Environmental Issues · Local Issues · The Great Lakes · Uncategorized

Frack Attack

With most introductions to the newest trend in “clean energy” the public response is explosive. In the Midwest we are seeing this with hydrologic fracturing (or “fracking”), a process used to extract natural gas from deep in the ground.

Pictured right is a shale map from U.S. Energy Information Administration.

With nationwide reports of water contamination and earth quakes allegedly tied to fracking, we find that impact studies and regulations are a few steps behind.

For Michigan, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality stated in a report in May 2011:  “The DEQ has not found any cases where hydraulic fracturing has caused adverse impacts to the environment or public health in Michigan.” The major concerns listed by the DEQ are as follows:

  1. Keeping the gas contained once it is fracked from the ground to protect aquifers (water reserves)
  2. Deciding where and how much water is withdrawn (A single fracture treatment for a typical Antrim well requires 50,000 gallons of water while a deeper Marcellus gas well needs about 500,000 gallons of water – Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council-National Wildlife Federation)
  3. Making sure the produced water (or the water that was used and mixed with chemicals) is disposed of properly.
  4. Managing flowback water (or water that comes back up through the piping)
  5. Identifying the chemicals added to the water during the fracking process (Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council does list a few of the known chemicals, Click Here to link to their fact sheet, but many are still undisclosed.)

Other states however, are experiencing adverse impacts. Recently Ohio experienced a 4.0 earthquake, the 11th earthquake to occur near a 9,200 foot deep disposal well where liquid waste from hydrofracking was injected, according to a New York Times report on January 3, 2012. In Texas, 4.8 magnitude earthquake occurred in a “center point for natural gas and oil production,” as stated in a KUT news, National Public Radio report.

Near hydraulic fracking sites in Wisconsin there have been concerns about water quality, prompting the EPA to conduct a study of ground water contamination. In the Draft Investigation of Ground Water Contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming the EPA states “A lines of reasoning approach utilized at this site best supports an explanation that inorganic and organic constituents associated with hydraulic fracturing have contaminated ground water at and below the depth used for domestic water supply. However, further investigation would be needed to determine if organic compounds associated with hydraulic fracturing have migrated to domestic wells in the area of investigation.”

The report also emphasizes a need for future study, believing that there is a “need for collection of baseline data, greater transparency on chemical composition of hydraulic fracturing fluids, and greater emphasis on well construction and integrity requirements and testing.”

While these findings help to pinpoint the problems, they unfortunately arrive after the fact. Regulation is too often behind the curve.

Luckily in Michigan the DEQ has set standards and permit requirements for fracking. As of September 2011, the DEQ implemented a Water Withdrawl Analysis for High Volume Hydraulic-fracturing with a two-phase permitting process to decide if there is any potential for Adverse Resource Impacts (ARI). These evaluations will decide if the area is fit for high volume fracking.

Great Michigan is an effort among environmental, conservation, and public health groups across Michigan to address environmental issues across the state. With the issue of hydraulic fracking wells they state: “At present, these wells are not subject to the highest monitoring and testing requirements because the fluids are designated as oil and gas waste, and this designation results in less protective requirements. There are no requirements to analyze the constituents in the fluids prior to injection.”

While the future of fracking is uncertain, we know it’s not going anywhere and we continue to learn more about the process every day. It is my hope that the industry take a hard look at the environmental impacts before continuing to move forward, or that regulations be put in place to make sure hydrofracking is a responsible and sustainable practice.

If you are interested in what fracking looks like, watch the 2 min video below:

Environmental Issues · The Great Lakes

This lake is my lake; this lake is your lake…

Our lakes are in trouble, which threatens to drag down an already stressed economy in the Great Lakes region.

A study was released this month by the National Wildlife Federation called- Feast and Famine in the Great Lakes: How Nutrients and Invasive Species Interact to Overwhelm the Coasts and Starve Offshore Waters, about the greatest problems happening within the ecosystem of the Great Lakes. The study notes that about 1.5 million jobs in the United States are associated with the Great Lakes in some way.

The issues within the Great Lakes revolve around a tug of war pull between a nutrient rich and nutrient deprived lake system.

How can there be both you ask?

The report explains there is too much nutrient near shore from all the surface runoff pouring into the lakes, and the essential nutrients are not able to reach the deeper depths of the lake. This is due in part to the zebra and quagga mussels that hitched a ride to the Great Lakes some few decades ago. They are everywhere within the Great Lakes, filtering water and holding the nutrient load near shore. With the filtered water providing sunlight and the abundant amounts of phosphorus available near the shore, the algae are able to thrive, especially now that water temperatures have increased.

When the nutrients are trapped near shore, fish and plant life beyond the shoreline are left starving. So what you have is explosive and dangerous algae blooms, too many mussels, and fish not getting what they need to survive and flourish.

Once the algae eventually die, it sinks and sucks up the available oxygen. This causes what the report calls “dead zones” in the deeper depths of the lake. Fish then have even less of a chance for survival with both oxygen and nutrients being depleted within their ecosystem.

The landscape surrounding the Great Lakes is very different than it was hundreds of years ago. Urban, industrial and agricultural land covers what were once miles and miles of trees and wetlands. The barriers that once kept the lakes protected are now mostly gone, making it harder to keep the lakes healthy. Of course, people will continue to populate the land, but there are things that can be done to give the lakes a better chance.

So the story of our lakes cannot end here. Not only are there millions of people that rely on the Great Lakes for income, but there are millions more that care about and enjoy the beauty and recreation these lakes provide, and rely on the resources supplied by the Great Lakes.

Read this report from National Wildlife Federation to learn more about what the lakes are worth, how our lakes are changing, and what is being done about it: Feast and Famine in the Great Lakes: How Nutrients and Invasive Species Interact to Overwhelm the Coasts and Starve Offshore Waters

Here is a list of programs and organizations provided by the study that are working on Great Lakes issues:

 The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

Clean Water Act

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)

U.S. Farm Bill

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

Total maximum daily loads (TMDLs)

International Reference Group on Great Lakes Pollution from Land Use Activities (PLUARG)

Environment Canada

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA)

International Joint Commission (IJC)

References: Feast and Famine in the Great Lakes: How Nutrients and Invasive Species Interact to Overwhelm the Coasts and Starve Offshore Waters