Protect the Southern Hills Aquifer!!!

Questions To Be Addressed:

What is Fracking?

What Are the Problems?

What Regulations Govern Fracking?

***A Note: Due to the particularly sensitive and impassioned nature of this discourse, along with the tendency nowadays for people to misused and misrepresent the words of others by manipulatively fragmenting quotes and studies, I relied heavily on exact quotes. Note that sources are linked both in the text and in the complete list of Sources at the end. This is in no way an intention at "plagiarism," but rather an attempt to allow the parties highlighted (EPA, API, etc) directly speak for themselves on the subject in the same dialogue, so as to avoid any misrepresentation or misunderstanding. All sources are direct sources- meaning the EPA, the USGS, the American Petroleum Institute, the World Energy Council, and various university studies.

What is fracking?

The Promise- The American Petroleum Institute promises that "what fracking means... security, economic growth, and jobs, jobs, jobs." [1 & 2] "What is hydraulic fracturing? It's energy and opportunity- for better lives and a stronger, more energy-secure country." [2] "Why should communities allow hydraulic fracturing? Besides the energy produced with little impact on the environment, communities benefit economically. Energy development creates jobs and generates millions of dollars in royalties, taxes and other revenues to federal, state, and local governments. It provides energy for U.S. industry, helps strengthen our economy locally and nationally, and helps contribute to higher disposable incomes." [3]

"Despite the current economic difficulties, the world might be looking at the 'Golden age of gas'..." [4] There are well over a million natural gas wells in the United States, as of 2009. [5 &1] Though the scale of operations has changed with new horizontal drilling and high volume hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic fracturing technology has been used since the 1940's [3]. The Environmental Protection Agency weighs in saying: "Natural gas plays a key role in our nation's clean energy future. The U.S. has vast reserves of natural gas that are commercially viable as a result of advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies enabling greater access to gas in shale formations. Responsible development of America's shale gas resources offers important economic, energy security, and environmental benefits." [6] Fracking both makes new resources available and allows additional resources to be extracted from existing wells. [3] It's describes as just a process to "stimulate" wells in order to maximize recoveries of natural gas from highly impermeable rock formations, including coalbeds and shale formations. [7 & 8] The movement of the oil and natural gas out of the rock pores is sped up by literally cracking a path through the rocks for the hydrocarbons to gather and travel towards the well. [8 & 9] Hydraulic fracturing is used to extract both oil and natural gas, as well as "geothermal energy, and even water" in some places. [9]

"Over the past few years, several key technical, economic, and energy policy developments have spurred the increased use of hydraulic fracturing for gas extraction over a wider diversity of geographic regions and geologic formations." [7] "The enormous resources of shale gas have always been there, but it is only since the introduction of hydraulic-fracturing technology at an economically attractive price, that the gas market revolution has become a reality." [4] "The advance of drilling and well completion technologies, including hydraulic fracturing, has opened up plays in an number of different basins that were not previously considered to have economic potential." [10] Simply put, it just wasn't technologically or economically feasible to extract from these "unconventional resources" before, because the gases are highly dispersed in the rocks and they couldn't be accessed as easily as the conventional and more easily extracted resources. [8 & 11] "Unconventional gas extraction includes: deep gas (greater than 15,000 feet), tight gas, shale gas, coal bed methane, gas from geopressurized zones, and methane hydrates. Like tight gas which is extracted from sandstone and limestone deposits that have low permeability, shale gas extraction requires techniques such as fracturing and horizontal drilling that are less commonly used in conventional extraction." [12] These unconventional resources produced about 42% of total US gas production in 2007, and are forecast to reach 64% by 2020. [10] "Unconventional natural gas and oil resources in the United States are important components of a national energy program that seeks both greater energy independence and greener sources of energy." [13]

You see there's a rush going on right now, not a gold rush but a shale rush. "In its search for secure, sustainable and affordable supplies of energy, the world is turning its attention to unconventional energy resources. Shale gas is one of them. I has turned upside down the North-American gas markets, and is making significant strides in other regions. The emergence of shale gas as a potentially major energy source can have serious strategic implications for geopolitics and the energy industry." [4] The Russian Federation, by far, has the most natural gas reserves in the world, ranging from one-third to one-fourth of global reserves. Quatar, Turkmenistan, and Saudi Arabia also have significant natural gas reserves. [4] "Development of the shale gas resource is considered a major component of America's energy supplies for the foreseeable future." [13] Shale has become an increasingly important source for natural gas in the U.S. [11] But, it's only been in the last decade that natural gas production from shale grew past 2% of the total U.S. outputs. Now shale is responsible for 37% of U.S. production. [10] And shale's become particularly important to the oil and gas industry, as well as the U.S. government. The American Petroleum Institute (API), through an uncited study by IHS, theorizes that by 2035 more than 75% of natural gas will come from fracking. [1] Shale is expected to contain 750 trillion cubic feet of gas and 24 billion barrels of oil, though again no reference for these numbers is given. [14] It's estimated that 13,000 natural gas wells will be hydraulically fractured or re-fractured every year, representing the majority of new natural gas production. [5] API estimates that 75% of natural gas development in the future will involve hydraulic fracturing of shale resources. [1] Although, the API funded study claims that over 95% of wells are "routinely" fracked. [14] API mentions (without citation) a government-industry study which found that up to 80% of natural gas wells drilled in the next ten years will "require" hydraulic fracturing. API notes (without citation) that 56 million American homes use "our clean-burning natural gas" and that one-fifth of the nation's electricity come from this source. Natural gas is also responsible for powering buses and fleet vehicles, and it used to create fertilizers and plastics. [3] This study claims that if hydraulic fracturing were stopped there would be nearly 80% less wells completed, causing the country to lose 17% of its oil production and 45% of its natural gas production by 2014, and a 23% decrease in oil production and 57% decrease in natural gas production by 2018. It goes on to declare that moving to "the No Fracking scenario" would cost 2.9 million jobs.[14]But this "study" commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute and often cited in their arguments against regulation, doesn't cite any sources, or refer to where there numbers are actually coming from. Perhaps they're industry numbers, reported by API members, but no reference is given to how any of their claims are supported with facts and documentation. Facts and documentation are the basic of any good study.

Despite this, it is more than apparent that natural gas, particularly from unconventional resources, is both a major political and social issue. Geopolitically natural gas production, and consumption, is only getting more and more important. And it's because of this that governments and industries alike are diving into the "shale revolution." It's all about imports and exports. But first some quick terms- A "net importer" imports more liquid natural gas than it exports. "Total imports" include all liquid natural gas imports, with no accounting for exports. Net imports are not the same as total imports. So who's got the gas power? "Europe is, and will remain, by far the largest net importer..." [4] By 2030, continental Asia is set to become the second largest net importer, followed by the Asia Pacific region. But here's the thing, the Asia Pacific region is also expected to reach #1 in total imports by 2030, bringing in nearly half the world's liquid natural gas imports, but exporting a significant amount of liquid natural gas as well, with Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia, and Brunei producing one-third of the world's natural gas. Europe only exports a very small amount of natural gas, which does nothing to offset it's massive imports, that's why it's the top net importer but not the top in total imports. North America, amidst its "shale gas revolution," produces just enough natural gas to meet its consumption needs. Mexico and Quebec import just about as much as the U.S. and Western Canada export. Africa and the Middle East are only expected to increase production. But, by far, the Russian Commonwealth is the biggest exporter and producer of natural gas, producing about one-quarter of the world's natural gas now, with expectations of that amount growing by 45%. "Russia holds the largest natural gas reserves in the world," mostly in Siberia. [4] A state-run company controls 80% of the country's total production and 65% of the country's reserves. Africa and the Russian Commonwealth are the only regions in the world that do not import any natural gas. And then there's China, whose reserves of shale gas remain a mystery, but which is estimated to hold more than the U.S. and Canada combined. Further, in China "the possible negative impact of shale gas development on the environment is not a front line issue," as it is in North America. [4] It's thought that if China fully taps into it's shale gas potential it could change the "energy landscape" of the entire world. Currently, Shell, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips are all active in China. The United States possess the fifth largest reserves of natural gas in the world, nearly a third of which are in Texas. But it's only about 4% of the world's total reserves and that's with all the unconventional sources included. Most of these reserves contain only natural gas, and no oil. [4]

[UPDATE (5-30-14): "Although Russia is still the world’s biggest exporter of natural gas, the United States recently surpassed it to become the world’s largest natural gas producer, largely because of breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing technology, known as fracking..." the New York Times announced in early March. With the rise of hydraulic fracturing the U.S. has moved from having "declining" amounts of natural gas, to having enough to export. Currently, most of Europe as well as the Ukraine are dependent on Russian gas exports. America hopes to undermine the influence (and power) of Putin by exporting gas to these countries instead.]

So when you look at the vehemence of either side of this debate consider that both sides consider themselves revolutions to safeguard the future, safety, and freedom of our country. It's just that one side thinks it's fighting to free the U.S. from international pressures while the other fights corporate domination. Despite any good intentions, the lines seem to be drawn in the sand. The American Petroleum Institute proclaims: "America's shale energy revolution is built on innovation that produced advanced hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technologies and techniques. And the innovation continues, working on ways to make fracking even safer for the surrounding environment." [2] While those opposed to the expanding development fear there is no "safe" way to frack, and that their interests are not being respected nor represented by either their elected officials or the oil and gas industry.

So now you know what the EPA and the American Petroleum Industry have to say about the future of hydraulic fracturing in the United States. Now let's look at the process. Essentially, here's how fracking happens. First the land is prepared with the necessary infrastructure. Then wells are drilled, with redundant layers of cemented steel piping, with generally 1-8 wells per well pad. [12 & 15] "A site is expected to consist of only one well pad." [12] The American Petroleum Institute estimates that each well takes 3 million pounds of steel and cement to construct. [15] This process produces a variety of wastes, including drilling muds, cuttings, and produced water. [16] A fracking fluid made up of water and additives is pumped into the rocks below at a very high pressure [9], around 10,000 pounds per square inch. [12] The high-pressure fluid actually breaks the rocks, forming fissures that hasten the movement of oil and natural gas from the rock pores. [9] Fracking fissures in the shale "create paths to connect the gas to the well." [12] These cracks can extend several hundred feet away from the well. Once the rocks are cracked, a "propping agent," usually sand, is pumped into the fractures to keep them open once the pressure returns to normal. "After fracturing is complete, the internal pressure of the geological formation cause the injected fracturing fluids to rise to the surface where it may be stored in tanks or pits prior to recycling." [9] These recovered fluids, that are forced out of the ground through the wellbore, are called "flowback." [9, 8, & 11] These waters along with formation water are collectively called "unconventional oil and gas extraction waters" or "produced waters." [8] One key attribute of hydraulic fracturing activities, particularly those that involve horizontal drilling, in unconventional reservoirs is the notably larger volumes of flowback, requiring larger storage pits or tanks. [16] Flowback is mostly collected in the first 2-3 weeks of HVHF (high volume hyraulic fracturing) production. Although it can be recycled, that is only up to a point, at which impurities have accumulated to such levels that the waste must be treated and disposed. [13] "Spill prevention, response, and clean-up procedures are implemented before drilling begins and are updated as operations progress... Numerous protective measures are in place at well sites, including liners under well pads, rubber composite mats under rigs, storage tanks with secondary containment measures, and barriers to control any potential runnoff." [15] These waters contain a lot of dissolved solids, suspended solids, and salts, including organic and inorganic chemicals, metals, and naturally-occuring radioactive materials. [8] They are disposed of by either discharging into surface water or publicly owned treatment facilities, as well as injection into underground wells.[8]

What are the problems?

"Shale gas development can bring positive impacts to small towns, for example through increased employment opportunities and economic expansion. The growth of the boom town may be positively capitalized by homes in the area; while lease payments can provide a great source of income for many homeowners (and these royalties may be spent locally, helping to boost the economy). However, negative externalities associated with shale gas development can extent beyond the immediate proximity surrounding the well. Netting out these different impacts, we find statistically significant evidence of boom town positive impacts in the general vicinity of shale gas development, as evidences by property value increases from wells drilled within one year of sale. However, the long-term impacts of wells older than a year or never drilled are cause for concern, as the boom is short-lived." [17]

Many areas of Louisiana easily rely on surface water, in rivers and streams, for their drinking water needs. But this isn't so for a number Louisiana residents. An estimated 69% of the population of the state relies on groundwater for domestic use, and the same is true for much of southeastern Louisiana. A survey performed as part of a House Resolution this year showed that only a little over half of the people surveyed knew that their water came from a single source, the Southern Hills Aquifer system. The Southern Hills aquifer is the sole source of water for 10 southeastern Louisiana parishes (including East and West Baton Rouge, East and West Feliciana, St. Tammany, St. Helena, Livingston, Tangipahoa, Washington, and Point Coupee), as well as 14 of 17 Mississippi counties that access the aquifer (including Adams, Amite, Claiborne, Copiah, Franklin, Hinds, Jefferson, Jefferson Davis, Lawrence, Lincoln, Marion, Pike, Rankin, Simpson, Warren, Walthall, and Wilkinson). In 1980, the aquifer served over a million people in Louisiana and Mississippi an average of 146 million gallons of water every day. It was projected in 1983 that by 2000 the aquifer would serve 1.5 million people about 220 million gallons of water every day.

The Save BR Water website describes the water from the Southern Hills Aquifer as "amongst the top in the world... long advertised... as being the best and purest. Far from an idle boast, our claim to this premium water is a scientific fact based on [the] location atop a unique geological formation called the Southern Hills Aquifer." The aquifer rangest in depth reaching over 2,500 feet deep, composed of many layers of sand and gravel alongside clay layers from 100-300 feet in depth. The deepest parts of the aquifer were formed 2-3 million years ago. As our ample rain falls, it works its way through the soil and the earth, slowly filtering out all impurities, until finally it reaches the aquifer.

When the USGS studied the Southern Hills Aquifer in 1983, they identified several major streams in southeastern Louisiana, the only alternatives should the aquifer become undrinkable. These rivers include the Amite, Tickfaw, Natalbany, Tangipahoa, Bogue Chitto, Atchafalaya and Pearl Rivers. Although the Pearl River borders St Tammany, and The Bogue Chitto crosses a small bit of the northeastern corner, none of these rivers really run through the parish. The Mississippi, Atchafalaya and Pearl Rivers are the three major rivers, moving between 10,000 gallons per second (Pearl) and 550,000 gallons of water per second (Mississippi). All the other mentioned streams move less than one-fifth of what the Pearl carries. These water sources aren't used because of the added expense of cleaning the water to make it drinkable, as well as the difficulty and expense of distributing this water (you can't just build a well). "Ground water, on the other hand, is available from wells located in the vicinity of the users and can be delivered at nearly half the cost of river water when considering water treatment alone." The USGS estimated that groundwater from Baton Rouge cost 10 cents less per 1,000 gallons than the treated river water of New Orleans (12 cents per 1,000 gallons in BR versus 22 cents per 1,000 gallons in NO). "Using surface water would nearly double the cost to users, based on the required water treatment alone." Further, threats to the river, such as chemical spills, can threaten to entirely disrupt the water supply. It's estimated that 66-70% of the water used in Baton Rouge alone goes to industrial use in paper mills and a variety of other industries, who rely on clean water.

Salt water intrusion, caused by over-pumping wells and drawing saltwater from across the Baton Rouge fault into the freshwater of the aquifer, has been threatening the aquifer for decades, with chloride levels rising by over 300% between 1975 and 1990. Other naturally occurring dissolved compounds, like iron, threaten to make the aquifer undrinkable as well. But it's the increasing threat of contamination from surface and other activities, including the new threat of fracking, that we can control. "We must deman a long-term sustainable solution for the benefit of future generations! It is the responsibility of our State Government to protect our fresh ground water now and for the future..."

Map source: http://www.epa.gov/region6/water/swp/ssa/maps/ssa_shills.pdf

USGS survey: http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/1983/4189/report.pdf

Save BR Water: http://www.savebrwater.com/goodwater.html

Related Articles:
House Concurrent Resolution No. 52
http://www.legis.la.gov/Legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=887779

A New Tool Arrives to Fight Saltwater Intrusion
http://theadvocate.com/home/6496152-125/new-tool-arrives-to-fight

Louisiana Water Quantity and Policy-
http://srwqis.tamu.edu/louisiana/program-information/louisiana-target-themes/water-quantity-policy/

Louisiana Ground-Water Quality-
http://www.ngwa.org/Documents/States/GWQ/GWQ_Louisiana.pdf

Protect the Southern Hills Aquifer!!!

Friday, May 30, 2014

Fracking 101 Q&A

What the frack is going on in St. Tammany? Our Situation.

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Fracking? Process, Problems, and Regulations.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Why Should I Care About the Southern Hills Aquifer?

Save the Southern Hills Aquifer!