Unconventional sources of gas and oil seem to present for many countries tangible opportunities of a new, cheap and reliable source of energy, accessible through the modern technique of hydraulic fracturing (fracking), thus answering to rising demands for energy. However, the technique of hydraulic fracturing (fracking), involves some risks, which are a central element of the opposition of civil society groups and the related contoversy.
In the countries involved in exploration or exploitation, civil society groups and activists have underlined the risks involved in hydraulic fracturing (or fracking), the only technique available today for exploring and exploiting unconventional gas deposits, shale gas. These risks are a central element of the opposition of civil society groups and the related contoversy. It is necessary to explain this technique in order to understand the related risks:
Hydraulic fracturing
Shale gas extraction involves drilling deep to the layer where the gas is trapped, and then horizontally in the shale layer (up to 3000 meters long). After drilling, water mixed with chemicals with different functions is injected into the drilling pipe, which will flow out under high pressure through holes in the pipe within the shale layer, in order to fracture the rock, liberating gas, which flows back in the pipe and out of the drilling well.
Exploitation of this technique in North America has shown a variety of risks and damages to the local environment and communities. The main categories of risks or potential impacts identified are: water table and air pollution (through migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals), surface contamination from spills and flowback water, with the related impacts of those impacts on health, as well as additional greenhouse gas emissions. These categories of risks and impacts are discussed in the next section of this paper.
As a recent report underlines, some EU member States describe shale gas as “the most convenient bridge between a carbon-intensive past and a decarbonised future, while for others it is rather a source of security concerns.” (id.). This shows the depth of the gap between governments and actors, making a sustainability assessment necessary.
You are in ePLANETe >
