![]() Like the draft study, the final report found specific instances where poorly constructed drilling wells or improper wastewater management affected drinking water. ![]() President Barack Obama generally supports fracking as part of a wide-ranging energy strategy.Ī spokeswoman denied that the White House applied political pressure regarding the report’s language. Tom Burke, EPA’s science adviser and a deputy assistant administrator, said in an interview that the removal of the phrase about “widespread, systemic” impacts came at the urging of the EPA’s Science Advisory Board.Įnvironmental groups have claimed that the finding of no widespread harm was inserted into the draft report at the insistence of the White House. The practice has spurred an ongoing energy boom but has raised widespread concerns that it might lead to groundwater contamination, increased air pollution and even earthquakes. “The report provides valuable information about potential vulnerabilities to drinking water resources, but was not designed to be a list of documented impacts,” the EPA said in a statement provided to The Associated Press ahead of the report’s release on Tuesday.įracking involves pumping huge volumes of water, sand and chemicals underground to split open rock formations so oil and gas will flow. The final report takes pains to avoid drawing any conclusions. Industry groups hailed the draft EPA study as proof that fracking is safe, while environmentalists seized on the report’s identification of cases where fracking-related activities polluted drinking water. The report removes a finding from a draft issued last year indicating that fracking has not caused “widespread, systemic” harm to drinking water in the United States. WASHINGTON - Hydraulic fracturing to drill for oil and natural gas poses a risk to drinking water in some circumstances, but a lack of information precludes a definitive statement on how severe the risk is, the Environmental Protection Agency says in a new report that raises more questions than answers. Still Carlson said it was a good sign that Halliburton and others have introduced fracking fluids that they say are safer for the environment for reasons such as using biodegradable ingredients or allowing for less water use.Digital Replica Edition Home Page Close Menu "Salt is a food-grade ingredient, but if you have too much salt in your well water, your well water is not usable," Brownstein said. Halliburton's website lists CleanStim's ingredients as enzyme, exthoxylated sugar-based fatty acid ester, inorganic and organic acids, inorganic salt, maltodextrin, organic ester, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil, polysaccharide polymer and sulfonated alcohol.īrownstein said using ingredients from the food industry won't necessarily make a fracking fluid safe for drinking water. "Halliburton is showing they can get the same economic benefits or close to that by putting a little effort into reformulating the fluids."Ĭompanies have resisted disclosing exact recipes for fracking fluid for competitive reasons, and those who voluntarily post disclosures on a public online registry called FracFocus can exclude some chemicals. "The thing I took away is the industry is stepping up to plate and taking these concerns seriously," Carlson said. As fracturing evolves, engineers have found other substances besides synthetic chemicals to perform those functions, said Colorado State University environmental engineering professor Ken Carlson, who also attended the conference. are fracked, according to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.Įach component of fracking fluid does something different, such as killing bacteria or preventing corrosion. ![]() "Because quite honestly, a homeowner in Pennsylvania doesn't have the option of having an underling drink his water. "I also do in some ways think the stunt is very much indicative of the problem the industry has in assuring the public that they are in fact taking public concerns seriously," Brownstein said. "Fracking" the cause of two minor quakes?ĮPA: Natural Gas Driller Tainted Texas Aquifer "60 Minutes" report on the pros and cons of shale gas drilling I wonder why if they have this technology why it wouldn't become standard practice. "My second thought, more seriously, is on the one hand, I'm pleased to see Halliburton is taking steps to remove toxic chemicals from hydraulic fracturing fluid. "I thought if this stuff was so benign, why wouldn't the CEO drink it himself? That frankly was my first thought," said Environmental Defense Fund's Mark Brownstein, who saw the demonstration.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |