Fracking & Groundwater Contamination: Are EPA Tests ‘Shoddy Science’?

When the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released the latest follow-up tests of water surrounding natural-gas-drilling sites near Pavillion, Wyo., October 10, they appeared to confirm how water can be contaminated by hydraulic fracturing. The operator of the gas field in question, Encana Corp., last week re-asserted it is not responsible for any chemicals found and that the natural gas found in this and other tests is naturally occurring.

This is the location of the natural gas field under scrutiny for water contamination in Wyoming stemming from a Dec. 2011 report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). CREDIT: EPA

OK, so whom are environmental policymakers and the public supposed to believe in this closely-watched showdown?

If companies were drilling for shale natural gas on land where you live — and you were earning money by permitting them to drill — how confident would you feel your water is safe to drink? Is the money worth the risk?

If one were to listen closely to comments by Mitt Romney and President Obama in their debates, you might think this is a non-issue. Both are promoting the benefits of finding and producing all the domestic natural gas we as a country can get our drill bits on in the hope for energy independence.

While these benefits undeniably are positive for U.S. energy security and the U.S. economy, all it takes is one serious accident to end what could prove to be just a honeymoon. Proof of water contamination could halt the progress industry seems to be making in producing shale natural gas safely.

The volume of this debate reached new heights when the EPA released a 121-page report in December 2011 raising questions about Pavillion’s water quality. The follow-up tests performed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) would seem to add weight to EPA’s original findings.

Not so say Ecnana and the oil and natural gas industry’s principal lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, API.

API said its analysis of water-testing data pulled by the USGS from an EPA-drilled test well did NOT find evidence of chemicals the EPA found in its original report. What it DID find, the API said, are examples of shoddy scientific practices.

In remarks to reporters, API Director of Upstream Erik Milito accused EPA of failing to follow sound scientific practices at Pavillion. API goes into to some detail here.

Milito said it raises concerns about the testing it is now doing in its national study on potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources.

Much of the debate could be settled if one or more collaborative efforts getting started could make credible progress in sorting out the facts. The stakes couldn’t be higher.

I summarized a few of the collaborative efforts underway in this August 30 post. I haven’t seen a announcement about either of them but if you have any such news to share, please post a comment.

the energy fix

5 Comments on "Fracking & Groundwater Contamination: Are EPA Tests ‘Shoddy Science’?"

SOS on Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 4:48 pm 



Fear mongering propaganda.

The EPA doesnt in any way represent any kind of science. Their original conclusions of no impact, before the money and power started to move in, is probably as close to the truth as they will ever get. Suddenly there is an exception.

Right now the EPA is being directed to fight and slow energy production. Ending facking wont happen before the election. Bad political timing. It will happen after, if the status quo prevails at the polls.

If common sense prevails at the polls the EPA will stand down and orderly production will follow in the process of making North America energy independent by 2020.

Maybe at that time we will get some relief from thie type of hysteria found in this article?

BillT on Wed, 24th Oct 2012 1:10 am 



And if you are pumping huge amounts of chemicals underground and then they show up in the water, what’s to question? I lived in farm country where nitrogen was found in the well water and it was from farmers just putting too much on their crops. If that small amount showed up in the water, then the thousands of gallons of toxic chemicals certainly would show up as contamination. I hope the courts shut down ALL Fraking in the Us now. Before it ruins all of the water we need to live.

SOS on Wed, 24th Oct 2012 6:04 pm 



Dont you think nitrogen, a surface application within a couple hundered feet of the aquifer and continual exposure of surface water sources to runoff over the past generation or so is a more pressing problem for our invironment than water being circulated a mile underground seperated from the aquifer by layer after layer of impermeable rock is a little different situation? Remember big Bird? One of those is not like the other.

download youtube videos as mp3 on Thu, 10th May 2018 5:08 am 



Here i am posting the link address of online video converter you can easily change the audio format of video.Thank you so much for being a part of it.

Carly Thorpe on Fri, 17th May 2019 3:27 am 



Hey, there is a broken link in this article, under the anchor text – 121-page report in December 2011

Here is the correct, working link so you can replace it – https://selectra.co.uk/sites/selectra.co.uk/files/pdf/Groundwatercontamination.pdf