Section 1100, Professor Heather Gorr, 6 p.m.
Group #R08
HYDRAULIC FRACTURING AND SHALE GAS: PROVIDING ENERGY AND
ECONOMIC SECURITY, OR ENVIRONMENTAL HARM?
Bryce Kampfe (bak63@pitt.edu)
OVERVIEW: GROWTH IN HYDRAULIC
FRACTURING TECHNOLOGIES AND
SHALE GAS
The process known as hydraulic fracturing has been
around for over half a century. This relatively new
technology first came about around 1940 and has
experienced growth since then, though the most notable
expansion of this technology has taken place in the past two
decades. Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as
“fracking” is a specific technique used in the retrieval of
energy resources such as gas and oil. Fracking has been
applied to many disciplines within the energy industry and
has become increasingly popular over the past few years.
Currently, “hydraulic fracturing is used for oil and/or gas
production in all 33 U.S. States where oil and natural gas
production takes place” [5]. This shows that the energy
industry really believes that hydraulic fracturing is a solution
to retrieving our resources, seeing as they are so invested.
Along the same lines, newer gas supplies are beginning to
rely more and more on fracking technologies. In fact, “more
than 90 percent of new natural gas wells in the United States
rely on hydraulic fracturing” [5]. This demonstrates the
growth in this industry and shows that the importance of
knowledge in the subject continues to grow more vital as
well.
A specific type of gas and oil extraction that requires the
use of hydraulic fracturing is the removal of natural gas from
low-permeability shale rock and sand formations. This
application of hydraulic fracturing has drawn the most
attention in recent years because of its potential output and
success. The Department of Energy’s Energy Information
Agency reported that natural gas production from shale
formations is the fastest growing source of natural gas [5].
Specifically, by 2010, after the 2008 financial crisis hit,
annual shale gas production was more than ten times greater
than production levels in 2000 [1]. Shale gas, along with the
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
October 9, 2012
broader technique of hydraulic fracturing lie at the pinnacle
of energy technology and are shrouded in controversy as to
whether the benefits outweigh the risks.
INDUSTRIAL BENEFIT
Shale gas has incredible potential to provide a sustainable
form of energy for those who choose to utilize it. In a recent
address, Jim Fitterling, Executive Vice President of the Dow
Chemical Company said, “Shale gas has the potential to
impact all of us in great and positive ways… It has the
potential to be a huge part of meeting growing energy
demands in America and the World” [2]. As a country, the
United States has had trouble maintaining energy sources in
recent years and has invested in research of sustainable clean
energies for the future. As a natural gas, shale gas is not
renewable like solar or wind energy. However, because of its
abundance and ability to burn clean, natural gas is a
reasonable solution for the intermediate periods until a final
solution can be reached. Natural gas releases less carbon
dioxide than its alternative of coal. Less carbon dioxide
emission means a cleaner atmosphere and less harm to the
environment. From a global view, though the use of
hydraulic fracturing is growing in popularity in some places
and shrinking in others, it is most often seen in the United
States and its immediate neighbors. “So far the boom in
natural gas production has been an exclusively American
story” [1]. It is well-known that the United States imports a
great deal of oil and is currently increasingly dependent on
foreign oil production. However, if considering the total
amount of production possible between the U.S. and Canada,
the potential in shale natural gas and oil could be enough to
provide a self-sufficient North America for many years to
come [3]. Minimizing the United States’ dependency on
foreign oil would be a monumental shift in the getting the
U.S. back on a safe track towards the discovery of clean and
renewable
resources.
Bryce Kampfe
fracturing. Much of this can be contributed to the fact that
there is a lack of scientific studies which assess the practice
of fracking and the risks that may be associated with it and
the contamination of groundwater [5]. There may be select
studies that attempt to identify the risks of fracking, but
these are still too few in number to absolutely say that there
are too many risks involved in the extraction of shale gas.
Outside of the U.S. there have been more restrictions on
hydraulic fracturing because of the possible harm it could
cause to the environment. Several European countries have
already banned fracking for such reasons [4]. Similarly,
there have been a large number of complaints concerning
earthquakes being caused by hydraulic fracturing. These
concerns can, however, be discredited. Hydraulic fracturing
does create minute seismic events, but these events, though
they are technically “earthquakes” do not cause harm and are
not even perceptible by sensitive geophysical instruments
[3]. What is important to note is that hydraulic fracturing is
not dangerous when it is done correctly. Though the
numerous reports of methane gas leaking into public water
supplies are a valid concern in the expansion of the industry
of shale gas production, these instances can primarily be
linked to human error. As Fitterling describes, “The science
right now says that hydraulic fracturing— when done
correctly— does not pose a significant risk to the
environment” [2]. The practice of fracking is safe and, as
long as the correct precautions are taken, there is much more
benefit than risk in this discipline.
ECONOMIC BENEFIT
Many people have recognized the potential of shale gas
in industrial terms, but few take note of the positive effects it
could have on the U.S. economy [2]. There are many ways
that shale gas and hydraulic fracturing could benefit the
country. The consistent and reliable energy output is one of
these benefits. Along similar lines, shale gas could also help
provide the struggling U.S. economy with stability and
growth [2]. It has been estimated that, over the next two to
three decades, the United States economy could experience a
growth as large as $2 trillion worth of new investments due
to shale gas production alone [2]. Along with a boost in the
economy, the production of natural gas by shale gas
fracturing could also level out energy and gas prices in the
U.S. for years to come. “There is increasingly widespread
agreement among energy experts that the United States will
enjoy moderate natural gas prices for decades” [1]. From a
consumer’s point of view, the increasing production of
natural gas from shale formations is good news. As long as
production continues to increase without outside interruption
due to restriction from legislature and other factors, shale
gas promises to level out energy prices for considerable
periods of time. However, there is also the possibility of
natural gas demands rising before the supply reaches a level
able to support such demands. Many factors, including large
rises in demand for shale gas coming from new markets,
such as natural gas automobiles, could send natural gas
prices right back up [1]. Hopefully as an economy we take
note of these possibilities and continue to utilize shale gas in
the amount that we are able.
SHALE NATURAL GAS VS COAL
Since coal has been the most significant source of energy
in the history of the world, it seems natural that new energy
supplies should be continuously compared to coal. The
cleanliness, or lack thereof, of coal-fired power plants has
been well documented in recent history and most scientists
would agree that natural gas is a much more environmentally
healthy solution. “We know gas will eventually displace
some coal in power plants… It’s more economical and
produces less greenhouse gas emissions. It won’t replace all
coal” [2]. To use specific statistics, “by early 2012, natural
gas was providing 70 percent as much electricity as coal—
up from barely more than 40 percent just a year before” [1].
The benefits of using natural gas over coal as an energy
source are clear and can be seen in the difference of
greenhouse gas emissions. “Switching from coal to gas
lowers carbon dioxide emissions from power generation by
50 percent or more” [1]. These show that natural gas is an
environmentally safer option than coal-powered energy.
Though natural gas burns cleaner than coal and would
produce much less volume of carbon dioxide, there is
another greenhouse gas, methane, that has been known to
leak from wells as a result of shale gas hydraulic fracturing.
“Each molecule of methane traps far more heat than a
molecule of carbon dioxide does, which means that small
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN?
There have been many complaints concerning the
environment and its preservation linked to hydraulic
fracturing and shale gas extraction. “Concern has emerged
regarding the potential impacts that this process may have on
groundwater quality and specifically on private wells and
public water supplies” [5]. As the industry has expanded, so
has the number of concerns surrounding the safety of natural
gas production by shale extraction. “As exploration and
production activities have increased and expanded into more
populated areas, so has concern that the hydraulic fracturing
process might introduce chemicals, methane, and other
contaminants into aquifers” [5]. Though most public
concerns that have been voiced deal with the actual process
of fracturing and the contamination of groundwater sources,
the more likely reason for contamination would come from
human mistakes and errors. Specifically, drinking water can
become contaminated from surface activities linked to shale
fracturing. The careless disposal of drilling fluids, accidental
spills, and leaky containment all increase the chances of
nearby water wells becoming contaminated [5]. Though
many citizens have voiced their opinions, little has been
done to slow the process of expansion in hydraulic
2
Bryce Kampfe
leaks can have big impacts on how much heat the
atmosphere retains” [1]. However, though methane traps
more heat than carbon dioxide, methane also has a much
shorter atmospheric lifetime than carbon dioxide and
therefore is limited in its ability to warm the planet [1]. If we
can limit the frequency of accidental leaks and keep methane
out of the atmosphere, we have a sure sign that shale gas is a
safer bet than coal.
This is an important statement when referencing the practice
of hydraulic fracturing. There have been many reports of
dangerous pollution of public drinking water and
endangerment of populated areas because of shale gas
extraction. This first list item already brings in to question
the ethics behind fracking.
In a similar fashion, the very next item on the code of
ethics for engineers brings into question the involvement of
different parties; government figures with no engineering
background. The code reads, “Engineers shall: Perform
services only in areas of their competence” [8]. I believe that
this is an ideal citation to demonstrate why government
involvement should be postponed. The members of
Congress, in majority, do not have in-depth knowledge of
engineering or what takes place in the natural gas fields.
This is another reason why I feel that legislation should not
be forced and that we as a society of engineers should take
the lead in situations such as this, when we know best.
POLITICAL CONTROVERSY
There are a great number of questions regarding
legislation on hydraulic fracturing and whether or not it
should be made stricter. Many people believe that Congress
needs to act and restrict the actions of the natural gas
industry because the process itself is to blame for such
controversy. “It is the rapidly increasing and geographically
expanding use of hydraulic fracturing, along with a growing
number of citizen complaints of groundwater contamination
and other environmental problems attributed to this practice,
that has led to calls for greater State and/or Federal
environmental oversight of this activity” [5]. However,
many industry leaders feel that the controversy in fracking
does not lie in the oil and gas fields, but instead in U.S.
Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency [3].
“Groups opposed to oil and gas— and therefore anything
that promises to make oil and gas more abundant— created
controversy in those places” [3]. In a recent article from
Congressional Digest, it was said, “Industry representatives
argue that additional Federal regulation is unnecessary and
would likely slow domestic gas development and increase
energy prices” [5]. With higher energy prices a direction that
no one in the United States would encourage, it is up to the
citizens and Congress to decide whether or not heavier
regulations will be placed on the shale gas industry.
I would venture to agree with the current heads of the
natural gas industry and say that extensive government
involvement and restriction in this area would only slow
shale gas production. Congress should wait and see the
potential benefit of allowing gas production to fluctuate
based on economic trends and not restrict it with legislation
for the time being.
WORTHWHILE EDUCATIONAL
EXERCISE
I think that the process of undertaking research and
formulating a well-developed presentation of this research is
an ideal activity for all students in every discipline of
engineering. Even outside of engineering, taking the time to
compile knowledge gleaned over weeks of hard work onto
one final piece is a valuable exercise. This shows that rough
data can be transformed and presented into a clean, welldeveloped demonstration of effort.
CLOSING REMARKS
To conclude, I would like to simply restate that, though
hydraulic fracturing is surrounded with questions and
controversy, the practice of extracting shale gas by this
method has yet to produce traumatic results and has the
potential to provide a stable source of energy and financial
growth for a country in need of such things. If we continue
to produce research and hold off congressional involvement
for the time being, I can see this potential coming to fruition
in the near future. The politics and questions regarding
ethics will take time to subside, but they will. As Dr.
Fitterling describes it, “Stick to the science.”
ETHICAL BEHAVIOR
I have already mentioned the controversy that dances
around the topic of hydraulic fracturing. This controversy
can be linked to the questions left open in areas such as
ethics. Practicing ethical behavior means that everyone that
may be impacted by a single decision is taken into account
and treated with the highest respect and dignity. In the
National Society of Professional Engineer’s Code of Ethics,
the first item listed under the first section heading of
“Fundamental Canons” reads, “Engineers shall: Hold
paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” [8].
REFERENCES
[1] M. Levi. (2012). “Splitting rock vs. splitting atoms: What
shale gas means for nuclear power.” Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists.
(Online
article).
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4d
286a50041844a09824c5bdc964f1f9%40sessionmgr111&vid
=4&hid=127.
[2] J. Fitterling. (March 28, 2012). “Shale Gas: Energy
3
Bryce Kampfe
Security for the Americas…or a Cautionary Tale of Bad
Decisions?” Vital Speeches of the Day. (Online article).
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4d
286a50041844a09824c5bdc964f1f9%40sessionmgr111&vid
=5&hid=127.
[3] B. Tippee. (November 10, 2011). “Shale: Politics vs.
Opportunity.” Vital Speeches of the Day. (Online article).
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4d
286a50041844a09824c5bdc964f1f9%40sessionmgr111&vid
=6&hid=127.
[4] B. Walsh. (May 21, 2012). “The Golden Age.” Time
Magazine. (Print article).
[5] (March, 2012). “Hydraulic Fracturing Overview: Growth
of the Process and Safe Drinking Water Concerns.”
Congressional
Digest.
(Online
article).
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4d
286a50041844a09824c5bdc964f1f9%40sessionmgr111&vid
=4&hid=127.
[6] K. Galbraith. (March 25, 2011). “Hydraulic Fracturing
Bill could Force Disclosure.” The New York Times. (Print
article).
[7] “Code of Ethics.” American Institute of Chemical
Engineers.
(Online
article).
http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics.
[8] (July 2007). “Code of Ethics for Engineers.” National
Society of Professional Engineers. (Online article).
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html.
[9] E. Marrocu, R. Paci. (October, 2012). “Education or
Creativity: What Matters Most for Economic Performance?”
Economic
Geography.
(Online
article).
http://apps.webofknowledge.com/full_record.do?product=W
OS&search_mode=GeneralSearch&qid=2&SID=1BPnaIMn
lNfDlKOIgOK&page=1&doc=5.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to say thank you to the writing staff for giving
such detailed instructions on the completion of this
assignment. Also, I would like to thank the librarians and my
professor for helping me to find valid information and
decide on a topic that truly interested me. Thank you for
taking the time to read and consider my thoughts.
4