Marcellus Shale Drilling in Pennsylvania and its Effect on the Environment - Term Paper Example

Environmental concerns of the Marcellus Shale Introduction The issues of environmental protection have been always positioned as the most crucial in the modern globalized world. A vivid discussion about the Marcellus Shale can be explained in the following terms: on the one hand it is a fruitful area of natural gas reserves beneath the surface of Pennsylvania, but on the other hand in order to extract this natural gas there is a need to implement environmentally risky technologies, which may cause a negative and destructive impact on local the supply of groundwater, use of land etc. Currently, a great emphasis is made on regulations development used for oil and gas drilling in Pennsylvania. Further discussion is determined in the following terms: shale drilling economic efficiency in comparison with the environmental hazards; correlation between drilling operations and environmental protection; considerations about public interest and public health. Therefore, in order to evaluate a real situation of the natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania, it is necessary to consider the most critical points of the industry in detail. Basic facts about the Marcellus Shale If to take into account the following data: 1,500 Marcellus Shale gas wells are located in Pennsylvania and it is supposed that 35,000 to 50,000 more will be developed soon by 2030 (Halperin 2010, p. 17), there is a great prospect to extract huge amounts of natural gas, which may win over oil extraction in Saudi Arabia. Due to the fact that Marcellus drilling operations caused numerous accidents and numerous environmental hazards, it can be claimed that environmentally concerns in the state violate environmental protection laws. On the one hand, it is impossible to correlate economical and environmental concerns in this case, because the society would pay a too high price for natural gas extraction. This particular case is often considered with respect to environmental concerns, because it is on-shore gas deposits in the world and contains a great potential being the largest fuel deposit helping to fill in the gap of the modern energy supply and remain independent from foreign energy resources. Environmental impact of the Marcellus Shale drilling There is no a single right idea defining the full extent of the local impacts from Marcellus Shale operations. Moreover, there is a need to consider this impact both at national and local levels. Of course, the proponents of gas extraction in Marcellus Shale claim that they act in compliance with environmental regulations and they take steps in order to satisfy the needs of the society and avoid economic destruction in the world. At the same time, their position is often supported by their compliance with environmental concerns. Currently, geologists underline that they have known about the natural gas resources of the Marcellus Shale formation for many years. On the one hand, massive gas exploration was considered to be too costly and complicated process and that is why only contemporaries try to embody this idea. Such technological advancement as specifically horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing enable modern engineers extracting natural gas beneath land. Possible environmental issues and community concerns about their health and many other issues have been raised in the discussion about potential environmental and community impacts caused by the drilling. Modern researches and studies are focused on water use and management concerns as well as the kind of the fluids used in the process of shell fracturing (Hiserodt, 2011). Horizontal drilling or hydraulic fracturing: the main choice is made between these two main areas. “The fact is that for hydraulic fracturing large volumes of water are needed. Therefore, it is supposed by the developers of the techniques implemented for hydraulic fracturing that large volumes of water are required for rocks fracturing and large amount of gas producing” (A Rush of Energy in Pennsylvania, 2011). Each well requires more than million gallons of water. It is also needed to add harmful particles to water in order to increase efficiency of water fracturing. In the result of such a harmful activity, negative outcomes as well piping may occur. Moreover, another special concerns of environmentalists is that it is necessary to prevent this negative impact made on well. For example, it is possible to prevent corrosion in pipes and protect the well. In accordance with Department, it is required to work out the best environmentally safe practices to ensure the necessity of safeguards used in the process of fracturing (Halperin 2010, p. 18). Another question remains open: whether New York approved a new type of drilling. A new regulation developed by Governor David A. Paterson (July, 2008) is directed on facilitation of a new drilling and protects the interests of adjacent property owners. Preventive factors of drilling negative outcomes Another regulatory program is DECs Regulatory Program and Permitting Process in combination with New York States developed program is focused on drilling.   IF combined, these regulatory programs are focused on the following issues: A proper consideration of a potential well location The suggested well design evaluation (for example, well casing and cement used for fresh water protection) A concomitant inspection of current drilling operations Strict restoration rules empowerment in the process of drilling (Hiserodt, 2011). Therefore, the abovementioned factors underline that in the modern context environmental issues are properly considered and different preventive measures against well pollution are taken. We can underline that the case of the Marcellus Shale illustrates a proper considerations about the environmental pollution at the local level. Not only financial benefits gained from economically sound projects are evident, but also protection of the environment is taken into account. In other words, the modern nation is much concerned about future prospects of their safe life under environmentally sound conditions and does not really care about an instantaneous enrichment or benefits gaining from short-term projects. Moreover, we can see that during the process of the Marcellus Shell processing the development of energy resources is also supported. The basic fact, which is the starting point for further developments of environmental concerns in this project, is development compliance with the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program developed in 1992. It is also taken into account that the development of new technologies enabled their implementation in different states and it is sound to combine both horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Public health and environment are the basic points to be taken into account by the developers of the natural gas extraction process. It can be suggested that the environmental concerns are so much crucial for the developers of this industry, because Pennsylvania plays an important role in natural gas extraction (McKay, Johnson and Salita, 2011). The price for natural gas extraction is too high, as antagonists of this industry claim. They underline that in the process of the shale cracking the well is damaged. Thus, in accordance with Dr. Conrad "Dan" Volz at University of Pittsburgh, the first and foremost concern for the developers should be water. He claims: "Our rivers and streams are a defining feature of our landscape, yet we have no river basin commission to regulate the drilling. Its an environmental justice issue for a region that for so long has suffered the environmental consequences" (Zwick, 2011). It is also possible to provide a negative comment to the process of drilling on the basis of the absence of technology, directed on proper water recycling and metals take out from the sewage process. Pros and cons of drilling: an environmental perspective There is also another point of view, directed on the necessity of technology development, which removes toxins out from the water. There is a need to implement technologies of energy producing and development of national plan, directed on protection of environment at both governmental and local levels. In terms of the project the Conservancy shale drilling industry is considered as means of regions affection caused by environmental hazards of drilling of the well. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that it is relevant to make investments and develop this industry. Natural gas is a perfect alternative and a great economic opportunity.  The developers of this industry claim that they do not implement the strategy of drilling in too sensitive forest areas. Moreover, the proponents and developers of the industry underline that they are able to incorporate the extraction of natural gas in favor of public safety and social interest. They advance their technologies and are also concerned about recycling of the fracking water and development of irrigation systems transferring the water. This industry should not be compared with the coal industry, as developers claim. The benefits, which they meet, overweigh the challenges. In accordance with Zwick (2011): “Clearly, making fracking "illegal or commercially impracticable" would be a grievous and irresponsible blow to the natural gas industry and the fate of the climate alike, and environmentalists who have that as their real goal are doing the country and the planet no favors. But when industry stands in the way of the commonsense increases in regulation that will be necessary to develop our gas reserves safely, it too is being irresponsible--and incredibly shortsighted” (Zwick 2011, p. 35). Pennsylvania would surely benefit from the shell drilling and long-term benefits for the economy of the country and for the nation are at stake. The developers underline the complexities of extraction methods, if to compare them with other conventional methods. There is a need to drill deep shale. As a result, in spite of the positive discussions provided by the developers of the industry, the following incidents prove environmental hazards of the industry: “In Pennsylvania, there already have been incidents involving water supply well contamination, a fire in an onsite flowback impoundment, and a well blowout during the fracking process which resulted in the off-site release of frack water” (Howels, 2009). It should be also mentioned that forest suffers from the process of fracking and local community cares about the scale of activities taken at the local level for the development of an unconventional deep shale formation well (Manuel, 2010). Conclusion Therefore there is no correct answer to the question: whether to drill or not to drill. Under conditions of the modern world, there is an evident tendency to the development of alternative kinds of fuel, natural safe technologies advancement and so on. On the example of the Marcellus Shale drilling we can assume that environmental hazards should not be considered as concomitant issues of the process of natural gas extraction. The issue about environmental safety should be considered in broader terms, because public health flora and fauna safety are at stake. There is no need for people to sacrifice life important concerns in the name of daily routine facilitation or instantaneous enrichment by introduction of environmentally hazardous technologies. Therefore, this paper is another attempt to draw attention of the society to the crucially important environmental issues. The Marcellus Shale drilling persuaded me once again in the necessity of humanity to facilitate their life, but not in the name of the nature or their own health. Works cited 1. Halperin, Alex. "Drill, Maybe Drill? Upstate New Yorkers Debate Whether Natural-Gas Drilling Is Their Ticket out of Economic Depression-Or a Serious Environmental Risk." The American Prospect May 2010: 16+. Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 2. Hiserodt, Ed. "The Coming Shale Gale: Recently Considered to Be Waning, Natural-Gas Production Is Now Booming, Thanks to New Methods of Obtaining Gas from Shale Stone. but Environmentalists Want to End the Drilling." The New American 20 June 2011: 10+. Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 3. Howells, Polly. "Dont Frack with Our Water!." In These Times Oct. 2009: 24+.Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 4. Manuel, John. "EPA Tackles Fracking." Environmental Health Perspectives 118.5 (2010): 199. Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 5. McKay, Lynn Kerr, Ralph H. Johnson, and Laurie Alberts Salita. "Science and the Reasonable Development of Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Resources in Pennsylvania and New York." Energy Law Journal 32.1 (2011): 125+.Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 6. "A Rush of Energy in Pennsylvania; Marcellus Shale Motherlode of Natural Gas Brings World of Change to Wary Community." The Washington Times (Washington, DC) 23 May 2011: A01. Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 7. Russell, William L. Structural Geology for Petroleum Geologists. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1955. Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. 8. Zwick, Jesse. "Clean, Cheap, and out of Control: Why Natural Gas Could Be the Fuel of the Future, and How the Industry Could Blow It All Up." Washington Monthly May-June 2011: 34+. Questia. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. Read More