Can California compromise on hydraulic fracturing?

July 13, 2015 | By Jaclyn Brandt

There are still plenty of unknowns with hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, but even after proving harmful effects on humans and the environment, is it possible to come to a compromise to keep the practice? A new report thinks so.

Fracking site. Credit: Ostroff Law/Wikimedia Commons

The report looked at the effects the practice could have on water, atmosphere, seismic activity, wildlife and vegetation, and human health in California, as well as possible mitigating effects, or alternative practices, that could be performed to lessen any possible impacts.

California Senate Bill (SB) 4 ordered the report, which was prepared for the California Natural Resources Agency, in partnership with the California Council on Science & Technology (CCST) and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The report was mandated by SB 4 to look at the effects of well and fracking activities on water, air, seismic activity, wildlife and vegetation, and human health.

"We applaud state leaders for seeking an independent scientific assessment to inform policy choices about hydraulic fracturing and acid stimulation," said CCST Executive Director Dr. Susan Hackwood in a statement. "CCST was created as an independent organization via the Legislature to do exactly this kind of careful scientific evaluation."

Berkeley Lab researchers teamed with subcontractors, as well as a steering committee to look at original research, data, and publicly-available data. From the research, the team came up with conclusions and recommendations in the form of seven major principles focused on making fracking and acid stimulation safer.

Maintain, expand and analyze data on the practice of hydraulic fracturing and acid stimulation in California.
Prepare for potential future changes in hydraulic fracturing and acid stimulation practice in California.
Account for and manage both direct and indirect impacts.
Manage water produced from hydraulically fractured or acid stimulated wells appropriately.
Add protections to avoid groundwater contamination.
Understand and control emissions and their impact on environmental and human health;
Take an informed path forward.

The report found that direct impacts of hydraulic fracturing appear small, but have not been investigated. However, managing and mitigating the impactscan address the vast majority of potential direct impacts of well stimulation, according to the researchers.

They also said that to do this, it will be important to assess adequacy of regulations to control direct impacts of hydraulic fracturing and acid stimulations.

"Over the next several years, relevant agencies should assess the adequacy and effectiveness of existing and pending regulations to mitigate direct impacts of hydraulic fracturing and acid stimulations," the report explained.

"This study found numerous threats to drinking water, public health and the environment from oil and gas development in California," said Briana Mordick, staff scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council's (NRDC) Land and Climate Programs, in a statement. "Due to the fact that both the statewide environmental impact report and final well stimulation regulations were completed before this independent scientific assessment was released, neither fully addresses the serious impacts identified in the study. That's unacceptable."

The study recommended that oil and gas operators be restricted in their use of certain chemicals, and recommended monitoring of health threats and monitoring and reporting of pollutants.

The chemicals include biocides and quaternary ammonium compounds, among others, which can present larger hazards because of their relatively high toxicity, frequent use, or use in large amounts. The report explained that the chemicals could present a threat to human health or the environment if not properly supervised.

The report found that the majority of impacts associated with hydraulic fracturing are caused by the indirect impacts of oil and gas production enabled by the hydraulic fracturing.

"Impacts caused by additional oil and gas development enabled by well stimulation (i.e. indirect impacts) account for the majority of environmental impacts associated with hydraulic fracturing," the report explained. "A corollary of this conclusion is that all oil and gas development causes similar impacts whether the oil is produced with well stimulation or not. As hydraulic fracturing enables only 20-25% of production in California, only about 20-25% of any given indirect impact is likely attributable to hydraulically fractured reservoirs."

Due to this, the researchers recommended evaluating impacts of production for all oil and gas development, rather than just the portion of production enabled by well stimulation. The report also suggested protecting groundwater around fracturing operations, as well as evaluating the effectiveness of hydraulic fracturing regulations to assure their success.

The researchers found that hydraulic fracturing can cause environmental and health hazards, but offered numerous mitigating tactics to help the process move forward in California.

"It's critical that we use these new scientific findings and recommendations to guide the policies for how we move forward. Policies must be put in place to halt hazardous practices -- including the continued use of unlined percolation pits, injection into useable groundwater resources, unrestricted use of dangerous chemicals, and the close proximity of production sites to communities," Mordick added. "Additionally, this report describes a long list of measures and studies that must be implemented to address threats to California communities and environment. This underscores the importance of putting a moratorium in place while the state works to implement the recommendations and protect against threats from fracking."

For more:
- read the full report

http://www.fierceenergy.com/story/breaking-down-hydraulic-fracturing-california/2015-07-13