Technology for Safer Fracking is Coming!

I recently read an article about a new form of technology that is supposed to make fracking safer.  I am presenting it for discussion.  If you know of other safe methods, please share them.  Thanks:

Fracking with propane gel


15 November 2011

An alternative approach to hydraulic fracturing or fracking of shale rock to release tightly-stored natural gas that may be safer than conventional techniques is being tested across North America. However, gas producers trialing the method, which uses propane instead of water to break up the rock, are not revealing results data. This is holding back the widespread introduction of the method in the booming shale gas sector which is transforming the US energy and petrochemicals feedstocks sectors.

Shale gas production could also transform the outlook in Europe, Asia and Latin America where there are large reserves. But fears about the possible hazards of fracking would have to be resolved first.

Gasfrac Energy Services, a small Canadian company in Calgary, Alberta, has developed a technology for using gelled propane-based liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) as a substitute for water to carry the chemicals and sand needed to fracture the shale rock.

Fracking


© iStock

Huge amounts of water are used during fracking - as much as 8 million gallons in an average shale gas well. This chemical containing water then flows back to the surface with the potential to foul drinking water supplies and rivers.

Also, small earth tremors which have on occasion accompanied shale gas production in the US and recently in Blackpool, UK, during test drilling for shale gas have been blamed on the massive pressure exerted by the water in underground rock formations.

So far, tests of the LPG, made up of 90 per cent propane and a diester phosphoric acid gelling agent to give it sufficient viscosity to carry chemicals and sands, show that it is both safer and far more efficient than water. Instead of bringing the fracking chemicals to the surface it leaves them behind.

'This is a game changer for the industry,' says Don LeBlanc, principal consultant at Eastex Petroleum Consultants in Halifax, Nova Scotia, who has been involved in shale gas trials with gelled propane in New Brunswick, Canada.

'The main advantage of the gelled propane is that once the gel is broken the propane flashes and mixes with the gas,' he explains. 'Since the propane becomes part of the reservoir flow, the generated fracture is completely cleaned up, whereas in a water-based fracture stimulation, some of the water remains trapped in the fracture. In addition a water-based fracture has an efficiency of around 20 per cent, while propane has 100 per cent efficiency. '

Nonetheless, despite being used around 1000 times in Canada and the US since first being tested three years ago, little data on the application of the technology has been made publicly available. In such a highly competitive industry, producers do not want to disclose its potential benefits. 

One perceived drawback of fracking by propane-based LPG is that initially it can cost 20-40 per cent more than water fracking. 'In reality the costs are comparable when the life cost of the well is considered,' says Mr LeBlanc. 'Fracturing with water also yields an ongoing cost for water handling and water disposal. '

Sean Milmo

Views: 3876

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on January 27, 2012 at 4:01am

Tanya with everyones exposure to chemicals and environmental effects such as radon gas your only looking for a probable cause. After all everyone knows SMOKING causes everything from a low birth weight, herpes, to even death if think your going to be immortal. I dare you try to take away the American Cancer Societies scape goat. 

 But what gets to me is your use of " The government has placed the entire burden on the tax payer."

Tax payer burden? Hmmm 

CBS News reports “First Solar was the biggest S&P 500 loser in 2011 and its CEO was cut loose – even as taxpayers were forced to back a whopping $3 billion in company loans.”  
When Solyndra Corporation stopped all business activity, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and laid-off nearly all of its employees in early September of 2011, Americans learned they would be on the hook to pay back a $535 million taxpayer loan guarantee made to the company by President Barack Obama’s administration. 
Need I say more?
Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on January 27, 2012 at 4:46am

Here is another green energy bust burdened upon the tax payer Tanya.  $118 million grant 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/27/parent-obama-backed-batt...  If you add these numbers up you get:

Taxpayers burdened with $3,653,000,000.00 !

Permalink Reply by Tanya Gabriele on January 27, 2012 at 8:55pm

Billy--That's aweful.  All of us should be angry with that.  I, however, don't understand why we have to fork tax payer money to subsidize an industry--like O & G--when that industry shows profit margins that are in the billions.  Can you?

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on January 28, 2012 at 5:16am

  Tanya to what extent we as tax payers have subsidized the gas and oil industry I really do not know.  However when you target one industry such as the gas and oil, it becomes a spin. 

  We have as taxpayers subsidized many a thing. For an example my neighbor that runs a dairy farm gets $135,000 a year in gov. subsidization. We subsidized at times the auto manufactures. when JEEP was heading down, the  State of Ohio bought a bunch of Jeeps. We subsidized a whole magnitude of things in the past such as the TVA, the interstate highway system (i said that in light of the desire for some states to make privatized toll roads of them) We subsidized the airline industy, we have also the internet to some extent. 

  Yes they make a profit. The railroads made a killing in their hay days and never reinvested the profits back into the industry, thus we have no high speed rail. At least we are getting a return as consumers with the Oil and Gas industry. Before you scream prices I say they at times are high, but ask a home owner if their brand new home 1963 price of $13,995 is worth $125,000 and they will say hell yea!

  

  Yes there are deaths in the Oil and Gas industry as in any industry. Can we make it safer yes but it requires a dedicated human approach. Trucking  for an example has been regulated for some time now, we are drug tested, need physicals, some require FBI background checks for HAZMAT (not here I  let my HAZMAT go when I was required to pay $150 for renewal, I said look you do a background check on Obama then I'll think about renewal) . W e are subject to Hours of Service.

  The problem is industry and government that write these rules fail to put the human equations into play.  When driving a truck rules can prevent you from taking a nap along the way. (Professional drivers say to hell with the load safety first, rookies will push it the dispatcher tells them to)

  I personally feel that 12 hour shifts (especially with broken sleep patterns)   are not safe anywhere there is movement of  heavy equipment or transportation is involved. But yet commercial aircraft, trucks, water vessels do not make money when they are not moving. 

  

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on January 28, 2012 at 8:46am

Tanya some food for thought hear some arguments http://video.foxnews.com/v/1420078500001/are-some-corporate-profits...

Permalink Reply by Tanya Gabriele on January 27, 2012 at 9:40pm

You're exactly right Billy.  That is aweful.  But I believe both Parties are responsible for cutting bad deals like that.  It's called "Crony Capitalism."  In fact, the provisions used that loosely distribute loans to green companies are a part of the 2005 Energy Bill authored by George Bush;  Solyndra donated campaign contributions to both Republican and Democrat Parties--but of course--a few bcks more to the Democrats; and the man urging the investigation, Rep. Darrel Issa (R-California) was also instrumental in arranging Clean Energy Loans to Aptera Motors--a company that creates electric cars and contributor who largely donates to the Republican Party.  Both Parties are guilty of Crony Capitalism and it is up to Congress to put a stop to it.  

Permalink Reply by Bert Bankovic on January 27, 2012 at 3:52am

Yes, GasFrac has been doing this for years.  The case for this method comes down to a couple of factors, mainly, not needing the original source water.  In places like TX, OK, and LA, the source water is a problem during dry seasons.  Here in PA, we don't have the source water issue like in the south (or even other parts of the world).  With nearly 100% recycling now, disposal wells are not as big of an issue either. 

Permalink Reply by Tanya Gabriele on January 27, 2012 at 9:44pm

Hello Bert!  So, you say the water is nearly recyclable at 100%  That's fantastic!  Then why are we using frack wells?  And--What can our State and the Federal governemtn do to help local water treatment plants be effective in treating disposal water? Thanks for your input.I really appreciate it.

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on January 28, 2012 at 7:34am

You said "Then why are we using frack wells?".

We are still using frac wells because you must frac the shale formation to release the gas and NGL's if they are to be produced in economically viable quantities. If you don't frac any well, it isn't going to be worth drilling as the cost will outweigh the production. Nearly all wells are "stimulated" to encourage production.

Did you mean "Then why are we still using injection/disposal wells?"?

We are still using injection wells because frac water recycling is not at 100%, as Bert stated. It is considerably higher today than it was even a year ago. Some of the larger producers with more resources have lead the way and developed frac recipes that allow the re-use of frac water from one site as some or all of the feedstock for their next frac job. This is in lieu of using all new fresh water for each new well frac and it is a step in the right direction. Injection well utilization should grow at a slower rate because of it. Part of this is due to Ohio law that requires frac water be in a closed loop system and produced into tanks and not into evaporation ponds as is so common in PA. Once back in a frac tank, it is easily transported to the next site which may be closer than the nearest injection well. Smaller producers that don't have the R&D budget will take longer to get there as may currently be cheaper/easier/faster to just dispose of produced frac water by the injection well method. Injection wells will never go away though because most oil and gas wells produce some water(brine) along with whatever hydrocarbons may be produced throughout the life of the well. This must be periodically removed from the well for it to continue to produce and it goes to injection wells for disposal.

As to your question about "What can our State and the Federal governemtn do to help local water treatment plants be effective in treating disposal water?", the whole premise of the question is just wrongheaded. Local waste water treatment plants CAN'T treat disposal water properly, and what they have "treated" and then released into rivers and streams is still laden with heavy metals and radiation. Those downstream who must utilize that water source for a municipal water supply are starting with a tainted product. Municipal waste water treatment plants are engineered to process sewage - not brine, heavy metals, and radiation - and should stick to sewage. No local water treatment plant should ever be processing used frac water.  There are industrial water treatment processes that can clean up frac water, but it is currently an expensive process and the capacity does not exist to treat the sheer volume being produced by the industry today. This is why injection well drilling and use is on the rise in Ohio today.

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on January 28, 2012 at 8:18am

  I used to work for a company that supplied Ultra High Purfied water to power plants and other industry.  I delivered deionization trailers and set them up at locations throughout the eastern US. In the process of setting up the trailers we sampled the water supply that would feed the trailer we did it with  TDS meter ( Total Dissolved Solids) our readings were in the PPM. 

  At the River Rouge power plant in Detroit Michigan i set up a trailer and had a TDS reading of 512 PPM from the city water supply. I had to take a break and when talking with the guard I said I wonder how good the water is in that 5 gallon cooler, heck lets check it. It tested a PPM of 737 PPM ! What people don't know! lol

  By the way fracking does include the use of sand (silica) well guess what all water contains silica (sand) our trailers could reduce the silica content to below 3PPB. That is about scientific grade water that sells for about $35 a gallon, makes oil cheap!

  A bit off topic but when water gets involved into the fracking picture water quality is usually a topic thrown about.

Permalink Reply by M. Sean Joyce on January 27, 2012 at 5:23am

I posted about this company on this website on November 12 2009.

Gasfrac is mentioned in the first draft NYDEC GEIS draft as an alternative.

I talked to this company personally in 2008 and have attended a presentation by them.

The so called chemical gelling agent is a non issue. People see the word chemical and always think the worst.

The dish detergent in everyone's kitchen is made from CHEMICALS!!!

The propane industry and the transportation of propane is one of the most highly regulated industries in this country and has been for many decades (1930's')

Truck trips for a single well are reduced from about a thousand per well to about forty.

There was propane flash due to a faulty valve on one of their sites NOT AN EXPLOSION!!!!!!  as the fractivists called it.

Gasfrac's response was to increase the  the amount of sensors surrounding the operation and the propane flow can be completely shutdown from the control house immediately.

The propane is gelled and mixed with sand onsite.

The propane is essentially recovered from the well 100% and resused on the next frac.

I believe the so called FLASHING of the propane is the return of the propane to a gaseous state, not a combustion of the gas.

Fractivists will lament the danger of propane as they barbecue on their gas grill.

all they want is to do away with fossil fuels regardless of the methods, that is their intent.

This is also a fight for private property rights:

http://my.brainshark.com/False-Choices-The-Story-of-Agenda-21-71315...

Shale gas is the future and is going to steam roll right over these leftists.

Permalink Reply by Tanya Gabriele on January 27, 2012 at 9:53pm

Thanks Mr. Joyce.  That's great information.  Gov. Kasich's plan is to make sure the well casings are up to par.  But, how do we manage the escape of methane, arsenic, and uranium into our acquifers?  This may sound ludicrous, but--ss there something the industry can add to the frack water that combines with those elements, make them insolvent in water, and possible to heavy to leach into the watertable?

Thanks for your input.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service