Serious cracks in fracking’s case

On the eve of the expiry-date of the South African moratorium on prospecting for shale gas in the Karoo via the controversial drilling known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking in February, the gas exploring industry’s claims that the process is safe, were delivered devastating blows on two fronts ­– in terms of pollution and geological safety.

The moratorium was originally introduced in April of last year by Mining Minister Susan Shabangu and extended for a further six months in Augusts to allow time for public consultation on the matter. The moratorium came after a furore broke out over plans to explore for shale gas over an area of more than 200 000 square kilometres in the Karoo.

Originally, in December 2010 the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (Pasa) accepted an application for exploration rights by Shell over an area of 95 000 square kilometres. Other companies that have shown an interest in fracking include Falcon Oil & Gas, which has sought exploration rights for an area of 100 000 square kilometres in the Karoo and Bundu Oil and Gas, with interest in an area of 35 000 square kilometres.

Minister Shabangu said at the time of the original introduction of the moratorium that it was done to give the department an opportunity to carry out a study of the potential environmental impact and economic potential of hydraulic fracturing.

It is not known at this time how far the department has progressed with its own study but the American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in mid December announced that it had found in the drinking water in Pavillion in Wyoming the chemicals used in fracking.

The EPA-study over a period of three years reported finding a host of chemicals in the groundwater around shale gas wells in Wyoming. These include petroleum hydrocarbons such as benzene, and tert-butyl alcohol, a fuel additive, which is among the more than 500 chemicals that are typically mixed with sand and water and blasted in to shale to fracture the rock to release the gas.

To deliver absolute proof is extremely difficult, but the EPA-report states: “When considered together with other lines of evidence, the data indicates likely impact to groundwater that can be explained by hydraulic fracturing.” Only days after this report, practically the same list of fracking chemical ingredients were found in water from Dimock, Pennsylvania tested for fracking contamination of groundwater.

Reporting on the Pavillion-incedent, the Guardian in the United Kindom wrote: ”What is also clear is that the aquifer in Pavillion will never be cleaned. The contamination there, for the foreseeable future, is permanent. And considering that the permanent contamination of huge areas of groundwater in the US is now a scientifically proven risk, the Pavillion investigation, as extensive as it was, must become the new standard for investigating fracking complaints worldwide.”

The Guardian also refers to the fact that proof is not easy and that “it is hard to prove something that is happening thousands of feet below the ground. It's very difficult and costly, both in time and money. To prove that fracking has contaminated water, even as obvious as it can be to residents who can see the apparent cause and effect, takes extensive and expensive hydrogeological study. Hundreds of chemicals need to be tested over a period of years in a large sample area. In Pavillion, nearly 50 water wells were sampled, two deep monitoring wells were drilled and years of working with the immense pool of data was required. After viewing the EPA draft study (pdf), no one can ever again say that robust science has not been brought to bear on fracking.”

The paper goes on toe point out that “beyond the US, Europe, South Africa, China and Australia are right now contemplating embarking on the ‘shale gas revolution’; they should take note of the EPA's findings. As the story unfolds, the real answer bubbles inexorably to the surface: fracking is deeply flawed; it is inherently contaminating in its present form and must be halted immediately. The empty excuses of the gas industry and the pro-fracking politicians who defend them just don't hold water.”

Geological dangers

The UK’s sole operational fracking site near Blackpool, was suspended in June of last year following complaints from local residents about two earthquakes in April and May. The subsequent report into the seismic activity and fracking concluded in November that it is highly probable that there was a connection.

The report also concluded that the fracking activity by Cuadrilla Resources was responsible for another 48 earthquakes.

Bloomberg in early January reported that the mayor of Youngstown, Ohio in the US has bought quake insurance in the wake of reports that fracking is the likely source of some 11 recent earthquakes in the northeastern part of the state.

The earthquakes started about nine months ago in an area where it has not happened before. John Armbruster, a seismologist from Columbia University was reported by CBS News as saying he believes the trigger for the quakes was a Youngstown well that disposes of contaminated water trucked in from elsewhere in Pennsylvania and beyond. The contaminated water is a byproduct of oils and natural gas extraction by fracking.

“These earthquakes were sitting there waiting to happen. We have triggered these earthquakes,” Armbuster said.

In December the New York Times (NYT) reporting on the fracking-plans for, amongst others the Karoo, hinted that the American State Department in promoting US exploration companies abroad seems to attempt to extend their sweetheart-status when it comes to policing contamination dangers. In 2005 exploration companies were exempted from the Safe Drinking Water Act, allowing them to inject toxic chemicals under the ground without disclosing it.

According to the NYT-report “officials from the State Department’s shale gas initiative have said that developing countries interested in fracking will need to create stronger protections for intellectual property rights so energy companies will think that they can safely maintain certain patents over their drilling techniques. Some environmentalists say that strengthening these intellectual property protections will only help energy companies argue that they do not have to disclose the chemicals they use in fracking abroad.”

According to the same report David Hunter director of the Programme on International and Comparative Environmental Law at American University, said, “Especially with energy projects, the US and its funding institutions have a habit of promoting policies that foster a stable climate for foreign investors but that are not in the best interests of local populations.”

In Peru, for example, the United States Export-Import Bank provided more than $400 million in loan guarantees in 2008 for a liquified natural gas terminal to export gas from the Camisea gas fields, which are in the Amazon rainforest. The project for drilling and pipelines in the Camisea, which received separate financing from the Inter-American Development Bank, has been dogged by spills, accusations that company officials bribed lawmakers and criticisms about exporting the gas rather than using more of it to lower prices for domestic consumers.

In July, South Africa’s Advertising Standards Authority ruled that several of Shell’s advertised claims — including one that said fracking had never led to groundwater contamination — were misleading or unsubstantiated and should be withdrawn. Shell said the advertisements were an accurate reflection of its opinion.

“The government is under a great deal of pressure to hurry up,” according to Hein Rust, director of disaster management for the central Karoo region. “But I don’t think these decisions should be made on faith or until all the costs are known,” he told the NYT.

• Add New
• Search

Comments (5)

• |2012-01-11 10:23:21 Christoff  - You should not even consider fracking in the Karoo
  Even a REMOTE chance that our underground water can be contaminated by this method should be ENOUGH reason to say NO to fracking.
  
  Contrary to the views expressed by PR companies on behalf of their corporate bosses, at the end it is all about profit and power and ... believe it or not, there are actually people in powerful positions who don't care at all for the welfare of future generations, the natural environment, animal life or even human life. (Don't believe me? Really?!)
  
  So honestly people, this research alone should be enough for Mining Minister Susan Shabangu and her team who will decide on this to simply say NO to fracking.
  
  Come ON people, wake up!!
  • 1
  • 0

  Reply

• |2012-01-11 10:42:31 Graham Williams  - Good news
  As an ex petroleum industry person,I must record my delight at these extensive, robust studies.
  
  The potential (if not likely) water-contamination and geological damage make a mockery of the claims of companies such as Shell to be good citizens in terms of profit, people and planet. Clearly only the first-mentioned really applies whatever spin they put on it.
  • 2
  • 0

  Reply

• |2012-01-11 12:44:06 Madgran  - Fracking ...........................are we stupid?
  Come on guys, use your common sense, logic, education, advice from your ancestors, whatever. Fracking cannot occur without destroying the water in the area around the site, or disrupting the geological stability of the area.......and if you think the Karoo is the only place these big companies are thinking of doing this, investigate Kwazulu Natal, where there are more sites being looked at/investigated or whatever.
  Fracking means the destruction of life in the area it occurs, and you dont need a college education or lab reports to understand or know this.
  I say no....to the destruction of South Africa, for its people and wildlife heritage, for now and for the future....
  We are the cradle of mankind, so now we want to destroy it................my reply DROP DEAD FRED!
  • 0
  • 0

  Reply

• |2012-01-12 09:03:24 Angaas
  Why should Luthuli House refund Shells "loan" for their grand children’s sake. Frack them and everybody else.
  • 0
  • 0

  Reply

• |2012-01-29 16:36:35 jeaniel  - If you are apposed to fracking, please visit this
  www.treasurethekaroo.co.za
  • 0
  • 0

  Reply

Write comment

Your Contact Details:

Name:

Email: do not notifynotify

Comment:

Title:

Message:

Security

Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 4.0 beta2