Worth The Fracking Risk

In response to Nirmal’s blog regarding fracking, though I honor your opinion that there are risks when hydraulic fracturing is used, I feel there are basic facts that were left out that would be helpful. This summer I have had the privilege to intern for a petroleum engineering firm that consults with many companies and have had the challenge of researching recycled “frac” water. To be more accurate Schlumberger defines hydraulic fracturing as: “A Stimulation treatment routinely performed on oil and gas wells in low-permeability reservoirs. Specially engineered fluids are pumped at high pressure and rate into the reservoir interval to be treated, causing a vertical fracture to open. Proppant, such as grains of sand of a particular size, is mixed with the treatment fluid to keep the fracture open when the treatment is complete. Hydraulic fracturing creates high-conductivity communication with a large area of formation and bypasses any damage that may exists in the near-wellbore area.” Your definition misleads because fracking can be done either vertically or horizontally. Hydraulic drilling that was used as far back as the 1860’s in which vertical hydraulic fracturing was used and is still used today; therefore, stating that it is only horizontal would be misleading.  

You addressed the use of millions of freshwater from areas in Michigan as a wasteful endeavor and equated it to the use of water used in Texas. In general, fracking uses .5 - .8% of water the state uses daily. Also, in the Permian Basin, recycling “frack” water is predominantly the method used there and they are able to prevent unnecessary fresh water usage. In fact, there are companies all over Texas that implement the recycling of “frack” water despite the cost to the companies. Too, there are many companies that now use a brackish water mix to lessen the use of fresh water. This is vitally important in presenting this debate so the public is fully informed. 

Despite your comment about the disclosure of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing jobs, there is a website (Frac Focus) in which companies list the fluid composition that identifies chemicals being used. You allude to the toxins that are added to the water used to complete the hydraulic fracturing; however 99.5% of the process uses water and sand and only .5% uses chemical additives. These additives include sodium chloride (table salt), ethylene glycol (household cleaners), borate salts (cosmetics), sodium potassium carbonate (detergents), guar gum (found in foods including ice cream), and isopropanol (found in deodorant).  As you can see the items that make up the .5% are used in our daily lives and are actually consumed by humans on a regular basis.

I appreciate your blog and the dilemma that fracking presents to the everyday citizen, but would encourage further research. Based on your pro and con list I can certainly see why you came to the conclusion you made, but after further research I believe you would agree that fracking is worth the risk. 

A Better Future For A Trashy State

Within the past few months at an outlying grocery store that has allowed the use of plastic bags, I had an epiphany that many of these people were leaving the city limits so that they would not have to change their usage of plastic bags. No doubt the use of reusable bags increased as well, but it became evident that making environmental change is hard for many people. Hard or not, Texans need to be encouraged to make that change and over time Texas needs to be a state that is the example of zero waste. This issue of getting people to change their habits and the way they see their interaction with the environment is one of paramount importance.  

In this next legislative session Texas needs to develop legislative policy to support zero waste. Zero waste is a goal to guide people to design and manage products so that we can avoid and remove the amount and the toxicity of waste and materials, and rid all discharges to land, water, or air that are a threat to planetary life. By supporting such a goal Texans would eliminate trash that is currently sent to landfills and is incinerated.

Currently most major cities in Texas have recycling programs and the state executed a law that requires cities to have a recycling program for paper.  This mandate, however, is not enough. Even Austin, the “greenest” city in Texas, only has 24% of the people using the recycling programs.  By implementing a state policy Texas could become a leader in creating zero waste and an example of implementing innovative solutions for more sustainability.

One sure way for improving the current situation is through education. The Texas Legislature would be doing the state a huge service by legislating education and recycling programs statewide and by making it more convenient to recycle. If current programs are not working then a task force could be put into place so that communities could improve what they are doing or find a better way to accomplish the task at hand.

For every 10,000 tons of solid waste going to landfills one job is created. That same amount of waste kept out of landfills could create between 10 – 75 recycling jobs. By employing and legislating for a zero waste policy, Texas could affect positive change not only for the state, but it could set an example for the rest of the United States.