https://hotair.com/archives/2018/05/10/study-wont-hearing-no-impact-groundwater-fracking/
The study you wonâ?Tt be hearing about from the left: No impact on
groundwater from fracking
by Jazz Shaw
Protests by environmentalists against hydraulic fracturing (or fracking)
have been going on for years now, along with the Hollywood efforts of serial
fabulists such as Josh Fox. One of the biggest concerns surrounding the
process is the possibility of contamination of groundwater. While a previous
study in Pennsylvania by the state Department of Environmental Protection
revealed zero instances of this happening (except for surface spills during
transport of hydraulic fluids), critics discounted the study and the
protests continued.
Now a different study conducted in Ohio on the Utica shale play has been
completed and published. They were looking for evidence of natural gas
methane (CH4) in the drinking water near fracking sites which might be
traced back to the drilling process. In order to identify the origins of any
CH4 detected in the ground, they employed radiocarbon dating of the samples
to determine if the compounds had come from the drilling sites or were
biogenic, naturally occurring methane. Baseline testing was done prior to
any drilling and continued during and well after the drilling was done. Once
again, they found no evidence of contamination. The study results are posted
at the Springer research material repository.
Here, we present the results of a free public water testing program in the
Utica Shale of Ohio, where we measured CH4 concentration, CH4 stable
isotopic composition, and pH and conductivity along temporal and spatial
gradients of hydraulic fracturing activity. Dissolved CH4 ranged from 0.2
μg/L to 25 mg/L, and stable isotopic measurements indicated a predominantly
biogenic carbonate reduction CH4 source. Radiocarbon dating of CH4 in
combination with stable isotopic analysis of CH4 in three samples indicated
that fossil C substrates are the source of CH4 in groundwater, with one 14C
date indicative of modern biogenic carbonate reduction.
We found no relationship between CH4 concentration or source in groundwater
and proximity to active gas well sites. No significant changes in CH4
concentration, CH4 isotopic composition, pH, or conductivity in water wells
were observed during the study period. These data indicate that high levels
of biogenic CH4 can be present in groundwater wells independent of hydraulic
fracturing activity and affirm the need for isotopic or other fingerprinting
techniques for CH4 source identification.
Another attack frequently launched by the â?okeep it in the groundâ? crowd
consists of questioning the bias of the study participants or the source of
funding. This testing was done on a completely independent basis and the
funding came from two sources. One was the David & Sara Weston Foundation, a
group whose mission is to, â?oenrich and strengthen underserved communities
inâ?¦ the arts, environmental conservation and social services.â?
Additional funding was provided by a grant from the Deer Creek Foundation,
which seeks to â?oenrich the cultural and artistic quality of life in the
St. Louis metropolitan area.â?
In other words, weâ?Tre not talking about flunkies for ExxonMobil here.
Do you suppose this study will surface on the front page of the New York
Times or the Washington Post with the same level of coverage they give to
protesters opposed to drilling? Or will this simply go down the memory hole
along with the rest of the science showing that the energy industry has
delivered on its promises to make this technology as environmentally
friendly as possible? Itâ?Ts just so hard to predict, so I wonâ?Tt hazard a
guess here.