Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas on Drinking Water Resources (External Review Draft) | EPA’s Study of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas and Its Potential Impact on Drinking Water Resources

?deid=244651

  • It’s Official: #EPA Says Fracking Pollutes Drinking Water
    http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/04/epa-fracking-pollutes-drinking-water

    “Despite industry’s obstruction, EPA found that fracking pollutes water in a number of ways,” said Earthworks policy director Lauren Pagel. “That’s why industry didn’t cooperate. They know fracking is an inherently risky, dirty process that doesn’t bear close, independent examination.”

    The report looked at water use at five stages of the water-intensive process: use of the available water supply for fracking; the mixing of chemicals with water to create fracking fluid; the flowback of the fluid after it has been injected underground to fracture shale deposits to release oil or gas; treatment of the wastewater byproduct of fracking; and the injection wells frequently used to dispose of fracking wastewater when the process is complete.

    #fracturation_hydraulique #eau #pollution

    • La fracturation hydraulique n’aurait pas d’impact majeur sur l’eau, selon l’EPA | Martin Croteau | Gaz de schiste
      http://www.lapresse.ca/environnement/dossiers/gaz-de-schiste/201506/04/01-4875452-la-fracturation-hydraulique-naurait-pas-dimpact-majeur-sur-leau-

      L’agence relève cependant plusieurs cas où des forages pétroliers ou gaziers ont entraîné la contamination de sources d’eau. Dans certains cas, des failles dans la conception ou la construction du coffrage de ciment des puits ont entraîné les fuites de produits chimiques ou d’hydrocarbures dans la nappe phréatique.

      « Le nombre de cas, par contre, était petit en comparaison du nombre total de puits de fracturation hydraulique », peut-on lire dans le document.

      Le site Inside Climate News, citant une demi-douzaine d’anciens employés de l’EPA, des sources politiques et plus de 200 pages de correspondance officielle, a rapporté en mars que l’étude de l’agence avait été minée par le manque de coopération de l’industrie pétrolière et gazière.

      L’EPA reconnaît d’ailleurs qu’elle n’est pas en mesure d’établir le nombre de fuites dans la grande majorité des États producteurs. Elle ajoute qu’elle dispose de données « insuffisantes » sur les sources d’eau avant et après les forages.

    • Le cœur de l’Executive summary (qui fait tout de même 25 pages…)
      http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/hfstudy/recordisplay.cfm?deid=244651

      Major Findings
      From our assessment, we conclude there are above and below ground mechanisms by which hydraulic fracturing activities have the potential to impact drinking water resources. These mechanisms include water withdrawals in times of, or in areas with, low water availability; spills of hydraulic fracturing fluids and produced water; fracturing directly into underground drinking water resources; below ground migration of liquids and gases; and inadequate treatment and discharge of wastewater.
      We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States. Of the potential mechanisms identified in this report, we found specific instances where one or more mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells. The number of identified cases, however, was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells. This finding could reflect a rarity of effects on drinking water resources, but may also be due to other limiting factors. These factors include: insufficient pre- and post-fracturing data on the quality of drinking water resources; the paucity of long-term systematic studies; the presence of other sources of contamination precluding a definitive link between hydraulic fracturing activities and an impact; and the inaccessibility of some information on hydraulic fracturing activities and potential impacts.
      Below, we provide a synopsis of the assessment’s key findings, organized by each stage of the hydraulic fracturing water cycle.

      Donc,
      • oui, il peut y avoir des effets (on a identifié les mécanismes)
      • on n’en a pas trouvé beaucoup (relativement au nombre de forages)
      • mais on n’a pas toutes les informations
      C’est bien ce que décrit La Presse.

      Le reste est à l’avenant. Il y a eu des forages dans 25 états, au total entre 25000 et 30000 par an entre 2011 et 2014. Le pourcentage de puits où il y a eu des fuites n’a pu être estimé que pour 2 états et il est compris entre 0,4% et 12,2%.

      La conclusion de l’Executive Summary (beaucoup de redites…) sur le même mode : #oui_mais_pas_beaucoup_cependant_on_n'a_pas_les_données

      Through this national-level assessment, we have identified potential mechanisms by which hydraulic fracturing could affect drinking water resources. Above ground mechanisms can affect surface and ground water resources and include water withdrawals at times or in locations of low water availability, spills of hydraulic fracturing fluid and chemicals or produced water, and inadequate treatment and discharge of hydraulic fracturing wastewater. Below ground mechanisms include movement of liquids and gases via the production well into underground drinking water resources and movement of liquids and gases from the fracture zone to these resources via pathways in subsurface rock formations.

      We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States. Of the potential mechanisms identified in this report, we found specific instances where one or more of these mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells. The cases occurred during both routine activities and accidents and have resulted in impacts to surface or ground water. Spills of hydraulic fracturing fluid and produced water in certain cases have reached drinking water resources, both surface and ground water. Discharge of treated hydraulic fracturing wastewater has increased contaminant concentrations in receiving surface waters. Below ground movement of fluids, including gas, most likely via the production well, have contaminated drinking water resources. In some cases, hydraulic fracturing fluids have also been directly injected into drinking water resources, as defined in this assessment, to produce oil or gas that co-exists in those formations.

      The number of identified cases where drinking water resources were impacted are small relative to the number of hydraulically fractured wells. This could reflect a rarity of effects on drinking water resources, or may be an underestimate as a result of several factors. There is insufficient pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data on the quality of drinking water resources. This inhibits a determination of the frequency of impacts. Other limiting factors include the presence of other causes of contamination, the short duration of existing studies, and inaccessible information related to hydraulic fracturing activities.

    • UPDATED: Newsweek, Wash. Times Publish False Headlines About EPA Fracking Study | Blog | Media Matters for America
      http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/06/04/newsweek-wash-times-publish-false-headlines-abo/203890

      Within hours of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) releasing a study on hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” Newsweek and The Washington Times published online articles with headlines that falsely claimed the EPA determined fracking does not pollute drinking water. However, while the EPA said it found no evidence that fracking has led to “widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States,” the study also identified “specific instances” where fracking “led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells.” 

      In its headline, Newsweek asserted: “Fracking Doesn’t Pollute Drinking Water, EPA Says.” The Washington Times’ similar headline, “EPA: Fracking doesn’t harm drinking water,” was also adopted by The Drudge Report, a highly influential conservative news aggregator. 

      But the EPA study said none of those things.