Earth and Industry » News

Colorado OKs Toughest Fracking Fluid Rules in U.S.

Timothy Hurst — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:50:42 +0000

After hearing more than 11 hours of testimony in a meeting last week, Colorado regulators Tuesday approved tough new rules governing chemicals used in the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing. Also known as "fracking," hydraulic fracturing is a process whereby a slurry of water, sand and chemicals are pumped into a well at very high pressure to force natural gas out of shale rock formations. The new rules require companies to publicly disclose the chemicals—and their concentrations—found in the fracking fluid.

Meeting all day on Tuesday with environmental groups, industry representatives and other stakeholders, the nine-member Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission unanimously approved the new rules which will take effect in April 2012.

Building upon a set of rules passed by Colorado regulators in 2008 mandating disclosure of fracking chemicals to state regulators and health professionals upon request, the amended rules adopted Tuesday require operators to publish the hazardous and non-hazardous chemicals used to hydraulically fracture a well, as well as the concentrations of each chemical, to a disclosure website within 60 days of hydraulically fracturing a well.

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper commended the various parties for coming together on the disclosure rule. “These new rules give Colorado the fairest and most transparent set of fracking regulations in the country and will likely serve as a model for other states,” Hickenlooper said.

The Democrat and former geologist, Hickenlooper, has been very public about his support of hydraulic fracturing, as long as it is done in a safe and responsible manner.

"We believe oil and gas development can thrive while also meeting our high standards for protection of public health, water and the environment,” Hickenlooper said.

The oil and gas industry also supported the new framework agreed upon Tuesday.

"Colorado now has the strongest hydraulic fracturing rule in the country," said Tisha Schuller, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association.

"But more importantly," Schuller added, "we have gained a model process to bring together industry, environmental advocates, and regulators to ensure energy development continues in keeping with protecting the environmental resources of our state.”

The regulations are similar to those passed in Wyoming and Texas but go a step further, requiring companies to disclose the concentrations of chemicals in addition to the chemicals themselves. Eleven states have adopted or are in the process of drafting rules governing the disclosure of fracking fluids. But each state is a bit different.

Under the new Colorado rules, drillers can claim a trade secret, but they must file a form ensuring trade secret claims meet the appropriate definition, and sign an affidavit that chemicals cited qualify for trade secret protection. Even then, drillers have to publicly disclose the ingredient's chemical family. And at any time, regulators and medical professionals can obtain trade secret information upon request.

The new rule gets past what has been the biggest sticking point for fracking operators, the issue of proprietary secrecy, by striking a balance that recognizes and protects industry trade secrets so operators can maintain their competitive edge.

The actual chemical make-up of fracking fluid changes from one location to the next, based on the given area's geological characteristics. Those geologically-determined differences in the fracking fluid compounds are what drillers say they are trying to keep secret, not the harmful chemicals that have sometimes been associated with fracking operations.

Photo credits: Some rights reserved by Tim Hurst

Oklahoma Earthquake Linked to Fracking?

Timothy Hurst — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 02:03:01 +0000

Was the earthquake the United States Geological Survey is now calling the largest earthquake on record in Oklahoma linked to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, the widely used but contentious oil and gas production technique which vastly increases the quantity of fossil fuels retrievable in a well?

As of Sunday night, 23 earthquakes have been recorded in central Oklahoma in the last 24 hours. The biggest quake in the latest seismic flurry, the 5.6-magnitude earthquake centered near Sparks, Oklahoma on Saturday night, could be felt as far north as Illinois and Wisconsin.

While most people don't consider Oklahoma to be a hotbed of seismic activity, geological activity in Oklahoma has increased in recent years where earthquakes are occurring with greater frequency and intensity.

According to the Associated Press:

Oklahoma typically had about 50 earthquakes a year until 2009. Then the number spiked, and 1,047 quakes shook the state last year, prompting researchers to install seismographs in the area.

But why?

One hypothesis being floated to explain the increase in the frequency of earthquakes in places like Oklahoma and Arkansas maintains that hydraulic fracturing, or the injection of "developed water" (wastewater) into wells as a disposal method is altering the geological balance in the immediate area of the drilling activity.

In Lincoln County, where most of this weekend's earthquakes were centered, there are 181 injection wells, according to an official from the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, the agency which oversees oil and gas production in the state.

Most scientists say they don't know exactly what is causing the recent uptick in earthquakes in Oklahoma but that fracking likely doesn't generate the kind of long-term geological pressure needed to induce an earthquake.

And one study (pdf) by Oklahoma Geological Survey seismologist Austin Holland found that most of the state's seismic activity was likely not caused by the injection wells which dot the Oklahoma oil fields.

But Holland, who is one of those scientists that doubts the link between fracking and earthquakes, also says more research was needed on the matter and that there may, in fact, be a correlation between fracking and other recent Oklahoma quakes.

Photo: Some rights reserved by kelleymcd at flickr

Are the Most Dangerous Impacts of Fracking Avoidable?

Timothy Hurst — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 04:52:00 +0000

One day after the Department of Energy released a nuanced report that was both critical and laudatory of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, as a means to develop previously unreachable deposits of natural gas, I was reminded of a recent episode of WBUR radio's On Point that focused on fracking. Fracking, the much-publicized oil and gas development technique has both made available tremendous quantities of previously unreachable natural gas and created a political firestorm replete with astroturfing industry groups, hyperbolic liberals, corporate cleanwashing, an "inflammatory" documentary, and a new protest tune by 92-year-old folk hero Pete Seeger.

The episode featured guests Abraham Lustgarten of ProPublica, reporter Daniel Robison of WNED, and Dr. Rob Jackson, professor of environmental sciences at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment.

If there was one takeaway from the discussion it was that fracking could be done more safely and responsibly and that if industry shared best practices and operated in a more open and transparent fashion, they might face less public backlash.

But as long as individual companies and industry groups continue to hide behind the shroud of competition and proprietary secrecy, especially with respect to the chemical make-up of the fracking fluids used to produce the hydrocarbons locked away in shale formations, the contentious debate will continue to flourish.

The Debt Ceiling Deal and The Environment – Gang of Four

David Wescott — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:26:26 +0000

It's been a long time, but Earth & Industry Radio's "Gang of Four" - Tim Hurst, Jeff McIntire-Strasburg, Maria Surma Manka, and me, David Wescott - got together for a Skype chat / podcast to discuss the political deal that everyone in DC is talking about.

Congress and the Administration finally agreed on a deal that raises the country's debt limit and significantly cuts government spending. The Washington Post provided the best explanation I could find on the overall deal here and POLITICO gave some details on the deal's impact on energy programs here.

We wanted to focus on the deal's implications for environmental policy and then on what environmental advocates could do to ensure their priorities are met moving forward. It's not a long podcast - about 12:25 - and we hope you enjoy.

Fungus May Be the Key to Cheaper, More Efficient Biofuel

Allison Leahy — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 06:35:20 +0000

Biofuel may soon be produced quickly, efficiently, and at a cost comparable to gasoline thanks to a discovery from researchers at the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center. The research team has identified several genes that improve yeast's ability to digest the natural sugar xylose. This means that it will soon be possible to efficiently produce bio-ethanol from cellulosic biomass--waste matter such as the stalks, leaves, and husks of plants, wood chips, sawdust, and dead trees--as opposed to land-intensive crops like corn. The unlikely source of the genes: fungus living symbiotically with bark beetles.

Cellulosic materials cost about half as much as corn per ton, but are historically more difficult than corn to convert to ethanol. Current strains of yeast used industrially for the purpose of converting cellulosic biomass to ethanol have difficulty fermenting the plant sugar xylose, and can do so only after all glucose is exhausted. As xylose makes up nearly half of all available plant sugars, this marks a great loss in ethanol yield.

The team chose bark beetles on account of their woody, xylose-rich habitat. By comparing the sequencing of two xylose-fermenting fungi that live alongside the beetles--Spathaspora passalidarum and Candida tenuis--the researchers was able to identify several genes that effectively increase fermentation of the sugar.

Ethanol can be used as a fuel for cars, but is usually used as a gasoline additive to increase octane and improve vehicle emissions. Production of corn-based ethanol in the United States is just over thirteen billion gallons per year. While biodiesel offers a fossil energy ratio of 5.54 to 1, there is still apprehension about its production and use. These concerns are linked to increased food prices because of the large amount of arable land required for crops as well as the energy-intensive production process (especially corn-based fuels). With available US cropland diminishing, the ability to convert woodier waste will be an important factor in keeping bio-ethanol part of the alternative fuels discussion.

As bark beetles and their related fungi are devastating forests from the northern Rockie s to the Czech Republic, it's nice to know they may provide some great ecological benefit alongside the destruction.

Image Credits: ja.fotopedia, Forest Service - Northern Region

Follow Allison Leahy on twitter or reach her by email.

Sponsorship for this article provided by:

PsPrint Online Printing

Google & GE Drop Big Money on Solar

Zachary Shahan — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:28:08 +0000

Google and GE, both of which certainly didn't start out in the solar arena, have made a number of big solar energy announcements in the last week.

Google announced that it was investing €3.5 million (approximately $5 million) into an 18.7-MW solar power plant in Germany. The power plant, which will be located near Berlin, is expected to generate enough power for 5,000 German homes. 70% of the solar panels will come from Germany. This is Google's first cleantech investment outside of the United States. Of course, with an extremely renewable-energy-friendly government in Germany, investment there comes easy.

It was also announced today that Google would invest considerably more money here in the U.S. in a utility-scale solar thermal project in the California desert being planned by BrightSource Energy. The project, the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System, will include three concentrating solar thermal plants. Google is investing $168 million into the project and BrightSource also just announced that it has secured $1.6 billion in loan guarantees from the U.S. Department of Energy for the project. The other investor in the project is NRG Solar. The Ivanpah solar power plant is expected to have a capacity of 392 MW, meaning it could generate enough electricity for approximately 85,000 homes. It is expected to be in operation in 2013. This is Google's largest energy investment yet, far surpassing the $38.8 million it invested in two wind farms in North Dakota last year.

GE One-Ups Google

While Google is clearly dedicated to cleantech and putting a ton of money into it, GE's announced an even bigger announcement in the past week. It and PrimeStar Solar, which it just announced it has acquired, have developed what has just been independently verified as the most efficient cadmium-telluride thin film solar cell on the market. In combination with the announcements above, GE let the world know that it is investing $600 million into manufacturing this efficient, cheap solar technology. It will build a manufacturing factory in the U.S. that is projected to produce 400 MW worth of solar panels each year and create 600 jobs.

These technology big boys seem to have a clear vision of where the future is brightest -- in the solar energy market.

Photo Credit: BrightSource Energy

Nuclear Radiation Experts: 2,000 Tons Nuclear Materials Spewing Radioactivity for Months

Allison Leahy — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:33:42 +0000

Earlier today, Earth & Industry had the chance to participate in a call with leading international radiation experts and learn what they had to say about the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi Plant and the threats posed by nuclear fallout.

The Physicians for Social Responsibility news event was held to address concerns about misleading and incomplete information that is being provided about the Japanese nuclear catastrophe and was led by Dr. Ira Helfand, lifelong nuclear energy educator and former president of Physicians for Social Responsibility; Dr. David Richardson, associate professor of epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of North Carolina; and Dr. Marvin Resnikoff, an international consultant on radioactive waste issues.

A streaming audio replay of this telenews conference will be available here. Read on to learn more about areas of concern and the impact of this disaster.

2,000 Tons of Nuclear Materials at Fukushima Daiichi

Six reactors, seven fuel pools and a storage tank total almost 2,000 tons of nuclear material. The reactors alone are storing 1000 times as much nuclear energy as the Hiroshima bomb released in one concentrated dose and include waste that has been undergoing nuclear fission for 3 years. Continued exothermic reactions make for more radioactive contaminants and contribute to the gravity of the daunting situation in Japan.

The Heat is On---For Months!

Steam explosions and burn off from exposed fuel pools are the hazards causing the most concern.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed a partial meltdown in reactors 1, 2 and 3 and workers have already experienced two fires at Reactor 4. They can no longer get close to problem areas because water, which serves to shield workers and cool the fuel, is not being dropped and gamma radiation is extremely high. As the water evaporates it exposes the nuclear fuel and uranium rods begin to burn, emitting more heat and radioactive cesium. Uranium is then able to mix with water and begin the reaction that sends radiation into the atmosphere.

Reactor #3 is especially dangerous, as it is fueled with a combination of Mox and uranium. Mox fuel releases plutonium, which has a 24,200 year half-life and can cause lung cancer at extremely low doses.

Roofless spent-fuel pools sit at the top of the reactors (70-80 feet up), if these pools aren't cooled to a temperature below 1800 F, hydrogen will be created and more explosions will occur.

Though water cannons are being deployed, Japan is having trouble resupplying water to cool the affected areas, which leads Dr. Resnikoff to believe that temperatures could be soaring for months.

External Ionizing Radiation and Human Health

There remains a lack of information on the environmental levels of external ionizing radiation--the kind that moves through the body in waves (think: gamma and beta rays)--but knowing these measurements of total body radiation exposure doesn't indicate personal health risk as much as knowing the exposure rate to specific tissues. We do know that the "Fukushima 50" (the workers left battling the meltdown) are in a grave situation, facing hazards of extreme heat, explosions and fires, and that the workers must move through some sites in a matter of minutes to avoid acute radiation.

Radioactive Isotopes and Ambient Radiation

Ambient radiation and the dispersion of radioactive isotopes will cause numerous health problems, warns nuclear expert, Dr. Ira Helfand. Radioactive isotopes may be inhaled, ingested, or absorbed into the bloodstream through open wounds and pose more of a threat to the Japanese population than radiation waves or beams. Land 100 miles downwind of Chernobyl was contaminated with radioactivity and is still not safe to use, "if winds blow in the direction of Tokyo, it is conceivable that large parts of Tokyo could be contaminated in this way," he says. A forecast for easterly winds could be the city's saving grace.

Exactly how much ambient radiation will be released is impossible to say and measured levels vary dramatically moment to moment. We will likely not know the volume released to the environment until the materials that remain stored at Fukushima are assessed. The highest levels noted by Dr. Helfand are 40 rems-- a dose that would cause sickness after 2.5 hours of exposure.

Of the 200 different radioactive isotopes that could be released, 4 pose real risk to human health:

Iodine 131 - concentrates in the thyroid, has a half-life of 8 days, leads to thyroid cancer

Strontium 90 - concentrates in bone marrow, has a half-life of 90 years, leads to bone cancer and leukemia

Cesium 137 - prevalent in all tissues, has a half-life of 30 years, can cause multiple cancers

Plutonium 239 - concentrates in the lungs, has a half-life of 24,200 years, low doses lead to lung cancer

Reach Allison Leahy on twitter and through email.

Image Credit: daveeza via Flickr