How Lack of Government Regulation Has Led to Many Dangerous Environmental Concerns
Natural gas obtained from shale formations has significantly increased the energy supply in the United States and the world in general. Over the years, shale gas production has been considered economically feasible attributed to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods. The fracking revolution is considered a game changer in the country as it has led to a decline in the prices of natural gas by 47% in addition to improved economic well-being of consumers (Hausman & Kellogg, 2016). Despite the benefits attributed to the fracking operations, conservationists condemn the process as dirty due to widespread cases of air and water pollution, as well as fracking-related earthquakes. A majority of researchers and experts in this field, on the other hand, agree that hydraulic fracking is reasonably safe if done right. Whereas regulations exists both at federal and state level, neglect or abuse has led to many dangerous environmental concerns around the fracking operations.
In an interview by Morison (2016), Mark Zoback, a renowned geophysicist and a fracking expert agrees that a well-functioning regulatory system would have stopped the dramatic accidents such as the Deepwater Horizon. Zoback acknowledges the immense contributions that hydraulic fracking has brought in ensuring energy security in the country. This is supported by the over 100,000 multi-stage and horizontal fractured wells that have been drilled in the US as well as Canada. While several regulatory agencies exist in governing waste water injection wells, air quality, and drilling, lack of coordination between the two levels of government has contributed to the adverse effects.
The state governments are particularly to blame for the many dangerous concerns associated with fracking. According to Zoback, the state’s governments have a better understanding of the local conditions such as potentially active faults and water scarcity (Morison, 2016). While these states have made strides in passing regulations with regards to natural gas exploration, they lack money to enforce them. In other cases, the local authorities have been found to deliberately fail in appropriating funds to enforce the regulations.
Fracking operations have yielded positive results in areas where government regulations are enforced effectively. For example, Pennsylvania and Texas have been attributed to safe fracking operations through recycling of water used in the drilling process as well as improved well-construction standards respectively (Morison, 2016). However, lack of regulation in the use of safe water for drilling in water scarce areas in addition to inadequate policies on gas exploration and the impact on communities adds to the dangerous environmental concerns associated with the fracking operations. Perhaps, the impacts of shale gas exploitation with regard to commercial success tend to prevent legislators from enforcing laws to curb the environment and public health effects of hydraulic fracking.
In a study by Hausman and Kellogg (2016), the authors analyze the welfare and distributional implications of shale gas in with an aim of determining how these impacts have affected regulatory approaches. This study finds that the financial benefits of fracking tends to outweigh the harm caused. In particular, the authors observe compelling evidence supporting the economic viability of the fracking operations noted by “an increase in welfare for natural gas consumers and producers of $48 billion per year (p.71). Since the commencement of shale gas boom, the prices of natural gas declined from $8 to $3 per mcf between 2007 and 2013. The decline in prices has impacted significantly on consumers of natural gas noted by a consumer surplus of $74 billion in the same period.
Hausman and Kellogg (2016) observe that the decline in prices has further benefited the consumers where benefits have trickled down to other product prices. Not only has the gas boom benefited the individual households, but also the commercial sector that relies on gas for heating. As such, a majority of steel industries reliant on electricity have switched to gas, a move that has implications for carbon emissions and in particular a reduction in greenhouse gases. On the other hand, an analysis of the impact of exporting shale gas notes of producers surplus of over $35 billion every year that offsets the decrease in consumer surplus. More importantly, the shale gas boom has led to a gas-intensive manufacturing activity in the country characterized by an increase in establishments, employment, compensation, and capital expenditures of 4.4%, 3.4%, 8%, and 3.6% respectively.
By weighing the positive impact of the fracturing process with environmental externalities such as increase in the total greenhouse emissions and water contamination, Hausman and Kellogg (2016) therefore argue that the local regulatory agencies have always been at crossroads in implementing policies that ban shale gas exploration. The reasons as to why the government should allow a process that contributes to over 40% of the nation’s total methane indicates a mismatch between the economic and harmful effects. This study also notes that lack of sufficient data has also limited regulatory approaches where a majority of areas lack comprehensive and cost effective environmental regulation. Differences in regulations such as the 2012 EPA rules where some forms of air emissions are allowed while in others only applying to federal lands further impacts on the rise of unconventional natural gas.
The regulating authorities thus lack proper monitoring of the fracking process that make the attribution of liability difficult. Hausman and Kellogg (2016) observes that any regulatory agency that seeks to hold the producers accountable for damages caused by the hydraulic fracturing should be able to “(i) observe a baseline level of environmental quality; (ii) document a change in environmental quality from fracking; and (iii) attribute the change directly to an individual producer” (p. 115). It is worth noting that, the regulatory agencies lack complete data with regards to the baseline environmental quality of groundwater, surface water, as well as air quality. Additionally, even in locations where the regulatory agencies have mapped the baseline and post-fracking water quality, it remains extremely difficult to hold any individual liable since the fracking process occurs deep below the earth’s surface. As such the local authorities lack enough finances to carry out tests as well as monitor each and every individual well. The authors further argue that comprehensive attribution and monitoring of methane emissions is also difficult as such gases can be emitted by a wide range of sources during the fracking process.
Cost effective regulation has therefore failed in mitigating the dangerous environmental concerns associated with the fracking process since the local authorities lack high-quality monitoring necessary for effecting emission taxes. This observation is shared by Sloto (2012) who through a research of baseline ground water quality from 20 domestic wells in the Sullivan County found high levels of toxicity in the water supplies across hydraulic fracturing locations.
Sloto (2012) argues that all residents in Sullivan County rely on underground water supply a fact that informs the study for a quality baseline prior to drilling of natural gas. Since 2006, the EPA has issued permits for 188 Marcellus Shale gas wells where over 67 natural gas wells have been drilled in the county. With drilling and hydraulic fracturing are likely to contaminate freshwater aquifers as well as hinder the base flow of streams, lack of sufficient data on the southern and central parts of the county continues to impact negatively on the environment and public health. Sloto observes that “without baseline data for associated water-quality constituents, it is not possible to establish a connection between gas production activities and the well-water chemistry that might be affected” (p. 3).
Results from the analysis of the 20 privately owned wells according to this study sought to test the underground water for 53 constituents such as nutrients, trace elements, inorganic constituents, radioactivity, and dissolved gases among others. Sloto (2012) observes that in one of the samples, radioactive materials that exceed the primary drinking water maximum contaminant level (MCL) set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) was present. In other samples, concentrations of dissolved solids of iron, chloride, and manganese that exceed the secondary contaminant levels were also found. Whereas other constituents were found to range within the set levels, it is, however, clear that the fracking process leads to underground water contamination.
This study therefore offers insights into the ineffectiveness of the government regulation in mitigating the negative impacts of hydraulic fracturing. Whereas regulations on shale gas exploration exists, a majority of the producers have been noted to ignore them due to poor monitoring by the local authorities. The companies also maintain a high level of secrecy around their operations that remain hidden from the regulating authorities and the general public (Morison, 2016). The government absurd laxity and a nearly non-existent state of monitoring that has enabled the shale gas companies to operate in secrecy is alluded to in a study by Weinhold (2012).
Weinhold (2012) argues that although natural gas has been lauded as a cleaner fuel as compared to oil or coal, the fracking process is a leading contributor of toxic gases and volatile organic compounds in ground water. With the industry previously unregulated, hydraulic fracturing has therefore significantly impacted on the environment and public health for years without intervention. The author notes that the announcement by EPA for the industry’s compliance with the new regulations of 18 April, 2012 comes late as efforts to mitigate the negative impacts have often been ignored. While many of the environmental groups find the new regulations as an improvement, they however contend that the rules only provide a minimal level protection.
Oil and natural gas production in the US is associated with human health effects such as cancer, developmental damage, and cardiovascular diseases (Weinhold, 2012). However, even with the new rules in place, the natural gas and oil industry’s emissions will only fall by 15% and 13% for VOC and methane respectively. This study also finds elevated levels of pollutants that exceed the set standards in states such as Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado despite the rules being in effect. Weinhold agree with the previous studies on the failure of the government regulation to effect these laws as well as lack of sufficient data to attribute these contaminations to the fracking process.
The above literature points to the laxity of the governing authorities that have led to dangerous environmental concerns around the fracking operations. While awareness of the benefits and impacts of air and water pollution exist, the differences between state and federal reporting of emissions renders the implementation of the laws difficult. More profoundly, the regulatory agencies have only been noted to act following public complaints. In the absence of proper monitoring, synchronization of the EPA rules at both federal and state level, and sufficient data, the fracking operations will continue to impact negatively on the environment and public health.
References
Hausman, C. & Kellogg, R. (2016). Welfare and Distributional Implications of Shale Gas. Brookings. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/welfare-and-distributionalimplications of-shale-gas/
Morrison, P. (2016, 22 April). Column Fracking expert Mark Zoback: We need good science, good engineering, good regulations and good enforcement. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0423-morrison-fracking-zoback-20140422-column.html
Sloto, R., A. (2012). Baseline Groundwater Quality from 20 Domestic Wells in Sullivan County,
Pennsylvania, 2012. U.S. Geological Survey, Report No. 2013-5085. Retrieved from https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2013/5085/
Weinhold, B. (2012). THE FUTURE OF FRACKING: New Rules Target Air Emissions for Cleaner Natural Gas Production. Environmental Health Perspectives, (7), A272. Retrieved from http://www.ehp.niehs.nih.gov.
