Hydraulic fracturing is when a hole or “well” is drilled deep into the ground, in an effort to extract valuable natural gas reserves which exist beneath the surface. The process of constructing a hydraulic fracturing well includes drilling into the Earth–first vertically and then horizontally, then lining the well with a two-terminal tube with one terminal that is filled with water while the other pipes the recovered natural gases up above ground (Withgott & Laposata, 2014).
In order to exhume the natural gasses, hydraulic fracturing injects water, sand and various other chemicals into the Earth, at such a high velocity that the underground shale rock bursts open, releasing the natural gas within it (“Fracking”, 2015). Although hydraulic fracturing positively impacts the environment by lessening the need for fossil fuels, based upon scientific data collected in places where hydraulic fracturing has been practiced routinely, there is reason to believe that hydraulic fracturing damages water and air quality, as well as the local land and wildlife.
This practice in considered to endanger both human health and local ecosystems by contaminating drinking water and releasing high levels of methane, volatile organic compounds and diesel exhaust (“Fracking Impacts: Air Quality”, 2012). Some proposed solutions to alleviate these damages include reduction of the water employed during the fracturing process, utilization of non-diesel fueled machinery, and institution of laws enforcing safe disposal of hydraulic fracturing byproducts.
It has only recently been discovered in 2011 that Ohio is home to a large amount of shale rock beneath its far Eastern counties, which has brought the hydraulic fracturing industry into the region (“Fracking”, 2015). Hydraulic fracturing has been done in the Western United States for half a century; however it has recently come under fire due to the detection of significant human and environmental health problems (“Fracking”, 2015).
The negative environmental impact on regional air and water quality posed by hydraulic fracturing are due to improper disposal of waste fluids used to extract the natural gasses, releasing volatile organic compounds into the air, and wastewater leakage which can contaminate both underground potable water sources and surface waters with radioactive waste (“Fracking”, 2015; “Fracking Impacts: Air Quality”, 2015; “Fracking Impacts: Water Quality”, 2015; Withgott & Laposata, 2014).
Thus, the hydraulic fracturing process potentially exposes the areas surrounding hydraulic fracturing operating sites to dangerous air emissions and contaminated drinking water (“Fracking”, 2015; “Fracking Impacts: Water Quality”, 2015). In order for hydraulic fracturing to extract the shale gas in Eastern Ohio, the process requires a substantial amount of freshwater (approximately 5. 6 million gallons), which is then mixed with sand and undisclosed chemicals (“Fracking Impacts: Water Quality”, 2015; “Fracking Waste Disposal”, 2015).
After this water mixture is used to extract the natural gasses, it is either recycled or injected into underground pools. These are considered to be the safest locations for the contaminated wastewaters, which are now full of radioisotopes, metals and dissolved solids (“Fracking Waste Disposal”, 2015). Wastewater poses a threat to the environment through spillage, potentially escaping via a poorly constructed and therefore defective well or through an improperly sealed underground pool.
Both of the latter examples present the risk of leaking into underground water sources used for drinking water and contaminating them, while spillage from improper disposal or handling of wastewater can directly impact rivers, streams and the overall local ecology (“Fracking Impacts: Land & Wildlife”, 2012; “Fracking Waste Disposal”, 2015). This is not an unlikely occurrence, for example, an incident of hydraulic fracturing wastewater was reported to have leaked 3 million gallons of wastewater into a North Dakota river (Spear, 2015).
According to a toxicology study, conducted in Cracow, Poland by Teresa Steliga, Dorota Kluk and Piotr Jakubowicz of the Oil and Gas Institute: National Research Institute which examined wastewater contamination associated with shale hydraulic fracturing, it was determined that hydraulic fracturing wastewater can vary in composition from location to location based on the natural make-up of the land, however the toxicological analyses of the wastewater fluids were either low toxicity or non-toxic to living organisms (Steliga, Kluk & Jakubowicz, 2015).
Despite these findings, exposure to the radioactive wastewater can be detrimental to young humans’ and animal health (Bamberger & Oswald, 2012). Another way both water and air has been polluted is by the release of methane gas into potable water aquifers and into the atmosphere. Researchers at Duke University published a peer-reviewed study which detailed the high levels of leaked methane into well water near locations which were used in shale hydraulic fracturing.
Water samples from 68 private groundwater wells throughout Pennsylvania and New York were tested, the findings revealed that there were measurable amounts of methane in 85% of the samples tested, and the samples within a kilometer of the hydraulic fracturing sites were 17 times higher than those which were located further away (Osborna, Vengoshb, Warner, & Jackson, 2011).
The air quality surrounding areas of hydraulic fracturing sites, and also locations along wind paths which pass these sites and ultimately global airways, are in jeopardy of being exposed to the many hazardous air pollutants that are being released into the atmosphere during the fracturing process. These pollutants include volatile organic compounds, greenhouse gasses and many other pollutants including, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (“Hydraulic Fracturing | Marcellus Protest”, n. . )
These are particularly worrisome for human and animal health, since benzene is a known carcinogen according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (“Benzene”, 2016; “Fracking Impacts: Air Quality”, 2015). The process of hydraulic fracturing also burns hundreds of thousands of gallons of diesel fuel to run the machinery required to manufacture and operate in these locations (“Fracking Impacts: Air Quality”, 2015).
Averages from West Virginia and Pennsylvania have shown that all stages of natural gas production (extracting, refining, transporting, and finally burning natural gas) can result in the burning of 29,000 gallons of diesel fuel in one work week (“Fracking Impacts: Air Quality”, 2015; “Fracking Impacts: Climate Change”, 2012). Diesel exhaust is in and of itself classified as a Group 1 carcinogen according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, and it is known to consist of other known carcinogenic toxins including benzene and formaldehyde (IARC: Diesel Engine Exhaust Carcinogenic, n. . “Fracking Impacts: Air Quality”, 2015).
While there is plenty of research which documents the amount of air pollution and diminished air quality that hydraulic fracturing produces, it is also in some ways beneficial to the environment. By using natural gasses exhumed through hydraulic fracturing, the need for coal or oil to produce power in the United States is lowered, therefore reducing the total amount of greenhouses gasses emitted into the atmosphere (Withgott & Laposata, 2014).
Because natural gas is cleaner-burning than either fossil fuel option, policymakers have supported the use and construction of hydraulic fracturing wells, however drilling operations have been exempt from some major federal environmental laws, which would monitor any negative environmental impact (Withgott & Laposata, 2014). This includes both the National Environmental Policy Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act (Withgott & Laposata, 2014).
So, there is some good reason to encourage the use of hydraulic fracturing from an environmental point of view, but some major changes will need to be put in place in order for it to be done safely. There are several proposed solutions to the problems which hydraulic fracturing is currently producing. These include reducing the amount of water used in the process by utilizing a gel that could be recycled and removed more easily than the current wastewater disposal methods (Kiger, 2014).
Using recycled “gray” water or brine in place of freshwater, lessening the initial negative impact the overuse of freshwater poses on the environment (Kiger, 2014). Reducing the amount of diesel fume emissions–benefitting the environment by improving air quality and decreasing the total amount of hazardous air pollutants that are a threat to human and wildlife health (Kiger, 2014). And lastly, holding companies accountable for any mishandling or improper disposal of wastewater in order to deter them from committing such acts (Merrill & Schizer, 2013).
According to the company GasFrac–which produces a gel to be used in fracturing, the amount of hydrocarbon in the gel fluid is comparable to what is already underground (Kiger, 2014). This means that the fluid can flow and be extracted easily from the well, eliminating wastewater and the trucks necessary to haul off and dispose of it, resulting in a smaller carbon footprint (Kiger, 2014).
The concept of using a gel is one which could be beneficial, as it retains sand better than the current water methods used and uses only one-eighth the amount of liquid (Kiger, 2014). This does solve one of the major issues behind hydraulic fracturing, water pollution. However, it does not solve the issue of methane being released into the atmosphere and the gel can become radioactive in the same way the wastewater does with the current methods used in the fracturing industry. The idea behind recycling the water/brine used in hydraulic fracturing is great in theory.
The reduction of freshwater used would certainly be a plus in terms of an environmentally friendly movement, but the issue still remains as to where this recycled water/brine would be stored and disposed. Though, the toxicology analyses done by Steliga, Kluk and Jakubowicz suggests that it would be environmentally friendly and safe to recycle the wastewater produced, however this may differ from region to region depending on the local contaminants (Steliga, Kluk & Jakubowicz, 2015).
Eliminating the diesel-powered equipment currently used in hydraulic fracturing process would definitely be a benefit not only from an anthropogenic climate change perspective, but also a human health one. Eliminating exposure to the toxic and carcinogenic fumes associated with diesel machinery and equipment is definitely something that would benefit the environment and the people working in the industry.
An article: 1 The Shale Oil and Gas Revolution, Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Contamination: A Regulatory Strategy written by Merrill and Schizer of Minnesota Law Review, proposes that the prevention of water contamination is largely influenced by legal measures and regulations, therefore in order to assure that fracturing companies will enforce the prevention of water contamination, they need to be held liable for any inflicted damages (Merrill & Schizer, 2013).
Putting in place official rules and regulations would have the effect of prompting the owners of the hydraulic fracturing operations to steer clear of spills, improper disposal methods and groundwater contamination because they will be held accountable for them (Merrill & Schizer, 2013). Ideally, in order to eliminate as many of the negative environmental factors for which hydraulic fracturing is responsible, it would be necessary to implement several different changes, resulting in a more environmentally friendly industry.
The changes would ideally include pieces from each of these proposed solutions–for example, the use of gel in place of water, using recycled water/brine to produce it and then recycling said gel. This combined with the elimination of diesel powered machinery and the establishment, installation and enforcement of laws which persuade hydraulic fracturing companies to handle their equipment and contaminated wastewater/gels properly, would make hydraulic fracturing a more environmentally friendly industry.
Utilizing these methods would be beneficial for keeping potable underground water sources cleaner by reducing the amount of contaminated water leaking or spilling into surface and underground waters, no longer using and contaminating freshwater, and decrease the hazardous air pollutants introduced into the environment via diesel emissions.