N.C. fracking can be done safely, bring economic prosperity
Published February 13, 2014
by Mark Cares, oil field worker from Raleigh, Charlotte Observer, February 12, 2014.
Safety and quality assurance are hallmarks of American-made products. Our automobiles, foods and myriad other items are subjected to tests, examined by inspectors, and must adhere to the highest standards before they reach the marketplace.
The same is true of oil and gas. At every step of the drilling and production process, there are state and federal regulators to demand adherence to rules designed to protect people and the environment.
Such is the case with hydraulic fracturing, often called fracking. Since the technology was introduced in the 1940s, it has been the subject of numerous studies. To date, there has been no confirmed case of fracking operations contaminating groundwater.
Yet despite this fact, hysteria over fracking spreads like wildfire whenever new energy-rich areas are considered for development. These concerns are overblown.
Consider the following:
More than one million U.S. wells have been fracked in the past 60+ years. Because fracking occurs below the drinking water aquifer and impermeable rock, groundwater is not affected. In North Carolina, the energy-rich formation is 5,000-6,000 feet below the surface, which is nearly a mile below potable water supplies.
I also have witnessed the economic benefits of fracking. According to an analysis by IHS Global Insight, shale and oil and gas development involving fracking will create 3.3 million U.S. jobs by 2020 and add $468 billion to the nation’s gross domestic product annually. The analysis shows North Carolina stands to gain more than 35,000 jobs by 2020, many of which pay twice the national average salary.
Most North Carolinians are aware of these benefits. In a telephone poll conducted by Harris Interactive in March, 92 percent agreed that harnessing North Carolina’s energy bounty would create jobs. More than half (52 percent) said they support oil and gas development.
Energy production can lead to greater prosperity for all of us in North Carolina. The underground shale formations in the Deep River Basin could help mineral rights owners pay their bills. Those who own homes, rental property and businesses within and outside the basin’s boundaries could see property values increase.
And most importantly, everyone could pay less for energy. According to one estimate, U.S. shale energy production already has reduced energy costs for every American household by about $1,200 a year.
Further, a risk index used by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce tracks the correlation between U.S. energy supplies and national security. By using fracking to increase domestic energy production, the index shows the United States is reducing risks from abroad, especially the Middle East. As a result, the nation’s future is more secure.
This is not to imply that there no risks. People can make mistakes and accidents can occur. Fortunately, North Carolina is wisely taking a thoughtful approach to oil and gas production, considering safeguards to protect people and the environment.
Obstacles to energy development are not insurmountable, and they should not be allowed to hinder North Carolina’s energy potential. The facts show fracking can be done safely and reap benefits for the state and the nation.
February 13, 2014 at 9:21 am
Rip Arrowood says:
Then why not reveal the contents of the fluid used in the fracking process?
February 13, 2014 at 10:12 am
Alan Ferguson says:
What a monumental collection of half-truths and untruths this piece is. 35,000 jobs will be created in North Carolina by the little bit of natural gas under our soil? Who is hiring them and when? Energy costs will be reduced for North Carolinians by fracking here? My gosh, there must be considerably more of the stuff in NC than has been reported. As for your $1,200 reduction so far in energy bills to North Carolinians, fracking here has not begun, so your figure is irrelevant to the issue as to whether it should proceed here.
Oh, and which oil field are you currently working in?
February 14, 2014 at 2:02 am
Vicky Hutter says:
I totally agree with the comments by Rip Arrowood and Alan Ferguson. I also take issue with the statements by Mark Cares that "safety and quality assurance are hallmarks of American-made products. Our automobiles, foods and myriad other items are subjected to tests, examined by inspectors and must adhere to the highest standards before they reach the marketplace"---half-truths and an attempt to get people to believe that because 'some' items are tested and public safety is considered before 'some' products are allowed to reach the market that this will be the case with fracking. Evidently Mr. Cares is not aware of the recall of cribs and infant car seats after causing serious injuries and deaths of infants; of lead being allowed in paints for decades before it was banned in interior paints due to it causing lead poisoning which caused brain damage in children; of new drugs which only have to be tested for a very short period of time before allowed on the market by the FDA with no one knowing what the long-term effects of the drug will be or even if it will be efficacious; of medical appliances used before adequate testing or sufficient practice with the equipment before it is used for surgical procedures; of DDT allowed to be sprayed on crops with farm workers also being sprayed before it was banned because it was a danger to people and the environment; of testing of the atomic bomb with observers not protected at all from radioactive fall-out since no one at the time knew about radioactive fallout and the long-term consequences of exposure to radioactivity on tissue; of chemical companies being allowed for decades to release dangerous chemicals into the air through ventilation stacks which lead to myriad health problems for the people in the community, etc., etc., etc.
Fracking would be another example of untried "ideas" which if implemented would have the people, animals and environment serving as the natural experiment re: unintended as well as intended consequences of this type of extracting natural gas---and like the miners dying because of exposure to asbestos when it wasn't known to be hazardous to their or their families health---unintended results of fracking may be devastating and not "fixable". Saying they are sorry or they didn't know is not going to be acceptable reactions by executives of energy companies to devastating results of fracking.
If fracking is so safe then why are the energy companies refusing to disclose the exact chemicals and the amounts being injected under pressure hundreds of feet underground? I assume these same energy companies would claim that there was "no way to foresee" the long-term consequences of the practice and that the "state of the art" just was not there yet to prevent or even consider long-term problems with water contamination, earthquakes, cancers in people and animals. And N.C. has more fault lines than California---are we willing to trade earthquakes for using this insufficiently researched process for extracting gas?
The American people, including North Carolinians, have every right to be very dubious and wary about the hype from the energy companies looking to short-term profits and politicians who care most about the next election. The onus for total safety should rest squarely with the energy companies and research should be conducted for years rather than the short period of time the energy companies claim is sufficient.
Any politicians who allow fracking in N.C. at this time with the "state of the art" the way it is now and without disclosure of unintended consequences and the exact chemicals and amounts injected under force being disclosed should be thrown out of office or not elected in the first place. Where will the large quantities of water required in fracking come from? What happens to it? Where is it discharged once it has been used? Water and oxygen are pretty important to life and survival of our species and life on this planet and the energy companies are not going to be producing new water supplies to take the place of the water being used in this inadequately researched process for extracting gas.
I don't think Mr. Cares is objective on the issue of safety of fracking in N.C. or anywhere else---I prefer recommendations of experts without a vested interest in the process under consideration.
