ENERGY: Coal, Gas, Oil

December 31, 2013

Defusing the explosive
conversation on fracking

Commentary by Marita Noon
Executive Director,
Energy Makes America Great Inc.
Contact: 505.239.8998, [email-masked]

Hydraulic fracturing started out as an “exploding torpedo” back in
1865. Today, nearly 150 years later, the actual process has made giant
technological strides, but now, it's the topic that’s explosive.

While the White House has been encouraging Christmas dinner table
conversation to center around Obamacare, in my experience, it is fracking
that came into the conversation—and when it did, the results had the
potential to be as explosive as the early practice.

Over the
holidays two young adults came home for Christmas. Somehow hydraulic
fracturing, or “fracking,” came into the conversation. Dad, a reader of my
column whose employment is also peripherally connected to the oil-and-gas
industry, spoke up in support of the practice that has unleashed America’s
natural resources and made us the world leader in energy production. His
children, and their friends who had gathered in his home, were shocked and
spouted the usual claims of water contamination, harsh chemicals, and
flaming faucets. The topic became so explosive that his kids packed up and
left before the festivities even began.

I was in California for
Christmas. I visited a cousin in Napa Valley whose adult son is in the
wine business. He was at her home when I arrived. She told him what I do
and stated that he had many friends in the oil-and-gas business. I smiled
and said: “I can talk oil, gas, coal, nuclear, fracking, whatever…” My
cousin quickly interrupted and stated: “We probably don’t want to talk
fracking.” I took the hint, and we moved on to another topic. Driving back
to my brother’s house, I wondered: “When did fracking become an explosive
topic.”

With the Christmas prime rib consumed, my family and
friends were still gathered around the table. Once again fracking came up.
I shared the previous two recent stories. One woman asserted that if her
sister, who was arriving in a few days from Boulder, Colorado, was there
and we talked fracking, the results would be explosive,
too.

Because they are not in the industry, I found that the group
gathered around our table had misconceptions about the process that they’d
been fed by the media.

While I don’t have an exact date when the
topic of fracking became explosive, I do know, from my speaking and
writing on the topic, from radio interviews with listener call-ins, and
private conversations, that the explosive reactions are due to a lack of
understanding about the process—with the biggest concerns being about
water, chemicals, and flaming faucets.

Water
As
I’ve written previously, there are accusations that fracking is taking
billions of gallons of water out of the hydrologic cycle. Especially in
the southwest where water is scarce and drought conditions persist, this
poses a problem.

The process of hydraulic fracturing has advanced
from the first nitroglycerin “torpedo” that was shot down a well hole on
April 25, 1865, and well acidizing that was used in the 1930s to enhance
productivity, to the modern mix of high pressure, water, and chemicals
began in 1947 in Grant County Kansas—and it continues to evolve and become
more economical.

In a piece addressing water used in fracking, The
Economist describes the process this way: “Water injected at high pressure
into rock deep underground during the process of hydraulic fracturing, or
'fracking,’ often returns to the surface as brine, having picked up a lot
of salt on its journey. It is also contaminated with chemicals from the
fracking process itself.”

Today, less and less freshwater is being
used—especially in the arid southwest where water for drinking and
agriculture is at a premium. A typical frack job can use as much as 5
million gallons of water and lasts about 3 days. The procedure can result
in decades of oil or gas production.

With the development of new
technologies, the fracking process can be done with brackish water that
may be as much as ten times as salty as seawater. A recent report from
Reuters, titled “Fracking without freshwater at a west Texas oil field,”
documents some of the advancements. Billions of gallons of brackish water
are located far below the fresh water aquifers. Producers in west Texas
are fracking with the brackish water from the Santa Rosa aquifer. They are
then recycling the produced water—a byproduct of oil and natural gas
drilling, and the flowback water—the fluid pushed back out of the well
during fracking. Both forms of wastewater have historically been trucked
to underground disposal wells.

A couple of months ago, I
participated in the Executive Oil Conference in Midland, Texas where a
panel of water experts addressed the crowd of more than 800 attendees and
discussed the new technologies.

Now, instead of trucking wastewater
to a remote location, mobile systems can treat the water onsite and
condition it to meet almost any specification the driller wants—resulting
in a reduction of expensive truck traffic. The portable systems can treat
20,000-30,000 barrels of water per day. For bigger frack jobs, additional
units can be added—making the system totally flexible.

These new
water solutions can reduce the total dissolved solids in the water from as
high as 200,000 to below 200. For reference, the Environmental Protection
Agency’s standard for drinking water is 500. The same water can be
recycled and used over and over again. Addressing the new technologies,
James Welch, Global Business Development Manager, Water Solutions, with
Halliburton, told the crowd: “Produced water is not a waste. It is an
opportunity. It is an offset to freshwater usage.” Halliburton is able to
fracture with water that's 280,000 TDS.

The result of these new
procedures is, according to The Economist: “Clean water …pure enough to be
used for irrigation, or even drinking water. …Alternatively, it can be
re-injected into the ground during the next frack.”

Rather than
taking water out of the hydrologic cycle, the oil-and-gas industry is
actually often taking formerly unusable water, using it in fracking and
then cleaning it up to a level where it can be introduced into the cycle
as either irrigation or drinking water.

Stan Weiner, Chairman and
CEO at STW Resources, was one of the panelists. He summed up the new water
solutions by saying: “Now we’ve figured out a way to clean it up
economically. There’s no reason not to use it. Companies nationwide,
worldwide, all want to do this. We get no resistance from them. They want
to see it work. It’s a go.”

GE (as addressed in The Economist),
Apache Corp. (as covered by Reuters), Halliburton, and STW Resources are
just a handful of the many companies, which are developing revolutionary
water treatment processes that neuter one of the biggest arguments against
fracking.

Chemicals
In our Christmas
conversation, someone asked: “Why do they need chemicals? Why don’t they
just frack with water?” She’d heard stories.

I explained that the
so-called chemicals are needed to provide lubrication for the tiny
particles of sand that hold open microscopic cracks in the “fractured”
rock that allow the oil or gas to escape. “As a woman, I am sure you’ve
had your fingers swell. That makes it hard to get your rings off.” She
nodded. “What do you do then?” I queried. “Soap my hands up,” she
replied.

Bingo!

That is the role the chemicals play in the
fracking process. But those chemicals are now mostly food-based and can be
consumed with no ill effects—both Governor Hickenlooper (D-CO) and CNBC’s
Jim Cramer have had a drink.

So, even if the chemicals did somehow
defy geology and migrate several miles from the fracked well through the
layers of sedimentary rock to the aquifer, they are not harmful.

To
illustrate the point, I am in the process of organizing what I am calling
“the great New Mexico fracktail party.” I have several state legislators
lined up—and am looking for more. I need to find an operator who is
willing to invite us onsite when a frack job is being done. The
legislators, industry folks, and anyone else who wants to participate,
will be invited to the location with cocktail glass in hand (umbrella,
fruit, olive—whatever—included). With media cameras rolling we’ll pour the
fracfluid from the tank to our glasses and toast to American energy
freedom.

Flaming Faucets
My sister-in-law
asked: “What about the flaming faucets?” “Those are real,” I explained.
“But they have nothing to do with fracking.” Natural gas, or methane, was
found in water wells long before any fracking was done in the area. In
fact, it was the gassy smell that often alerted explorers to the potential
oil and gas in the region. Oil-and-gas drilling didn’t cause the flaming
faucet phenomenon. Quite the contrary. The presence of gas near the
surface brought about the “don’t smoke in the shower” adage. While the
water is harmless to consume, a gas build up in the house could cause an
explosion.

Lies about hydraulic fracturing are rampant. If fossil
fuel opponents can spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about fracking—with
the goal of causing a federal fracking ban, they can virtually stop
oil-and-gas development in America, as it is estimated that 90 percent of
producing wells have been fracked. Without American ingenuity and
increasing production, gasoline prices and utility bills will skyrocket.
Economic ruin will reign. America will, once again be beholden to
increasingly hostile foreign sources.

A fracking conversation
shouldn’t be explosive. Today’s hydraulic fracturing is really benign,
American technology that is ecologically sound and economically
advantageous. Keep these facts in mind. As my stories illustrate, not
everyone will listen—but if more people, such as my brother and
sister-in-law, know the truth they can help de-fuse the explosive
conversation.

The author of Energy
Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great
Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for
Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public
and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and
the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the
environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the
organizations’ combined efforts serve as America’s voice for
energy.

comments powered
by Disqus