[img]2097|right|||no_popup[/img]Dateline Santa Maria – A recent column in the Santa Maria Times tried to generate fear about the process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a standard, and until recently, uncontroversial part of the completion process that has been used in California for more than 60 years. Nationwide, it has been deployed 1.2 million times.
Those seeking to generate fear are doing so contrary to the scientific consensus on this practice held by President Obama and federal regulators, Gov. Brown and state regulators, leading scientists inside and outside of the academy, and scientists within the industry.
As a Santa Maria native and the CEO of the California Independent Petroleum Assn., I welcome the opportunity to share some facts.
How Often Can You Check?
Hydraulic fracturing already is one of the most studied commercial practices in the world. In 2009, a study from the U.S. Dept. of Energy and the Ground Water Protection Council — an interstate body of environmental regulators — concluded that fracking is a “safe and effective” technology.
In 2011, a 250-page study of hydraulic fracturing in a Los Angeles oil field was completed by an independent firm and peer reviewed. Fourteen distinct environmental issues were studied. No significant impacts were found to groundwater, well integrity, methane emissions, seismic activity, subsidence, noise, vibrations, criteria pollutants and community health risks. The Dept. of Energy confirmed once again last month that fluids used in hydraulic fracturing do not contaminate groundwater.
It is worth noting that more than 80 percent of hydraulic fracturing in California happens in western Kern County, where no people live and no potable water exists. Of the thousands of times it has been used in California, where is the evidence of specific harm?
Similarly, there never has been a felt seismic event associated with hydraulic fracturing in California. This is because, as was said to the U.S. Senate by Stanford geophysicist Mark Zoback, the energy released by a fracture is equivalent to “a gallon of milk falling off a kitchen counter.”
Hydraulic fracturing is also making our air dramatically cleaner. Natural gas — which requires fracturing in most cases — is replacing coal in the nation’s power plants, and it has led to a dramatic, 20 percent decrease in carbon emissions in the U.S. This leads the developed world, and it brings us to 1990 levels, the goal of California’s global warming law, AB 32.
While California’s unique geology means we don’t use fracturing nearly as much as in the east, it may be a technology that helps develop the vast Monterey Shale. This could generate hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of jobs and $25 billion in tax revenue in the next seven years, a time when our state desperately needs both.
It is important to be aware that extreme anti-industry activists like Josh Fox, the director of Gasland Part I and Gasland Part II, are honest about their actual goal, which is not to ensure that hydraulic fracturing is safe but to eliminate domestic oil production altogether. That is why he misleads. The most famous instances are the “flaming faucet” scene from Gasland, which he admits had nothing to do with oil and gas activity, and the “flaming hose” scene from Gasland Part II, which featured a hose connected to a gas line, not a water line.
California’s energy industry supports new rules, scheduled to be formalized soon, that provide more transparency in the process, including mandatory disclosure of all chemicals used, and advance disclosure of when and where fracturing occurs.
For citizens who have concerns, it will become even clearer why this process has been used safely in California for decades.
This essay originally appeared in the Santa Maria Times. Sacramento-based Mr. Zierman, chief executive officer of the California Independent Petroleum Assn., mat be contacted at rock@cipa.org
