The Truth About Water Use
Friday, February 8th, 2013 | 5 Comments | Tagged in: DOE, duke, Energy In Depth, Hydraulic fracturing, Illinois, New Albany, New Albany Shale, shale, water use
Kyna
Field Director, Illinois
Last year, Illinois watched as a bill designed to regulate the safe and responsible development of New Albany Shale (SB3280) was turned into a proposed moratorium on hydraulic fracturing. Unfortunately, that wasn’t enough for those committed to blocking energy development in our state: On February 6, 2013, yet another bill was put before our General Assembly (SB1418) calling for a two year ban to review, evaluate, and make recommendations regarding the regulation of hydraulic fracturing operations in Illinois.
These bills are simply smoke and mirror illusions that undermine the concerted efforts of legislators to develop meaningful regulation, which would provide our state with the possibility of tens of thousands of new jobs and represent an enormous amount of new investment in Illinois. They mask the real objective of these groups – to ban development entirely in Illinois and rob our state of the numerous benefits that other states around the country are already experiencing.
What these groups consistently fail to acknowledge is the fact that the safety of hydraulic fracturing has been repeatedly confirmed by state and federal regulators, choosing instead to repeat false talking points in an attempt to obscure the truth.
One of these oft-repeated claims is that hydraulic fracturing would exacerbate or even create drought-like conditions. Looking at the facts, such a claim is demonstrably false.
On the high end of estimates, a report from the U.S. Department of Energy estimated the water required for hydraulic fracturing in any given region to be roughly 0.8 percent of total demand. That’s certainly not a drought-inducing drain on Illinois’ water supply. Data from states with long histories of oil and gas development also prove that hydraulic fracturing does not create a realistic threat of water shortages.
Need more proof? Check out EID’s latest fact sheet, which can be viewed below or by clicking here.
Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Use by Energy In Depth
Tags: DOE, duke, Energy In Depth, Hydraulic fracturing, Illinois, New Albany, New Albany Shale, shale, water use
5 Responses
-
Joe Weaver says:
Kyna,
I know you’re a paid shill for EID and your goal is promote hydraulic fracturing. But, you can’t sit in an ivory tower and spew misleading information uncontested while you pretend to be more educated than everyone else. Your misleading information is worse than no information at all.Why do you assume that anyone who wants to learn more about this new type of high volume slick water fracking before our water is consumed and turned into wastewater doesn’t have the best interest of the economy on their mind? It was our tax dollars that funded the research that gives us this new and as yet unproven technology.
If that shale has been there for millions of years and we’ve known it had energy to give since 1956 but could only reach it since the early 2000′s, what’s the harm in understanding it’s long term impact on the economy before we drill for it? Is it so unreasonable to make sure our water is protected first? I thought that annoying chick on those million dollar commercials on prime time TV said protecting the water was important? Is she just saying what she needs to say to win hearts and minds even if it’s not true? (that was a rhetorical question btw)
And, regarding your misleading information, when you compare water usage for watering farm lands versus water used for hydraulic fracturing, you’re comparing two totally different things. Water used for farming goes right back into the aquifer. Water used for fracking is turned into toxic waste and forever removed from the natural replenishment of the hydro-logic cycle.
Please let me know how I’m getting it wrong. Because I think you’re the one who needs educating.
-Joe Weaver
-
Dear Joe,
Thank you for your comment and for your interest in the topic. My post was not a critique of anyone who wants to learn more, but rather an opportunity for them to obtain additional information. This post was specifically about the amount of water that would be required, which remains small – at less than 1 percent – whether you compare it to agricultural usage or not.
This is not an unproven technology, either. It has been used in one form or another since the 1940s, and regulators have consistently stated that there is no evidence that hydraulic fracturing has ever polluted drinking water.
The information is quite the opposite from misleading. The studies and facts presented are the result of research that continues to this day.
I hope you continue to seek out facts on the topic.
-
-
Brenda Rezvan says:
You didn’t answer the important question that Joe raised. Please address the fact that the water used in HF is taken out of the hydrologic cycle completely, rather than used and re-absorbed as when used for agriculture (which could be called borrowing, while HF could fairly be called destroying.) Also, the carefully crafted phrase “no evidence that hydraulic fracturing has ever polluted drinking water” does not enhance your credibility any more than it has thus far for any industry spokespeople. The entire cycle of exploitation from trucking to drilling to extraction does pollute surface waters, air, soils, and drinking water…needlessly. Just because you and everyone at EID parrot it repeatedly does not make it true and is not fooling those who have experienced or seen with their own eyes this kind of devastation.
-
Thanks for your comment Brenda.
Technological innovation is way ahead of your talking points. Producers in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania, for example, have moved rapidly toward recycling and reuse, which means even less water use overall. State regulators in Pennsylvania have noted that approximately 80 percent of all brine from hydraulic fracturing is used on another well completion. In Illinois, the latest hydraulic fracturing legislation also establishes tight standards on water management. You can read more about that here: http://www.energyindepth.org/illinois-lawmakers-lets-move-forward-with-hf/
You claim that producing oil and natural gas is done “needlessly.” Since you presumably posted your comment from a computer or smart phone, I’m curious: How do you recommend creating the numerous petrochemical products necessary for those devices to work?
Once again, thank you for reading.
-
A little background from experience on far SE Illinois fracking.
During the approx. 1995-1957 time frame my father became involved in the oil industry in several areas on several wildcat wells from the Flat Rock,Palestine, Belmont, Keensburg areas in Illinois and at Mt. Vernon in Indiana. The town of Keensburg was one area where I have more specific memories, starting with the stories of the 1920′s where the wooden drilling rigs were so many that to be able build them the rig legs spread to neighboring yards and on many occasions crisscrossed each other. They were shallow wells about 1000 ft.. At times there was no night because of the gas burning flares and the wells flowed freely to my recollection of the stories. There weren’t any spacing restrictions at that time.
In the 50′s my father had promoter a Salem limestone formation well at 3500 ft deep which had some oil shows and logged to be potentially productive. After an acid fracking process it was determined that the formation was too tight to be profitable. Of Course it was aa vertical well.
It was decided to drill lower to attempt a Devonian formation exploratory completion for pure data of the formation thicknesses and rock types, for future use. It was expected to be 1500 ft.down. At 1400 ft they hit a vacuum pocket they couldn’t fill. Nothing that Dow Chemical Dowell Division had would fill the void, even locally around tast hole. Finally plugging the hole (process unknown) was necessary and it was filled witth cement and capped, dry hole.
As sometimes happens, the drill site was located within a shallow waterflood plot which became for sale shortly after because low barrels per day production for the production company operating it. My father bought it and continued to operate it for many years. All the while this is going on our famile lived in suburban Chicago.
THere is more but this is just a small part of the Southern Illinois petroleum industry within a couple thousand feet of Keensburg, IL along the Wabash River. There was also an offset well drilled in Illinois to be produced from a formation in Indiana, exact location or time frame unknown.