EPA’s assessment concludes that there are above and below ground mechanisms by which hydraulic fracturing activities have the potential to impact drinking water resources. These mechanisms include water withdrawals in times of, or in areas with, low water availability; spills of hydraulic fracturing fluids and produced water; fracturing directly into underground drinking water resources; below ground migration of liquids and gases, and inadequate treatment and discharge of wastewater.
EPA did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States. Of the potential mechanisms identified in this report, we found specific instances where one or more mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells. The number of identified cases was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.
The entire EPA Press Release
WASHINGTON—The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is releasing a draft assessment today on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing activities on drinking water resources in the United States. The assessment, done at the request of Congress, shows that while hydraulic fracturing activities in the U.S. are carried out in a way that have not led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources, there are potential vulnerabilities in the water lifecycle that could impact drinking water. The assessment follows the water used for hydraulic fracturing from water acquisition, chemical mixing at the well pad site, well injection of fracking fluids, the collection of hydraulic fracturing wastewater (including flowback and produced water), and wastewater treatment and disposal [http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/hydraulic-fracturing-water-cycle].
“EPA’s draft assessment will give state regulators, tribes and local communities and industry around the country a critical resource to identify how best to protect public health and their drinking water resources,” said Dr. Thomas A. Burke, EPA’s Science Advisor and Deputy Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Research and Development. “It is the most complete compilation of scientific data to date, including over 950 sources of information, published papers, numerous technical reports, information from stakeholders and peer-reviewed EPA scientific reports.”
EPA’s review of data sources available to the agency found specific instances where well integrity and waste water management related to hydraulic fracturing activities impacted drinking water resources, but they were small compared to the large number of hydraulically fractured wells across the country. The report provides valuable information about potential vulnerabilities, some of which are not unique to hydraulic fracturing, to drinking water resources, but was not designed to be a list of documented impacts.
These vulnerabilities to drinking water resources include:
water withdrawals in areas with low water availability;
hydraulic fracturing conducted directly into formations containing drinking water resources;
inadequately cased or cemented wells resulting in below ground migration of gases and liquids;
inadequately treated wastewater discharged into drinking water resources;
and spills of hydraulic fluids and hydraulic fracturing wastewater, including flowback and produced water.
Also released today were nine peer-reviewed EPA scientific reports (www.epa.gov/hfstudy). These reports were a part of EPA’s overall hydraulic fracturing drinking water study and contributed to the findings outlined in the draft assessment. Over 20 peer-reviewed articles or reports were published as part of this study [http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/published-scientific-papers].
States play a primary role in regulating most natural gas and oil development. EPA’s authority is limited by statutory or regulatory exemptions under the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Where EPA’s exemptions exist, states may have authority to regulate unconventional oil and gas extraction activities under their own state laws.
EPA’s draft assessment benefited from extensive stakeholder engagement conducted across the country with states, tribes, industry, non-governmental organizations, the scientific community and the public to ensure that the draft assessment reflects current practices in hydraulic fracturing and utilizes all data and information available to the agency.
The study will be finalized after review by the Science Advisory Board and public review and comment. The Federal Register Notice with information on the SAB review and how to comment on the draft assessment will be published on Friday June 5, 2015.
Read more:
Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil...
Review of Well Operator Files for Hydraulically Fractured Oil and G...
Tags:
The difference being that the Anti-Frackers are supported by Saudi Arabia and they are not constricted by little things like "Truth" when speaking to infidels as they consider ALL of us to be.
Russia is also behind the scenes stirring the anti-fracking pot. Russia supplies over 90% of Europe's gas.
Yes. You are absolutely correct.
The Saudi's are trying to stop the Russians first and then the USA. And, Russia would like to stop us from interfering in their Energy position as Western Europe's dominant supplier of Natural Gas.
I don't think this article is as glowing for the industry as you think it is. Guess it just depends on which sentences you choose to BOLD.
KSM
+1
Anyone who thinks this report is, in the overall, friendly to drilling, has not read the report in detail.
I've read the report in detail and despite the millions of fracked wells and hundreds of thousands over the last 5 years, there are no instances found in the report or elsewhere where fracking was shown to have caused contamination. There are, however, instances where improper well completion techniques have caused problems. But this occurs in cases whether the well was vertical or horizontal or fracked or unfracked. The report's language is concerned with "potential" for problems and few instances of problems.
When most wells (vertical, horizontal, fracked, unfracked) are drilled the driller is required to put steel casing in the hole to a depth lower that the deepest drinking water aquifer. Then, cement is pumped down the casing until it comes back up the outside of the casing to the surface. As the well is deepened, as second steel liner is run inside the first and cement is pumped down it until it comes back of the annulus (space between the two pipes). So there are normally two sets of steel pipes and two layers of cement between the inside and the rock. But problems do occur on rare occasions and the cement may not fill in all of those spaces. This allows fluids to migrate from the deeper producing formations to the surface or fresh water aquifers. It's kind of like plane or crashes--all precautions are taken but most feel that the isolated mishaps are worth the risks for the benefits involved.
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher). Powered by
h2 | h2 | h2 |
---|---|---|
AboutWhat makes this site so great? Well, I think it's the fact that, quite frankly, we all have a lot at stake in this thing they call shale. But beyond that, this site is made up of individuals who have worked hard for that little yard we call home. Or, that farm on which blood, sweat and tears have fallen. [ Read More ] |
Links |
Copyright © 2017 GoMarcellusShale.com