By Steve Goreham
Originally published in The Washington Times.
Last Thursday, the US Department of the Interior released a draft proposal that would “establish common-sense safety standards for hydraulic fracturing on public and Indian lands.” Last Friday, the US Department of Energy (DOE) approved a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminal in Freeport, Texas. Despite opposition from environmental groups, the Obama administration apparently supports the expansion of the natural gas industry and the controversial technology of hydraulic fracturing. These events are welcome common sense from an administration that is typically deep in green ideology.
Good old Yankee ingenuity has produced a new hydrocarbon revolution. Vast quantities of oil and natural gas can now be recovered from shale rock formations, thanks to enabling technologies of hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) and horizontal drilling. US crude oil production in 2012 was up 30 percent since reaching a low in 2008. Natural gas production is up 33 percent since 2005. Bob Dudley, CEO of BP, forecasts that the United States will be “nearly self-sufficient in energy” by the year 2030.
Fracking is not new, but has been perfected over the last 20 years to allow cost-effective recovery of hydrocarbon fuels from shale. Water and sand, along with a small amount of chemicals, are injected under pressure to fracture the shale and create millions of tiny fissures, releasing the trapped gas or oil. To develop a large producing field, horizontal drilling is used to bore mile-long horizontal shafts into the shale. Fracking is typically used at depths greater than 5,000 feet.
But hydraulic fracturing is under assault from environmental organizations. According to the Sierra Club, “Fracking, a violent process that dislodges gas deposits from shale rock formations, is known to contaminate drinking water, pollute the air, and cause earthquakes.” A 2011 letter from Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace USA, Climate Protection Campaign, and other groups urged President Obama to “halt hydraulic fracturing…until and unless the environmental and health impacts of this process are well understood and the public is adequately protected.”
The draft rule released Thursday from the Department of the Interior acknowledges that hydraulic fracturing can be conducted in an environmentally safe manner. It calls for disclosure of chemicals used in fracking, assurances of well-bore integrity to prevent leakage of gas and fluid into ground water supplies, and confirmation of a water management plan for disposal of water and fluids used in the fracking process. Indeed, fracking has been used more than 500,000 times over the last 50 years without incidents of water contamination when proper safeguards were employed.
The hydrofracturing revolution has created a glut of natural gas in the US market. Prior to wide-scale use of fracking, natural gas prices reached $15 per million British thermal units (Btu), and port facilities were being constructed to import LNG. By 2011, prices had fallen to $4 per million Btu and import terminals sat idle.
Unlike crude oil, which is priced and sold in a global market, natural gas is priced and sold regionally. To date, the fracking revolution has been a US phenomenon, with other nations slow to join. While US gas prices have dropped to under $4 per million Btu, Europe’s prices remain above $10, and the price of imported LNG in Japan is above $15.
US producers now see an opportunity to liquefy the gas and ship it to Europe and Japan. Twenty applications have been filed with the Department of Energy (DOE). The approval last week of the Freeport export terminal in Texas is the first since 2011. The $10 billion terminal plans to export up to 1.4 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, or about two percent of annual US consumption.
Environmental groups have criticized the approval. “Exporting LNG will lead to more drilling―and more drilling means more fracking, more air and water pollution, and more climate fueled weather disasters like last year’s record fires, droughts, and superstorms,” according to Deb Nardone of the Sierra Club. Nevertheless, it appears that the Obama administration will support hydraulic fracturing and the growth of the natural gas industry.
Shale gas booms in Texas, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania have created tens of thousands of jobs. Low natural gas prices are attracting global chemical firms to build plants in the US. Thousands of additional jobs and tax revenues can come from LNG exports. Sound energy policy demands that fracking and export of natural gas be allowed, if environmental safeguards are met.
Steve Goreham is Executive Director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
let’s face it, the fat lady has sung:
Deutsche Bank’s CO2 offset portfolio for sale: sources
LONDON, May 22 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Deutsche Bank is hunting for a buyer for its U.N. carbon offset portfolio, once worth hundreds of millions of dollars, two sources said on Wednesday, as the German bank seeks to sell one of the last pieces of its shuttered global carbon trading business…
http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2383981
——————————————————————————–
Waddles Gillard goes “Laaaaaaaaa…..”
Laughed. Out loud. Really.
Actually sounds more like a threat than a warning… however, stupid is as stupid says…
Money for a third term.
By making exports easier, the price of domestic natural gas will rise, which will make it less competitive against “renewables” in competing for contracts for power plants. That’s the plan of Obama’s advisors, I believe.
in Australia it is a big issue the gas mob want to frack all over the country including under sydneys water supply dam the Gov’t is backing them and the average Australian have been told to get lost as we need the money so we can wast it on stupid things like carbon reduction
Morgo, as I am not Australian, I will say it for you. Ford now closes down production in Australia because of the carbon tax but they cannot say that, they have to say “cost base too high”. see latest BBC report. Price for everything.
Simply amazing. This sudden burst of common sense won’t last, especially if the Sierra Club and other environmental groups sue EPA over the new rules. EPA will find a way to fold like a canvas tent. But at least it is a start. If only the administration would now approve the exploration of the Outer Continental Shelves and the shale oil that lies underground in this country. We might actually have a real economic recovery.
Quote
Environmental groups have criticized the approval. “Exporting LNG will lead to more drilling―and more drilling means more fracking, more air and water pollution, and more climate fueled weather disasters like last year’s record fires, droughts, and superstorms,” according to Deb Nardone of the Sierra Club
Unquote
Is that the same Sierra Club that took 25 million in contributions from Chesapeake Gas?
If tes, that needs to be widely distributed.
Obama is faced with a tough choice: On the one hand is the economic prosperity and strength of a nation with an ample supply of its’ own cheap energy, and on the other is the rabid anti-American demagogy of Enviromania such as that displayed by the Sierra Club. Like a wayward child, he should be applauded when he makes the right choice.
Actually it makes sense for Obama to approve fracking.
If the economy improves Democrats gain votes.
And they lose nothing because who else will the tree huggers vote for?
cn
I hope the rules are “common sense”. I am suspicious. The Green River Shale formation in SW Wyoming, N Colorado and NE Utah lie mostly under land controlled by the Dept of the Interior (BLM). The hydrocarbon potential in the Green River Shale Formation is huge. More oil is trapped in it than the entire Middle East. If we could now start to explore and develop that resource the benefit to our people would be correspondingly big. We need to remember who really owns public land. Not the government, per se, but the governed. OurGovernment needs to manage the resources to our benefit.
But then there is this:
” Obama’s Energy Secretary Says Climate Change Not Debatable
by William Bigelow 23 May 2013, 3:40 AM PDT
Ernest Moniz, Barack Obama’s new Secretary of Energy, is making it clear there is no room for dissent regarding climate change. Speaking to his department’s employees after he was sworn in, Moniz said, “Let me make it very clear that there is no ambiguity in terms of the scientific basis calling for a prudent response on climate change. I am not interested in debating what is not debatable. There is plenty to debate as we try and move forward on our climate agenda.”
”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/22/Obama-s-Energy-Secretary-Says-Climate-Change-Not-Debatable
One comment from an insider in the industry.
It is spelled: F-R-A-C-I-N-G. There is no ‘K’ i the word fracturing. If you want to use our term, please use it correctly.
Regarding the new Energy Secretary’s pronouncement: Didn’t the Inquisition tell Galileo that “The Science is not Debatable”???
@morgo says:
May 23, 2013 at 12:43 am
Although I am not familiar with your countries particular geography, I suspect that fracing below the water supply will result in no change to the water quality, but will enhance your countries economic prosperity. Fracing is necessary to release gas and oil trapped in rock formations typically more then 1 mile below the surface. In North Dakota’s Bakken field, the depths vary from 7500 ft to 11000 feet depending upon local topography.
The potable water table stops at roughly 2000 ft, which is a seriously deep well for domestic water. Thus the water is separated by 5000 to 9000 ft of various rock formations, several of them are barrier formations that further isolate the gas/ oil bearing formations from the upper water bearing formations.
Typical drilling sequence is to drill a surface hole, approx 13″ in diameter to a depth below the water bearing rock. The drilling stops, and a steel ling is installed and cemented into the rock formation, sealing off the water bearing rock.
After surface casing is complete and the water sealed off, then the next phase of drilling occurs using a smaller bit and smaller hole approx 9″ in diam, to the oil/ gas bearing formationi. Once this is achieved, then a steel sleeve is installed and cemented to the rock formations. This second laey of casing also overlaps the bottom of the surface casing to prevent any loss of oil/ gas or contaminationi of ground water.
After this casing is complete, then a smaller bit is used to drill horizontally making a 6″ diam lateral hole up to 12,000 ft depending on local conditions, through the oil/ gas bearing formation. Once this lateral is complete, a 4-1/2 ” steel sleeve is run into the lateral to maintain hole integrity and cemented to the formation. After this is complete they begin the proceedures for fracing.
Because of these procedures, over 500,000 wells have been drilled and fracked with no contamination of the water supply.
Don’t let your fears and politics rob you of the truth. Fracing is safe virtually every time.
Matthew R. Epp
Apparently the new energy secretary thinks he now has the power to end scientific debate.
Someone should ask this new fool in town (from MIT, home of fools) which of the twenty five different global warming models is not debatable. Don’t the Dems know ANYONE with a brain?
So how long before James Hansen erupts and pronounces Obama the enemy?
Environmentalists are learning : you don’t trust a crook.
“It is spelled: F-R-A-C-I-N-G. There is no ‘K’ i the word fracturing. If you want to use our term, please use it correctly.”
It is being used correctly, and the spelling you claim is bogus in our language – a hard “C”
cannot occur when followed by an “i”. If you want a K sound, you must use a K.
Obama is a politician. He will be on whatever side is winning . Liberals call it evolving.
“Exporting LNG will lead to more drilling―and more drilling means more fracking, more air and water pollution, and more climate fueled weather disasters like last year’s record fires, droughts, and superstorms,” according to Deb Nardone of the Sierra Club.”
Typical self-loathing liberal , delusional, narcissist.
IMHO.
Matthew R.Epp,P.E. I hope you are right in what you are saying because there is a lot of experts saying the opposite to what your saying
Morgo–please provide a list of these “experts” that say the opposite regarding fracking; as a geologist and mining engineer, I’d like to evaluate their credentials, vested interests, political persuasion, and overall grasp of the subject. From what I know, Matthew is pretty much correct in his analysis.
The Sierra Club is spitting into the wind and Obama knows it.