All CATEGORIES
☰ Menu
Ohio Utica Shale

Energy in Depth weighs in on GAO reports

By Bob Downing Published: October 11, 2012

From Energy in DEepth-Ohio:

GAO Report Confirms Facts about HF and Groundwater

Tuesday, October 9th, 2012 |


 

Julia
Researcher

 

A new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) examines the relative risks of shale development and hydraulic fracturing, using existing research as its guide. Unfortunately for opponents who have invested so much time stating otherwise, GAO finds no evidence of hydraulic fracturing fluids migrating from depth up into groundwater.

Granted, GAO wasn’t conducting an original investigative report, but rather aggregating research that’s been done to date. For that reason, the report did not make conclusions or recommendations on the topics it examined. Nonetheless, its findings are instructive in the broader discussion about hydraulic fracturing, specifically as it pertains to groundwater.

Here are a few excerpts worth highlighting:

  • “The risk of contamination from improper casing and cementing is not unique to the development of shale formations.” (GAO, p. 45)
  • “Fractures created during the hydraulic fracturing process are generally unable to span the distance between the targeted shale formation and freshwater bearing zones.” (GAO, p. 46)
  • “When a fracture grows, it conforms to a general direction set by the stresses in the rock, following what is called fracture direction or orientation. The fractures are most commonly vertical and may extend laterally several hundred feet away from the well, usually growing upward until they intersect with a rock of different structure, texture, or strength. These are referred to as seals or barriers and stop the fracture’s upward or downward growth.” (GAO, p. 47)
  • “In addition, regulatory officials we met with from eight states—Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Texas—told us that, based on state investigations, the hydraulic fracturing process has not been identified as a cause of groundwater contamination within their states.” (GAO, p. 49)

GAO even listed studies in relation to the “HF causes water contamination” claim: one from the Center for Rural Pennsylvania (no impact, more on that study here), the infamous Duke University report (methane found in water wells [more on that here], but GAO rightly noted the researchers’ conclusion that there was “no evidence” of fracturing fluid in their samples), and findings from the Ground Water Protection Council (no contamination examples in 16,000 wells).

In other words: another governmental report, another nail in the coffin for the claim that hydraulic fracturing has contaminated groundwater.

Another topic GAO examined was the issue of seismicity. As we know the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Research Council have studied that topic and determined there is no link between major earthquakes and hydraulic fracturing. Thus, unsurprisingly, here’s what GAO found:

  • “According to several studies and publications we reviewed, the hydraulic fracturing process releases energy deep beneath the surface to break rock but the energy released is not large enough to trigger a seismic event that could be felt on the surface.” (GAO, p. 52)

To recap, the Government Accountability Office has examined the studies and investigations conducted to date and determined that (1) the risk of water contamination from hydraulic fracturing fluids migrating from depth is not only extremely low, but state regulators and other experts have even said there’s no evidence of that ever happening; (2) the amount of rock separating shale formations from drinking water supplies is often thousands of feet, and the fractures created during hydraulic fracturing are not large enough to connect them; and (3) hydraulic fracturing is not causing major earthquakes.

Confirming the facts may not make great headlines, but the truth is always worth mentioning.


 
Print
Add This

SUBSCRIBE VIA RSS

OHIO.COM VIDEOS

See the most recent drilling report and an injection wells map From NewsOutlet.org
Prev Next

Utica and Marcellus shale web sites

Ohio Department of Natural Resources' Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management State agency Web site.

ODNR Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management. State drilling permits. List is updated weekly.

ODNR Division of Geological Survey.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

Ohio State University Extension.

Ohio Farm Bureau.

Ohio Oil and Gas Association, a Granville-based group that represents 1,500 Ohio energy-related companies.

Ohio Oil & Gas Energy Education Program.

Energy In Depth, a trade group.

Marcellus and Utica Shale Resource Center by Ohio law firm Bricker & Eckler.

Utica Shale, a compilation of Utica shale activities.

Landman Report Card, a site that looks at companies involved in gas and oil leases.FracFocus, a compilation of chemicals used in fracking individual wells as reported voluntarily by some drillers.

Chesapeake Energy Corp,the Oklahoma-based firm is the No. 1 driller in Ohio.

Rig Count Interactive Map by Baker Hughes, an energy services company.

Shale Sheet Fracking, a Youngstown Vindicator blog.

National Geographic's The Great Shale Rush.

The Ohio Environmental Council, a statewide eco-group based in Columbus.

Buckeye Forest Council.

Earthjustice, a national eco-group.

Stop Fracking Ohio.

People's Oil and Gas Collaborative-Ohio, a grass-roots group in Northeast Ohio.

Concerned Citizens of Medina County, a grass-roots group.

No Frack Ohio, a Columbus-based grass-roots group.

Fracking: Gas Drilling's Environmental Threat by ProPublica, an online journalism site.

Penn State Marcellus Center.

Pipeline, blog from Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Marcellus shale drilling.

Allegheny Front, environmental public radio for Western Pennsylvania.