Introduction
This report is an assessment of the current environmental risks associated with hydraulic
fracturing. Because hydraulic fracturing is occurring in Arkansas it’s important to understand
these risks including groundwater contamination, earthquakes, infrastructure damage and the
overconsumption of water. It is clear there are many risks involved with hydraulic fracturing, and
by identifying those risks we can begin exploring solutions to mitigate them.
Background of Hydraulic Fracturing
Hydraulic fracturing is a process used to extract natural gas and oil located in shale rock deposits
underground. The process of fracturing requires large amounts of water to be pumped at high
pressure underground creating fractures in the rock for gas and oil to flow through. The fluid
used in this process does not just consist of only water, but is mixed with a “proppant” such as
sand and several other toxic chemicals. The sand is used to hold open fractures in the rock and
ensure they do not reseal. The other chemicals added are used to preserve the oil and gas from
being degraded by bacteria, and to hold the sand in place. Once the fracturing occurs gas and oil
can then be extracted from underground. (Merrill and Schizer 152-153)
Hydraulic fracturing has been around since the 1940s, but only recently has become affordable
for oil and gas companies to utilize, due to the implementation of horizontal drilling combined
with hydraulic fracturing. Once drilling is between six and ten thousand feet, the drill is then
turned sideways. This increases the contact that occurs between the layer of shale rock
containing gas and oil. Utilizing this technique when drilling dramatically increases production
making it more affordable for companies to drill. (Merrill and Schizer 153-154)
Traditionally, gas and oil companies have only drilled in more porous rock that allows oil and
gas to flow through it. However, this represents only a fraction of the deposits located
underground. Therefore, with the development of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling gas
companies have been able to tap into these huge deposits creating a new supply of natural gas
and oil in the United States.
Locally, in Arkansas one of the biggest areas fracking is occurring is in the Fayetteville Shale
rock layer. This rock formation is known as the Arkoma Basin which stretches from Eastern
Oklahoma to Eastern Arkansas. There have been over 4000 wells drilled and fracked between
2005 and 2012 in the Fayetteville Shale rock layer with 15-30,000 projected. The top producing
counties of natural gas in Arkansas include White, Conway, Van Buren, Faulkner and Cleburne.
As you can see, fracking is not a foreign operation but one occurring in our very own backyard.
(Stoparkansasfracking.org/where it happens)
Environmental Risks of Hydraulic Fracturing
Several environmental risks involved with hydraulic fracturing exist. However, the most
prevalent risks include ground water contamination, earthquakes, infrastructure damage and the
overconsumption of water. Fracturing fluid used in “fracking” contains up to 600 chemicals
including mercury, hydrochloric acid and even formaldehyde. Therefore, there is a significant
risk for underground water drinking sources to become contaminated. The two most common
ways for this to occur is when a drilling well begins to crack and leaks fracturing fluid, and by
spills that occur during the transportation process of leftover fracturing fluid. Claims of water
contamination made by communities in Texas, Colorado and Pennsylvania include deformed
livestock and poisoned fish. It is often hard to prove that water contamination is linked to
fracking wells making it difficult to hold companies liable. Additionally, studies funded by
natural gas and oil companies have been unable to prove any link to local fracturing operations in
those areas. Water contamination is one of the greatest risks involved with hydraulic fracturing,
as it has the ability to affect our entire ecosystem. Though water contamination is a huge risk of
hydraulic fracturing it is not the only risk. (Begos ; Stoparkansasfracking.org; Schumacher and
Morrissey 244-245 )
Hydraulic fracturing is a process that uses large amounts of fresh or salt water to extract natural
gas and oil from shale rock beds underground. A typical fracturing job may use up to 6 million
gallons of water or more. The water comes from several places including local municipal
suppliers, treated wastewater, surface water, power plant cooling water and industrial water
treatment facilities. Although some might say that the water use is within acceptable ranges in
comparison to other industrial water consumption; it is heavily dependent on the area where the
fracking is occurring. For instance, areas in Texas where water resources are low or are
experiencing a drought will be affected greater by the water usage of hydraulic fracturing.
Therefore, with water consumption in mind it is important to monitor the amount that can be
used in areas with fewer available resources. (Merrill and Schizer 177-178; Schumacher and
Morrissey 249-251)
Induced seismic activity is another major risk associated with hydraulic fracturing. It is caused
by underground injection wells where drilling waste also know as brines is stored (leftover
fracturing fluid). These disposal wells are used to hold fracturing fluid and are thought to interact
with existing fault lines causing swarms of earthquakes. Most of the earthquakes occurring in
the Fayetteville Shale area were small and unnoticed at first. However, in 2010 a surge of
Earthquakes began occurring ranging 3.0 on the richter scale near disposal wells in Damascus
AR, Guy AR and just outside of Searcy AR. Then, on February 27 in 2011 the largest earthquake
occurred near Greenbrier with a 4.7 magnitude. After this the disposal wells in those areas were
shut down in a 1,150 square mile area located in the middle of the Fayetteville Shale. However,
small earthquakes have continued to occur near disposal wells located outside of the ban area.
It is also speculated that normal production wells may cause small earthquakes to occur. The
seismic activity in the above stated areas such as Guy and Greenbrier, AR. has not completely
stopped, and is a hazard that residents are actively dealing with. Several residents have filed class
action lawsuits against the companies operating wells in those areas due to damage sustained by
the earthquakes. While natural gas and oil companies continue to drill and frack in the
Fayetteville Shale area residents will continue to deal with the risk of earthquakes.
(Stoparkansasfracking.org; Schumacher and Morrissey 252-253)
In addition to the above risks of fracking there is also the occurrence of infrastructure damage.
Specifically, the damage to roads in the areas where wells are being operated. This is happening
when trucks transport water to the fracking site and then transport fracturing fluid to a disposal
site. With the heavy weight of the trucks and their frequency of travel roads are being damaged
faster than they can be repaired. For residents in the Fayetteville Shale area this is being
experienced first hand as it is causing damage not only to the roads but to the vehicles traveling
them. With the damage to roads occurring at a faster rate than repairable it’s obvious this will be
an ongoing occurrence as heavy trucks travel back and forth in the Fayetteville Shale area.
(Stoparkansasfracking.org)
All in all, there are several environmental risks and hazards involved with hydraulic fracturing.
The most prevalent risks include ground water contamination, earthquakes, infrastructure
damage and the overconsumption of water. By identifying and understanding these risks
involved we can then begin exploring solutions.
Possible Solutions
While not every problem can be solved by a simple answer it is important to break that problem
into smaller issues and then begin to explore solutions. As I don’t have any concrete solutions to
mitigate the risks and hazards of hydraulic fracturing I would like to point out a few possible
solutions.
First of all, one would be to stop hydraulic fracturing completely and instead use other
alternative energy sources including solar, wind, and nuclear energy. However, this is not
feasible, but it is possible to combine hydraulic fracturing and alternative energy sources in order
to reduce the use of hydraulic fracturing.
Moreover it is possible to mitigate the risks involved with hydraulic fracturing through the
development of new technology. For example, recent advancements in water treatment
technology can reduce the risk of contamination, from disposal wells and fracking fluid.
According to Kevin Bullis “The new technology would make it unnecessary to dilute the wastewater,
or transport it for treatment or disposal.” This technology uses membrane distillation to purify the water
of toxins and make it reusable. As of now this technology will mainly be used where the waste water is
salty. However, companies are beginning to use water treatment facilities in order to cut down water
usage and pollution. This would also decrease the transportation needed to move water and fracking fluid
between sites. All in all, it’s clear that this technology is still in the developmental stages, but with
persistence the outcome looks promising. (Bullis “Virtually a Reality”)
As there is no one solution to the risks of hydraulic fracturing there are several things that can be done to
minimize those risks. This includes the combined use of alternative energy and fossil fuels to reduce the
need for hydraulic fracturing, water treatment technology, increased public awareness and oversight. With
increased public support and oversight natural gas and oil companies would be forced to follow any set
requirements for fracking. In the end, time will only tell if a solution is found to reduce the risks involved
with hydraulic fracturing.
Conclusion
There are several environmental risks and hazards involved with hydraulic fracturing. The most
common risks include ground water contamination, earthquakes, infrastructure damage and the
overconsumption of water. By identifying and understanding these risks involved we can then
begin exploring possible solutions including the combined use of alternative energy and fossil fuels to
reduce the need for hydraulic fracturing and the use of water treatment technology. In short, there is no
one size fits all to the fracking problem, but there are several steps that can be taken to reduce the risks
and hazards that occur.
Recommendations
This report examines the common environmental risks involved with hydraulic fracturing. Those
risks include ground water contamination, earthquakes, infrastructure damage and the
overconsumption of water. It is my recommendation that we must generate public support to
help mitigate these risks. It is important to inform people of the risks associated with hydraulic
fracturing in order to generate their support. I would also propose the use of water treatment
technology to reduce pollution and water contamination. Generating public support will increase
pressure on natural gas and oil companies to begin using water treatment technology to mitigate
risks. However, as with anything there is no way to completely eliminate the risks involved with
hydraulic fracturing. Therefore, we must continue to monitor and evaluate the hydraulic
fracturing process in order to reduce the amount of environmental risks and hazards involved.
References
"ArkansasFracking.org." ArkansasFracking.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Mar. 2014.
Begos, AP Kevin. "4 States Confirm Water Pollution from Drilling." USA Today. Gannett, 05
Jan. 2014. Web. 09 Mar. 2014.
Bullis, Kevin. "Virtually a Reality." MIT Technology Review. N.p., 24 Sept. 2013. Web. 09 Mar.
2014.
Merrill, Thomas W., and Schizer, David M. "The Shale Oil And Gas Revolution, Hydraulic Fracturing,
And Water Contamination: A Regulatory Strategy." Minnesota Law Review 98.1 (2013): 145-264.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
Schumacher, J. Morrissey, J. "The Legal Landscape Of "Fracking": The Oil And Gas Industry's GameChanging Technique Is Its Biggest Hurdle." Texas Review Of Law & Politics 17.2 (2013): 239-303.
Legal Collection. Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
Simons, Robert. Throupe, Ron. and Mao Xue. "A Review Of Hydro "Fracking" And Its Potential Effects
On Real Estate." Journal Of Real Estate Literature 21.2 (2013): 205-232.Business Source Complete. Web.
9 Feb. 2014.