Boom in gas drilling fuels contamination concerns in Colorado
Boom in gas drilling fuels contamination concerns in Colorado Monday February 09, 2009
By: Josh McDaniel
When Lisa Bracken noticed gas bubbling to thesurface of Divide Creek, which runs along one side of her 60 acres inwestern Colorado, she suspected another gas "seep." It had happenedonce before, in 2004, after faulty natural-gas drilling in the vicinitycontaminated the creek with benzene and methane.
Boom in gas drilling fuels contamination concerns in Colorado Monday February 09, 2009
By: Josh McDaniel
When Lisa Bracken noticed gas bubbling to thesurface of Divide Creek, which runs along one side of her 60 acres inwestern Colorado, she suspected another gas "seep." It had happenedonce before, in 2004, after faulty natural-gas drilling in the vicinitycontaminated the creek with benzene and methane.
Her concern, though, is not confined to the small waterway. Hercottonwood and pinyon trees are dying, along with parts of meadowlandthat her family manages for wildlife, and Ms. Bracken believes thelikely culprit is methane seepage stemming from one or more of the 11natural-gas wells within a mile of her property – though independentinvestigations have not been able to prove a link.
"It is so frustrating to watch the land die," she says. Bracken doesnot think the current drought is responsible. "We have seen it gothrough drought cycles, but nothing like this. The land has lost itsability to sustain itself."
Her concern and that of others is putting new scrutiny on a drillingpractice knows as "fracing," short for hydraulic fracturing.
A common component of natural-gas extraction worldwide, fracturingoperations inject water, sand, and a cocktail of chemicals at highpressure into rock formations thousands of feet below the surface,opening existing fractures in the rock and allowing gas to rise throughthe wells. The practice makes drilling possible in areas that 10 to 20years ago would not have been profitable, including parts of Colorado,which accounts for 6.2 percent of natural-gas produced in the US.
The concerns center mainly around the injected fluid. Most comes backto the surface, but 30 to 40 percent is never recovered, according toindustry estimates.
The composition of hydraulic fracturing fluids is proprietary, andenergy companies are vehement about the need to keep the contentssecret to protect their competitive edge. That confidentiality isprotected by the federal Energy Policy Act of 2005, which exemptedhydraulic fracturing from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
"We now use five to 10 ‘frac' jobs per well, with up to 100 milliongallons of fluid used per frac," says geologist Geoffrey Thyne of theUniversity of Wyoming, whose analysis of the large gas fields aroundDivide Creek found elevated methane and chloride levels in groundwatersamples.
"They are injecting fluid that may or may not be hazardous intothousands of wells and not recovering all of it. We have to ask, whatis in those fluids and where does the fluid go?" says Mr. Thyne.
Theo Colborn, a leading researcher on the effects of toxins on thehuman endocrine system, has been trying to glean what is in theinjection fluid.
Preliminary results of her study identify 65 chemicals that areprobable components. She is urging that groundwater sampling beexpanded to determine whether these chemicals or their byproducts areshowing up in areas where hydraulic fracturing is being used.
"We know less and less about what chemicals are being used, but theones that we do know are being used are very dangerous," says Dr.Colborn.
Chemicals such as benzene, glycol-ethers, toluene, 2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethanol, and nonylphenols were used in the fracturing fluids, her studyfound – all of which have been linked in previous research to healthdisorders when human exposure is too high.
Pushing for legislation
Colborn's work and complaints from residents living near drillingoperations are spurring policymakers to take a closer look at hydraulicfracturing. US Reps. Diana DeGette (D) and John Salazar (D), both ofColorado, have introduced legislation that would repeal the SafeDrinking Water Act exemption for hydraulic fracturing and force energycompanies to reveal the contents of the fracturing fluids.
"There is little reason to continue the exemption," says RepresentativeDeGette in a phone interview. "Communities have a right to know what ispotentially threatening their water."
Energy industry officials say there's no evidence that hydraulic fracturing contaminates groundwater or threatens public health.
"This is an answer in search of a problem," says Doug Hock, a spokesmanfor EnCana, the firm that is drilling near Bracken's land. "Chemicalsin themselves do not create risk; risk is created when the propertechnology and procedures are not in place. We take very stringentprecautions."
Colorado fined EnCana $371,000 – the largest fine in state history fora drilling-related incident – after finding the company responsible forthe 2004 gas seep in Divide Creek. But the state is allowing drillingto continue in the area.
The proposed federal legislation would only increase the regulatoryburden on industry but do little to protect human health, suggestsDollis Wright, a public-health consultant who has conducted studies forthe Colorado Oil and Gas Association. "There are groups out there thatare listing chemicals found in the fluids, and they always say such andsuch chemical causes cancer.
Well, just because a chemical is in the fluids does not mean it isgoing to get into your water. And if it gets into your water, it doesnot mean that it is going to cause harm," she says. "It may have to beinhaled, rather than drunk, to cause the negative effects they cite."
Others argue the legislation is well past due. "If you don't know whatyou are looking for, it is hard to do analysis," says Susan Griffin, atoxicologist with the US Environmental Protection Agency in a phoneinterview. "There are a lot of good scientific tools out there, but weneed opportunities to apply them. Those opportunities don't exist rightnow."
‘Fracing' to blame for explosion?
Ben Bounds, for one, would like additional assurances about fracing's safety.
In the summer of 2007, methane seeped from his domestic well andexploded inside his pump house. The explosion lifted the pump-houseroof off the frame and melted or singed everything inside. A few dayslater, a state inspector with a methane detector investigated theBounds property in rural Huerfano County, at the base of the Sangre deCristo Mountains.
"When he opened the door to the garage, the detector went absolutely crazy," says Mr. Bounds.
While 50 methane drilling wells and active hydraulic fracturingoperations are nearby, a lack of independent monitoring and testing hasmade it impossible to prove that fracing created pathways for methaneto collect in Bounds's domestic water system.
Bounds and his family immediately evacuated the home, and they've hadto evacuate many times since when detectors Bounds installed havesignaled the presence of methane.
The state advised that Bounds not allow his grandchildren or anyvisitors to come to the property, and his insurance company hasthreatened to drop coverage. He has thought about simply
abandoning the home since he could not in good conscience sell the property.
"Why are they allowed to keep this a secret? That's not right," Boundssays. "It only seems like common sense to me that they would have torelease the contents of those fluids and prove they aren't causingproblems."