Article

2016-04-27 Economy

Why Are They Hiding The Good News About Fracking?

Geologists at the University of Cincinnati just wrapped up a three-year investigation of hydraulic fracturing and its impact on local water supplies.

The result? There's no evidence—zero, zilch, nada—that fracking contaminates drinking water. Researchers hoped to keep these findings secret.

Why would a public research university boasting a top-100 geology program

"So, how many geology programs are there in the U.S.?"
"Um, about 102. I think."
"Does that include junior colleges?"
"Maybe. They got any rocks?"

deliberately hide its work? Because, as lead researcher Amy Townsend-Small explained, "our funders, the groups that had given us funding in the past, were a little disappointed in our results. They feel that fracking is scary and so they were hoping our data could point to a reason to ban it."

That an environmentalist ideologue would see evidence of fracking's safety as "disappointing" is to be expected. But that a university would so flagrantly put politics before science is deeply troubling.

Hydraulic fracturing has significantly bolstered America's energy independence by unlocking an abundance of domestic oil and gas. In fact, our country has officially surpassed Russia and Saudi Arabia as the global leader in natural gas and oil production, respectively. Just as important, these newfound energy resources have delivered economic benefits to Americans. In 2012, the average U.S. household had an extra $1,200 thanks to the energy boom. The oil and gas industry, meanwhile, supports more than 2 million jobs—a number that is expected to grow to nearly 5 million by 2025.

This energy renaissance has also helped the environment since fracking provides a cheaper, cleaner alternative to coal. Last April, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions hit a 27-year low, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, thanks largely to a widespread transition from coal to natural gas.

None of these benefits would matter if fracking endangered drinking water. So the University of Cincinnati's report comes as good news. Of course, the findings only confirm what experts and policymakers have been saying for years.

Back in 2011, for instance, former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson admitted that there hasn't been a "proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water." Two years later, current EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy affirmed Jackson's remark, stating, "I am not aware of any definitive determinations that would contradict those statements."

A review of the available research bears out both claims. Consider the Ground Water Protection Council's recent study on gas exploration in Ohio, from 1983 until 2007, and in Texas, from 1993 until 2008. According to that report, neither officials in Texas nor those in Ohio "identified a single groundwater contamination incident…at any of these horizontal shale gas wells" during those periods.

Similarly, a 2013 U.S. Geological Survey study on the Fayetteville Shale in north-central Arkansas found "that shale gas development, at least in this area, has been done without negatively impacting drinking water resources." A 2015 EPA draft report confirmed these findings.

Fracking's impressive safety record is partly due to the energy industry's own vigilance; it has worked aggressively to improve the safety of oil and gas production.

The University of Cincinnati's fracking research further establishes what myriad studies have already shown: Concerns about groundwater contamination are baseless. As Townsend-Small stated, "We haven't seen anything to show that wells have been contaminated by fracking."

This might be "disappointing" to certain environmentalists, as Townsend-Small suggests. And it may interfere with the university's fundraising efforts. But for the rest of us, the study demonstrates that fracking is a safe source of jobs, prosperity and low-cost energy.

Posted by Steve White 2016-04-27 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ] Top

#1 It is only 'good news' when it's your lease, your drilling company, or your well servicing firm.

Posted by Besoeker 2016-04-27 01:36|| 2016-04-27 01:36|| Front Page Top

#2 But that a university would so flagrantly put politics before science is deeply troubling.

‏ROFLMAO

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-04-27 05:06|| 2016-04-27 05:06|| Front Page Top

#3 And you are shocked that in todays America a university would suppress a research paper that provides results that it considers politically incorrect. I'm not.

Posted by Cheaderhead 2016-04-27 06:24|| 2016-04-27 06:24|| Front Page Top

#4 "...a public research university boasting a top-100 geology program." Yeah,like 99th of 100. The U. of C is a glorified junior college.

Posted by Black Charlie Gloluque7156 2016-04-27 09:44|| 2016-04-27 09:44|| Front Page Top

#5 The U. of C is a glorified junior college.

Do you have a basis for that statement? The trailing daughters chose to do their undergraduate work there, though as National Merit Scholars they had many other opportunities.

Separately, I consulted with Mr. Wife on this one, because he negotiates university research contracts as part of his responsibilities, and he pointed out several things:

First of all, a research contract might forbid publication of the results, if the sponsor wants exclusivity. If that is the case, the scientists cannot discuss the results in a public forum or publish the results, because the data belongs to the sponsor, not the university, the researcher, or the public. The sponsor bought it, just like we might buy a book or gasoline for the car.

But Professor Townsend-Small has in fact been talking about this study (I googled it). Among others, in February she made a presentation summarizing the research and their findings to a Carroll [County] Concerned Citizens meeting, which subsequently posted PDFs of the presentation and a master's thesis written about the study. (See here for links to both in the right-hand column). There is also apparently a video of the presentation, as mentioned in an article about it all here.

Still, there's been no announcement of formal publication of the results. It could be, according to Mr. Wife, that the publication is in process, either being written up or undergoing the usual back and forth with the journal editors in response to peer review, which often takes months, and then the wait to actually get a place on the journal's pages. Or it could be that no journals were interested in publishing the study. Or, though useful as a teaching tool on how to conduct geologic research, the study results are not strong enough or important enough to be worth writing up. The EPA concluded from their own studies that fracking does not impact groundwater according to a draft circulated almost a year ago, so the UC results are not exactly groundbreaking.

Posted by trailing wife 2016-04-27 11:23|| 2016-04-27 11:23|| Front Page Top

#6 UMass- Boston is a glorified community college. I don't know if I could say the same about U. of Cincinnati.

Posted by Raj 2016-04-27 13:12|| 2016-04-27 13:12|| Front Page Top

07:43 Procopius2k
07:42 BrerRabbit
07:42 Procopius2k
07:39 Procopius2k
07:36 Procopius2k
07:35 Procopius2k
07:34 trailing wife
07:31 Procopius2k
07:30 NN2N1
07:22 NN2N1
07:18 trailing wife
07:14 Richard Aubrey
07:10 NN2N1
07:09 Besoeker
07:03 NN2N1
06:58 NN2N1
06:58 Besoeker
05:28 Whiskey Mike
05:23 Whiskey Mike
05:21 Whiskey Mike
05:18 Whiskey Mike
05:15 Whiskey Mike
05:13 Whiskey Mike
05:08 Whiskey Mike