“For the first time in 18 years, America is poised to produce more of our own oil than we buy from other nations. And today, we produce more natural gas than anybody else. So we’re producing energy. And these advances have grown our economy, they’ve created new jobs, they can’t be shipped overseas — and, by the way, they’ve also helped drive our carbon pollution to its lowest levels in nearly 20 years.”
–Barack Obama in a June 25, 2013 speech on climate change at Georgetown University {Image courtesy of http://frack-off.org.uk}
In May, 2013, the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) unveiled a revised proposal, technically called the “Oil and Gas; Hydraulic Fracturing on Federal and Indian Lands” rule, on the regulations of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) on over 750 million acres of federal and Indian land. Fracking is used to unlock natural oil and gas from shale rocks by making small fissures for the oil and gas to flow. The May proposal marked the BLM’s second attempt at proposing federal fracking regulations after a first draft was released in 2012. Both proposals were met with heavy criticism from oil-and-gas industry insiders and environmental groups alike. The proposed rules require oil-and-gas companies to disclose the specific chemicals used in the fracking process. Companies must also verify that fracking fluids are not escaping into the groundwater.
Environmental groups expressed disappointment in the fact that the rules did not include a ban on storing waste fluids in open, lined pits. Many critics also take issue with allowing companies to use the pre-existing industry-favored database, “FracFocus,” to monitor and guarantee that drillers are meeting the rules’ chemical disclosure requirements. Some consider this system to be a feeble monitoring system and the rules, in general, to be lenient toward oil-and-gas companies. Environmental groups urge that complete disclosure of the chemicals used in fracking should be required without the involvement of FracFocus, which has ties to the oil-and-gas industry.
On the oil-and-gas industry side, many companies are complaining about the burdensome cost of complying with the regulations. Yet, the BLM estimated that the total annual cost of the regulations would range from $12 million to $20 million and that when spread over all fracking wells on federal and Indian lands, the annual costs would average only about $5,100 a well.
Furthermore, some groups such as the American Petroleum Institute contend that such regulations should be left to the states to regulate. Several state legislatures, such as New York, have even contemplated implementing a moratorium on fracking. Here in Pennsylvania, most of the fracked land is actually state-owned, so the federal regulations do not even apply. Act 13 was enacted in 2012 to regulate environmental standards related to oil-and-gas drilling in Pennsylvania. Yet, in September, 2013, State Senator Jim Ferlo (D- Allegheny) introduced a bill to implement a ban on fracking. The bill would place a time limit on the moratorium, during which a commission could study the range of impact that hydraulic fracturing has on the state. It is safe to assume, however, that the Republican-led house and Senate make the possibility of passing such a bill very slim.
Opponents to the federal rules, and opponents to fracking in general like Sen. Ferlo, stress fracking’s questionable environmental impact. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council’s (NRDC) website, “Fracking is a suspect in polluted drinking water in Arkansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming, where residents have reported changes in water quality or quantity following fracturing operations.” The EPA is currently implementing a rigorous ongoing study about natural gas drilling and its potential for groundwater contamination. The final report, however, will not be released until late 2014.
In the meantime, the BLM will likely release the final version of the fracking rules for federal lands. The public comments period for the proposed “Oil and Gas; Hydraulic Fracturing on Federal and Indian Lands” rule ended on August 23, 2013. Between May and August since the proposed regulation was released, over one million Americans commented. Many anti-fracking groups and staunch environmentalists have utilized the public comments to let their anti-fracking voices be heard. While the environmental concerns about fracking cannot be ignored, it is also difficult to overlook the fact that not only has the U.S. surpassed Saudi Arabia at being labeled the largest oil producer in the world as a result of natural gas drilling, but also that the industry has created so many valuable jobs in the U.S.
Ideally, fracking will be able to be performed safely without any potentially harmful repercussions for the environment. As President Obama said recently, “The problem is that we haven’t established clear guidelines of how to do it safely and to inform the public, so that neighbors know what’s going on. … We are going to work with industry to establish best practices. We are going to invest in the basic research and science to make sure this is done safely and in a way that protects the public health.”