What the frack, bro?

Here is a copy of a paper I recently wrote on environmental protection and land use issues, focusing on fracking, for my public policy class:

The environment we are living in today is one unlike any other the world has seen before.  It is true that our atmosphere has a natural Earth energy balance and passes through warm periods and cold periods.  Thanks to climate analysis of ice cores, tree rings, glacier remains and ocean sediments it is also known that this is the warmest warm period we have seen in hundreds of thousands of years.  The level of greenhouse gases also appears to be on the rise as well.  It is believed that this rise in greenhouse gases like carbon-dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and water vapor (H2O) may be caused by the burning of fossil fuels and other human activities.  Policy makers have been greatly urged to develop laws in regards to climate change and sustainable energy, but unfortunately we have seen little action in recent years in regard to these events (EPA, 2013).  President Obama recently stated in his State of the Union address that he was going to be taking serious measures against climate change in his second term as the time to make changes is dwindling. 

As we search for ways to decrease the effects for future generations, it has led to debates on sources of clean energy, and one of these highly debated sources is hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’.  Fracking is “the use of fluid and material to create or restore small fractures in a formation (i.e. shale or other rock) in order to stimulate production from new and existing oil and gas wells” (Frac Focus, 2013).  This source of cheap natural gas emits less carbon-dioxide, but it is believed to still heat the planet as well as having other affects on the environment.  The key idea is that natural gas produced by processes like fracking can curtail the burning of fossil fuels like coal so that we may eventually turn to all sustainable energy (i.e. wind and solar) by the years 2-2020-2060,  in hopes of keeping the warming of the earth’s atmosphere below the predicted 2ᵒC rise.  Hydraulic fracturing only began in the late 1940s and has only recently begun to become more popular as inexpensive procedures have been discovered (Plumer, 2013).  Therefore, there is still much unknown about the process and its effects.  More importantly, fracking is not yet highly regulated and has led to policy debates by many. 

            In Upstate New York and Pennsylvania, Marcellus wells (Figure 1) are the most common fracturing wells (Frac Focus, 2013).  Due to the recent boom in hydraulic fracturing in Upstate New York, the state has been pushed to pass regulations on the oil and natural gas process.  The New York Department of Environmental Conservation has recently revised its draft regulations for high-volume fracking.  According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG) these regulations are flawed and do not make the fracking process much safer.  The EWG lists five key reasons why the regulations should not be passed yet. The first being that the health assessment is incomplete, meaning these regulations cannot possibly guarantee the safety of New York residents.  The second is that the water supply is not properly safeguarded.  The new regulations allow fracking as close as 500 feet from private wells and some aquifers even though there is proof in other states that this distance doesn’t properly protect the water supply.  Thirdly, the volume threshold of 300,000 gallons of water per well is defined as high-volume, therefore wells just under that threshold follow only the two-decade old environmental protection measures, which are not highly regarded.  The fourth issue stated by EWG is that the drilling agencies are given too much leeway to hide important information about the likely dangerous chemicals used to advance fracking.  Lastly, the plan for disposal of the toxic waste water left behind from the fracturing process has too many holes and is too weak so it cannot be done safely enough.  The EWG concludes their analysis by recommending a stronger, more extensive review of hydraulic-fracturing before the regulations are passed and that in the mean-time the New York DEC does not authorize fracking until it can guarantee regulation, safety, clean air and water, and economic security (EWG, 2013). 

Figure 1: Marcellus hydraulic-fracturing wells. Source: Frac Focus, 2013.

            However, New York is not the only state dealing with policy issues regarding fracking.  As in Upstate New York, the fracking industry has primarily targeted rural areas.  Therefore a seemingly perfect place for fracking would be North Dakota.  According to a recent article by NPR, the fracking boom has rapidly spread in this state.  One hundred fifty oil companies have moved to the region and are now producing 660,000 barrels a day which is double the amount produced just two years ago, making North Dakota the second-largest oil producing state, with Texas, of course taking the number one spot (Krulwich, 2013).  The fracking has become so large that it can now be seen from space at night making this once rural ranching region now nearly as bright as some of the major US cities (Figure 2).  The biggest problem in North Dakota right now is the fact that after this oil is brought to the surface it brings natural gas with it, and according to the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources about 29% of this natural gas is flared (burned off) into the atmosphere since the oil companies do not see much value in it and it is being done with barely any regulations.  This flaring is what can be seen from space at nighttime.  The Natural Resource Defense Council states that these North Dakota drillers burn off enough gas to heat 500,000 homes every day (Krulwich, 2013).  To put it into perspective, that is enough gas to heat a home for every person in New Haven, CT.  Unfortunately these flares are only subject to tax or royalties after 1 year, that being if the state doesn’t already grant the company(s) extensions.  The burning of this natural gas has brought great concern by the farming industry in how it is affecting the air and the water.  There have been many complaints by farmers about poisons in the air and water that harm their crops, this being in a region that is still suffering from a drought.  In North Dakota the rights to the minerals below the farms were separated from rights to farm land itself years ago, meaning that much of the fracking is going on without the consent of farmers and possibly hurting their industry.  There is not much being done by North Dakota policy makers to ensure the safety and security of the farmers, their land, and their products (Krulwich, 2013). 

Figure 2: Fracking field in the North Dakota Bakken formation as seen from space at night.  Image via NASA. Source: Krulwich, 2013.

            There is simply too much that is not yet known about fracking and its environmental effects.  For this reason alone I feel that it should be highly regulated at least until we do know more about the process, specifically its emissions and chemicals.  Even though the gas and oil may be cleaner than other sources for fuel like coal there is still too much of a risk that its pollution threats could completely negate these benefits.  These regulations and policies need to be made quickly, and by the right people (not just congress, but including scientific input) as fracking is expanding rapidly at unprecedented levels.  In the mean-time there needs to be continuous research into other oil and natural gas solutions that may be safer and can be easily regulated.  With the science and technology of today this is certainly possible.  These regulations and practices should be done on a state and/or regional level, but if fracking continues to expand at the level it has been it may be quickly made into a national issue.  Fracking has been linked to methane gas by the Environmental Protection Agency as it produces carcinogens like benzene and other volatile organic compounds.  If these byproducts can be mitigated or greatly reduced or captured, then it is possible that fracking could be a decent source of cheap oil and natural gas, at least until we can find cheaper ways in more sustainable energy like solar and wind power.  President Obama has taken positive steps in developing an Advisory Board Shale Gas Production Subcommittee which will hopefully soon bring steps that the oil producers can immediately begin to reduce air and water pollution threats (Hart and Weiss, 2011).  Being from Upstate New York and having seen and heard the stories of fracking pollution, I have signed declarations for policies to be developed properly and passed quickly by the policy makers in Albany.  As we look for new oil and gas sources we must continuously weigh the expected benefits with predicted outcomes and find the value in a cost benefit analysis of not just the economic cost, but the cost on our environment as well as other industries, like farming.

Sources: 

"Causes of Climate Change." EPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 8 Jan. 2013. Web. 10 Mar. 2013. <http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/causes.html>.

"EWG Says Proposed NY State Fracking Rules Won't Assure Safety." Environmental Working Group. EWG Public Afffairs, 11 Jan. 2013. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://www.ewg.org/release/ewg-says-proposed-ny-state-fracking-rules-wont-assure-safety>.

Hart, Melanie, and Daniel J. Weiss. "Making Fracking Safe in the East and West."Center for American Progress. N.p., 21 Oct. 2011. Web. 11 Mar. 2013. <http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/21/10407/making-fracking-safe-in-the-east-and-west/>.

"Hydraulic Fracturing: The Process." Frac Focus: Chemical Disclosure Registry. N.p., 2013. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://fracfocus.org/hydraulic-fracturing-how-it-works/hydraulic-fracturing-process>.

Krulwich, Robert. "A Mysterious Patch Of Light Shows Up In The North Dakota Dark."NPR. NPR, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 10 Mar. 2013. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2013/01/16/169511949/a-mysterious-patch-of-light-shows-up-in-the-north-dakota-dark>.

Plumer, Brad. "Is Fracking a 'bridge' to a Clean-energy Future? Earnest Moriz Thinks So." The Washington Post. N.p., 4 Mar. 2013. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/04/is-fracking-a-bridge-to-a-clean-energy-future-ernest-moniz-thinks-so/>.