WBEZ | fracking

Morning Shift: May Day

Wed, 01 May 2013 08:24:00 -0500

EPA rolls back methane emissions from natural gas

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:25:00 -0500

In a revision to its sweeping inventory of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, the Environmental Protection Agency scaled back its estimate for natural gas, stoking supporters’ claims that the fossil fuel could be a viable carbon reduction strategy in the short-term.

But those pushing for a ban of the controversial technique of high-volume hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, say the data are still unclear and that EPA’s revision doesn’t change the big picture.

The Illinois legislature is at a crossroads on fracking as members prepare to vote on bills that would either regulate the process or ban it entirely for at least two years.

Natural gas is mostly methane, a greenhouse gas 21 times more potent than carbon dioxide, according to EPA standards. Mining and distributing the gas involves some leakage, but the amount that escapes is a point of contention. Supporters contend if methane leakage is contained, the fossil fuel burns about twice as clean as coal. Some say it could serve as a bridge to an electricity grid dominated by renewable energy.

Using new data largely reported by oil and gas industry groups, EPA’s report lowered its estimate of methane emissions from natural gas between 1990 and 2010 by about 20 percent.

Previous studies, however, have calculated figures that appear to torpedo its viability as a comparatively low-carbon fuel. The EPA’s latest inventory comes ahead of work from NOAA scientists and the University of Texas at Austin studying natural gas emissions on a national scale. Their results are expected within a year.

Most of the data currently used to estimate methane leakage don’t come from field tests done at real wells, which has led some to question their worth. Hugh MacMillan, a senior researcher with Food and Water Watch, says EPA raised its estimate of 2010 emissions from fracking itself at the same time that it drastically lowered emissions from another part of the process.

"EPA is making large changes in how it’s arriving at these estimates, and that means there remain large uncertainties," MacMillan said.

Food and Water Watch, like many environmental groups, supports an outright ban on fracking.

A 2011 study by the Center for Atmospheric Research found methane leakage would have to be below 2 percent to beat coal when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Using EPA’s 2013 and 2012 data to calculate methane leakage, a new report from the World Resources Institute found the recently revised numbers produced a leakage rate roughly one third lower than the agency’s previous estimate — a figure below that 2 percent threshold.

Even if the lower methane figures prove true, MacMillan is against fracking.

"'Better than coal' is not an acceptable measure," he said. "We need to do more to fight climate change."

System failures can have effects beyond accelerating global warming. Cement well casings cracked in Dimock, Penn., where methane contaminated some nearby wells, according to the state government.

And while aquifers are separated from gas wells by thousands of feet of rock, environmentalists worry small fissures in the cement could over time cause failures and foul drinking water. During fracking, large volumes of water flow back to the surface along with the freed oil or gas, and they are laced with naturally radioactive minerals and proprietary chemicals.

Industry experts counter that wasted gas is wasted product, and that new technology will continue to tamp down leakage.

In March, Illinois legislators moved toward a vote on a regulatory bill called the Hydraulic Fracturing Regulation Act. It would set up regulations and permitting for fracking.

Negotiations over the regulatory bill hit a snag when oil and gas companies objected to natural resource extraction fees and a surprise amendment that would create a licensing board. It would require energy companies to hire a state-licensed water well driller in order to be licensed for high-volume fracking in Illinois.

Lawmakers could also back moratorium bills in the state house and senate, which call for a two-year ban on fracking so scientists and regulators have more time to study and prepare for the industry explosion that’s likely to take place.

Fracking and horizontal drilling in general are old technologies, but recent advances have allowed them to be used together and on large scales. There are already about 500,000 acres leased mainly in Wayne, Hamilton and Saline counties in southeastern Illinois. The right conditions could go as far north as Jasper and Effingham counties. Fracking grew in the U.S. by at least 48 percent per year in the last five years, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Chris Bentley writes about the environment. Follow him on Twitter at @Cementley.

Madigan, Mell push for two-year ban on fracking

Fri, 15 Mar 2013 05:00:00 -0500

As legislation to allow and regulate hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” in Illinois’ New Albany Shale moves through the state legislature, House Speaker Michael Madigan has called for a two-year ban on the controversial fossil fuel extraction process so scientists can study its potential impacts on public health and the environment.

Rep. Deb Mell’s HB 3086 in the House and SB 1418 (sponsored by Sen. Mattie Hunter) each call for a statewide moratorium on fracking until a task force conducts “a thorough review."

Fracking blasts loose previously inaccessible stores of gas and oil in rocks deep underground using water, sand and a proprietary mix of chemicals. The process has allowed other states to tap new energy resources, but has sparked widespread pollution concerns.

So far there is no high-volume fracking in Illinois, but Madigan’s proposal pre-empts the expected passage of a regulatory bill that would set up a permitting process and potentially allow drilling in a matter of months.

Downstate Reps. John Bradley (D-117) and David Reis (R-108) introduced that bill, HB2615, which was called the most stringent nationwide for its water monitoring provisions and environmental restrictions.

According to an amendment to that bill, anyone applying for a permit must disclose to the government the chemicals and total volume of water in their fracking mix at least three weeks before they start drilling. They can apply to have that information protected as a trade secret, however, in which case it could be revealed only to a health professional who “articulates why the information is needed,” or to other government agencies in the event of an emergency. In addition, anyone can challenge a company’s invocation of trade secret protection.

The department will also create a website for public information on hydraulic fracturing, including a searchable database with information on well operators, their chemical disclosure information (that hasn’t been protected as a trade secret), and violations or complaints.

Proponents of the bill announced Thursday that industry would be required to pay $13,000 per well, as well as 3 percent per barrel in severance taxes for the first two years of operation, with that figure set to increase over time. Of that money, about 85 percent will go to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources for enforcing hydraulic fracturing regulations. The remainder will go to the state's Environmental Protection Agency for general pollution complaints.

But environmental groups, who praised Madigan for supporting the moratorium, urge caution. Activists rallied in Springfield this week, calling for such a ban in light of concerns over fracking's potentially harmful effects on the environment and public health. The federal Environmental Protection Agency is currently studying fracking’s impact on drinking water resources. Their report is not due until 2014.

Industry advocates say even a temporary ban on fracking is an economic loss to the state. A report commissioned by the Illinois Chamber of Commerce Foundation projected up to $9.5 billion in economic activity and 47,000 jobs for the state if 90 percent of estimated resources are developed. Besides direct employment in drilling, that report included other industries, including food services, hospitals, real estate and engineering.

New York’s State Assembly voted for a 2-year moratorium on hydraulic fracturing last week, but the measure now faces a divided state senate. Governor Andrew Cuomo is awaiting recommendations from the Departments of Health and Environmental Conservation, and has previously supported two similar measures in 2010 and 2011.

In Illinois, environmental organizations lobbying for the moratorium include The Illinois Coalition For a Moratorium on Fracking (ICMF), S.A.F.E. (Southern Illinoisans Against Fracturing our Environment, CAPOW! (Citizens Act to Protect Our Water), Stop the Frack Attack on Illinois, Rising Tide, RAN Chicago, IPA (Illinois People’s Action), the Gray Panthers, the Illinois Sierra Club and Environment Illinois.

Chris Bentley writes about environmental issues. Follow him on Twitter at @Cementley.

Manti Te'o hoax: Sports reporting's best ... and worst

Thu, 17 Jan 2013 05:00:00 -0600

SPORTS REPORTING'S BEST ... AND WORST. Deadspin's revelation that the girlfriend of Notre Dame flinebacker Manti Te'o didn't die -- and, in fact, never lived -- is the result of reporting "better than almost anything you’ll see on any media site," according to Sports Media Guy Brian Moritz. But he says it shines a spotlight on the worst of others' work.
* Which news organizations swallowed the hoax? The Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times make a list compiled by SB Nation.
* Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick calls it a "sophisticated hoax perpetrated for reasons we can't fully understand. ... Manti was the victim."
* John Kass: "Swarbrick is the same mealy-mouthed bureaucrat who defended the football program after student videographer Declan Sullivan ... was sent into that scissor lift in the high wind and died when it collapsed in October 2010."
* CNN: Dead girlfriend tweeted last night.

'HOW SHAMELESS DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO DO THAT?' Politico's Roger Simon (member of the Illini Media Alumni Hall of Fame) poses that question to the NRA for its video "twisting the Secret Service protection of the president’s children to aid those who make a fortune by manufacturing and selling guns."
* Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show": 10 years ago, NRA-allied representative passed law that limited the government's ability to do what the NRA now says it wants the government to do.
* Republican Party chair calls Obama's plan -- the biggest gun-control push in generations -- an "executive power grab."
* Cook County gun reporting law wins board president's backing.

HIGH EXPECATIONS ... LOWERED. Although aldermen who backed decriminalizing marijuana possession in Chicago predicted the city could take in as much as $7 million dollars a year from tickets, a WBEZ investigation finds the take since the change took effect in August more like $98,000. Bonus: Map shows 2012 pot arrests and tickets issued.

WHO WANTS TO BE AN ALDERMAN? Mayor Emanuel says he's taking online applications to replace Sandi Jackson.
* But privately, Jackson says she's picking her own replacement.

FREE CALLS, COURTESY OF FACEBOOK. As of this week, Facebook's Messenger app for iPhone has acquired a button that lets you call other Messenger app users free over Wi-Fi and cellular networks.
* Metra set to experiment with Wi-Fi on commuter trains.

DIG THIS. Construction projects can reveal archaeological keys to Chicago's past. A WBEZ Curious City report reveals some of what's turned up.

A FRACKING BRIGHT LIGHT. NPR's Robert Krulwich examines a phenomenon that makes the North Dakota skies rival the Aurora Borealis.

ANNOUNCEMENTS.
* Study up. Tomorrow brings WBEZ Meyerson News Quiz No. 2. Last week's is here.
* Soundtrack for preparation of this edition: All Over The World: The Very Best Of ELO on Rdio.com.

'Morning Shift' #57: Big fracking deal

Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:25:00 -0600

Proposed mine may threaten Starved Rock

Wed, 04 Jan 2012 18:59:00 -0600

Starved Rock is located in Utica, Illinois - a two hour drive southwest from Chicago. It's a popular destination for fishing, rock climbing, hiking and picnicking.

Tony Giordano said a new silica sand mine adjacent to the park would mean new jobs and could inject $9 million into the local economy. He's the president of Mississippi Sand, the company proposing the mine. It mines a special kind of sandstone found in this part of the state and sell it to companies who frac for natural gas around the United States.

Giordano said he's not surprised that people are concerned about what the mine could mean for Starved Rock.

"We don't believe in any way that our utilization of our proposed parcel will negatively impact anybody within the park," he said. Giordano added that regulatory bodies are in place to make sure of that, too.

But environmentalists worry about its effects on the local ecology. Mike Phillips is a Geology Professor at Illinois Valley Community College and said the mine would hurt 73 acres of wetlands.

"The process of creating the mine will de-water part of that wetland initially and then the mine plan has them mining most of it," Phillips said.

Phillips said the aesthetic value of the park is at risk, too, "If there's noise, if there's dust, if you can feel vibrations from the occasional explosions at the mine - what would the value of that be? And that's very, very difficult to determine."

Phillips said he and many others he's spoken to learned about the proposed mine in November. He's hoping LaSalle County will slow the process down of issuing permits to the mining company and that they'll first make a comprehensive assessment of how a mine may impact the ecology and economy of Starved Rock, as many people's make their livings off the park's tourism.

The LaSalle County Board voted unanimously for the mine in December and they could make a final recommendation next week.

Gas drilling could take air out of offshore wind

Wed, 09 Nov 2011 11:11:00 -0600

I understand the power of Lake Erie wind as soon we’re out past the breakwaters of Cleveland Harbor. The waves make our 74-foot tugboat bob like a rubber toy in my preschooler’s bath tub.

Before long, I’m sweating and looking for a place to heave.

Right next to me, Bill Mason seems to be enjoying the ride. In fact, he wants to show me a spot where the wind is even stronger. “Where we’re headed is to an anemometer,” Mason says, mispronouncing the instrument’s name. “It’s been measuring the wind speeds since, I think, 2007. So I know we have good wind.”

Mason doesn’t know all the particulars about wind energy. But, as the Cuyahoga County prosecutor, he knows a lot about Northeast Ohio. Since taking office in 1999, Mason has seen about a 100,000 manufacturing jobs disappear from the area.

Installing a handful of wind turbines offshore could spark a revival, Mason says, changing Cleveland’s image from a deindustrialized ghost town to “a green city on the blue lake.”

Mason has been promoting the wind-farm idea for seven years. In 2009, he helped form a quasi-public group, the Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation, to turn the idea into reality. Representing Cleveland and four counties along the lake, LEEDCo has held dozens of community meetings. It has secured an option for nine square miles of the lake. It has studied possible impacts on wildlife. And it has begun work on designs and permits.

Mason tells me Cleveland could help build offshore wind farms throughout the Great Lakes. He points to the city’s proximity to rail lines, deep-water port facilities and manufacturers. He says companies in the area could retool to make parts and supplies ranging from transmission cables to ice-resistant blade coating. The wind-farm supporters commissioned a study that says their project could lead to 15,000 new Ohio jobs within two decades.

The supply chain could include Lincoln Electric, which makes welding equipment in Euclid, a suburb northeast of Cleveland. Lincoln Electric is already getting a taste of wind-energy generation since installing a 443-foot-tall turbine this year to help power the company’s main plant.

Driving up the lakeshore, I can see the three rotor blades spinning from miles away. On a windy day, the tips go 160 miles an hour, the company tells me. But I can’t hear any sound from the turbine until I’m within a stone’s throw. Looking straight up at the blades, I notice a subtle swoosh as each one passes.

The turbine has given a lot of local people—from regulators to engineers to truck drivers—their first contact with a wind project. Lincoln Electric energy manager Seth Mason (no relation to the prosecutor) says this experience could help with the offshore installation, which would be just a few miles away.

“You basically have the same wind regime [and] you’re basically going to have the same amount of migratory birds at this longitude,” Mason says. “So I think it provides a case study for the next machine.”

It’s not just local boosters who think a Lake Erie wind farm could revive Northeast Ohio. Christopher Hart, the U.S. Department of Energy’s offshore wind chief, sees it that way too. “If a place like Cleveland is able to establish the demonstration project and then is able to leverage that demonstration project into a larger position in the industry, this could really, really have an impact on the local economy.”

Hart tells me Cleveland has the best shot at installing the first Great Lakes wind farm. But he points to a huge barrier: “Given the current technology, given the current regulatory structure, offshore wind doesn’t make economic sense.”

DOE calculations suggest it’s more than twice as expensive to generate electricity from offshore wind as from coal, natural gas or nuclear fission. The New York Power Authority pointed to costs this fall when it pulled the plug on some proposed Great Lakes turbines.

That frustrates Chris Wisseman, who leads a consortium called Freshwater Wind that LEEDCo chose last year to develop Cleveland’s offshore wind farm. “All we’re talking about here is a new technology that looks like it’s got the ability to be very cost-effective inside of a decade,” he says.

The construction will run about $130 million, Wisseman tells me. The financing will be tricky because few utilities are eager to buy electricity that is so expensive. The only purchaser on board so far is municipally owned Cleveland Public Power, which has agreed to buy a quarter of the wind-farm output.

So LEEDCo is pushing for Ohio to compel utilities to buy the electricity and pass along the cost to customers—a process known as rate recovery. If the plan covered just northern Ohio, Wisseman says, business and residential customers would each pay an extra $0.40 a month.

The area’s big utility, Akron-based First Energy, says it won’t take a stand on that rate recovery until it sees a proposal. The Ohio Association of Manufacturers tells me it will probably go along with the plan if it doesn’t hit electricity-intensive companies hard.

But rate recovery won’t get far without support from Gov. John Kasich. He appoints the members of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, which regulates the state’s electricity rates. And his Republican Party controls both houses of the state legislature.

At an energy forum Kasich’s office organized this fall, the governor didn’t leave any doubt that his energy focus would be an Appalachian rock layer called Utica Shale. In Ohio, that shale holds a lot of natural gas. To free up the fuel, companies such as Oklahoma-based Chesapeake Energy Corp. want to drill thousands of horizontal wells and inject pressurized fluids—a process known as fracking.

An industry-funded study says the fracking could create more than 200,000 jobs in Ohio over the next four years. The potential boom is keeping Kasich’s staff busy. “We have had 129 separate meetings—5 regional meetings, 78 with business associations, 46 meetings with oil-and-gas division experts—all across Ohio,” the governor said at the forum.

At the same time, contaminated groundwater in nearby Pennsylvania is giving fracking a bad name. Kasich promises environmental safeguards for Ohio.

The governor says he’ll also promote renewable energy efforts. So, when I catch up with him, I ask whether those will include Cleveland’s offshore wind project.

“There is a place for renewables,” Kasich replies. “But we have to be very clear: They’re very expensive. That doesn’t mean there aren’t opportunities in the state. It doesn’t mean that over time they [won’t] become less expensive. But specific projects have to be looked at very, very carefully.”

I press Kasich, asking whether he will support the rate recovery proposed for the offshore project. He declines to answer.

Another Ohio Republican is talking about that rate recovery. State Sen. Kris Jordan, who represents suburbs north of Columbus, tells me it’s a bad idea. “I just don’t believe—when we have more affordable, more ready energy sources—that government should be subsidizing" an offshore wind farm.

Back on the Lake Erie tugboat, the vessel’s captain notices my pale color. He says he once had to clean off a seasick crewmate with a hose.

Bill Mason, the prosecutor behind the proposed wind farm, agrees I’ve seen enough of the lake. On the way back to port, he shakes his head at the thought of a natural-gas boom tripping up his project.

“We don’t know how much energy is going to be produced from this fracking,” Mason says. “We don’t know the environmental damage that possibly could happen from it. And we don’t know what it’s going to cost, if there is damage, for that recovery. If we take that step down that road, won’t it be nice to know that we have other alternatives such as the wind industry out here on the Great Lakes?”

And wouldn’t it be nice, Mason adds, if the center of that industry were Cleveland?

Great Lakes wind projects struggle for footing

Offshore wind-energy advocates face tall hurdles in the Great Lakes, but some projects are advancing. WBEZ’s Maham Khan brings us these snapshots.

Gas extraction creates a boom for sand

Wed, 03 Aug 2011 04:00:00 -0500

The rise of fracking as a method for extracting natural gas from shale rock has triggered demand for a key ingredient in the process: silica sand. In parts of the upper Midwest, there's been a rush to mine this increasingly valuable product.

In northeast Iowa, a mine recently reopened to profit from the new demand. It's owned by the Pattison family, who have run a grain business for decades. They had been storing the grain in the old, unused mine tunnels carved into the cliffs and then loading it onto barges to ship downriver. They pretty much ignored the sandstone all around them.

But then one day owner Kyle Pattison got a phone call.

"We decided to open the mine because of being requested by a fracking company to," Pattison says. "They asked us to supply sand, for frack."

So with a nudge from the natural gas industry, Pattison sold his grain business and opened up Pattison Sand Co.

And he's not the only one to jump into the business. Sandstone deposits are plentiful and accessible across the upper Midwest and in Texas and Oklahoma. Dozens of companies are ramping up production and expanding their mines and quarries to meet the huge demand. But why can't the natural gas industry get enough of this sand?

"This sand happens to have lot of properties that they covet. So they're descending on all these areas to provide their sand for their shale gas fracking operations," says Iowa State University geologist Bill Simpkins.

He says the industry is using silica sand because of its unique spherical shape and incredible toughness. To extract natural gas bound up in shale rock, energy companies drill thousands of feet down and then blast pressurized water and chemicals into the shale to fracture it.

"And the role of t he sand is to keep the fractures open," Simpkins says.

Other materials can do the same job, but sand is the cheapest. According to U.S. Geological Survey data, production of frack sand has more than quadrupled since 2000.

Tom Dolley of the U.S. Geological Survey says he's not sure just how many frack sand mines there are across the country, but he says the industry is growing. "It's happening so quickly it makes my head spin sometimes," Dolley says.

One region that's seen huge growth is in Wisconsin, which is already the nation's second-largest industrial sand mining state after Illinois. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources official Tom Portle likened the surge to the gold rush.

"There's been other counties where there's been frack sand mines for many, many years, and they've just kind of been sleepy deals, kind of under the radar, steady business, but not explosive like we're seeing now," Portle says.

Back at the Pattison Sand Co. in Iowa, business has been booming. Over the past 6 months, the company has hired 50 workers.

To enter the mine, you have to drive a diesel truck — because gasoline is too combustible — down a switchback road that winds its way to the bottom of the 300-foot bluff to an opening carved into the cliff's side.

After decades of using the mines just to store grain, sand is flying out the door. Pattison ships as many as 45 rail cars full of sand each day. A back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that could bring in more than $100,000 a day.

Dolley says this sand fetches a much higher price when used for fracking than for construction or even making glass bottles.

"There's considerable variation in price, but yeah, frack is gonna be over double what you would see for glass container price," he says.

In Iowa alone, the Pattison mine could easily have enough sandstone to last 10 years. That's a lot considering that to meet fracking demand, it's running 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, all year long.