Horizontal high volume hydraulic fracking

Report
Committee to Ban
Fracking
Todd Bazzett
What is Fracking?
Fracking is a slang term used to describe the combination of new
technologies used to extract natural gas from shale formations
deep in the earth.
Horizontal high volume hydraulic fracking is the technical term
used to distinguish it from conventional fracking that has been
done for over 50 years in Michigan.
Four technologies developed
to support “unconventional”
shale gas development
•
•
•
•
Directional drilling
High Frac fluid Volumes
Slickwater
Multi-well Pads
Technology timeline
1996: Slickwater fracturing
fluid introduced
2002 - Multi-stage slickwater
fracturing of horizontal wells
2003 - First hydraulic
fracturing of Marcellus Shale
2005 - Halliburton Loophole,
excludes waste from
• Safe Drinking Water Act
• Clean Water Act
2007- Use of multi-well pads
and cluster drilling
Why Frack Michigan?
How many wells in Michigan?
• 57 Active permits for High Volume Horizontal
Hydraulic Fracturing wells
• Enough land has been leased to drill 500 more
• The DNR auctions state land twice a year for as
low as $2/acre
• Residents in many counties, rural and urban,
are being approached about signing mineral
rights leases.
• The most recent frack well is located in
Fowlerville in Livingston County, north of Ann
Arbor.
Fracking is devastating
• Natural landscapes become large-scale industrial zones.
• Thousands of truckloads of water and waste hauling per well.
• Huge amounts of toxic waste are injected into deep wells, proven to cause property
damaging earthquakes.
• Multiple risks for surface and groundwater contamination, poisoning food sheds,
farms, homes and businesses.
• People and animals become sick from water and air quality issues
• Land values go down
Pure Michigan
Massive Amounts of Water
Consumption and Waste Disposal
• Michigan just set the record at 21 million gallons and has
permits to use over 30 million gallons of water per frack.
• A well can be fracked up to 18 times.
• The frack solution consists of about 95% water, 4.5% sand
and .5% chemicals.
• After the frack fluid is injected in the ground, about 40-60%
returns as flowback with naturally occurring radioactive
materials and heavy metals which are also toxic.
• This water cannot be treated or reused for consumption or
agricultural use.
• The waste must be disposed of in injection wells which has
proven to cause property damaging earthquakes.
Intentional and
Unintentional Spills
• Oil companies in North Dakota reported more than 1,000 accidental releases of
oil, drilling wastewater or other fluids in 2011, about as many as in the previous
two years combined. Many more illicit releases went unreported, state
regulators acknowledge, when companies dumped truckloads of toxic fluid
along the road or drained waste pits illegally.
• In Michigan, the DEQ approved a spread of 40,000 gallons of toxic frack
flowback in May 2012
•
•
•
•
Mackinac area tourist campground sprayed
Paradise Lake roads sprayed
Mackinaw State Forest road drenched
Deadly materials used
• 215 Government, Industry, University and Nongovernmental Organizations
Experts Agree on 12 consensus risk pathways.
•
•
•
•
7 involve potential risks to surface water quality
2 involve potential risks to air quality
2 involve potential risks to groundwater quality
1 is related to habitat disruption
Contribution to Climate Change
• An estimated 3 to 12% of the methane produced is released
to the atmosphere
• 6% of all wells fail immediately. 60% fail within 30 years.
• Methane is 84 times worse than CO2 in causing climate
change over a 20 year time span.
• A 2010 study from Harvard says natural gas from fracking
could be “dirtier” than coal.
Human Health Impacts
• Air quality degradation: Volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) are emitted in various
phases of the natural gas development
process. This causes asthma and other
neurological disorders.
• A recent study in Colorado shows an
increased rate of birth defects for women
living near frack wells
• Over 5000 people, mostly in other States
on the “List of the Harmed” (Pennyslvania
Alliance for Clean Water and Air)
107. Jaime Long
Location: Northern Michigan
Gas Facility: Offloading facility of sour gas
Exposure: Air
Symptoms: Illness “health has been ruined”
781 – 782. Phyllis Senske, Ruth Crawford
Location: Kalkaska County, MI
Gas Facility: Chevron gas well
Exposure: Dust, noise, vibration
Symptoms: House shaking, dust, excessive
noise, heavy truck traffic, property value
diminished
783. Paul Brad
Location: Kalkaska County, MI
Gas Facility: 40,000 gallons of Encana
produced water spread on roads
Exposure: Land
Symptoms: Unknown, replacement water
or relocated
Regulations are insufficient
•
•
•
Deficiencies in Michigan Regulations
• Setback restriction of a mere 300 ft
• Water withdrawal assessment tool is inaccurate
• No pre-drilling water well testing
• No disclosure of frack chemicals
Regulations cannot stop the damage from occurring.
• Water will always be destroyed
• Wells made of concrete will always fail
Many “regulations” simply require a permit, which is a
mere formality given the current legislation which requires
state agencies to maximize production rates
Regulations aren’t enforced
•
•
•
By Michigan Law, the DEQ must favor ultimate recovery of
maximum production of oil and gas. (Public Act 451 of 1994
entitled "Natural Resources and Environmental Protection
Act,")
Michigan DEQ collects 7% severance tax on oil produced in
the state
There is currently an injunction against Encana to stop
drilling due to a lawsuit filed by the Committee to Ban
Fracking lawyer, Ellis Boal. The lawsuit highlights 2
violations of Michigan regulations granted and overseen by
the DEQ.
Why a Ban? Only a ban will protect
us!
Massive amount of water consumption
•
Lower lake, river and stream levels
•
Permanent destruction of water
Ecological damage
•
Ground water contamination
•
Surface water contamination
•
Air quality degradation
•
Natural habitat/environmental destruction
Increased traffic
Long-term economic devastation
Irreversible destruction to subterranean formations
Advancement of climate change
Human Health impacts
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Economics
• Job claims are exaggerated. Politifact Ohio evaluated the industry job claims in a
TV/internet ad: labeling it “Liar, liar, pants on fire”
• Unions in Ohio are complaining that jobs are not given to locals
• Some economists believe that fracking is creating a false bubble that will ultimately
collapse, leaving us with energy infrastructure that will damage our economy
• Applications to open natural gas export ports have been submitted. If opened, industry
will be able to sell natural gas to Europe and Asia at much higher rates. In the US, gas sells
for about $4/mcf whereas overseas, the market demands in excess of $11/mcf.
• Wall Street Journal has identified that China has significant investment in US Energy.
• Chinese companies have invested more than $17 billion* into oil and gas deals in the U.S. and
Canada (since 2010)
• China surpassed the U.S. in 2009 as the world's largest consumer of energy in all forms.
• Its natural gas consumption nearly doubled between 2006 and 2010, according to the BP
Statistical Review.
• Sinopec agreed in January to pay $2.5 billion to Devon Energy Corp. of Oklahoma City for a onethird stake in about 1.3 million acres of drilling property in Ohio, Michigan and elsewhere
• Natural gas future prices are up $1.592 from year earlier (as of 2/13/2014)
Who we are
• We are a non-partisan group of individuals that believe in direct democracy:
• Health instructor, folklorist, electrical engineer, artists, attorney, teachers, nurses, physicians,
director of religious temple, architects, librarians, etc.
• democrats, independents and republicans.
• www.letsbanfracking.org is our website
• political ballot initiative seeking to add a ballot to the 2016 Election.
• We are in our third attempt to gain necessary signatures. In the first year we gathered about 30,000.
Last year we more than doubled our signatures to over 70,000 almost enough people to fill MSU’s
Spartan Stadium (75,005). We need to collect 270,000 valid signatures to get our initiative on the
ballot
• Many of our signature collectors are members or leaders of the Sierra Club. We work closely with
members of other groups like Food & Water Watch which also support a ban. Many water
conservation groups throughout the state have also endorsed our group. If you go to the
endorsements page on www.letsbanfracking.org you will see big names like:
• Josh Fox, film director of Gasland I and II.
• Dr. Jill Stein, 2012 Green Party candidate
• Wes Wilson, EPA whistleblower and retired analyst – Be the Change, Colorado
• Jim Nash, Oakland County Water Resource Commissioner
Committee to Ban Fracking Ballot
Language
An initiation of Legislation:
• to prohibit the use of horizontal hydraulic
fracturing and production, storage, disposal,
• and processing of horizontal hydraulic fracturing
wastes in Michigan;
• to eliminate the state’s policy favoring ultimate
recovery of maximum production of oil and gas;
and to protect public health, land, water, and air
by amending Public Act 451 of 1994 entitled "Natural
Resources and Environmental Protection Act
We are under attack
• Michigan Chamber of Commerce’s PAC II ballot question committee has
raised over $477,000 to spread misinformation against our committee.
• Over $37,500 has come from out of state interests.
• Donors include names like: Jordan Exploration Co, Summit Petroleum
Corp, Savoy Exploration, Dart Oil & Gas, Michigan Oil and Gas
Association, West Bay Exploration Co, Omimex Energy (Fort Worth TX),
Operating East (Charleston WV), Bigard & Huggard Drilling, Rock Oil Co,
Southwestern Oil Co, Encana Oil & Gas USA (Denver CO), Pharma
(Indianapolis IN), Nestle Waters North America, Maness Petroleum,
American Aggregates Corp., Lilly USA, North Bay Energy

similar documents