
vehicles for 1 year.
Water Use Statistics
Source
Volume (Gallons)
Frac Groundwater
1,230,712,693
Frac Surface Water
Drilling Rig
Groundwater Supply
Drilling Rig Surface
Water Supply
8,223,152,516
Other Groundwater
Other Surface Water,
Other Surface
Water
<0.5%
879,649,632
Rig Supply
Ground
Water
8% Frac Supply
Ground Water
12%
157,839,504
155,545,829
39,007,638
Other Ground
Water
1%
Rig Supply
Surface Water
2%
Source
Volume
(Gallons)
Frac Groundwater
1,230,712,693
Frac Surface Water
Drilling Rig
Groundwater Supply
Drilling Rig Surface
Water Supply
8,223,152,516
Other Groundwater
Other Surface Water,
879,649,632
157,839,504
155,545,829
39,007,638
Frac Supply
Surface Water
77%
Average Water Demands of Well Fracking

Barnett
◦ Water Use (gallons/well): 2,300,000

Haynesville
◦ Water Use: 2,700,000

Marcellus (PA)
◦ Water Use: 3,800,000
Source: EPA Frac Study Plan
15
Environmental Concerns
• Chemical concerns
o
o
Pumping chemicals near water table
Failure in pits and liners could leak chemicals
• High water usage
• Air Emissions from truck use
• Surface Area used
Risk to Groundwater



Little to no evidence of direct impact to groundwater.
Potential contamination of groundwater if mechanical
integrity of well is compromised.
Lowering aquifer water levels by water consumption
from fracking may:
◦ Affect water quality by exposing mineral to oxygenrich environment;
◦ Increasing salination and potential chemical
contamination;
◦ Increase bacterial growth;
◦ Cause upwelling of lower quality water from deeper
within aquifers.
Sources: http://www.api.org/policy/exploration/hydraulicfracturing/ and EPA Frac Study Plan
17
Risks to Surface Water: Flowback
After fracing, pressure decreases and frac fluid flows back to
the surface.
 Amount of frac fluid recovered as flowback varies from 25%
to 75%.
 Flowback rate in first few days can exceed 100,000 gallons
per day

◦ Will drop to ~ 50 gallons per day over time
As of 2009, none of 27 states with fracing require reporting
of flowback
 Flowback can have frac fluids and high TDS values,
concentrations of major ions (e.g. barium, bromide, calcium,
iron), radionuclides, VOC, and other natural occurring
elements.
 Depleted surface water sources may affect flow, depth,
temperature and reduce dilution of surface water sources
increase contaminations concentrations.

Source: EPA Frac Study Plan
18
Handling/Disposing of Flowback



Flowback and produced water are held in storage tanks and water
impoundment pits prior to and during treatment, recycling, and
disposal.
Impoundments may be temporary or long-term.
Underground injection is primary method for disposal for flowback
and produced water.
◦ Concerns regarding injection capacity and cost of trucking wastewater
to injection site.

Potential for use of publicly owned treatment works (POTW) or
commercial treatment facilities if in populated areas.
◦ POTWs not designed to treat fracing wastewaters

Releases, leaks, and/or spills involving storage and transportation of
flowback and produced water could contaminate shallow drinking
water aquifers and surface water bodies.
Source: EPA Frac Study Plan
19
Federal Regulations
2003 Memorandum Agreement
◦ 3 Largest oil service companies agreed to
eliminate diesel fuel from fracturing coal bed
methane seams
2004 EPA Study
◦ Injection of fracturing fluids into coal bed
methane wells posed little or no threat to
underground sources of drinking water
◦ Identified diesel fuel as a constituent of concern
Federal Regulations contd.
Fracking, except for fracking with diesel fuel, was excluded from Safe
Drinking Water Act definition of “underground injection” by the Energy
Policy Act of 2005. (42 U.S.C. 300h(d)(1)(B)(ii)).


◦
Bills introduced March 15, 2011 to remove exemption (HR 1084).
◦
Similar bills introduced in Senate (S 587) and in past (2009 – HR 2766).
Definition of “underground injection”
◦ (1)(A) - means the subsurface emplacement of fluids by well injection; and
◦ (1)(B) excludes –
 (i) the underground injection of natural gas for purposes of storage; and
 (ii) the underground injection of fluids or propping agents (other
than diesel fuels) pursuant to hydraulic fracturing operations
related to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities.
21
Clean Water Act and State
Regulation

CWA covers the discharge of water
produced by hydrofracturing regulations

Regulated by the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System
UIC Program Requirements
To be issued a permit, the applicant must
show that the underground injection will
not endanger drinking water resources.
 UIC program must require inspection,
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements on those who employ
underground injection.
 The EPA can administer a UIC Program
itself, or delegate that authority to the
states.

The FRAC Act
Introduced on June 9, 2009
 Aims to define hydraulic fracturing as a
federally regulated activity under the Safe
Drinking Water Act.
 Energy industry to disclose the chemicals it
mixes with the water and sand it pumps
underground in the hydraulic fracturing
process.
 Broaden the definition of “underground
injection” to include hydraulic fracturing.

EPA Hydraulic Fracking Study






February 8, 2011 EPA releases Draft Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan
Study designed to examine “life cycle” of fracing, particularly
potential affect to drinking water resources and human exposure to
chemicals.
Study will analyze and research questions involving:
◦ Water Acquisition; Chemical Mixing; Well Injection; Flowback and
Produced Water; and Wastewater Treatment and Waste Disposal
Study will include:
◦ Retrospective case studies, possibly in Barnett Shale counties of
Wise and Denton Counties
◦ Prospective cases studies, possibly in Flower Mound/Bartonville.
Study expected to be completed in 2012, with 2014 follow-up.
In 2004, EPA conducted study finding that hydraulic fracturing in
coal-bed methane wells pose little to no threat to underground
drinking water.
Sources: EPA Frac Study Plan and Evaluation of Impacts to Underground Sources of Drinking Water by
Hydraulic Fracturing of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs (EPA 816-R-04-003), 2004.
25
Other Recent Studies and Reports

April 16, 2011:
◦ Congressional report prepared by Waxman, Markey,
and DeGette outlining chemicals used in fracing,
including benzene, lead, and methanol.
◦ Alleged use of 29 chemicals that are known or
possible carcinogens.

April 2011:
◦ Prepublication of report by Cornell Professors that
CO2 emissions from shale fracing are greater than
coal.
Sources: U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Chemical Used in Hydraulic Fracturing (April 2011) and
Robert Howard, et al, Methane and the Greenhouse-Gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations (2011).
26
US Economy and Hydraulic Fracking
Study Results for the U.S. Economy
Decrease in production of oil and natural gas, which results in
increase in imports to meet the nation's energy demand.
 No Fracturing scenario:

◦ Oil and natural gas production losses,
◦ Increasing toll on U.S. economic performance from 2014 through
2020.
◦ 2014: GDP is lower by $374 billion and employment falls by 2.9
million jobs.
◦ Severe recession, exacerbating recovery and job growth.

UIC Compliance scenario:
◦ Economic impacts also rise through 2014,
◦ GDP and employment both drop 0.5%
◦ 2014: GDP is $84 billion lower and there are 635,000 fewer jobs.

Fluid Restrictions Scenario:
◦ GDP is lower by $172 billion and employment falls by 1.3 million
jobs.
COMPETING
INTERESTS AND ISSUES
Cheaper Fuel
Jobs and Training
Income for Landowners
Greener than Oil and Coal
Revenue for Local Communities and New York State
Reduced Reliance on Imported Oil/National Security Implications
Vs.
Impacts on Water, Public Health and Safety
Infrastructure Maintenance Costs
Financial Impacts and Burdens
Character of the Community
Advocacy and Actions
Quality of Life
Opportunities for Consulting Firms
Filing for permit application
 Effective ways to handle/dispose the
flowback
 Regulation compliance
 Possible contamination with BTEX
compounds
 Reporting and disclosing as per federal
and state requirements
