The Board of Directors of the
North Carolina Academy of Science
Statement on
Horizontal Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing (“Fracking”) in North Carolina
During the last decade, the use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (also called
“hydrofracking,” or “fracking”) has increased rapidly in several states. These technologies have
enabled the gas industry to extract natural gas (or shale gas) from impermeable rock formations
by injecting large volumes of fluid (water, plus sand and chemicals) to fracture the rock. Natural
gas has been touted as a transitional fuel or “bridge fuel” 1 to an energy future that is carbon free
and based on renewable sources of energy. Fracking is not without controversy, however, and
has potentially detrimental effects on the environment, society, and human health.2 The state of
North Carolina presently has no oil and gas industry and no prior experience managing these
industries. Recent discussions and proposals in the North Carolina legislature indicate interest
in encouraging development of these resources.
In July 2012, the North Carolina General Assembly ratified the Clean Energy and Economic
Security Act, or Session Law 2012-143.3 This Act requires “the Mining and Energy Commission
and other regulatory agencies to develop a modern regulatory program for the management of
oil and gas exploration and development activities in the state, including the use of horizontal
drilling and hydraulic fracturing for that purpose.”
The North Carolina Academy of Science commends the General Assembly for soliciting public
opinion, requiring pertinent state departments to conduct in-depth studies, and adopting the
recommendations of these studies in drafting language of the Clean Energy and Economic
Security Act.
The North Carolina Academy of Science strongly encourages the General Assembly to proceed
with equal caution in developing a regulatory framework and before drafting any future
legislation that could allow issuance of permits for horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing.
More specifically, the North Carolina Academy of Science recommends the following:
1) the issuance of permits be truly prohibited until the state has the trained personnel and
financial resources to monitor and regulate fracking activities effectively, and until such time
that adequate safeguards are in place to ensure protection of the environment, society,
human health, and the economy
2) the state of North Carolina investigate the economic and social impacts of fracking in
consideration of the limited amount of natural gas in the state’s shale formations and the
economic benefits that would actually result from fracking
3) the Mining and Energy Commission and other state regulatory agencies actively engage
members of the scientific community in deliberations on the development of a modern oil
and gas regulatory program
4) regulations are made subject to ongoing review to accommodate the latest scientific
knowledge and technological advances, and to accommodate any impacts on the
environment, society, human health, and the economy
5) the state of North Carolina provide financial support for scientific research on the effects
of fracking. Sound science is critical for informed decision making, yet the paucity of existing
scientific, peer-reviewed studies on fracking poses serious constraints.4 Particularly
troubling is the absence of long-term studies on the effects of fracking on human health and
drinking water4,5,6,7
6) the state of North Carolina invest sufficient financial resources to develop and use
renewable energies, while reducing its dependency on fossil fuels, including natural gas.
1. Levi, M.A. January 2013. Climate consequences of natural gas as a bridge fuel.
(unformatted pre-print version available at http://www.cfr.org/energyenvironment/climateconsequences-natural-gas-bridge-fuel/p29772). Climate Change.
2. Smith, R. and T. Ozer, Lead Authors. 2012. North Carolina Oil and Gas Study under
Session Law 2011276. (http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/guest/denr-study). North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the North Carolina Department of
Commerce.
3. Act of 2 July 2012. Session Law 2012-143. Senate Bill 820.
(http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2011/Bills/Senate/HTML/S820v6.html). General Assembly of
North Carolina Session 2011.
4. Jackson R.B., B. Rainey Pearson, S.G. Osborn, N.R. Warner, and A. Vengosh. 2011.
Research and policy recommendations for hydraulic fracturing and shale‐gas extraction.
(http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/cgc/HydraulicFracturingWhitepaper2011.pdf). Center on
Global Change, Duke University, Durham, NC.
5. Committee on Science for EPA's Future; Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology;
Division on Earth and Life Studies; National Research Council . 2012. Science for
Environmental Protection: The Road Ahead. The National Academy of Sciences. National
Academies Press.
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 2012. Study of the Potential Impacts of
Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources: Progress Report.
(http://www.epa.gov/hfstudy/pdfs/hf-report20121214.pdf). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, EPA/601/R-12/011.
7. Vidic R.D., S. L. Brantley, J. M. Vandenbossche, D. Yoxtheimer, and J. D. Abad. 2013.
Impact of shale gas development on regional water quality. (Available online at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1235009) Science 340, DOI: 10.1126/science.1235009.