As hydraulic fracturing has spread inexorably across the United States, other countries have taken notice and are looking to follow America’s lead and capitalize on the benefits associated with shale gas. But along with this growing foreign interest in fracking comes a healthy dose of skepticism – which is very similar to the skepticism that has (and still is) present in some areas of the United States. Specifically, these concerns focus on the potential health risks associated with hydraulic fracturing and the potential impact that such activities can have on the global climate. (Image courtesy of Bloomberg Business week).
Regarding the health risks presented by hydraulic fracturing, a recent study conducted by the United Kingdom’s government health agency states that the risks caused by fracking for shale oil and gas are low as long as operations are properly run and regulated. Kate Kelland, Shale gas fracking a low risk to public health – UK review, hereinafter Shale gas. While this conclusion may appear to be so obvious as to render the study pointless, its implications are actually far reaching. According to the results of the study, the health impacts from the actual fracking process of injecting millions of gallons of water, chemicals, and sand miles underground to fracture dense shale formations are actually minimal. Id. This is especially important because many of the anti-fracking movements in the United States maintain that fracking results in harmful air emissions and pollutes drinking water aquifers deep below the earth. These concerns are also present in Britain, where environmental campaigners have staged anti-fracking protests, arguing that fracking pollutes groundwater and causes earthquakes. Id.
The results of this study are also important to Britain’s conservative-led government. Id. Looking to offset dwindling North Sea oil reserves with a US-style production boom, Britain’s government has backed fracking as an “energy revolution” that could create jobs and cut energy prices. Id. Yet Britain’s government also acknowledged the importance of maintaining public health and safety, and vowed to work with industry representatives to ensure that “stringent safety guidelines are upheld” regarding shale exploration. Id. Overall, this report demonstrates that proper operation and regulation of fracking wells can offer new sources of energy while guaranteeing the health of both the public and the environment.
Additionally, in a meeting held by the London-based Green Alliance think tank, European Union (EU) climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard (Hedegaard) suggested that increased use and reliance on shale gas to meet Europe’s energy needs could actually have an impact on global climate change. Sophie Yeo, Shale gas could be a “game changer.”Hedegaard based her statement on data demonstrating that US emissions fell almost 4% from 2011 to 2012, something which many analysts believe is linked to America’s transition from coal to gas as a source of electricity generation. Id.
Yet Hedegaard also advised that fracking is not a “silver bullet” that will automatically resolve Europe’s energy woes. Id. Specifically, Hedegaard believes that shale gas prices in Europe will not reach the level of those in the United States, mainly because the difference in geology between the two locations means that extraction in Europe will likely be more complicated and expensice than in the United States. But even though increased reliance on shale gas might not automatically solve Europe’s energy and climate problems, Hedegaard heavily criticized Europe’s continuing subsidies on fossil fuels, which are five to six times that of renewables, as guaranteed to only worsen the problem. Id.
Overall, both Britain’s study on the health risks associated with fracking and Hedegaard’s support of shale gas demonstrate that hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling are slowly making their way across the pond. The success the United States has experienced with shale gas has been noticed by other countries, and those other countries are quickly realizing that fracking appears to be greatly superior to continued dependence on fossil fuels. But the United Kingdom and the EU are also realizing that not everyone is willing to support the fracking movement. So while fracking may answer many of the energy questions currently vexing the world, Hedegaard is right in maintaining that fracking should not and cannot be viewed as a “silver bullet” guaranteed to resolve energy problems in one fell swoop.