LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF TARRANT COUNTY....AGAINST TOXIC CHEMICAL INJECTION WELLS

PREAMBLE / LWV POSITION

Tonight, the sole issue of this forum is whether the City of Fort Worth should permit the disposal of contaminated drilling water within our city limits. The Tarrant County League of Women Voters Board of Directors opposes the granting of that permission.

The League of Women Voters is not opposed to safe drilling that respects the environment. The Tarrant County League of Women Voters is, however, opposed to the destruction of our most valuable and increasingly threatened natural resource water by its injection into disposal wells.

Far too much water used for gas drilling is "lost forever to the water cycle." We encourage the reuse of as much drilling water as possible for further extraction activities. In an area with limited water supplies, no water should be lost unnecessarily.

Many people often express a concern for debts passed on to our children and grandchildren. Do they feel that same concern for causing an increasing deficit of drinkable water, especially as population increases…especially in times of drought such as we now face?

PROBLEM EXPLANATION

The gas drilling industry tells us that the amount of water consumed is necessary to their production process. Once contaminated by drilling chemicals and natural salt, this drilling water must be disposed of.....meaning, buried deep in the earth forever. This requires transport to disposal wells either by trucks that damage our streets and pollute our air, or by pipelines that require rights of way and are potential hazards.

We see this as a seven-part problem.

1. The permanent loss of irreplaceable water because of drilling is immense and ever-increasing.

A figure of five million gallons per well comes from Chesapeake's own web site within the past few months. 

Yes – a one-time use! Water used once, and never to be used again.

The current, prevalent, method of disposal for that contaminated water is to inject it deep into the earth deep enough that it can never seep, never be used again for any purpose never again to fall back as rain or to flow through an accessible aquifer. This waste is not debatable. Quote: "The 5 million gallons of water needed to drill and fracture a typical deep shale gas or oil well is equivalent to the amount of water consumed by," for example, "New York City in approximately seven minutes or 7.5 acres of corn in a season." They then add, "While these represent continuing consumption, the water used for a natural gas or oil well is a one-time use."

2. The City of Fort Worth has no detailed, enforceable incentives for drilling-water recycling, and no penalties for its destruction.

• For example: Fort Worth city water costs a residential user $4.20 for a hundred cubic feet of water above 30 units (– that's 22,440 gallons). Gas drillers are only charged $4.50 for that same amount of water—water you'll never see again. In spite of the huge consumption, and in spite of their road damage for trucking that water, THEY PAY ONLY SEVEN CENTS MORE ON THE DOLLAR THAN WE DO. (http://fortworthtexas.gov/water/info/default.aspx?id=79858)

3. Residents pay for, with our taxes, unfunded damage to city streets from water trucking, both in and out.

We seem to forget that the water for this process requires delivery INTO the drill site—perhaps as many as 100 truckloads per well. We also forget that some wells may require fracking again after two to three years. (LWVTC Facts & Issues 2007, www.lwvtarrantcounty.org)

You can fix roads—but you cannot replace water.

Disposal wells within the City will only confine water truck street damage to within city limits. Having disposal wells within the city limits can only reduce the distance of that transport, and the degree of reduction has not been defined.

4. To date, we have seen no clear master plan for disposal pipeline regulation.

Even being assured that these pipelines cannot exercise eminent domain, we have concerns involving property rights, citizen health and public safety, and environmental protection. We ask: What Fort Worth City authority will study and permit their placement and perhaps above all be held accountable for their function? What inspection and maintenance is guaranteed?

If the City permits disposal wells, drillers will expect to construct a network of pipelines between their producing and disposal wells right along with our existing maze of underground drinking water pipes, natural gas supply lines, electric and telephone lines, and our city sewage system. While the City's proposed, revised ordinance addresses the construction of pipelines in some detail, it is silent on other factors.

5. We see no definite controls proposed over the environmental hazards of groundwater contamination from disposal wells in a densely populated area, or a means to rectify damage.

The effect of disposed water upon our groundwater remains unresolved, as does the subject of the well's design integrity, safety, inspection and regulation. The effect of drilling upon air quality remains in continual debate, as does the effect of seepage of contaminated water into our aquifers.

6. We see no regulatory positions for protecting land use from pipelines and disposal wells, or for preventing and rectifying environmental damage from spills or line ruptures.

In reading the City's proposed standards for disposal pipelines, we see no protection for land owners who do not want them, or any City or driller accountabilities for subsequent damage.

7. We see no city or state studies or regulation concerning potential earthquake or fault line hazards. We hear only that these concerns must be studied and addressed from state or federal levels.

Fort Worth lies near the Ouachita/Balcones Fault line and intersection of the Trinity Aquifer, as shown on USGS maps. Who has the responsibility of determining that we are not at risk; as, for example, the Oklahoma 5.6 quake of last November 5th, near Oklahoma City? While waiting for state or federal responses, who assesses our risk and liability?

WHAT CAN BE DONE NOW?

Right now, the City of Fort Worth can encourage recycling and other conservation alternatives through its price for drilling water sold, and can apply that income to street maintenance.

Recycling is expensive to the gas drilling industry only because of its tremendous water consumption – and because they currently receive it from the City so cheaply. The City of Fort Worth could easily provide an incentive for recycling by increasing the cost of its water for drilling. This increase might not only reduce the amount of water used and the amount of water trucked but, furthermore, compensate for road damage.

The gas drilling industry contends that the process is too expensive. A frequent figure is that recycling runs about 40-percent more costly than disposal wells. This cost difference is actually only pennies per gallon. Devon, for example, reports recycle costs of $3.35 per barrel and conventional disposal wells as $2.00 to $2.50 per barrel – that's 8-cents per gallon versus 6-cents per gallon TWO cents per gallon more for recycling. (

New technologies for waterless drilling and fracing have been reported but not considered in our area to our knowledge. This example is reported in

CONCLUSION

Basin Oil & Gas [trade journal], July 2008) Drilling Contractor, May/June 2011. Instead of water, Calgary-based GasFrac uses liquefied propane gas (LPG), which is actually a thick gel. The gel purportedly turns to vapor underground…returns to the surface with the gas…and can then be collected and possibly reused. The company also claims that the gel does not carry drilling chemicals back to the surface, a problem with traditional fracking. Houston-based Baker Hughes is using a "foam," called VaporFrac, to reduce water use, purportedly by 95 percent. (Basin Oil & Gas [trade journal], July 2008)

There is no question that we need the energy of this natural gas resource. The cost-benefit of its production may be debatable.

The population of Texas has grown immensely with no signs of lessening. Our growing population must have water for its survival. Water is a finite resource that does not increase with population. More people consume more food, and food production demands more water. Our recent drought—and knowledge that there will always be droughts—warns us that a continued supply of natural water cannot be taken for granted.

Now we have, currently, about 20,000 permitted wells in our immediate area, each consuming three to five million gallons of this precious resource—and we have the promise of more gas wells to come. Each and every one of those wells will generate millions of gallons of contaminated water, unfit for human or animal consumption, unfit for agriculture, unfit even for irrigation of our lawns.

Whether that contaminated water is delivered to a disposal well by trucks that damage our roads or pipelines that consume land and carry their own risks makes little difference. The point is that these billions of gallons of irreplaceable water are destroyed......gone forever.

For example, even though Hillwood Development and Quicksilver Resources get their drilling water from lakes (or ponds) their premises, the gas well drilling consumes that water. Eliminating truck traffic because of their own water source and own disposal source is admirable and profitable but nevertheless destroys water that will never again nourish a living plant or human being. We've heard that site space is a problem for recycling facilities at some locations but certainly not for Hillwood and Quicksilver at Alliance. What better opportunity for an on-site recycling facility than here—right here, where we are.

The total and final loss of billions of gallons of water forever is not debatable or even a question.

That irreplaceable loss is a fact.

The gas drilling industry's enormous consumption of water is one of our primary concerns. The destruction of that water and its eternal loss by injection into disposal wells is a fact.