VANCOUVER, British Columbia, February 17,
2012 - The use of hydraulic fracturing
in shale gas development took center stage Friday as a panel of
U.S. and Canadian experts discussed the contentious practice in a
three-hour symposium hosted by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS).
The panel, moderated by Dr. Raymond L. Orbach, former Under
Secretary for Science in the U.S. Department of Energy, addressed
concerns related to the role of hydraulic fracturing in shale gas
production, which has at once been heralded as a game-changer for
North American energy supplies and a threat to drinking water and
air quality.
Hydraulic fracturing involves the
high-pressure injection of water, sand and chemicals into a shale
seam, which causes the rock to shatter, releasing natural gas. The
process is conducted after a well bore has been drilled and lined
with concrete to prevent communication between the deep,
gas-bearing shale and shallow freshwater
aquifers.
The practice, often used in tandem with horizontal drilling, has
been in use for decades, but has come under scrutiny from
environmentalists and others who fear it poses a threat to public
health.
Orbach, now Director of the Energy Institute at The University
of Texas at Austin, decried the divisive tone of public discourse
over hydraulic fracturing, which he characterized as "driven
largely by fear and emotion, rather than by science and facts."
Dr. Charles "Chip" Groat, a geology professor at The University
of Texas at Austin and an associate director at the Energy
Institute, presented findings from a new study of shale gas
development in the Barnett, Marcellus and Haynesville Shales.
The study, which the Institute funded, found no evidence of a
direct link between hydraulic fracturing and groundwater
contamination.
"Many reports of groundwater contamination occur in conventional
oil and gas operations, often caused by poor well-bore casing or
cement construction," Groat said. "These problems are not unique to
hydraulic fracturing."
Researchers also determined that natural gas found in water
wells often can be traced to natural sources, and likely was
present before the onset of shale gas operations, Groat added.
Other participants in Friday's AAAS symposium included Dr. John
Clague, a professor at Simon Fraser University who studies
earthquakes and other natural hazards; Dr. David Layzell, Executive
Director of the Institute for Sustainable Energy, Environment and
Economy (ISEEE) at the University of Calgary; and Dr. Danny Reible,
an engineering professor at The University of Texas at Austin who
studies the fate of contaminants and devises risk mitigation
measures.
"Certainly, there are some trouble spots, especially with
respect to surface issues, such as the handling of flow-back
water," said Reible. "But most of these problems are
manageable."
Dr. John Clague, from Simon Fraser University, said the
re-injection of waste water produced from hydraulic fracturing
likely triggered seismic activity in the Horn River area in
northeastern British Columbia, but that the threat to Vancouver and
other populated areas was "negligible."
Still, Clague said he supports a temporary suspension of shale
gas operations until scientists complete additional research on
hydraulic fracturing's effect on the environment.
While panelists acknowledged
numerous concerns related to hydraulic fracturing, and agreed that
additional scientific research on the practice is warranted, the
consensus view was that none of the problems identified thus far
are insurmountable.
The University of Calgary's Layzell said the public debate over
shale gas development "raises the bar" about the impact of
hydraulic fracturing on the environment.
"We need to ask ourselves, 'What is required to get hydraulic
fracturing right?' " Layzell said.
Moreover, the issue presents an opportunity to share knowledge
and build consensus on how to achieve a more sustainable energy
future, he added.