Natural gas: Will drilling create a big fracking problem? Last week, Northern Express covered a potential boom in natural gas exploration, known as fracking (short for hydraulic fracturing), that has some people excited over the money to be made, while others worry about potential water contamination. This week, area environmentalists—fractured over the Traverse City biomass proposal—weigh in on this new issue. By Anne Stanton The controversy over natural gas fracking comes at a time when this cleanest of the fossil fuels has emerged as an option in the energy mix. Huge supplies are opening up across the country and prices are down. Wind energy entrepreneur Marty Lagina of Traverse City, featured in last week’s Express article, wants to couple wind and natural gas. His idea is to build a “smart” natural gas plant right next to a field of wind turbines, which would kick on when the wind is low. The hybrid power would solve wind’s greatest downside—its inability to provide 24/7 power, thus making it a real player in the power mix. A veteran in the natural gas field, he said that water contamination is extremely rare. At the same time, Traverse City Light and Power has backed off biomass gasification as an energy source due to concerns over air pollution potentially causing respiratory problems and the impact on Michigan forests (several biomass plants have been proposed in Northern Michigan). TCL&P’s newest proposal is to analyze natural gas, possibly renovating its aged peaker plant in Kalkaska County.
MORE PROBLEMS... “Gas possesses many problems and is not a panacea. Water contamination is just one problem. It being a fossil fuel is another for me,” said Jim Carruthers, a TCL&P board member and veteran activist who favored biomass because the wood supply is renewable. “For the past 25 years the environmental community has been fighting use of fossil fuels for energy and now all of a sudden they are changing their tune because they don’t like biomass. Nothing is perfect. Also, most of the gas leases were gobbled up by out of state interests. Very few if any went to Michigan companies so it really will do nothing toward boosting our economy. Just because it is there does not mean it is good for us, the environment or the energy industry. A handful of environmentalists are leading our community astray with misinformation, which is most damaging.” Jim Olson, one of the leading defenders of Michigan water, wasn’t outspoken against biomass, although he doesn’t support it on a large scale. But he is deeply fearful about fracking’s impact on the water supply. He said that state and landowners, especially farmers, are leasing oil and gas rights without knowing the full consequences. They don’t realize that their rights are subordinate to the drilling company when signing away their rights. Specifically, if the natural gas driller needs groundwater to complete the fracking operation, the property owner’s rights to that water come second—unless otherwise specified in a lease. “On top of this, the individual and cumulative effects and impacts will pervasively affect adjacent landowners, lakes, and streams. I don’t believe the state is looking out for the public’s interest in water,” Olson said.
SEEK MORATORIUM Olson feels that citizens and the state’s leaders must demand a moratorium on any more leasing and permits until there has been a complete and thorough investigation and determination of the effects and cumulative impacts of hydraulic fracturing statewide. M’Lynn Hartwell, also an environmental activist who opposed biomass, supports Lagina’s idea of coupling natural gas and wind. She has also suggested using biofuels from area farms. Does she still support the idea with the environmental concerns over fracking? “The short answer is yes, but the long answer would explain that we need more regulation over the natural gas drilling industry and accountability. Much more,” she said. Fracking has actually been used commercially since 1949 in more than one million wells by the natural gas and oil exploration and production industry, including many shallow natural gas wells, she said. Most wells were managed properly and caused no significant harm to the environment. But Michigan must absolutely assure that all environmental protections are in place to protect air and water before granting permits for fracking, which involves drilling at much greater depths—up to two miles—using the tremendous pressure of millions of gallons of water and close to 600 chemicals, several of them toxic. “I believe if drillers were to have their license to operate in Michigan suspended due to pollution from their carelessness, there would be very few, if any, accidents.” Hartwell also wants to force drillers to reuse their fracking fluid, rather than consume millions of gallons of fresh water every time they drill. “Currently fresh water polluted with fracking fluids are disposed of in deep injection wells. This takes our fresh water supply out of natural systems, something that is a very ill advised idea,” she said.
STATE LAW Drillers were exempted from the federal Safe Drinking Water Act during the Bush administration. The good news is that three Michigan state laws require drinking water protection, including the Water Resources Act, the Environmental Response Act, and the Michigan Environmental Protection Act, said Chris Grobbel, an environmental consultant. Ed Timm, a chemical engineer who was heavily involved in stopping an Alba injection well in the Jordan River Valley, said that the disposal of fracking and brine water in injection wells will surely become an issue because of the threat posed to rivers and streams. Yet it’s unrealistic to believe that solar or wind—a favorite alternative among environmentalists—can supplant coal in the short-term. The huge jolt in energy costs would be catastrophic for businesses and homes. Despite political promises, experts believe that the transition to solar and wind will likely take about 100 years, he said. “The age of cheap power is over, and we have to look at conservation, because power will cost four times as much. Conservation is important, but when you live in Northern Michigan, you can only go so far. This is an intensive energy climate to live in. The natural gas and wind hybrid with low carbon and air pollution is one that might work, but the state must think big picture as we proceed to new energy sources, Olson said. “It’s our natural gas,” he said. “It belongs to us. Why isn’t the state leveraging it with conservation requirements. Why isn’t it getting an assurance of stablized prices and a certain supply in Michigan before selling these leases? We are not thinking big picture. This planet is facing serious problems. We have to very carefully articulate the public purposes and goals we are after—water, climate change, purity of water. How do we get there? “The BP disaster in the Gulf is a great example of why we must do this. Putting it in our face as human beings that there are certain areas that are so important to everyone that we have to drop the old thinking about turning important public matters entirely into a highly centralized private market mechanism.” Timm said there are still things we can do as individuals, such as choosing to build low-energy homes or improving the homes we have. “Just for grins, I got out my ancient copy of my Whole Earth catalog in 1968, and I was stunned by how current it is. How to make car fuel out of French fry oil, solar and wind, earth bermed homes. We were on the right track during the Jimmy Carter administration, and we didn’t want to hear it.”
Send a Press Release
