Dealing with Fracking Facts and Fiction
Even if hydraulic fracturing is absolutely safe, how does an E&P entering into a new market counter what it considers misinformation about shale gas?
This and other topics were covered in a panel discussion entitled How Real are the Environmental Threats of Fracking? at the Global Shale Gas Plays Forum in Krakow, Poland.
Andras Jenei, Senior Energy Advisor at Falcon Oil & Gas was one of the panel members.
“There are many rumors about hydraulic fracturing,” he began. “The shale ban in France is political. It’s not from the company side. You don’t really see how fracking affects the aquifer when you are drilling 2-3000 feet in depth. I don’t think fracking can contaminate groundwater.”
However, Mr. Jenei showed a slide from 30 years ago, documenting an incident when fracking fluid breached an aquifer in Jackson County, West Virginia. At that time, the US Environmental Protection Agency found that the technology had, indeed, contaminated groundwater and private wells. But there was a caveat, according to him.
“They were too close to the old cased wells from the 1940s,” he explained. “The casing couldn’t withstand the frack. Read ‘Cracks in the Façade.’ This can happen, but on the other side the French government is not just banning fracking but drilling altogether, because you always go through the aquifer.”
Additives were also mentioned in the discussion.
“The real problem is the flowback,” said one of the conference delegates, “all those things that you don’t want to see. If you keep the rules, it’s a safe technology. The danger is always the human factor.”
Seismology was a second concern, he said.
“If you have a small earthquake, that makes it into the news - in politics that’s enough to have a temporary ban. In this case it’s not only PR but you must be proactive. Tell the truth to the people so they can understand it.”
“I think we have to distinguish the foreground – environmental concerns – and the background,” added Thomas Teyssen, Head of New Ventures at Austria’s RAG Rohul-Aufsuchungs. “I think we have to clarify the truth. Shale gas is the same gas, it’s only produced differently. Fracking is an old technology and has been around for at least 50 years.”
He continued: “We have drilled over 100,000 conventional wells in Europe and there has never been any significant issue of contamination. The construction technologies are the same as for conventionals.”
“Even if they’re not valid,” he said of the environmental objections to hydraulic fracturing, “we’re an industry that has to take society as it is; it’s the environment that we live in.”
Teyssen mentioned what he thought might be happening in the background. “Why are these concerns suddenly emerging even if no significant shale gas activities are occurring in Europe? These are the enemies we have because there is competition for money. There’s a lot of money at stake. You mentioned that Poland will spend money on the development of shale gas. The debate going on is energy policy at large.”
“People don’t want to see activity where they are,” he said of drilling. “Gas pipelines are underground and they don’t see them. We have to tell people that gas can be carbon free.”
Dr. Stanislaw Cios, First Counsellor, Head of Global Energy Challenges Unit in the Department of Economic Policy at Poland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, provided background on why Polish people could potentially fear some extraction practices.
He said that for those living near a coalmine in Poland, a collapse could occur after extraction, and did. “A small lake was formed,” recalled Dr. Cios. “You can imagine what happened when there was a house at this place - the industry had to pay substantial damages.”
Andras Jenei showed a photograph of a drilling operation in Hungary, where a noise barrier had to be built to protect nesting birds from the noise.
Stanislaw Cios questioned who, if anyone, should promote shale gas? Who should do it at a broader level, or at national level? “Which of these institutions or actors are entitled to do this? My government would be very interested, but we don’t have the resources,” he said.
What, he asked, were effective activities to convince the society at large?
“This autumn we are organizing research, asking what people think about shale gas in Hungary,” reported Mr. Jenei. “Secondly, we are negotiating with green organizations and want to sit down with them and start communication with them. We have to sit down and tell them the truth - you don’t have to hide anything. The hardest part is to sit down for discussion with the greens. It’s really hard.”
“Everyone should do this,” he continued. “Right now the industry and companies have to do this, because no one else will do it. Of course the government can’t. We are spending a lot on it.”
“You can’t do anything without allies,” said Thomas Teyssen. “The EU can learn something from its younger members regarding unconventional gas. I think Poland is one of the more rational members, like Slovakia, Romania, etc.”
“We in the last 1.5-2 years have stepped up our presence in Brussels,” he said. “That is something that we should do. We are looking for allies to support the gas industry, which is not so strong and out of focus. It’s typically linked with electric power business, which gets more attention.”
“What we need is a shale gas initiative,” explained Teyssen. “We need an information group that really informs the general public about shale gas issues. I can only recommend that you do it in a serious, very transparent way, presenting the risks, too.”
A participant from the audience said he believed that those in attendance were missing one important point.
“Back in first quarter of 2010, European gas prices went down. In France we say ‘we don’t care, we will continue paying this high price.’ As long as the general public does not feel benefits for their wallets of shale gas, we are missing their addition to this project.”
Reported by Drew Leifheit