Fracking – New Dangers Found In Produced Water
Sara Jerome Water Online Produced water appears to contain two harmful chemicals that researchers previously did not know about, according to a new study. “Harmful levels of ammonium and iodide have now been found in wastewater from conventional oil and gas production plus the more controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking. The chemicals, pulled up from the earth, arrive at the surface at concentrations high enough to harm aquatic life and form cancer-causing compounds when mixed with the chlorine in tap water,” according to Science News. The study, published this month in Environmental Science & Technology, noted the dangers these chemicals may pose. “Bromide, iodide, and ammonium in surface waters can impact stream ecosystems and promote the formation of toxic brominated-, iodinated-, and nitrogen disinfection byproducts during chlorination at downstream drinking water treatment plants. Our findings indicate that discharge and accidental spills of oil and gas wastewater to waterways pose risks to both human health and the environment,” the study said. Click here to read more
The Infrastructure Act 2015: Fracking’s key to the kingdom?
By Simone Davidson February 26, 2015
The Infrastructure Act 2015 (IA 2015) received Royal Assent on 12 February 2015 and this has had an effect on a couple of key areas connected with fracking.
No trespass at depths below 300m
Remember the age old law that to avoid a claim for trespass, permission from the landowner was needed before accessing the land? Well, that is no more when dealing with access to land at depths greater than 300m, thanks to sections 43 – 48 of the IA 2015. These sections set out new rights of use for the purposes of exploiting petroleum or deep geothermal energy at deep level, without the need to notify the landowner (unless further regulations are made in this regard). This will be welcome news for fracking operators who will now no longer have to wrangle with adverse landowners and protracted statutory controls for gaining consent to access.
Is anywhere out of bounds? Given it will now be easier for operators to get on with the business of fracking, does the IA 2015 provide us with any safeguards? Prior to the IA 2015 receiving Royal Assent, calls were made in an Environmental Audit Committee Report for another moratorium on fracking (like Scotland has done) because it was concluded that fracking wasn’t compatible with the nation’s climate change targets, as well as posing substantial environmental and health risks.
However, calls for a moratorium were rejected and instead a suite of amends were inserted into the then Infrastructure Bill, to placate those opposed to giving fracking the go-ahead. It was hoped that these amends would help to keep some 40% of land in England safe from the potential risks of fracking. Certain areas, like Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and Groundwater Special Protection Zones were to be free from fracking.
A crafty last minute amend in the House of Lords, however, has seen the safeguarding provisions at IA 2015 section 50, tweaked enough to remove their bite. The legislation now states that fracking can’t take place within:
- ‘protected groundwater source areas’ or
- ‘other protected areas’.
- The catch? These areas are yet to be defined – but this must be done through regulations by 31 July 2015. This means the hot potato has been thrown to the incoming government to clarify and in the meantime we have no moratorium and no clear protection.
Arrogance, incompetence, and wishful thinking – why the UK’s fracking narrative is falling apart
James Murray – Business Green Climate change and carbon budgets mean UK fracking was always likely to be a temporary phenomenon, Ministers need to reflect on where their surrender to unjustified hype is leading them.
Finally, about three years too late, the debate on fracking is moving onto the territory it should have always been played out upon: climate change. There are myriad reasons to oppose fracking in the UK, varying enormously in their legitimacy, but the one source of opposition that trumps all others is the very real threat that a successful fracking industry is incompatible with long term efforts to tackle climate change. As Environmental Audit Committee Chair Joan Walley argues today, “ultimately fracking cannot be compatible with our long-term commitments to cut climate changing emissions unless full-scale carbon capture and storage technology is rolled out rapidly, which currently looks unlikely”. Bravo.
As I’ve argued before the problem with fracking in the current UK context is that if it were to prove as successful as David Cameron and George Osborne hope it would quickly prove incompatible with our climate change goals. Walley uses the “oil tanker” metaphor, arguing that adding ever more fossil fuel infrastructure makes it ever harder to turn the trajectory of UK’s energy sector towards decarbonisation. I prefer the Chekov’s Gun metaphor: if you build a fracking industry it is going to get used. Either way, in a carbon constrained world you can’t construct a new fossil fuel industry without a credible plan for quickly deconstructing it.
No Comment