Fracking Stupid?

Fracking is an issue that I have debated with numerous intelligent and well-informed people without any consensus or remote resolution, possibly because my intent in arguing is misunderstood.  Thus, let me be very clear from the beginning of this post.  There are three levels at which the fracking issue can be debated, from my point of view.  First, is it safe and are its effects well-understood from an environmental and human safety point of view?  Second, is it well-regulated and is legislation in place to make sure that best practices are followed?  Third, is it advantageous to the United States as a whole - does it give us a stronger position as a player in the global energy market and/or does it provide attractive qualities at home (more jobs, etc.)?  Although the answers to these questions may be slightly intertwined, conflating one with another is unlikely to give an accurate answer to the overall issue: is the increasing prevalence of fracking a good thing for the United States?

First things first - what is fracking? Fracking is the process of drilling deep into the earth, and injecting a high pressure water and chemical mixture to fracture gas-rich shale deposits.  The released gas is then collected and processed.  In fact, the oil and gas industry has known about these shale deposits for decades, but only recently have energy prices made it profitable to extract the gas.  Due to fracking, the United States can now produce enough natural gas to satisfy domestic needs, and is poised to become a net exporter for natural gas by 2017, reducing our dependency on foreign energy imports, and making us a strong global energy player.

So, lets take our questions:

Question 1: Is fracking safe for the environment and in regards to human safety? Relatedly, are its effects well-understood?  Based purely on my own extensive reading about the subject, there seem to be two main complaints to fracking in this respect: the contamination of drinking water and underground wells & the increase of earthquakes and sinkholes caused by fracking wastewater.

Answers 1: A recent study published in Science journal by Weingarten et al. contends that the standard practice of disposing of fracking wastewater through injection wells (essentially, shooting it deep into the earth)  is indeed responsible for the increase in earthquakes throughout the region.  "Basically, the increased earthquake rate has increased the chances of an M5.5 or greater by 50%, according to the earthquake hazard folks at USGS. Without the injection activities, the earthquakes in these region would likely not have happened on this timescale." - reddit AMA.  Note that this increased chance of seismicity is due to wastewater disposal, not fracking itself.

A 2012 Duke study by Johnson et al. also yields upsetting insight.  In a study that examined 141 drinking water wells, from homes located amidst about 5000 drilling sites atop the Marcellus shale (stretching from PA to NY), Johnson et al. discovered that four out of five wells were contaminated with methane, ethane and propane at levels well above those considered safe.  Nor can this contamination be attributed simply to the presence of gas-rich shale in the region, for without the drilling, such gases would be trapped deep in the earth.  In addition, some wells had a chemical signature that suggested the gas was indeed from the Marcellus, instead of from a possible conflating factor.

For more information on fracking's environmental effects, see this 2013 report by Environment America Research and Policy Center, and for a pretty cool and informative infographic, see Dangers of Fracking.

Question 2:  Is fracking well-regulated and is there legislation in place to ensure that best practices are followed?

Answers 2:  Fracking has allowed jobs in the energy sector to expand considerably, ensuring that politicians will take note, and in the late 2000's (when fracking started to become profitable, and the number of wells increased drastically) the Oil and Gas lobby was spending over 100M a year.  In fact, the sheer number of wells in 2014 - more than 1 million - compared to 342,000 in 2000 goes to show that this industry has grown very quickly - many fear too quickly, bypassing proper safety research and regulation.

Most egregious is the reprehensible so-called 'Halliburton Loophole', which allowed fracking to be exempted by the Safe Drinking Water Act.  In addition, until March 2015, under federal law fracking companies were allowed to keep the chemicals used in fracking a 'trade secret'; fracking wells were not subject to the same standards and construction regulations as other drilling wells; and there were no regulations is place regarding disposal of waste water.  Individual states have been far ahead of the federal government in terms of fracking regulation, but whether or not they truly protect the concerns of their constituents has been debatable.

In March 2015, the Obama Administration announced new federal fracking rules, including disclosure of chemicals used in fracking, updated requirements for well construction, and requirements for waste disposal.  This announcement was immediately met with a lawsuit by two organization representing the energy industry.

In essence, I would say that fracking regulation is underway, but will face heavy opposition by powerful lobbies.

Question 3: Is it advantageous to the United States as a whole - does it give us a stronger position as a player in the global energy market and/or does it provide attractive qualities at home (more jobs, etc.)?

Answer 3:  Although the total number of jobs that fracking has provided in the Unites States is still under debate, it is undoubtedly true that it does provide some jobs and that these jobs typically pay better than many now flooding the market.  From a foreign policy standpoint, having a steady flow of natural gas into US and global markets is a definite advantage.  Having an internal energy source lowers our reliance on Saudi Arabia and Venezuela - two of our major energy importers - which in turn give us a firmer foothold for dealing with the Middle East and South America.  In addition, the US potential to export natural gas to Europe also gives us a stronger standing in regards to Russia - Europe's biggest natural gas importer - a nation which has been acting increasingly 'shady' towards us in the last several years.

All in all, from a political standpoint, fracking is a solid solution for hitting two birds with one stone - increasing the energy sector and decreasing our reliance on foreign energy imports.

Having laid out the evidence as I perceive it, my own opinion is that the advantages of fracking are clear, but that we must proceed with caution and strict regulation.  The 2015 federal fracking rules do much to allay my fears, but it is yet to be seen whether or not they will be followed sufficiently to avoid serious environmental problems.