Showing posts with label Hydraulic fracturing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hydraulic fracturing. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

A look back at the work of George Mitchell and the development of fracking

Image Source: insential.com

George Mitchell is not the inventor of hydraulic fracturing but earned the fond title “father of fracking” after pioneering the economic extraction of shale gas. The method was first used in the late 1940s and it was further developed in the 1970s in cooperation with the Department of Energy. Before Mitchell’s innovation, however, no other company used the method to free natural gas from shale.

It was in 1981 when Mitchell, already one of the most influential businessmen in Texas, decided to explore for gas in an unlikely area. He had set his sights on the Barnett Shale, which was located deep under a thick layer of rock around Fort Worth. Previously, other oil and gas companies had already brought up fuel from above and below the shale. That time, Mitchell drilled into the shale and fractured it with highly pressurized fluids to free natural gas and draw it to the surface.


Image Source: sonoraninstitute.org

Many of his peers thought that the decision to use fracking was a mistake. For Mitchell, however, it was a necessary risk because his wells in North Texas were drying up. Mitchell Energy struggled for 15 years to prove that producing reliable and economical gas was possible with fracking.


Image Source: nebb.com

It was only in 1997 that one of the company’s shale gas wells, which drilled in water, sand, and chemical mixture, finally established that fracking can be financially viable over the long term. That time, fracking was building momentum in resurrecting the nation’s oil and gas industry.

Today, credit is given to Mitchell, his perseverance amid 15 years of failure and his courage to look beyond common knowledge for the widespread commercial use of hydraulic fracturing.

Dr. Ali Ghalambor is the author, co-author, and editor of several books and more than 160 technical articles and manuals on hydraulic fracturing and related topics. For more articles about the development of the natural gas industry, visit this Facebook page.

Friday, December 13, 2013

REPOST: Experts Eye Oil and Gas Industry as Quakes Shake Oklahoma


According to this NewYorkTimes article, thousand of earthquakes in Oklahoma has been linked to the disposal of wastewater from oil and gas wells and hydraulic fracturing.



This fall her neighborhood in the northeastern part of this city has been shaken by dozens of minor earthquakes. “We would just have little trembles all the time,” she said.

Even before a magnitude 4.5 quake on Saturday knocked objects off her walls and a stone from above her neighbor’s bay window, Ms. Sexton was on edge.

“People are fed up with the earthquakes,” she said. “Our kids are scared. We’re scared.”

Image Source: nytimes.com
Oklahoma has never been known as earthquake country, with a yearly average of about 50 tremors, almost all of them minor. But in the past three years, the state has had thousands of quakes. This year has been the most active, with more than 2,600 so far, including 87 last week.

While most have been too slight to be felt, some, like the quake on Saturday and a smaller one in November that cracked a bathroom wall in Ms. Sexton’s house, have been sensed over a wide area and caused damage. In 2011, a magnitude 5.6 quake — the biggest ever recorded in the state — injured two people and severely damaged more than a dozen homes, some beyond repair.

State officials say they are concerned, and residents accustomed to tornadoes and hail are now talking about buying earthquake insurance.

“I’m scared there’s going to be a bigger one,” Ms. Sexton said.

Just as unsettling in a state where more than 340,000 jobs are tied to the oil and gas industry is what scientists say may be causing many of the quakes: the widespread industry practice of disposing of billions of gallons of wastewater that is produced along with oil and gas, by injecting it under pressure into wells that reach permeable rock formations.

“Disposal wells pose the biggest risk,” said Austin Holland, a seismologist with the Oklahoma Geological Survey, who is studying the various clusters of quakes around the state.

Oklahoma has more than 4,000 disposal wells for waste from tens of thousands of oil and gas wells. “Could we be looking at some cumulative tipping point? Yes, that’s absolutely possible,” Dr. Holland said. But there could be other explanations for the increase in earthquakes, he added.

Scientists have known for years that injection wells and other human activities can induce earthquakes by changing pressures underground. That can have the effect of “unclamping” old stressed faults so the rocks can slip past each other and cause the ground to shake.

The weight of water behind a new dam in China, for example, is thought to have induced a 2008 quake in Sichuan Province that killed 80,000 people. In Australia, a 1989 quake that killed 13 people was attributed in part to the opposite effect — the removal of millions of tons of coal during more than two centuries of mining.

In other places, including California and Switzerland, enhanced geothermal projects, in which water is pumped into hot rocks deep underground to produce energy, have caused quakes.

In Texas, some earthquakes have been connected to the industry practice of “water flooding,” increasing the yield of older oil wells by pumping water into nearby wells to force the oil out, said Cliff Frohlich, a University of Texas scientist. In other cases, Dr. Frohlich said, just the extraction of oil and gas from a long-producing field has been seen to induce quakes.

The practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking — injecting liquid at high pressures into shale rock — causes very small tremors as the rocks break, releasing trapped oil or gas. The technique has also been linked to a few minor earthquakes — in Oklahoma about a year ago, and in England and British Columbia. Yet unlike the continuing clusters of quakes elsewhere, the fracking-related earthquakes occurred only over short time periods, scientists say.

Of greater potential concern, scientists say, is wastewater disposal — from fracked or more conventional wells. Disposal wells linked to quakes have been shut down in a few states, including Arkansas and Ohio.

Along with oil and gas, water comes out of wells, often in enormous amounts, and must be disposed of continuously. Because transporting water, usually by truck, is costly, disposal wells are commonly located near producing wells.

The oil and gas industry points out that many of Oklahoma’s disposal wells are in areas with no earthquake activity, and that the practice of injecting wastewater has been going on for years.

“We’ve been doing this for a long time and it hasn’t been an issue before,” said Chad Warmington, president of the Oklahoma Oil and Gas Association.

But Dr. Frohlich said that what had changed was where the disposal was occurring. With the boom in production of oil and gas from shale formations, he said, “People are disposing of fluids in places they haven’t before.”

Still, it is difficult to show a definitive link between a group of quakes and nearby disposal wells, and Dr. Holland thinks there may be other explanations for some of the recent quakes, including the largest one, which occurred on a known fault line about 50 miles east of Oklahoma City.

Oklahoma does have natural seismic activity, he noted, and has had a few powerful quakes in the past, including one with a magnitude of 5.5 in 1952 and one estimated at about a magnitude of 7 that the geological record shows occurred 1,300 years ago. He also thinks changes in the water level of a large nearby lake may be responsible for some of the quakes around Oklahoma City, although he says this is not the most likely explanation.

The swarm of quakes has state regulators concerned, but cautious.

“We have to look at what data and scientific evidence supports some connection,” before deciding on steps to manage the risk, said Dana L. Murphy, a commissioner with the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. Theoretically, at least, the commission could order some wells to be shut.

Already the commission has reached an agreement with a disposal well operator in Love County, about 100 miles south of Oklahoma City, to reduce the amount of wastewater injected into his well. The facility had been operating for only two weeks, injecting up to 400,000 gallons of water a day from nearby fracking operations, when earthquakes started occurring in September, including one that toppled a chimney and caused other damage.

All the shaking in the state has people talking about what to do if a bigger one were to hit. “I’ve been through a lot of tornadoes — you can go hide from them,” said Bill Hediger, whose home in Edmond, just north of Oklahoma City, shows cracks in the walls from the magnitude 5.6 quake. “But you can’t hide from an earthquake.”

Dr. Holland said that given the geological record, he could not rule out the possibility that a larger quake may occur in the state.

Ms. Sexton said she was not against the oil and gas industry, but added that if the quakes in her area were definitively linked to disposal wells, they should be shut down.

“It would hurt oil and gas,” she said. “But it’s oil and gas hurting homeowners and making people fearful.”


Ali Ghalambor specializes in drilling trainings and consulting duties that aim to uplift the current status in the world of petroleum engineering. This blog site contains articles related to his expertise.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Study disputes gas leak concern on fracking

Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a process of extracting natural gas or oil applying pressurized fluid deep into the ground so that fractures in rocks will be formed. This process increases rock permeability, which provides pathways for natural gas or oil to move upward.

Image Source: geology.com

At a certain extent, hydraulic fracturing generates concerns and contestation within the country and around the world. Some skeptical individuals and organizations hold their ground until other alternative techniques come up.

For instance, many fear that drilling for shale gas causes huge amounts of gas leaks into the air. However, The New York Times presents a study that contests this. Conducted by the University of Texas and supported by the Environmental Defense Fund and nine petroleum companies, the study reinforces the uses and advantages of hydraulic fracturing, as advocated by several groups that stand strong on their belief that shale gas is a better energy source than coal.

Image Source: news4jax.com

The study showed that fracking makes significantly smaller leaks of methane gas than the Environmental Protection Agency had estimated and shale gas detractors had thought. Furthermore, it stated that 99 percent of methane gas that escapes from new wells is captured through containment measures.

While the researchers of the study expect questions of objectivity, petroleum experts believe that the research and its proponents are reputable and reliable.

Image Source: processingmagazine.com

The oil and gas sector holds an unending interest among oil professionals, such as Dr. Ali Ghalambor. Find more materials about the industry by following this Twitter account.

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Obama administration issues rules governing hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas on public lands

As part of the Obama Administration’s comprehensive strategy to support safe and responsible domestic energy production, the US Department of the Interior announces the issuance of an updated safety standards proposal for hydraulic fracturing on public and Indian lands.

Image Source: freeenterprise.com


This updated proposal was formulated based on feedback on the 2012 initial draft proposal. The highlights single out the importance of sticking to safety standards; enhancing coordination between tribal and federal safety, and upholding flexibility for oil and gas developers.

The New York Times says that under the updated rule, oil companies can keep some components of their drilling fluids secret. They can also run integrity tests on a representative well instead of all wells in a fluid wherein construction methods are the same.

Image Source: discovermagazine.com



While the Obama administration’s intention is to promote responsible energy production and safety and environmental protection on public lands, some environmental advocacy groups and industry officials were critical of the proposed rules.

Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government affairs for Western Energy Alliance, an association of oil companies, remarks that the government fails to justify the economic and scientific aspects of the proposal. Rather, it outwits states and tribes, decreases job creation, and hampers economic advancement.

Image Source: centerforabetterlife.com

No matter what the public speculates about the proposal, there is one thing that everyone must work on: working together with and toward best practices for drilling and protecting human health and the environment.

Dr. Ali Ghalambor has written several significant references on hydraulic fracturing. To access more resources about the topic, follow this Twitter account.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

The fracking debate in the UK

Image Source: globalpost.com



The use of hydraulic fracturing to extract shale gas remains a tricky prospect to mainstream. While this is a groundbreaking (literally) manner of harvesting oil or natural gas, it is also decried as an environmental threat by concerned groups.

In the U.K., there are recent reports of this clash. Protesters are rising up against an exploratory oil drilling project at Balcombe. The worries of activists are the same: water contamination and seismic tremors, which fracking could trigger. Apart from these, environmental groups are also against the industrialization of Britain’s countryside and how the influx of industrialists and their equipment and facilities will adversely affect the communities there.



Image Source: theguardian.com


Meanwhile, British Prime Minister David Cameron has voiced his support for the technology, trumpeting potential economic benefits such as lower energy bills and the generation of more jobs. Other proponents of fracking in the U.K. look to the U.S., which demonstrated that exploiting natural gas reserves can reduce fossil fuel emissions.

Exploratory drilling for gas and oil around Britain has been on-going since 2011, but hasn’t commercially produced shale gas on-shore. Observers doubt there will be major developments within the decade. The opposition is stronger in the U.K. and there are still many details to be worked out by British lawmakers and private corporations. Without a solid agenda for how it will extract and export natural gas, the U.K. may end up missing out on the economic benefits that it has set out to attain.



Image Source: theweek.co.uk


Dr. Ali Ghalambor has co-authored several books on hydraulic fracturing and well productivity. Learn more about hydraulic fracturing and how it has affected the global oil and gas market by following this Twitter page.

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Hydraulic fracturing: Turning unproductive shales into large natural gas fields



State Impact, a reporting project of NPR, defines hydraulic fracturing as a process of extracting natural gas and oil by drilling into the earth’s underground. Natural gas is mostly trapped in coal beds and shale formations, and hydraulic fracturing is used to stimulate these wells and penetrate rock formations. The drilling process utilizes advanced equipment to fracture or crack the ground and the underlying earth layers to ease the flow of natural gas and oil and tease them out.


Image Source: propublica.org


This article from Geoscience News and Information illustrates how the combined work of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling has transformed unproductive shales into some of the largest gas fields worldwide. Previously unproductive rock units that are now potent gas and oil fields are the Bakken Formation, The Marcellus Shale, and Barnett Shale. These rock units have been stimulated and turned into viable gas fields through hydraulic fracturing.


simplified diagram of hydraulic fracturing in the Marcellus Shale
Image Source: geology.com


The combination of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling can yield significant results, and it usually targets previously thought unprofitable rock formations. The technology has been around since 1940, and has gone through controversies such as its possible hazards to groundwater that people convert to drinking water.

In the past, natural gas used to be flared off in oil fields for its little use. But now, with hydraulic fracturing, it has become a substantial international commodity.


Image Source: ridley-thomas.lacounty.gov


Get more information about hydraulic fracturing and other related topics through the ‘Frac Packing Handbook’ by Ali Ghalambor, Ali Syed Ali, and W. David Norman. For more information about the industry, access this Facebook page.

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

EPA conducts a study on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water



Natural gas has a vital role in the world’s pursuit of clean energy. The United States is home to several reserves of commercially viable natural gas exploited through horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies, which allow access to gas in shale formations. This accessibility allows for a vast number of uses for natural gas varying from domestic benefits, power generation, transportation, fertilization, to manufacturing.


Image Source: news.nationalgeographic.com


The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hopes to frame the current clamor for natural gas in terms of boosting the economy, laying out energy security, and keeping it friendly towards the environment and public health. In doing so, it works with stakeholders to make sure that gas extraction proceeds according to environmental standards and laws. Among such efforts is the agency’s ongoing study to explore the plausible impacts of hydraulic fracturing on water resources. The research scope focuses on the full cycle of water use in hydraulic fracturing and the impact to drinking water safety of each step of the process.


Image Source: energy.korea.com


The study’s progress report was released in December 2012. While this progress report summarizes the details of the study, it does not present conclusions yet on the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water safety. Congress awaits the definitive results of the study in 2014.

EPA has worked with stakeholders and industry leaders so that the study would be based on contemporary hydraulic fracturing practices and trends.


Image Source: michiganlcvedfund.org


The ‘Natural Gas Engineering Handbook’ authored by Ali Ghalambor and Boyun Guo, illustrates more concepts about natural gas production. For more information about the subject, follow this Twitter page.

Friday, July 26, 2013

REPOST: Lawmaker, others say state oversight of oil field fracking is lacking



Lawmakers and environmentalists encourage state regulators to strictly monitor the fracking activities around California fields. This Los Angeles Times article has the details. 



Image Source: latimes.com


SACRAMENTO -- Environmentalists including a lawmaker criticized state regulators Wednesday for not adequately tracking and overseeing fracking activity in California oil fields.

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, involves the injection of water and chemicals into the ground to stimulate production in oil wells.

Sen. Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) had requested that California Department of Conservation Director Mark Nechodom answer questions about the oversight as she pushes legislation that would require strict monitoring. The director submitted a letter to lawmakers this week that she said is troubling.

"It is deeply concerning that dangerous acids and Proposition 65 chemicals are being pumped underground without any permits or oversight,” Pavley said in a statement. “Unfortunately, regulators have not deemed these activities worthy of monitoring.”

Nechodom provided Pavley with a list of chemicals and techniques used in the stimulation of oil wells. But he wrote that the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) has “sporadic documentation in well files on well stimulation since the Division does not currently require operators to report well stimulation.”

As a result, he said “extensive file reviews and surveying of the oil and gas industry would be necessary to accurately capture the extent of current practices.”

Pavley said the letter did not dissuade her from pursuing a bill on the issue.

“The Director’s letter reaffirms the need for legislation to force DOGGR to fulfill its legal responsibilities -- protection of life, health, property and natural resources,” she said.

Nechodom’s response that his agency lacks a searchable database on well stimulation operations and resources to review thousands of scanned documents also concerned Briana Mordick, a staff scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“Director Nechodom’s response confirms what we suspected, which is that DOGGR doesn’t know what, where, when, or with what chemicals well stimulation is being used in California,” said Mordick, a former senior geologist for Anadarko Petroleum Corp.

Dr. Ali Ghalambor is the author of the “Well Productivity Handbook.” To get information about Dr. Ghalambor and his works, follow this Twitter page.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

REPOST: Shale Oil And Gas Development Is Heavily Regulated



This Forbes.com article discourses the false claim made by anti-fractivists regarding hydraulic fracturing.




Image Source: forbes.com
In Gasland, Director Josh Fox ’s first fake documentary about hydraulic fracturing, or ‘Fracking’, the false claim was made that the oil and gas industry is somehow exempt from the Clean Air Act and other major federal environmental laws. Mr. Fox continues to make this false claim – often referring to it as the Halliburton HAL +3.7% Loophole – despite it having been completely and thoroughly debunked, even at liberal blog sites like The Daily Kos, which recently had this to say on the subject:

“First, here is the actual truth of the matter … Dick Cheney didn’t do any harm to the Federal Clean Air Act because there is no “Halliburton Loophole” statutory law amendment of the Clean Air Act contained in the Energy Policy Act of 2005; you can read it here for yourself.

Because I’ve been tracking Congressional action on the Federal Clean Air Act for the last 37 years I can tell you with 100% certainty that the Federal Clean Air Act has never been amended to incorporate a categorical oil and gas industry exemption from the fundamental jurisdictional requirements of the Act. Josh Fox’s claim that the oil and gas industry has some sort of categorical exemption from regulation and that hydraulic fracturing and other oil and gas industry process equipment and facilities are exempted from regulation under the Federal Clean Air Act is fabrication and erroneous conflation.”

But Mr. Fox is far from the only anti-fractivist who makes this demonstrably false claim. Late last year, I traveled to Austin to participate in a panel discussion on the Sustainability of Shale Natural Gas at the annual SXSW Eco Conference. My basic role was to be the lone spokesperson for the natural gas industry on a panel whose other three participants were otherwise tilted (predictably) in the opposite direction. Which was fine – I actually enjoy a good debate, at least when the debate is based on facts and focused on real issues surrounding shale gas production.

Unfortunately, as is typical of this kind of setup, that turned out to largely not be the case. One statement made by the representative of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) really stood out from the rest. During his opening remarks, he characterized shale gas development as “an unregulated free for all”, and claimed that the “industry is exempt from RCRA, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act”, and other major federal environmental laws.

That characterization of the oil and gas exploration and production industry would come as a huge surprise to those who work in it. I personally have had a 33 year career in the industry, and know beyond any doubt that NRDC’s contention here is completely false. The fact of the matter is that pretty much everything anyone at an oil and gas company does on a daily basis is heavily regulated at the federal, state, and local levels, often at multiple levels simultaneously. I know that, and could only marvel that the NRDC could somehow remain unaware of it after years of opposition to the industry’s existence.

This reality was really brought home to me recently as I listened to the director of Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) for a large independent natural gas producer go through a presentation about the various state and federal laws and regulations his team of 35 people is responsible for ensuring the company be in compliance with. Note that this company employs around 700 people, so fully 5% of its workforce works full time to ensure compliance, and that does not include the daily efforts by the company’s field and office personnel to ensure compliance in their own activities.

At one point, the HSE Director displayed a slide listing the major federal acts the company must comply with. Lo and behold, that list included “RCRA, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act” and other major environmental laws like the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and OSHA, the act that governs workplace safety.

The HSE Director’s next slide listed, in very small print, all the various provisions of just the Clean Air Act that apply to exploration and production activities. If I tried to list them all here I’d run out of space, so I won’t try to do it. But one key point to understand is that last August, the EPA finalized a major new rulemaking related to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) – governed by the Clean Air Act – that apply specifically to oil & gas E&P operations.

Is it really possible that the folks at the NRDC somehow missed completely a rulemaking process that dragged on for almost a year? Or was the NRDC spokesman just engaging in the very common practice preferred by these anti-development groups these days of throwing out inaccurate, hyperbolic statements about the oil and gas industry, expecting to go unquestioned on them by a sympathetic news media or a general public that doesn’t know any better?

While this practice is no doubt a useful way for anti-development groups to raise money by creating a perception of a never-ending crisis, it is a wholly non-productive exercise in what ought to be a quest to find real solutions to real issues that do exist around the development of this nation’s incredible wealth of shale oil and gas resources.

Are the existing regulations around shale gas development perfect? Probably not. Could they use some modernization? Probably so, and many states with significant shale development – like Texas, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Wyoming – are heavily engaged in that process right now. But characterizing the oil and gas E&P industry as “an unregulated free for all” is simply not true, and serves no useful purpose from a problem solving perspective. Those who engage in this sort of intentional misleading commentary, whether it be in presentations, written articles, speeches, panel discussions or filmmaking are performing a great disservice to the public.

Dr. Ali Ghalambor has served as consultant to numerous petroleum production and service companies. This Facebook page provides updates concerning the oil and gas production.

Friday, June 28, 2013

REPOST: Why such hysteria over fracking?

How important is it for the regulators to continue reviewing the rules that apply to hydraulic fracturing? This Los Angeles article will help us understand the issue. 


Fracking is short for hydraulic fracturing
Image Source: latimes.com


Is hydraulic fracturing — used for more than 60 years to produce oil and natural gas — safe?

The "safe fracking" question has been asked and answered many times over by government regulators, scientists and other technical experts, and they have concluded that hydraulic fracturing is a fundamentally safe technology. Interior secretaries and EPA heads have repeatedly said that fracking can be done, and is being done, so that it doesn't present environmental or public health problems.

That's been the case for decades, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, a former petroleum engineer and a former president of REI, the outdoor equipment retailer, said in May. Jewell's predecessor, Ken Salazar, testified to Congress that hydraulic fracturing "has been done safely hundreds of thousands of times" and warned lawmakers against anti-fracking "hysteria."

As far back as 1995, the Environmental Protection Agency studied whether hydraulic fracturing contaminated drinking water. The EPA studied a site in Alabama at the request of environmentalists and found "no evidence" of "any contamination or endangerment of underground sources of drinking water." In 2004, the agency conducted a broader study and also found fracking "poses little or no threat" to water supplies.

In 2009, another study from the U.S. Department of Energy and the Ground Water Protection Council — an interstate body of environmental regulators — concluded that fracking is a "safe and effective" technology for producing energy from deep geological formations like California's Monterey Shale.

More recently, Stanford University geophysicist Mark Zoback, who's also served as an advisor to the Obama administration, confirmed that fluids used in hydraulic fracturing "have not contaminated any water supply," and with more than a mile of rock separating deep shale formations and shallow drinking water aquifers, "it is very unlikely they could." In California, it is worth noting, more than 80% of hydraulic fracturing occurs in parts of Kern County where there is no potable groundwater.

Anti-fracking forces respond to such good news by finding new ways to scare the public. That's why you hear more and more allegations about air quality, water use and earthquakes. On air quality, they are ignoring that California's oil and gas industry already operates under some of the world's tightest emissions controls, and such controls have worked well in states where fracking and drilling are more widespread than in California.

For example, in Colorado, regulators have reported "decreases in the levels of many organic pollutants associated with oil and gas operations" during a dramatic rise in energy production. And in Texas in recent years, regulators responded to air quality fears in the Dallas-Fort Worth area with round-the-clock monitoring, and found "no levels of concern for any chemicals" and "no immediate health concerns from air quality."

Next, activists exaggerate problems associated with water usage and wastewater disposal associated with hydraulic fracturing. In states where hydraulic fracturing is used much more frequently, and where many times as much water is used as in California, the process accounts for less than 1% of total water demand, according to the Department of Energy and the Groundwater Protection Council. In addition, wastewater can be treated and reused, minimizing both issues.

In California, we use much less water than other states because of our geology. For perspective, the amount of water used in all of the hydraulic fracturing jobs in California last year was about the same amount of water that the state's golf courses consumed in half a day.

As for earthquakes, a yearlong study released in 2012, the first of its kind in the state, at the Inglewood Oil Field in the Baldwin Hills area found "no detectable effects on vibration" — and no water or air quality problems either — from hydraulic fracturing. Perhaps that's because, as Zoback has explained, the amount of seismic energy released during hydraulic fracturing is about the same as "as a gallon of milk falling off a kitchen counter." In fact, the National Research Council concluded last year that hydraulic fracturing does not pose a high risk of inducing earthquakes. The separate process of injecting oil and gas wastewater into deep disposal wells, while it does carry some risk, has never triggered an earthquake in California.

Despite the sound bipartisan defeat of legislation that would impose a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, some activist groups are still pressing lawmakers to ban the technology. There is no reason to impose a moratorium or ban on a technology that is fundamentally safe, will lead to more jobs and economic growth and will reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Regulators should continue to review the rules that apply to hydraulic fracturing, and find ways to improve them to ensure that the public has the information it needs about the process. The facts clearly show that this technology can be used safely while regulatory updates are made.

Internationally renowned for his expertise and remarkable contributions, Dr. Ali Ghalambor has worked with the finest universities and organizations such as the University of Louisiana, the Tenneco Oil Company, and the United Nations.Follow this Twitter page for more updates.

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

REPOST: Fracking bills flop after gusher of opposition cash, report says

Several bills on hydraulic fracturing have been opposed by the California Legislature. This Los Angeles Times article has the story.



Campaign contributions from the oil industry flooded into the California Legislature before it killed several bills that would have closely regulated the use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to get oil and gas from the ground, a nonprofit group reports.

In the two years ending Dec. 31, 2012, oil companies Chevron, British Petroleum, ExxonMobil and Valero Energy contributed $464,450 to state legislators, according to MapLight, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization.

Of 12 bills on fracking, 10 stalled or were voted down by the deadline last month, including one, AB 1323, that would have imposed a moratorium.

Interest groups opposing AB 1323 contributed 7.1 times as much money as groups supporting it, MapLight concluded, using data from the National Institute of Money in State Politics.

State lawmakers voting against the bill received, on average, 31 times as much money from opposing groups as supporting groups, MapLight found.

It also said lawmakers who didn't vote at all received five times as much money from opposing groups as from supporting groups. All of those who withheld their votes are Democrats.

The issue is not dead for the year.

One of the bills still pending, SB 4 by Sen Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills), would require public notice and groundwater testing on fracking projects, but Pavley has agreed to remove from the bill a requirement for a moratorium if a study of the practice is not completed by 2015.


More pertinent information about Ali Ghalambor can be found at this blog site.

Monday, June 17, 2013

REPOST: Chevron CEO: Industry must address 'legitimate' 'fracking' concerns

Several measures to impose tighter regulations over hydraulic fracturing have been requisitioned by the chief executive of Chevron Corp. Read the story from this Los Angeles Times article:



Chevron CEO said fracking concerns are legitimate
Image Source: latimes.com


The chief executive of oil giant Chevron Corp. says that oil and gas producers must regulate themselves more tightly over hydraulic fracturing to address "legitimate concerns" that the practice is unsafe and harmful to the environment.

At an event for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, John Watson said the energy industry must work harder to police itself as the public learns more about so-called fracking, the controversial technique that involves injecting large volumes of chemically laced water and sand deep into the ground to release oil or gas.

"There are some risks out there. Some are overstated. But we have to engage them either way," said Watson, according to Bloomberg. "Public expectations are very high, and there is no reason they shouldn't be high."

Watson brought up the 2010 BP oil spill, which gushed millions of barrels of oil before it was finally capped after 87 days, the report said. And with fracking getting at previously unrecoverable oil and gas, more people are pondering the risks and possibilities of the technology.

Chevron has suffered its share of accidents since 2011, including a fire at its Richmond, Calif., refinery and two deaths at a Nigerian drilling rig operated by a subsidiary. Watson and several other top executives saw their compensation cut following these occurrences, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Fracking is a hot topic of late in California. Some industry experts say the state could enjoy a huge oil boom in the future thanks to the Monterey Shale, an oil deposit that spans 1,750 square miles through Southern and Central California.

But environmental concerns could stymie efforts to drill. Democrats in California's Assembly have introduced several measure to impose tighter regulations and impose a moratorium on fracking in the state.


Dr. Ali Ghalambor has delivered numerous technical presentations on various aspects of petroleum production such as drilling, well completion, well planning, and well integrity. For more updates on policies affecting the energy industry, visit this Facebook page.

Sunday, June 16, 2013

Rethinking arguments against fracking



Environmentalists are clear about their opposition to fracking. It is better to ban the process entirely instead of treading into unknown territory only to end up with a mistake that could pollute other valuable resources.



Image Source: inhabitat.com


In some parts of the globe where oil supply is abundant, however, hydraulic fracturing is already widely accepted and the energy industry forges ahead without much opposition. The benefits of accepting the process with proper regulations are also becoming clearer with explorations of underground shale gas reserves underway. In using a proven method to harvest this resource, many countries have a chance at creating more jobs and increasing energy security.



Image Source: insideclimatenews.org


Still, it would take time before many countries can lift their moratoriums on fracking. More studies and examples would have to be presented to convince the majority that the process can be used without dire consequences for the environment.

Meanwhile, many nations are already looking at the US for models in regulating fracking. Many are worried about whether fracking can be done safely and about how such an outcome can be achieved. To answer these concerns, experts maintain that the way to reap the economic benefits of hydraulic fracturing and large-scale oil and gas production without adversely affecting the environment and the health of the people is through strict regulation which can be formulated through the cooperation of industry experts and environmental groups.



Image Source: appvoices.org


Dr. Ali Ghalambor has previously served as the head consultant to more than 50 petroleum production and service companies. Stay abreast on the developments in the energy industry by following this Twitter page.

Fracking regulations: Balancing economic growth and environmental protection



The use of hydraulic fracturing for high-volume oil and gas production presents the nation with large opportunities that may come with dire consequences to the state of the environment.



Image Source: guardian.co.uk


For one thing, pursuing developments in this area of the energy industry could generate thousands of jobs. Meanwhile, the abundant supply of domestically produced oil and gas can be used to offer alternatives that could help them recover faster from the effects of the recession. There may also be more than enough supply, thus opening up opportunities for export.

However, those who oppose the use of fracking to produce natural gas point out that the effects of the process are still unclear. Many studies need to be conducted to determine the health and environmental impact of fracking because many fear that it could cause pollution and it may significantly deplete water resources.



Image Source: blogs.bakerhughes.com


While the debate goes on, lawmakers in Illinois have gone ahead with a measure to create strict regulations for high-volume oil and gas drilling. The legislation was created through collaboration between some key players in the energy industry and an environmental group.

Strict regulations are seen as a way for the energy industry to move ahead and take advantage of the opportunity presented by the abundant supply of natural gas in several areas while taking measures to protect the environment and the health of the people.



Hydraulic Fracturing - Frac
Image Source: hydraulicfracturinghq.org


Dr. Ali Ghalambor is the author, co-author, and editor of several books and more than 160 technical articles and manuals that discuss various aspects of petroleum production. Find more updates on the developments in the energy industry on this Twitter page.

Thursday, June 13, 2013

REPOST: U.S. oil and gas reserves up by a third, new report says

A new data says U.S. oil and gas reserves are up by about a third due to hydraulic fracturing. Neela Banerjee of Los Angeles Times has the story.



Fracking
Image Source: latimes.com


WASHINGTON -- Reserves of oil and gas that can be developed using current technology are 35% greater in 2013 than in 2011, according to a new report by the Energy Information Administration, the research branch of the Energy Department.

The rise in estimated domestic reserves to 223 billion barrels of oil equivalents, which include crude oil and gas, stems in large part from the inclusion of reserves found in shale formations. Increased use of production methods such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, have made oil and gas trapped in tight geological formations economically recoverable.

The United States is second to Russia in the amount of technically recoverable barrels of shale oil, at 58 billion. It is fourth among countries with reserves of technically recoverable shale gas reserves, with 665 trillion cubic feet. China has the largest shale gas reserves, 1,115 trillion cubic feet.

The Energy Information Administration said “32% of the total estimated natural gas resources are in shale formations, while 10% of estimated oil resources are in shale or tight formations.”

"Today's report indicates a significant potential for international shale oil and shale gas, though the extent to which technically recoverable shale resources will prove to be economically recoverable is not yet clear," EIA Administrator Adam Sieminski said.

The data bolster predictions that the U.S. will be able to decrease imports of fossil fuels as it ramps up domestic production, including oil in North Dakota and the Eagle Ford formation in Texas and natural gas in the Marcellus shale formation in western Pennsylvania.

But the energy boom has unlocked controversy along with opportunity. Dozens of communities around the country have passed limits on fracking because of concerns about possible air and water pollution and heavy truck traffic.

Fracking involves shooting water laced with chemicals and sand deep underground to shatter rock formations and tap deposits of oil and gas. Many communities have expressed worries that the process could lead to contamination of local water resources with fracking fluid or the migration of methane and other gases and minerals into water supplies.


A leader in the oil and gas sector, Dr. Ali Ghalambor has over 35 years of industrial and academic merits. He has also provided consultation services to petroleum production and service organizations in both private and government sectors. More about Dr. Ghalambor and industry-related updates can be found on this Facebook page.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

REPOST: Germany drops fracking law until after September's election

Plans to regulate fracking in Germany were  postponed until after September's election. Find out the reason behind it in this Reuters.com article.

* Fracking in Germany hampered by legal uncertainty

* With environmental concerns, technology splits opinion

* Plan for national regulations scrapped for now

BERLIN, June 4 (Reuters) - The German government has suspended plans to regulate fracking until after September's election, prolonging the uncertainty that has hampered development of the gas extraction technology in Europe's biggest economy.

Hydraulic fracturing, which involves pumping water and chemicals at high pressure into the ground, is criticised by environmentalists, who warn of potential seismic effects and water pollution, and political opinion is split on whether to embrace it as a path to cheaper energy.

Angela Merkel's centre-right government had drawn up legislation laying out the conditions for exploration and imposing restrictions on where drilling could take place, but that has now been put on hold.

"The fracking law has failed," Horst Meierhofer, a member of the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) who share power with Merkel's conservatives, told Reuters. Senior conservatives also said the plans had been put on hold.

The law was unlikely to have passed, given resistance from opposition Social Democrats (SPD) and Greens who could block it in the upper house of parliament.

Merkel, riding high in the polls, is seeking a third term in Sept. 22 elections, but it is unclear what sort of a coalition she may be able to form and it is possible she will have to join forces with parties currently in opposition.


Dr. Ali Ghalambor and Boyun Guo have updated their best-selling manual to provide the latest in natural gas production. For more updates on the developments in the energy industry, visit this Facebook page.

In defense: LNG as a domestic and export product



Various environmentalist groups are calling for a stop to all fracking operations because of the environmental risks involved, and this is likely where most of the opposition to liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a domestic and export product is coming from. Advocates of the product, however, insist that the product itself is not as unsafe as most of the public would think.




Video Source: youtube.com



Peter Micciche, manager of ConocoPhillips’ Kenai LNG Facility in Alaska, previously shared some facts about LNG that could change how the public perceives it. In his demo, he points out that LNG is less volatile than other hydrocarbon products. As such, a predominant misconception about it leading to massive explosions due to transport mishaps is unlikely to happen.

To liquefy natural gas, it needs to be cooled in a processing facility to about minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit, and then it can be transported to an insulated container. As long as the container releases pressure, the LNG is not going to explode.


Image Source: gasdetection.com


Micciche also demonstrates in the video above how safe the supercooled substance is. One demonstration, which involved pouring LNG into a fish bowl, should serve to dispel fears in transport that are linked to some major oil spills that have occurred in the past.

Meanwhile, LNG retains its appeal to oil and gas companies which are pushing for the widespread use of the product as an industrial and transport fuel. Many also see that with the abundant supply, LNG could also be pushed as an export product.



Image Source: lngworldnews.com


Dr. Ali Ghalambor has worked with more than 50 petroleum production and service companies as a top consultant for petroleum engineering matters. Find the latest developments in the natural gas industry on this Twitter page.

Sunday, June 2, 2013

New rules for fracking on public lands



The US Department of the Interior has recently released an updated draft proposal for a new set of rules that would govern hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas on public lands. This update on the proposal drafted about a year ago is reported to be a part of the Obama Administration’s all-of-the-above strategy to support safe and responsible domestic energy production.


Image Source: news.enersciences.com


The update on the draft proposal has kept the three main components of the proposal in 2012. Operators still need to: disclose the chemicals they use in fracturing activities on public lands, run well-bore integrity tests to make sure that the fluids used during operations don’t contaminate groundwater, and have a water management plan to ensure that fluids that flow back to the surface are handled properly.


Image Source: ecowatch.com


While the proposal is still subject to a 30-day public comment period, however, it has already drawn the ire of environmentalist groups for the allowances it gives to operators. With the new rule, operators have the option to keep some components (such as proprietary compounds) secret, and well-integrity tests can be done on a representative well instead of all wells in the field.

In light of the criticism, the Interior maintains that the new proposal ensures that best practices will be used to ensure steady development in the industry while protecting human health and the environment. And while several groups oppose the use of fracking, the fact still remains that it has been done safely for decades and that it has great potential in significantly increasing domestic resources and improving the economy.


Image Source: matternetwork.com


Dr. Ali Ghalambor has delivered numerous technical presentations on various aspects of petroleum production such as drilling, well completion, well planning, and well integrity. For more updates on policies affecting the energy industry, follow this Twitter page.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

REPOST: More Scientific Evidence Linking Fracking and Earthquakes

Significant earthquakes occurring within the United States are linked to hydraulic fracturing. This Huffington Post article has the details.

As the practice of hydraulic fracturing to produce natural gas continues to spread not only in the U.S. but worldwide, the scientific community has increasingly focused on the environmental consequences of the technique. The most worrisome side effect of "fracking" is the rise of earthquakes in areas where the practice is extensive.

The latest evidence comes in the form of an article in the March 26 issue of Geology, a publication of the Geological Society of America.

Entitled "Potentially induced earthquakes in Oklahoma, USA: Links between wastewater injection and the 2011 Mw 5.7 earthquake sequence," the study was coauthored by University of Oklahoma Geophysics Professor Katie Keranen, U.S. Geological Survey geophysicist Dr. Elizabeth Cochran and Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory's seismologist Dr. Heather Savage and Dr. Geoffrey Abers.

The study focused its research on seismic activity in Oklahoma over the past two years and concluded that a 4.8-magnitude earthquake centered near Prague on Nov. 5, 2011, was "induced" by the injection wells. Two subsequent earthquakes, including a 5.7-magnitude "event" the following day, was the biggest in contemporary state history, were caused by the first earthquake and existing tectonic stresses in the earth.

Oklahoma's Nov. 6, 2011 earthquake was the state's largest recorded with modern instrumentation. Two people were injured in the quake, which destroyed 14 homes, buckled pavement and was felt in 17 states, as far north as Wisconsin.

Professor Keranen said during an interview that there is excellent seismic data to back up the paper's conclusions, stating, "The evidence that we collected supports this interpretation. We can say several things with certainty: That the earthquakes begin within hundreds of meters of the injection wells in the units they inject into, so spatially we don't have much doubt, there is a direct spatial link."

The credentials of Keranen's coauthors are impressive. Dr. Abers is Associate Director of Seismology, Geology and Tectonophysics of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and Dr. Savage Lamont, Assistant Research Director, while in October 2011, President Barack Obama named Dr. Cochran a recipient of a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers for her contributions to the understanding of earthquake physics and earthquake triggering, the physical properties and geometry of earthquake fault zones and their evolution after earthquakes, and to the development of a new method of earthquake monitoring using low-cost earthquake sensors, the "Quake-Catcher Network (QCN)."

The pair's methodology was thorough. The paper reported that within 24 hours of the first earthquake Dr. Keranen and Oklahoma Geological Survey research seismologist Austin Holland set up seismic recorders in the area. The Geology study reports that 1,183 aftershocks were recorded by the seismic network and subsequently examined, of which 798 were studied closely.

Oklahoma's official seismologist, the Geological Survey's Austin Holland is skeptical of the link between injection wells and earthquakes, stating that more research is needed, with the OGS stating, "The interpretation that best fits current data is that the Prague Earthquake Sequence was the result of natural causes." Holland's view is, not surprisingly, shared by the Corporation Commission and the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association, a trade group that lobbies for the interests of oil and gas producers.

Farther afield, seismologists suspect that oil and gas activity may have triggered earthquakes in Texas, Arkansas, Colorado and Ohio. States have adopted differing approaches to the issue, but there is now no doubt that the seismic issue is beginning to impact state legislatures considering fracking activities. Regulators in Arkansas voted to ban injection wells from one particular region after a series of earthquakes rattled the state two years ago. Oil and gas regulators in Colorado now require a review by a state seismologist before injection well permits are issued, and Illinois has passed legislation requiring injection wells to stop operating if related earthquakes cause a public safety risk. But as of yet, earthquake risk has not impacted state fracking regulations in California, Texas, New York or Oklahoma.

In any case, it would appear that Holland and his fellow skeptics will not have long to wait to comment yet again on local earthquakes, as on March 4, the U.S. Geological Survey reported that a 3.5-magnitude earthquake struck southern Oklahoma, also centered around Prague.

In the last four years, the number of quakes in the middle of the United States surged 11-fold from the three decades prior.

Something to ponder when you read the hydrocarbon industry rubbishes the latest scientific research on fracking as "fuzzy science."

Dr. Ali Ghalambor has published several notable works valuable to the oil and gas sector. Find more information about him by following this Twitter page.

Friday, May 17, 2013

REPOST: Interior Department offers new rules for 'fracking'


Federal standards gained criticism from environmentalists because of hydraulic fracturing. What was the action made to address the issue? This Los Angeles Times article has the details.





'Fracking'
Image Source: latimes.com


WASHINGTON — The Interior Department proposed new rules to regulate hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas on federal land Thursday, drawing criticism from environmentalists that it had weakened an earlier draft to placate industry.

Industry officials were not mollified, however, reiterating their objections to federal standards. Last year, they criticized the department's earlier draft rules as inflexible and onerous.

"We are proposing some common-sense updates that increase safety while also providing flexibility and facilitating coordination with states and tribes," Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said. "As we continue to offer millions of acres of America's public lands for oil and gas development, it is important that the public has full confidence that the right safety and environmental protections are in place."

The changes did not satisfy industry officials.

"States have been successfully regulating fracking for decades, including on federal lands, with no incident of contamination that would necessitate redundant federal regulation," said Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government and public affairs for Western Energy Alliance, a Denver-based trade group. "While the current rule is better than the first impractical rule, DOI still has not justified the rule from an economic or scientific point of view."

High-volume hydraulic fracturing involves shooting millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals underground to crack shale formations and unlock oil and gas. Companies resist disclosing what chemicals they use.

Critics insist that a federal standard is needed to avoid the states' patchwork of rules, some of which are controversial or weak. They want to know what chemicals are being injected, and they want to ensure that air and water supplies are protected.

Environmentalists criticized the latest rules for allowing companies to submit a list of fracking chemicals after a well has been fractured, not before. The draft rules also allow companies to withhold information about chemicals they consider trade secrets. Nor do the rules call for baseline monitoring of nearby air or water before fracking and after.

The Interior Department will accept public comments on the draft rules for 30 days after their publication in the Federal Register.

"These rules protect industry, not people," said Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "They are riddled with gaping holes that endanger clean, safe drinking water supplies for millions of Americans nationwide. This draft is a blueprint for business-as-usual industrialization of our landscapes."

Dr. Ali Ghalambor is well-known for his expertise in the field of petroleum engineering. Follow this Twitter page for more updates.