I've read before that fracking is commonly associated with earthquakes, which makes sense considering that the process involves pumping a toxic cocktail of water and chemicals almost two miles into the earth's crust to break apart the dense shale that contains natural gas. I've also read about widespread fracking in neighboring West Virginia. So today when I saw the news about the earthquake in Virginia, I put two and two together and did a bit of research on Google Scholar.
As it turns out, Bame and Fehler (1986) found a statistically significant relationship between microearthquakes (between 0.4 and 3.1) and their proximity to fracking sites. Fehler, House and Kaieda (1987) also found a significant relationship between fault and joint planes, i.e. where earthquakes occur, and the fluid path created by the hydraulic fracturing injection process. The science must be convincing, as even Fox News reported earler this year that Arkansas earthquakes were very likely associated with fracking.
It's sad that despite the overwhelming evidence against fracking, oil companies and their Washington shills are still able to get away with this blatantly deleterious practice. Not only have they repeatedly enacted dangerous legislation that helps companies hide their chemical lists, they've even gone so far as to encourage fracking with tax subsidies and other government benefits. Remember, these companies are some of the most profitable in the world, yet the US government continues to reward them for polluting our water, land and air.
Now, that's not to say that natural gas extraction is 100% bad or that mitigating its environmental impacts is impossible, merely that it's poorly regulated. In fact, it's much cleaner than coal and petroleum, generating about half as much CO2, less than a fifth as much CO, and a fifth as much NOx as coal. Obviously, problems still exist, but a recent study by researchers at MIT notes that:
the environmental impacts of shale development are challenging but manageable. Shale development requires large-scale fracturing of the shale formation to induce economic production rates. There has been concern that these fractures can also penetrate shallow freshwater zones and contaminate them with fracturing fluid, but there is no evidence that this is occurring. There is, however, evidence of natural gas migration into freshwater zones in some areas, most likely as a result of substandard well completion practices by a few operators.
Moreover, There are some economic benefits from expanding natural gas use. For one, it's cheaper, cleaner and more readily available than coal and petroleum. There are also some national security benefits, as we would be significantly less dependent on foreign oil. For more of the benefits on natural gas (and no drawbacks!), visit the American Natural Gas Alliance.
Stricter regulation is necessary, especially if a misstep by a well-worker can lead to groundwater contamination for a local population. Congress has to allow the EPA to do its job and make the distinction between science and politics.
But, even if regulation is improved and the process is cleaned up, the relationship between fracking and earthquakes is hard to deny. More broadly, it's also difficult to deny the relationship between human-induced climate change and the increasing occurrence of natural disasters. Hard decisions have to be made, and it's unfortunate that our voices will be ignored, even though the general population is the most directly affected.
Sources:
Bame, D., and M. Fehler (1986), Observations of long period earthquakes accompanying hydraulic fracturing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 13(2), 149-152.
Fehler, M., L. House, and H. Kaieda (1987), Determining Planes Along Which Earthquakes Occur: Method and Application to Earthquakes Accompanying Hydraulic Fracturing, J. Geophys. Res., 92(B9), 9407-9414.
No comments:
Post a Comment