Home » Posts tagged 'fracking' (Page 16)
Tag Archives: fracking
Fracking Go-ahead For National Parks as Controversial Infrastructure Act Becomes Law
Fracking Go-ahead For National Parks as Controversial Infrastructure Act Becomes Law
Weak fracking rules have officially been enshrined in law as the controversialInfrastructure Bill became an actlast night.
The new act will see national parks and groundwater protection zones at riskfrom fracking as the government backtracked on amendments agreed only weeks ago to increase the safety of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas.
Amber Rudd, energy minister at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), said: “In the case of areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks, given their size and dispersion, it might not be practical to guarantee that fracking will not take place under them in all cases without unduly constraining the industry.”
She was supported by Peter Lilley, a self-described ‘global lukewarmist’Conservative MP, who said fracking should be “pursued energetically”.
Conservative Votes
The weak fracking rules were passed by the House of Commons last night in a vote of 257 to 203 with five Conservative MPs defying the government’s stance on fracking.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Never before has drilling for oil collapsed this far this fast.
Never before has drilling for oil collapsed this far this fast.
The word “boom” can never be thought of as a stand-alone concept that everyone loves, particularly governments because they get to rake in the big bucks. It’s always attached to its miserable twin that no one wants to see, the “bust.” They come invariably in cycles, one after the other. You can’t have one without the other. It’s just a question of time. And in the world of fracking, it’s no different.
The fracking-for-oil boom started in 2005, collapsed by 60% during the Financial Crisis when money ran out, but got going in earnest after the Fed had begun spreading its newly created money around the land. From the trough in May 2009 to its peak in October 2014, rigs drilling for oil soared from 180 to 1,609: multiplied by a factor of 9 in five years! And oil production soared, to reach 9.2 million barrels a day in January.
That’s what real booms look like. They’re fed by limitless low-cost money – exuberant investors that buy the riskiest IPOs, junk bonds, leveraged loans, and CLOs usually indirectly without knowing it via their bond funds, stock funds, leveraged-loan funds, by being part of a public pension system that invests in private equity firms that invest in the boom…. You get the idea.
That’s how much of the American shale-oil revolution was funded.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Fracking Quakes Pose Added Risks and Require Study, Expert Warns
Fracking Quakes Pose Added Risks and Require Study, Expert Warns
Researchers need more seismic data to understand unique hazards.
One of Canada’s foremost experts on earthquake hazards recently told an audience of Calgary engineers that earthquakes triggered by hydraulic fracturing can exceed “what the natural hazard was in the first place” and pose risks to infrastructure only built to withstand natural earthquake hazards.
As well, earthquakes induced by fracking can produce more damaging ground motion at lower magnitudes than natural quakes due to their shallowness, said Gail Atkinson, the NSERC/TransAlta/Nanometrics Industrial Research Chair in Hazards from Induced Seismicity at Ontario’s Western University.
Natural earthquakes have an average depth of 10 kilometres, whereas industry-made tremors are much shallower and closer to the ground surface where people can feel them more strongly.
Natural earthquakes typically cause structural damage in buildings at a magnitude of 5.0, Atkinson said. But earthquakes triggered by fracking could possibly cause damaging ground motions at magnitudes as low as 3.5 to 4.0, due to their shallowness.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Junk Science? Report Finds Shale Industry Cited ‘Retracted and Discredited’ Studies
Junk Science? Report Finds Shale Industry Cited ‘Retracted and Discredited’ Studies
Since the beginning of the shale gas rush, the drilling industry has insisted that the process is relatively benign, arguing that its critics are simply fear-mongering and that a sober scientific review of the data fails to prove, for instance, that fracking has ever contaminated water supplies.
In the wake of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s decision to disallow fracking in that state, for example, one of the most active boosters of the shale drilling rush, the industry-funded Energy in Depth, issued a statement labeling the ban “’Junk Science’ and ‘Political Theater.”
In the wake of news reports, academic publications, or policy decisions that it opposes, Energy in Depth often circulates lists of sources that it describes as debunking “junk science.” But how reliable is the science that EID cites?
A report issued today by the Public Accountability Initiative (PAI) reviews a list of over 130 studies cited by Energy in Depth (EID), testing its sources for markers of credibility.
How often was the research cited peer-reviewed? Was it accurately labeled? Was the research funded by the oil and gas industry, and if so, was that funding properly disclosed or was it concealed? Were any of the papers cited revoked or rescinded?
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Fracking set to be banned from 40% of England’s shale areas
Guardian analysis reveals new rules agreed by government will make huge swath of protected areas off limits for shale gas exploration
Fracking is set to be banned on two-fifths of the land in England being offered for shale gas exploration by the government, according to a Guardian analysis.
Such a wide-ranging ban would be a significant blow to the UK’s embryonic fracking industry, which David Cameron and George Osborne have enthusiastically backed.
There were setbacks last week after the Scottish government declared a moratorium and UK ministers were forced to accept a swath of new environmental protections proposed by Labour, leading some analysts to say the outlook for fracking was bleak
One of those new protections was to rule out fracking in national parks, areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs), sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) andgroundwater source protection zones (SPZs).
Neither the government nor Labour have stated how much of the land available for future shale gas drilling – 60% of England – would be affected by the new bans. But a Guardian data analysis has revealed it is 39.7%, with large swaths of the south and south east off-limits, as well as the Yorkshire Dales and Peak district.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
The High Cost of Capitalism
The High Cost of Capitalism
In my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism, I explain the concept of external or social costs. These are the costs associated with production that are not incurred by the producer but are inflicted on outside third parties, most often the environment, such as land, air, and water resources on which humanity is dependent. In models demonstrating the efficiency of capitalism in allocating resources, economists include assumptions that move external costs out of the picture.
Finian Cunningham describes external costs associated with fracking.
If the cost of earthquakes to homeowners and owners of commercial buildings and damaged and ruined water resources had to be covered by the fracking companies, the total cost of production would exceed the value of the oil and gas recovered. As long as the oil price was high, the frackers made money by imposing what could well be the largest production costs on people who do not participate in the profits of the enterprise.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Fracking Failure: Frackers In Pennsylvania Violate Health And Environmental Regulations On A Daily Basis
Fracking Failure: Frackers In Pennsylvania Violate Health And Environmental Regulations On A Daily Basis
From the American Petroleum Institute’sclaim that fracking is “safely unlocking vast U.S. reserves of oil and natural gas” to Chris “Frack Master” Faulkner himselfinsisting “fracking isn’t contaminating anything,” the oil and gas industry constantly tells us that fracking can be done safely, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary.
But just to be sure the public understands how seriously they considered public health, a group of oil and gas companies fracking in Pennsylvania formed the Center for Sustainable Shale Development in 2013. According to its website, CSSD is dedicated to “the development of rigorous performance standards for sustainable shale development and a commitment to continuous improvement to ensure safe and environmentally responsible development of our abundant shale resources.”
“Rigorous performance standards for sustainable shale development” certainly sounds great. The only problem is, none of the four companies that founded CSSD— Chevron Appalachia, Consol Energy, EQT Production and Shell — seems to have actually adhered to those standards.
According to a new report by Environment America titled “Fracking Failures: Oil and Gas Industry Environmental Violations in Pennsylvania and What They Mean for theU.S.,” ever since those four companies “told the public they would adhere to higher standards” in 2013, they have collectively committed as many as 100 violations of Pennsylvania’s existing oil and gas regulations.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Flustered Liz Truss Blames Civil Servants for Redacted Fracking Report Fiasco
Flustered Liz Truss Blames Civil Servants for Redacted Fracking Report Fiasco
Liz Truss, the environment secretary, turned on her own department yesterday as the Tory government came under increasing criticism for its heavy-handed redactions to a controversial report about fracking.
Truss, a Conservative member of the Cabinet, toldthe House of Commons there are “no plans” for the release of an unredacted version of the incedury Shale Gas: Rural Economy Impacts report and blamed her own officials at the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).
She complained that Defra should never have produced the report. “The economic impact of fracking is a matter for the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC),” she argued. She said the report “was not analytically robust and was not signed off by Ministers”.
This echoes statements made by Amber Rudd, the Under Secretary of State at DECC, on Monday during the Infrastructure Bill debate. The Tory told MPs that the report was prepared by a junior member in another department “and it was not appropriate for them to have done so”.
Labour were quick to attack the government. Maria Eagle, shadow environment secretary, said: “Ministers have responsibility for what is done in their Department. The report has been so heavily redacted that even the name of its author has been removed.”
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Leaked Document Could Shatter UK Shale Dreams
Leaked Document Could Shatter UK Shale Dreams
U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron’s hopes for a British-style shale gas revolution recently took a major hit.
Cameron has promised that his government will be “going all out” to develop Britain’s shale gas resources, which he argues will create new jobs and cut dependence on imported gas.
But a committee made up of members of parliament (MPs) from several political parties issued a damning new report on the state of “fracking” in the United Kingdom. The Environmental Audit Committee published a report that called for a 30-month moratorium on fracking, citing “huge uncertainties” regarding the environmental fallout from widespread drilling. On top of the usual controversies over water supplies, the report says that allowing fracking will upend British climate change goals.
“Ultimately fracking cannot be compatible with our long-term commitments to cut climate-changing emissions unless full-scale carbon capture and storage technology is rolled out rapidly, which currently looks unlikely,” MP and Committee Chair Joan Walley said. “There are also huge uncertainties around the impact that fracking could have on our water supplies, air quality and public health.”
Related: Emergency Tax May Not Be Enough To Save North Sea Oil
The committee report was a political bombshell in London, but the House of Commons overwhelmingly shot down an amendment – by a vote of 308 to 52 – on January 26 that would have banned fracking outright.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Did Alberta Just Break a Fracking Earthquake World Record?
Did Alberta Just Break a Fracking Earthquake World Record?
Hydraulic fracturing, a technology used to crack open difficult oil and gas formations, appears to have set off a swarm of earthquakes near Fox Creek, Alberta, including a record-breaking tremor with a felt magnitude of 4.4 last week.
That would likely make it the largest felt earthquake ever caused by fracking, a development that experts swore couldn’t happen a few years ago.
Fracking operations in British Columbia’s Montney shale generated similar seismic activity of that magnitude last year, and earthquake scientists at Ontario’s Western University are still analyzing the two events to see which is the largest.
“The location of the earthquake is consistent with being induced by hydraulic fracturing operations,” confirmed Peter Murchland, a spokesman for the Alberta Energy Regulator.
“The AER regards all changes in seismicity that have the potential to indicate an increased risk associated with hydrocarbon production seriously,” Murchland added.
Jeffrey Gu, a physics professor at the University of Alberta, said the Alberta Geological Survey and other agencies were investigating the Fox Creek swarm, which hit about 260 kilometres northwest of Edmonton. But Gu said he could not disclose their findings at this time. He offered no details on the scale or scope of the investigation.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
‘The Drop in Oil Price Means We Need More Action on Climate Change Not Less’
‘The Drop in Oil Price Means We Need More Action on Climate Change Not Less’
This month, a powerful article in Nature highlighted yet again that most of the world’s oil, coal and gas needs to stay in the ground, if we want to prevent dangerous climate change. This is the “unburnable carbon” analysis that President Obama and Bank of England Governor Mark Carney have both made mainstream in recent months.
Related, over the last 6 months the world oil price has crashed, catching almost all economists and analysts by surprise. As well as profound economic effects, this crash affects “unburnable carbon” in two broad and opposite ways.
It is leading to cancellations of potential fossil fuel projects, as they become less or non-profitable. Great for stopping colossally dirty projects like Arctic oil and Canadian tar sands. And in the opposite direction, it makes oil cheaper, meaning people use it more. Bad for climate, though good for people’s pockets.
How should Governments react to this? A Government who genuinely thought climate change was a global priority would not sit passively by and let these conflicting effects of the oil price crash on climate sweep over us. It would act. Government surveys show the British public want more action on climate change.
Tax Cuts
Despite this, the sole response to the oil price crash from the UK Government is do the opposite – last week it announced detailed plans for tax cuts for oil companies to drill another 11-21 billion barrels of oil from the ground. That’s way more than even the three billion barrels in the Government’s Wood Review on offshore oil and gas. Climate change impacts got one sentence of dismissal. And yesterday, it drove through a clause in the Infrastructure Bill – with almost no debate – requiring the UK to “maximise economic recovery” of North Sea oil.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Message to the UK: the fracking ‘bridge’ is burning!
Message to the UK: the fracking ‘bridge’ is burning!
The lesson of fracking in the US and Canada is a simple one, writes Naomi Klein. The fracking industry is vicious, brutal and will stop at nothing to get its way. British anti-frackers can celebrate yesterday’s achievements – but the fight ahead will not be an easy one.
On a week-long trip to the UK last fall, I was struck by how quickly the push to open up the country to fracking has been escalating.
Thankfully, activists are mounting avigorous and creative response, and are more than up to the task of galvanizing the public to put a stop to this mad dash to extract.
A notable victory was scored yesterdaywhen MPs forced amendments through the UK government’s Infrastructure Bill to keep fracking out of national parks, areas of outstanding natural beauty, and places where major aquifers would be placed at risk of pollution.
But still MPs failed to impose the fracking moratorium demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, and the fracking industry will still enjoy carte blanche to exploit shale gas across most of the country. The fight ahead will not be an easy one.
In rushing to exploit the UK’s shale gas reserves, the industry has spent millions on public relations and brazenly overridden the democratic will of British citizens by overturning laws that had prevented drilling under homes. The coalition government, meanwhile, has done the sector’s bidding at every turn.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
MPs brand fracking ‘incompatible’ with UK climate targets
MPs brand fracking ‘incompatible’ with UK climate targets
Fracking should be banned because it is incompatible with the UK‘s climate targets, according to the cross-party House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC).
The committee’s report has been rushed out in advance of a series of parliamentary votes this afternoon on the government’s Infrastructure Bill. Ten MPs have tabled an amendment to the bill that would ban fracking “in order to reduce the risk of carbon budgets being breached”.
This amendment also has cross-party support: it is backed by former Conservative environment secretary Caroline Spelman along with two other Conservatives, five Labour MPs and one each for the Liberal Democrats and the Greens.
The Labour Party says it will block UK fracking unless the government agrees to a series of environmental conditions set out in a separate amendment to the Infrastructure Bill.
The committee report and parliamentary votes come at a crucial time for the nascent UK shale gas industry. It is hoping to resume exploration activities, which have been on hold since causing earth tremors in 2011.
Last week, Lancashire council’s planning department said exploratory fracking at two sites should not go ahead, citing concerns over noise and traffic. The council’s planning committee was due to have voted on the plans this week until developer Cuadrilla asked for more time.
Carbon Brief takes you through the EAC‘s conclusions on fracking and the climate, and assesses the evidence behind its findings.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
HYPE, BROKEN PROMISES AND SHALES
HYPE, BROKEN PROMISES AND SHALES
The term shale revolution has been used so much that it almost has no meaning anymore. But were shales ever really the energy panacea promised or merely a self styled hype machine? Would the frenzy in drilling ever have truly taken off if it weren’t for cheap money? These are valid questions which have not been explored adequately because too many investors, journalists and elected officials were caught up in shale mania. But was this ever truly an exercise that would provide long term benefits to American consumers?
It is an inarguable fact that shales have produced copious quantities of hydrocarbons in the past few years but this is not really surprising given that the wells, by their very nature, produce the most oil or gas they will ever produce in the first twelve months or so of their lives. So when the industry engages in a frenzy of drilling and brings many wells online very rapidly and essentially all at once, then it stands to reason that it will look like an enormous success. For a short while.
The problem is that operators have not been able to maintain a stable long term production profile. Looking at the following chart, one can see why.
A great portion of all new wells being drilled in the best of our shale plays are doing nothing more than replacing declines in older wells. And older, in this case, means a mere 4-5 years. Not decades. If one considers the per well production in both the Bakken and the Eagle Ford, it peaked in June, 2010. Although there have been countless wells added since that time, the production per each individual well has never reached that level again. This is highly problematic in the long run.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
