Shale Drillers Turn on Each Other as Toxic Water Leaks Hit Biggest US Oil Field
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
Over a decade ago I was searching for a dissertation topic and a self-reporting fracking site had come online (only CO and TX were required to track IIRC) that showed promise for helping to assess impact.
Before jumping blindly into the data, I interviewed several former field workers and engineering professors. The consistent narrative was that water spills with the fracking chemicals where extremely common and only had to be reported under a very limited set of situations, if they were even reported at all.
To the person, the field hands were personally worried about future cancers and other health conditions. All the field hands had since moved on to graduate school themselves, several in medicine.
Further, not all the chemicals being leaked, spilled, or entered into the water supply via bad casings were reported, as any that had trade secrets (at the time and to the best of my recollection) were excluded.
EDIT: https://archive.is/gaQ5x
The amounts of water involved are truly remarkable.
it's unsurprising because in all human endeavors, success has many parents, while failure is always an orphan. Has nothing to do with fracking.
I wish you had read OP's comment more carefully:
> Further, not all the chemicals being leaked... were reported, as any that had trade secrets (at the time and to the best of my recollection) were excluded.
The exact mix of chemicals used in fracking fluids is proprietary -- in all likelihood not because it's so valuable as a trade secret, but as an excuse not to report the presumably toxic / carcinogenic contents to the public.
This is absolutely something specific to fracking.
would that headline surprise you? it has nothing to do with fracking. The news is that there is a fracking related toxic water issue, one entirely similar to what we are very familiar over a history of the handling of many toxic chemical industrial sites. It has nothing to do with turning on each other which is what the headline says is the news.
It’s both. The former ranges from performance to make management look like they have a secret sauce to actual chemical breakthroughs in surfactants.
Following SB 19-181, the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (now ECMC) overhauled many rules. One rule now requires operators to disclose all chemicals used in fracking and in spills, including trade secret ingredients, but there's a catch: They still don’t have to reveal the exact chemical identity to the public — only to regulators and, in limited cases, medical professionals.
Additionally:
The rule rollout has been slow, and compliance remains spotty.
There's no standardized enforcement mechanism to verify what’s actually used on-site.
If a spill happens, the data available to the public is still often vague or incomplete — and trade secret protections can render the chemical list nearly meaningless if you're trying to assess toxicity. (As we've tried, ourselves)
- Missile tech has advanced and proliferated.
- US ship building is crippled, and expanding it (especially where needed) is going to be very difficult. Basically the US is going to need a lot of SSN and it won't be able to make them.
- There is a competitor power with sufficient resources to make it a real competition, and a very different conceptualisation of how the world should work.
It's also miniscule.
The US will never solve the problem of nuclear waste.
I really hate all of the defense of nuclear based on hypotheticals that realistically will never become reality by conveniently ignoring externalities like capitalism.
Our regulatory and governance environment is so unstable and can change significantly every 4 years. Companies play the long game and delay or resist change to outlast administrations.
This prevents any meaningful advance of the technology preventing it from becoming a viable solution.
We also know its dangers and how to store it properly, and compared to the waste that simply oil and gas extraction creates, its significantly less (up to 90% less), and its exceedingly predictable.
Global conventional peaked a long time ago, and EOR/TOR will only keep the game going another decade or so. Renewables and nuclear are the only long-term options. There's also coal, of which we have at least a hundred years in the PRB alone, if we're willing to match China in the "fuck the environment" game.
people have been saying that since the 70s at least. The reason why no one is fracking is because oil/gs is so cheap it's not worth it. If the price rises enough the wells turn back on and everyone starts doing it again. Renewables, demand, and regional stability is keeping prices low so putting in the extra effort fracking requires just isn't worth the return. Google says the average break even price of a fracking well in the Permian Basin (SW Texas) is $65/barrel. And the price of oil as of this comment is $65.98 so that would mean a lot of wells are just sitting there because it's not worth the money to pump.
On the flip side, our economy is dependent on a certain EROI. Below that, it chokes because we don't have enough energy "slaves" to render the services we've came to depend upon.
The peak and decline of global oil production -not just U.S.- has been predicated for longer than I am alive. It's still in the future, and reserves have grown significantly. And the U.S. has natural gas reserves that are enormous, so at least the energy side is covered (though not non-fuel things like plastics and lubricants).
As for U.S. ship building... that could probably be fixed, though it will take years, but not so many that the USN's current advantages dissipate completely.
Among the many examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfHcypKLxgc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP5fIKqobm0 (This is not an example of fracking pollution, according to child comment.)
I was stunned, to say the least.
The rods in my hot water tank were separating the hydrogen and oxygen. Called electrolysis
Perhaps just a little dangerous if you've got fracking contamination?
I don't think it's the contaminants from the fracking fluid itself, more that you can get natural gas finding its way into the water supply that creates this (and it can happen naturally even without fracking). The stuff in the fluids that's a problem is mainly a problem because it's toxic, not flammable.
Though I don’t see why sweetwater cant simply put up a fence and call it a day
Come on, 30 acres in Texas? What a nothingburger compared to the footprints of other dirty industries.
30 acres is probably, what, 2 H-E-B parking lots?
The plan includes over 160 wells across a dozen pads—right next to a major reservoir serving Eastern Denver/Aurora, a Superfund site, a landfill, and a growing suburban community.
In April, Chevron had an uncontrolled blowout at their Bishop well in Galeton, CO. Cleanup is still ongoing. Meanwhile, a new study from the Colorado School of Public Health showed increased childhood leukemia risk linked to proximity to oil and gas wells. We've asked regulators to address how their current rules fall short in light of these findings.
There are over 40 existing pads nearby, all relying on a small volunteer fire department. We've documented consistent gaps in spill/leak reporting and monitoring. Despite this, the State and County continue approving new pads.
We organized over 2,000 public comments against the largest proposed pad—more than any public-works project in County history. Our group was also the first activist group in the state granted “affected party” status to participate in hearings for a Comprehensive Area Plan (CAP).
The CAP was approved anyway. So were the well pads. Regulators thank us for our feedback, then move forward regardless.
One example: I flagged that a pad's construction would disrupt Mule Deer mating season. The operator paid a $6,000 preemptive fine and got the green light.
Another time, I pointed out that a required public document wasn’t posted—an error that should’ve triggered a new comment period. It didn’t. The site was approved after a closed-door session to review the issue with the document not being made available.
To borrow from my recent comment:
"Lastly, I want to return to a point raised by one of the Commissioners today, drawing a comparison between Commission approval and a driver’s license: that by the time the license is stamped, the tests have been passed and the boxes checked.
It’s a fair analogy. In fact, I’ve used it myself to describe both the County and ECMC processes. But I would add this: imagine an applicant standing at the DMV counter, ready to be approved. Now imagine 100 people surrounding them—neighbors, relatives, retired law enforcement, health professionals—each holding documentation of prior violations or evidence of risks, warning that issuing the license could result in injury or death. Would that clerk still confidently apply the stamp?"
The pressure to approve these projects seems to outweigh the purpose of the review process itself. We’re still fighting.
If you want a real idea of the scope of these operations: Invite you to check out the Colorado GIS mapping tool https://cogccmap.state.co.us/cogcc_gis_online/?lat=39.572042...
click the toggle for "directional wellbores" and look north of Denver. Then, look at SE Denver and see how they are starting to build out around my home.
If you are meaning the Reservoir, the superfund site, and/or the nearby landfill. We've pushed the related agencies (including the EPA) to enact protections surrounding the sites - the most we've gotten is stopping the wells being drilled directly-under them (but they can/will still go right up against).
> pumped so much fluid underground in the Permian Basin that it leaked into a prolific oil-producing layer of rock, making it all but impossible to extract crude, according to an April court filing.
> The Permian produces almost as much oil as Iraq and Kuwait combined. But its wells generate up to five barrels of chemical-laden waste fluid for every barrel of crude, creating a growing disposal challenge.
its a lot of water
Water use per well can be anywhere from about 1.5 million gallons to about 16 million gallons.
I think a Golf course might use a bit more per year, but this is per well and the state of Texas has 279,615 active oil and gas wells. Not sure of all of them are fracking wells or not.
That's a lot of water, no?
Or
About 1 year worth of US almond production.