Lawmakers, particularly on the Republican side of the aisle, are increasingly exasperated with the slow progress of an EPA investigation into the impact of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) on underground sources of drinking water.  The EPA was scheduled to report on the research in 2013, but the Agency now anticipates that it will be late 2014 before a draft report is ready for public comment.  Further, the administration is now requesting an additional  $38 million–on top of last year’s $45 million request–to fund interagency research into unconventional oil and gas (UOG) development, which includes hydraulic fracturing. 

Congress and the president must agree on a federal budget for fiscal year 2014 by September 30, 2013. 

Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) is one House member who says she is having difficulty being sympathetic to the request for more money in light of how the EPA botched its investigation into whether fracking contributed to contaminated drinking water in Pavillion, Wyoming.  According to Lummis, EPA’s Pavillion report was prematurely released to the public, creating public concern even though Lummis says that former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson assured her that the drinking water in Pavillion was not contaminated by fracking. 

“In late 2011, EPA put Pavillion in the national spotlight with a ‘draft’ report implying that fracking was somehow responsible for the quality of water in the areas near town,” Lummis said at a recent House hearing.  “The problem I’m having is that the EPA is not distinguishing between drinking water versus nondrinking groundwater.  Furthermore, the fact that the EPA was probably responsible for contaminating some of those wells during the testing process adds to the frustration.  Pavillion is frequently held up as the poster child for bad practices and bad consequences when [the Pavillion report] was prematurely released, not peer reviewed, and exaggerated.  I am hugely frustrated with the EPA’s treatment of my state and fracking in general.”

Prudent development

At the hearing, witnesses from the federal agencies overseeing research into fracking and its environmental and human health consequences uniformly expressed the administration’s support for the “safe and prudent development of unconventional oil and gas resources” and the positive contributions UOG can make to the U.S. economy.  But environmental and public health advocates continually draw attention to the risks posed by fracking, primarily potential contamination of drinking water aquifers by the chemicals used in fracking injectate.  The administration is clearly giving deference to these concerns. 

To date, federal research into the risks associated with fracking has left many questions unanswered.  As exemplified by the Pavillion study, there is a great deal of disagreement among the many parties expressing opinions on fracking as to whether there is any solid evidence showing that fracking has contaminated a single drinking water source. 

Under its “prudent” approach, the administration now seems inclined toward investigating the sources of contaminated drinking water whenever there is a nearby gas well.  There have not been many investigations.  At the hearing, Robin M. Ikeda, representing the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), noted that in the past 2 years the ATSDR completed more than 300 health consultations, of which approximately 1 percent examined health concerns potentially related to natural gas development. 

Ikeda went on to describe ATSDR’s ongoing assessments of water contamination in five locations, including Pavillion, where gas exploration is also occurring.   None of these investigations have revealed a link between contaminated drinking water wells and development of natural gas resources, she testified.  However, Ikeda did note that workers at the wells were exposed to high levels of silica, which is used to hold open fissures created by fracking.

Energy revolution

Republicans view the administration’s insistence on more research as part of a fabricated problem impeding the extraordinary access to domestic natural gas provided by fracking and other technological innovations, such as horizontal drilling and advanced drill bits. 

“It is difficult to overstate the incredible benefits of the fracking energy revolution that is underway across America,” said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) at the hearing.  “A recent report found that the Eagle Ford shale developing in Texas is now producing 700,000 barrels of oil and natural gas liquids every day–up from zero just three years earlier.  Unfortunately, a widely publicized handful of unsubstantiated charges that fracking pollutes ground water has led many to question the safety of this practice.  The EPA is at the center of this debate, linking fracking to water contamination in at least three cases, only to be forced to retract their statements after further scrutiny.”

Also at the hearing, Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) referred to a recent Energy Information Administration report stating that U.S. domestic carbon dioxide emissions decreased by 12 percent between 2005 and 2012—more than any other nation, including countries such as Germany and Spain, which have implemented aggressive green energy agendas.  Global emissions increased by 15 percent over roughly the same period.

“This should give pause to the EPA and any other agency that seeks to hinder the development of our unconventional natural gas resources,” said Stewart.  “Rather than search for problems that do not exist, the EPA and this administration should recognize that shale gas is a solution rather than a problem.  Production, not regulation, has led to a reduction in greenhouse gases, and market forces, not restrictions, quotas, or carbon trading schemes, have positioned the U.S. as a global leader in oil and gas production.”

Multiagency MOA

With this background, the administration’s request for funding increases to investigate fracking may not find much support in the Republican-led House.  Nonetheless, representatives from the EPA, the Department of Energy (DOE), and the Department of Interior (DOI)–the three agencies that have signed an interagency memorandum of agreement (MOA) to cooperate on a UOG research program–outlined the administration’s plan for UOG research at the hearing. 

The multiagency effort will cover six areas–water quality, water availability, air quality and GHG emissions, effects on people and their communities, ecological effects, and induced seismicity.  The agencies are still developing a “collaborative research framework” that will give more information on goals and agency-specific tasks.  However, the following excerpts from testimony by the witnesses provide initial information on their expected activities.

EPA

“The EPA has taken steps to coordinate with other Federal agencies throughout the development and implementation of our drinking water study.  For example, DOE and DOI are participating in the technical workshops related to our study.  These workshops are devoted to analytical chemical methods, well construction/operation and subsurface modeling, wastewater treatment, water acquisition modeling, and hydraulic fracturing case studies.”

“The EPA is also working with the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory to explore the potential for both liquids and gases to move from hydraulically fractured zones to drinking water aquifers.  Additionally, EPA’s principal investigators remain in frequent contact with their counterparts at DOE and DOI (principally the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)) regarding research devoted to this important topic.”

-Kevin Teichman, Senior Science Advisor, EPA’s Office of Research and Development

DOE

“The Department is carrying out research directed at quantifying and understanding the environmental and safety risks of shale gas and shale oil development, improving our understanding of emerging and developing shale plays, and increasing the efficiency of technologies for treating hydraulic fracturing flowback water. 

“For example, DOE partnered with Altela, Inc., to test the AltelaRain® fracturing water treatment process at a well site in western Pennsylvania.  Over a nine-month period, 77 percent of the produced hydraulic wastewater was successfully treated onsite, resulting in distilled water as the effluent.  Following the DOE-sponsored demonstration project, four AltelaRain® modules were sold and installed at a facility in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, to treat Marcellus shale wastewater.  Building on the success of this application, Altela, Inc., and its partners are opening two new wastewater treatment facilities in western Pennsylvania.  Each facility is able to process up to 12,000 barrels of waste water a day—about 500,000 gallons per facility.  The purified water can then be reused for any number of purposes.

“Our current program focus is on improving environmental performance by mitigating impacts related to wellbore integrity and zonal isolation to protect shallow groundwater resources, and reducing water usage, air emissions, and resource degradation through improved unconventional resource stimulation that appropriately matches technology to local geologic and hydrologic conditions.”

-Guido DeHoratiis, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil and Gas (Acting), Office of Fossil Energy

USGS

“The USGS has historically had responsibility for assessing the undiscovered, technically recoverable hydrocarbon resources of the nation and will continue this function for unconventional resources.  Using geologic mapping and geochemical techniques, the USGS will also evaluate the geologic parameters of oil and gas basins under current or anticipated near-term development.  Potential impacts to water quality from hydraulic fracturing related activities are one of the primary concerns of communities and public-health officials.  The USGS will identify and model water-quality changes associated with the life cycle of UOG production.  The USGS will determine the impact of well injection and produced waters on groundwater quality through monitoring and research.  This will be accomplished, in part, through baseline surface-water and groundwater quality sampling and modeling.

“For water availability research, the USGS will support streamgage baseline monitoring in states where production is ongoing or planned.  The USGS will also provide water-resource information on water withdrawals, will develop water budgets to understand how much water is required to produce UOG deposits, and will develop predictive tools and statistical models for estimating the amount of water needed for drilling and production operations.

“To better understand the potential effects of UOG activities on people and their communities, the USGS will develop decision tools to evaluate and predict human health impacts.  There is a diverse set of stressors that may ultimately degrade ecosystems where UOG operations are performed.  The USGS will review data and monitoring protocols to evaluate potential impacts of UOG activities on habitats and species.

“The USGS will also conduct wastewater toxicity testing and vulnerability assessments to identify and prioritize regions, aquatic communities, and wildlife habitats that have the greatest potential for impact from UOG activities.

“Beginning in the 1960s, research has demonstrated that the deep injection of large volumes of fluids underground can induce earthquakes. The USGS will calibrate physics-based models against field and lab data to support the development of best management practices for minimizing induced seismicity.  The USGS will analyze seismic data to update the national probabilistic seismic risk maps in ways that account for induced earthquakes.”

-David P. Russ, Regional Director, USGS Northeast Region

Click here for Congressional testimony on the administration’s UOG research plan.

William C. Schillaci