An article detailing some concerns over hydraulic fracturing and their recent confirmation as valid.

1. For the past four years, as innovations in hydraulic fracturing – fracking – technology have
opened previously inaccessible oil and natural gas deposits beneath the Earth, oil men, geologists, and
PR people have fervently denied that there is any concern that chemicals pumped into the ground for
fracking could move all the way up through bedrock into the water table. Well, unfortunately, that
seems to be exactly what has happened underneath Pavilion, Wyoming – population 213. Last week, the
EPA announced new USGS results that were consistent with results obtained from a December, 2011
test in Pavilion, confirming that fracking likely contaminated groundwater there. Duke University
professor Rob Jackson has studied the effects of fracking in the areas surrounding recently developed
plays in Pennsylvania and (when they were still active) New York state. Jackson has also been closely
following the Pavilion study as it develops. Jackson stated, “The industry likes to say there’s never been
a case of fracking contaminating groundwater. What made the EPA report so controversial is that they
concluded that’s what happened.” Yesterday, Oct. 2, 2012, the EPA found that methane has leaked into
a watertable in Dimock, PA, where drillers are tapping into the Marcellus Shale. The results in
Pennsylvania are not terribly concerning, however, states Jackson. The methane leak there was most
likely caused by a crack in pipe, which is a relatively easy issue to address. Furthermore, the drilling that
occurs in Marcellus takes place thousands of feet beneath aquifers. In Pavilion, conversely, drilling,
which was performed by the company Encana, reaches less than 1,000 feet below the surface. “If it’s
moved up into the rock, that’s a harder problem to fix than a poorly constructed pipe,” stated Jackson.
Doug Hock, one of Encana’s spokespeople, claimed in an email that there was nothing surprising in the
USGS’results:
More important is the fact that USGS only sampled one of the two monitoring wells. This goes
to heart of the concerns raised by state and federal agencies, as well as Encana – EPA’s wells are
improperly constructed. Specifically, the report seems to indicate that USGS declined to sample
MW02 because the well could not provide a sample that was representative of actual qater
quality conditions.
The EPA has not announced yet when it will it will make a final conclusion for Pavilion – the agency is
still in the process of accepting public comments on its findings from the December study. Jackson is of
the opinion that no matter what the outcome fracking, as a technique, is here to stay. The results will
certainly place a great of pressure on the oil and gas industry, and scrutiny from environmental agencies
and NPOs should also be expected to increase. The oil and gas industry continues an uphill battle against
dissenters who believe fracking to be environmentally harmful. “[The EPA’s decision] will still be
controversial,” said Jackson. “The take home message in Pavilion is: ‘Don’t frack a well so close to the
surface.’”