A recently released U.S. Congressional report sheds some light on the toxic stew of chemicals used in the increasingly prevalent practice of hydraulic fracturing by the oil and gas industry.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, involves injecting massive quantities of water and chemicals into rock formations deep underground to release natural gas and oil.
The 30-page Congressional report determined that 14 of the top oil and gas producers injected 866-million gallons of chemicals, including known or suspected carcinogens such as benzene, into wells.
With conventional oil and gas reserves on the decline, fracking is becoming increasingly common practice in the U.S. and Canada.
Landowners and environmentalists say fracking can contaminate underground aquifers — an accusation industry has long denied.
Yet, in Canada the industry seems to be getting a pass. Many companies simply refuse to release a full list of chemicals, citing the mixtures are proprietary knowledge.
According to Alberta’s Energy Resources Conservation Board, more than 168,000 fracturing operations have occurred in the province.
Meanwhile, the Quebec government recently announced a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, saying more research is needed.
“There are environmental and health concerns here that the science just isn’t able to give us good answers to, and those are questions we should have answers to,” says Matt Horne, director of B.C. energy solutions for the Pembina Institute.
“And those questions are just as relevant in B.C. and Alberta.”
Comments: 11
Robert wrote:
on Apr 21st, 2011 at 8:39am Report Abuse
AlanH wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13053040
As usual, we seem to be diving into the pool before we know what's under the surface (puns intended)
Alan
Calgary
on Apr 22nd, 2011 at 5:21pm Report Abuse
officematt2002 wrote:
on Apr 24th, 2011 at 3:10pm Report Abuse
HeavyMetalHeathen wrote:
on Apr 25th, 2011 at 11:07am Report Abuse
Editor Drew Anderson wrote:
on Apr 25th, 2011 at 12:02pm Report Abuse
laricasurf wrote:
on Apr 26th, 2011 at 6:53pm Report Abuse
officematt2002 wrote:
on Apr 26th, 2011 at 7:45pm Report Abuse
laricasurf wrote:
Speaking of Mrs. Reading Comprehension...(hint-I'm referring to you (officematt2002) again).
on Apr 27th, 2011 at 5:43pm Report Abuse
officematt2002 wrote:
on Apr 27th, 2011 at 6:34pm Report Abuse
Clairvoyant wrote:
Does hydraulic fracturing have risks? Duh. What does not have risks? Perhaps during the Quebec moratorium, there may be some intelligent discussion of hydraulic fracturing, of the data that goes into a frac job (gradients, stress fields, caprock, ...), of things that can go wrong, of the impacts if things go wrong, of equipment and procedures and training to minimize the risk of things going wrong, of new ideas to further decrease the risks, of the benefits to society (ok for those of you who still make a living in subsistence agriculture, ploughing with sticks, hand seeding, grinding your grain on a rock, and heating & lighting your soddy with dung, there may not be a lot of benefit from an economic supply of natural gas), ...
Would it be possible in this discussion forum to have some positive ideas on how to decrease risks while maximizing benefits? Come on Pembina Institute, some constructive ideas please!
on May 6th, 2011 at 4pm Report Abuse
antielvis wrote:
on May 13th, 2011 at 8:42pm Report Abuse
Post comment: (Login or Register)