I fell for it too.

When I first started researching unconventional gas development, Mr Bonang Mohale, the chairman of Shell South Africa repeatedly assured audiences that his company has been fracking “for 60 years, in over 1.1 million wells, in the USA alone”. In support of economic stimulation, job creation and a response to South Africa’s energy crisis, I welcomed this news and repeatedly boasted the fine track record to concerned farmers in the Karoo:

“These companies have been fracking for three times as long as I’ve been alive, I think you’ll be okay Oom.”

But soon after I arrived in the United States, the origin of fracking and the main country currently carrying out the process, I realized how the Karoo community and many others had been duped.

Truth is, we’re talking about an entirely different drilling destination and a new type of technology to take us there.

Since the 1800s, conventional drilling would simply drill down into existing pockets of gas. These deposits had been formed after hydrocarbons had moved from the original formation, up towards the subsurface and become trapped against an impermeable layer of rock.

A typical conventional, vertical well in Pennsylvania. (pic: Jolynn Minnaar).

With hardly any stimulation, these pockets produce a constant supply of gas for 20 to 30 years. Now, with dwindling resources and expanding demand, we’ve reached what Michael Klare has called “the era of extreme energy” whereby traditional energy production moves into hard-to-reach reserves revealing inadequacies in technology as companies encounter unexpected hazards and all the while increase the risk for greater environmental damage.

Case in point: unconventional gas drilling. Now companies are stretching down deeper and then out horizontally to the shale gas that is trapped in its original formation – a flat, relatively impermeable layer of rock.

The latest method of shale gas extraction via high volume, slickwater horizontal hydraulic fracturing. (pic: Jolynn Minnaar).

High volume, slickwater horizontal hydraulic fracturing in action.(pic: Jolynn Minnaar).

Figuring out how to achieve this has certainly been a bumpy road. At one stage, nitroglycerine was used to try and explode shale formations. Think Acme Corporation and the Road Runner. And, right up until the 70s, the US government, under the Energy Research and Development Administration, tried to frack shale wells with atomic bombs. Colorado’s Western Slope was the testing ground for a 43-kiloton “Project Rullison” nuke in 1969 and the triple 30-megaton series that followed in 1972. Think atom bombs more than twice as powerful as the one that destroyed Hiroshima in 1945. These experiments did more than obliterate the shale, the gas was far too radioactive to use and now the Department of Energy has to babysit those wells for the next thousand years.

The point is, how can one claim that the technology has been time-tested since the 1940s, when the US – the origin of fracking – was still experimenting with underground Hiroshimas up until the 1970s?

Again, as with the confusion around the true definition of ‘fracking’, it comes down to clever wordplay.

It is true that hydraulic fracturing has been used since the 1940s to develop gas or oil in conventional sources. But, there’s “hydraulic fracturing” and then, there’s “multi-stage, slickwater, high volume hydraulic fracturing from subhorizontal wells in an unconventional source”.  According to Anthony Ingraffea, Professor of Engineering from Cornell University, this shift in technology started in the 1990s and only once it became viable in the early 2000s did it take off.

Slickwater high volume hydraulic fracturing is distinguished from conventional drilling by substantial technological differences and an increased risk of encountering technological shortcomings and causing environmental damage. Underground, this is a far more aggressive technique with laterals extending in various directions from the vertical well. It requires up to 100x times more fluid which in turn requires more fresh water and chemicals which in turn requires a much larger surface area to accommodate this multi-pad drilling, which then, in order to break even and meet energy forecasts, requires substantial tracts of land that were once natural ecosystems to make way for the swift drilling advancement.

So, to return to Mr Mohale’s claims, we are no longer looking at 60 years nor millions of wells worth of experience. Instead, with roughly a decade’s experience in around 20 000 shale gas wells in only 4 or 5 major shale plays, most would argue that the technology is still in its nascency.

Even the former Vice President for Mobil Oil Corporation expressed his fears around this nascent technology to me. In an interview for Unearthed, Lou Allstadt admits “it seems as though the processes and chemicals being used were done pretty hastily, it was rushed and does not seem well thought out. You dont just take something and increase it by 100 times and hope that it works.”

His concerns are shared. In 2011, the chief marketing operator for Schlumberger, one of the largest companies performing the fracking operations in the US, acknowledged that “the process being used in North America cannot be used overseas” because “they first have to find a better way to do it”.

Sorry Oom. I guess my early optimism had the better of me.

Originally posted on Green 24.

Jolynn Minnaar is the director of the upcoming South African fracking documentary Unearthed. She has spent over 18 months researching fracking and has interviewed close to 400 people on all sides of the debate – from the heads of multinational energy companies and US Senators to hydrogeologists and specialized engineers; from workers in the field to communities living in the gas drilling areas. After filming throughout South Africa, in the US, Canada and the UK, she is at the forefront of information on shale gas extraction and has already presented her findings at various conferences both locally and abroad.

For more info: info@un-earthed.com
or follow @jolynnminnaar on Twitter.

Similar articles:

Unearthed: the fracking facade
The definition of “Fracking”

It is here, amidst clever wordplay and misconceptions around complex definitions, where the fracking debate reaches a stalemate between proponents of the technology and those opposing the global shale gas advancement.

The first stumbling block comes down to lack of common understanding around the definition of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking”. In recent years, the word seems to have been adopted by the general public to refer to the entire window of shale gas extraction and production – the clearing of well pads, pipelines and compressor stations; the thousands of trucks bringing in all the additives; the drilling of the well; the explosions in the shale layer; the pumping down of fluids and the production of the gas.

As a result, the words “hydraulic fracturing” or “fracking” have become synonymous with any possibility for one of the shale gas extraction processes to impact groundwater.

However, in reality, the term refers to a brief, albeit essential, activity used in the development of unconventional gas.

During hydraulic fracturing, perforations are made between the production casing and the shale rock to allow a mixture of water, chemicals and sand to be forced down under high pressure and release the trapped gas.

In fact, the fracking process itself, happening at thousands of feet below the ground, is arguably the part of the gas extraction process with the least – not zero – likelihood of causing problems.

This misunderstanding has severely sidetracked the public discussion and, while the everyday person grapples with the technical jargon, false assurances that “fracking has never contaminated drinking water” regularly go unchallenged.

So, if fracking isn’t too blame, how do contaminants – whether stray methane, chemicals or elements resident in the shale – enter water resources?

And how did glutaraldehyde, a powerful biocide used in the fracking fluid, wind up in the Philips water well in Bradford County, Pennsylvania (a case I discovered in the US) and cause the entire family, including their 6-month-old baby girl, to suffer severe health impacts?

Mike Philips relays the horrors on Paradise Road in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, after water supplies were impacted by nearby gas drilling activities; click to enlarge (pic: Jolynn Minnaar).

To answer these questions, we have to shift our focus – and vocabulary – up from 4000 feet below to the surface where most of the possibilities for water contamination exist.

1. Surface

On the wellpad, an enormous amount of additives are handled that include chemicals that are capable of contaminating millions of litres of water in minute concentrations and others that are carcinogenic or known to impact the nervous and endocrine system. This is the first possibility to introduce contaminants directly into the environment through commonly occurring surface spills and toxic releases into the air.

Fine grained silica sand, a key ingredient in the fracking fluid, escapes into the air on a well pad in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. The substance has been declared a “Health Alert” by US government agencies who are warning workers that exposure could lead to silicosis, an incurable lung disease; click to enlarge (pic: Jolynn Minnaar).

2. Drilling

Moving onto the drilling phase, as was most likely the case with the Phillips’ well, there is a possibility that subsurface aquifers can be punctured and exposed to the drilling mud which includes acids such as hydrochloric acid, powerful biocides and anti-corrosive agents similar to ones you have in your car’s radiator.

3. Well construction

The well casing, where the borehole meets the surface, acts as conduit from the shale and is the source most responsible for contamination during natural gas extraction.

Substandard casing jobs will compromise aquifers whether the well is vertical or horizontal, fracked or unfracked. The steel and cement jobs need
to be designed and implemented to ensure that no drilling additives, brines or hydrocarbons exit the well – either from reservoir or closer to the surface around the well casing – while drilling or when the fracking fluid passes through twice (going down; coming up) or whilst producing gas or afterwards, when the well is declared exhausted and forever abandoned.

I will unpack the all these challenges in a later article.

4. Alternative pathways

Foreign fluids can also migrate via fractures in the rock and, in the Karoo, companies have been dealt a couple of curveballs, they have yet to encounter elsewhere in the world: the hefty dolerite dykes and sills and an artesian geology which introduces a significant risk of encountering vertical movements of contaminated fluids to the surface and surrounding water supplies.

Brines from deep below the surface spew out of an old, abandoned Soekor well on a farm near Merweville in the Karoo; click to enlarge (pic: Jolynn Minnaar).

5. Flowback fluid

Once the well has been drilled and fracked, around 20-60% of the 20+ million litres of fresh water sent down returns to the surface. This fluid is laced with the original chemicals sent down the hole and the elements found naturally in the shale: concentrated salts; heavy metals, such as lead and arsenic, and naturally occurring radioactive materials including uranium, radium and barium.

This toxic fluid needs to be handled and somehow stored in such a way that it never comes into contact with water resources and the outside environment. Companies are still experimenting with possible disposal methods.

Previous attempts include open frack ponds that threaten public health, strainingmunicipal sewerage systems and injecting the fluid back into the earth, which, in turn, reintroduces a major risk of contaminating water sources or causes earthquakes.

Now you know Rule 1 in Frack Club: Do not speak of fracking unless you mean fracking.

Wondering how the rule has been bent up until now to calm the public about the potential for water contamination? When someone said ‘fracking’ instead of “all activities associated with the entire cycle of natural gas production or shale gas development”?

This video, featuring US Senators, the administrator for the US Environmental Protection Agency and the chairman of Shell South Africa, best illustrates the abuse of the wordplay:

Originally posted on Green 24 

Written by Jolynn Minnaar

Jolynn is the director of the upcoming South African fracking documentary Unearthed. She has spent over 18 months researching fracking and has interviewed close to 400 people on all sides of the debate – from the heads of multinational energy companies and US Senators to hydrogeologists and specialized engineers; from workers in the field to communities living in the gas drilling areas. After filming throughout South Africa, in the US, Canada and the UK, she is at the forefront of information on shale gas extraction and has already presented her findings at various conferences both locally and abroad.

Jolynn describes the challenges of independent filmmaking and the arduous journey to get to the bottom of fracking. Speaking her mind, Jolynn shares her views on the risks and benefits of shale gas extraction and questions whether or not this form of energy production fits into future energy economies.

Unearthed was recently featured on RSG’s EkoForum. Christine Wessels spoke to the director, Jolynn Minnaar, to find out more about the project and the findings that have been uncovered during the 18 month investigation. Below is a translated, transcribed version.

Christine: Jolynn, we’re sitting here at Zootee Studios in Cape Town where you are busy with the post-production on a documentary you’ve produced called ‘Unearthed’ that investigates hydraulic fracturing. Over the last year, we have all been holding our breath to see what happens with regards to fracking in South Africa.

Jolynn: During the past 18 months, prior to making a decision on whether or not to allow hydraulic fracturing, the South African government decided to conduct more research and declared a moratorium on all license applications. This year, on the 7^th of September, the moratorium was lifted and now the various companies can apply for exploration rights to test for possible shale gas reservoirs in the Karoo.

Christine: The documentary, ‘Unearthed’, how did that come to fruition?

Jolynn: It all began in April 2011. I stumbled across the word ‘fracking’ in a newspaper and an innocent, inquisitive streak ended up prompting the project . Having done some research and realizing there was a severe lack of information impeding a broader public discussion on the matter, I was concerned that those responsible for making the decisions about fracking were in no position to make an open, inclusive, informed decision. One of the main obstructions in accessing information is due to the fact that the only existing shale gas model is in America. This is a problem if you’re situated in South Africa or Europe and you’re trying to understand what it is about and decide whether or not it is good idea to pursue. So, I set off to see what the whole saga is about.

Christine: The reason why this fracking saga is so close to home is that they want to frack in the Karoo – an area where you grew up.  You have told me before that you originally thought that it would be a good idea; that it could create job opportunities and possibly strengthen the economy. This was when you decided to go and do extensive research to find out what the true impact would be from hydraulic fracturing. You then went over to America to do research into the making of your documentary Unearthed; tell us about your findings in America.

Jolynn: At first, I was very optimistic about shale gas development. I believed that we could strengthen the economy and address our severe unemployment crisis but in America I was shocked to find that so much information is manipulated or hidden from outside researchers. One staggering example is the prevalence of gag orders that are signed by families who are impacted by air or water pollution. I, and other researchers, are unable to speak to them because they are bound by contractual obligations with the companies who are drilling in the area and have been linked to the relevant contamination on that property. Those cases become hidden statistics. This is very troubling because crucial information is missing and the rest of the world is unable to see the entire picture.

Christine: Just your mentioning of ‘gag orders’ makes me suspicious. Explain to us what this entails.

Jolynn: If a family is impacted by drilling activities, usually the relevant company extracting gas on or near their property will settle on the grounds of a ‘non-disclosure agreement’. In this scenario the family involved would receive financial compensation, property relocation or clean water but would then have to swear not to talk about it.  This is happening across the entire US which is very disturbing because there are governments worldwide that are considering shale gas extraction and they are not aware of the secrecy involved with this process to keep the general public oblivious to what is actually going on.

Christine: What are the impacts that come with fracking?

Jolynn: There is an array of impacts. I’ve met families who have chemicals or methane in their water; children dealing with nosebleeds from the air pollution and animals suffering in compromised environment. And the impacts don’t always have to be that dramatic. Someone who lives in a quiet, peaceful town suddenly has to deal with the deafening noise of a never-ending line of trucks driving past at all hours of the day. Local residents are also having to deal with a more expensive everyday life due to inflated prices that accompany the arrival of new workers in the area.

Essentially, it is an enormous challenge to fully understand the array of ramifications and an even greater one to try and quantify those impacts.
You can’t be in a country like South Africa and just Google it; you have to be in the US and actually talk to the people, test the water, test the air, talk to their governments, talk to the regulatory agencies to truly understand what is going on. After 18 months on this project, I am still meticulous and constantly research my findings to ensure credibility that will aid the shale gas debate – one which has failed the public in many countries across the world due to a lack of open, informed discussions and a severe paucity of information coming from ‘ground zero’ in extraction areas in America.

Christine: Are there other people that have also done proper research who you can go to and talk to? Are there others who won’t cover or omit information regarding this issue?

Jolynn: The broader context is what makes the fracking debate so complex. In America, the mainstream media is largely privately owned and this limits the amount of attention given to issues such as fracking. Due to budget constraints, pressures from advertisers, funders or political allegiances and perceived audience interest ratings, news outlets such as FOX NEWS won’t necessarily send someone out to Colorado or Texas to find out what is going on. There may not be budget nor is it necessarily a “sexy story.”

Independent researchers or scientists also struggle to generate the capital to thoroughly investigate fracking. I also struggled to get all this information and no one paid me. I am just incredibly grateful that to the many generous supporters out there that have enabled me to carry the project as far as possible.

So, to answer your question, yes, there are amazing people who are researching this but perhaps not enough and where there are, their work does not reach headlines or the tables of those making the decisions in government. There are various reasons for these circumstances. You’re dealing with constraints on the mainstream media, financial challenges for the independent scientist or investigator and the fact that what you’re investigating is not necessarily in everyone’s backyard; you’re working in rural areas, uncovering the untold stories of the backroads of the United States.

Christine: It seems to me that all of this is taking place in areas where the public is not informed about the consequences. They just hear that they are going to earn more and make an extra buck, but these are people who don’t have access to the necessary information.

Jolynn: I have written a piece on this.

I believe that some powerful proponents of shale gas extraction are guilty of capitalizing on the socio-economic status and the naivety of the people in the rural areas. Shale gas receives a warm welcome because it promises to address the vulnerabilities in our society : our energy crises, our economy and our desperate socioeconomic disparities.

You cannot overlook the fact that, globally, economies are suffering and many are in need of financial relief and employment opportunities. In this context, you can understand why some people are signing a lease to allow drilling on their land in the hope that shale gas will alleviate their financial burdens. If you ask them about the potential impacts they could encounter, it is a risk many are willing to take because at that moment, a child needs to be sent to school or bread needs to reach the table.  This is the great energy vs environment nexus our world currently faces and it is not limited to fracking. We’ve moved into the era of extreme energy so we’re looking at activities such as deep-sea drilling or the development of the Tar Sands in Canada. We find ourselves in a dangerous position because we need to make money and bolster our economies but it comes at an enormous cost to the finite natural world.

This is why the world is at a crossroads. We need to make a massive decision: are we going to continue with this era of extreme energy, or are we going to try and do things better? Are we going to prioritize the transition to a low or carbon-free future? This is where the South African government is currently sitting. Are we to first create jobs in the community and prioritize the economy? Is it a short-term gain? Is it a long-term gain? This is the research or the homework we have to do. In order to achieve a responsible, long-term energy policy – both locally and internationally – these are the questions that need asking.

Is that homework being done by decision-makers? I am not so sure.

Long-term, there are reasons why shale gas is not necessarily a panacea for the current issues that we’re facing. As far as job creation goes, yes jobs are created. Not nearly as much as some of the optimistic studies have shown, but jobs are created for the basic skills sector. The problem is those jobs only last for about six months to a year or three when that company is in the area doing their drilling and so it’s not something you’re investing in or a twenty or thirty year time frame. As far as energy provision goes, studies are less and less optimistic and resources and estimates have been slashed. So when the US thought the Marseilles Shale would provide a 100 years of energy, those estimates have been slashed and that’s dangerous for a government that’s gambling an energy resource that is reduced to 40%, or less, of the original estimate.
The key issue, at the heart of the energy debates, is the urgent need to curb carbon emissions and the potential for fracking to contribute to the irreversible effects of runaway climate change. A considerable amount of fugitive methane is released during the entire life cycle and methane is up to 25x more powerful a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Christine: If we look at the environmental impact on the Karoo, can you explain to us what will happen there?

Jolynn: There will be considerable environmental impacts.

Firstly, on the surface, you need to clear a large area of land; you need to eradicate the vegetation and also create an access road to the site. Thereafter, you need thousands and thousands of trucks to transport the water, chemicals and sand and all the equipment. After the drilling and fracking phases, you have to lay down pipelines to zigzag from every well to central compressor plants and collection points. The surface footprint is huge and it is not just a couple of wellpads; it’s an entire industrialization of what was once a natural ecosystem.

And then you are also introducing the risk of contaminating the air and water sources. The Karoo is a semi-arid area which relies heavily on underground water reserves and, in most cases, it is the only water that farmers and the small towns depend on. I am particularly concerned about air pollution. Where there is a possibility for water pollution in the Karoo, air pollution is a certainty and this a factor that hasn’t received enough attention. There is a high concentration of chemicals being released into the air, the dust, the low level ozone and on the long term, you’re facing the issue of imminent, irreversible climate change.

Stepping back, the fracking debate is not between Shell, the Government and a few farmers. There are many people in the Karoo who are worried about fracking and these are people who live in townships; people who don’t have money to buy replacement water or withstand health impacts. These are the people who I’m doing this project for.

There is also misconception that fracking is only something that those in the Karoo have to worry about. This is hogwash. If you live in South Africa, your government owes you an accountable, responsibly calculated energy future. If you disagree with the decisions being made right now, whether it fracking or the state of our country’s education system or government corruption, you need to stand up and say something about it.  This is particularly true for my younger generation – both locally and abroad. There are decisions being made today that will directly influence our futures; we need to wake up and ensure they are in the best interests of tomorrow.

Christine: So when can we look out for the documentary Unearthed?

Jolynn: We’re working day in and day out to finish the film but we hope to be done with mid year 2013. Our main hurdle at the moment is funding – we have remained independent throughout the production to ensure a balanced, thorough investigation. I have done months of research, filmed over 15 terabytes of footage and have conducted over 400 interviews but to get all of that work into a final product requires a many hours and a couple of miracles. We’re extremely excited to finally release the project and are looking at possibly expanding in 2013.

You can follow our progress on our website and on our Facebook and Twitter channels. We also have a 24 minute film, The Fracking Facade, that has been broadcast across the world, freely available online. It is an important video that exposes a flawed claim often abused in the salespitch for shale gas, the notion that “in a 60 year history, there are no documented cases that hydraulic fracturing has led to the contamination of ground water.”

Fast-forward around 50 years and you’ll find the same area currently being eyed out for “fracking”, or, to avoid falling into the wordplay trap,  more accurately referred to as shale gas extraction.

Why is the correlation between the Soekor wells of yesteryear and today’s applications for unconventional gas extraction important?

Meet Professor Gerrit van Tonder, a leading geohydrologist from the UFS Institute for Groundwater Studies who is better known in recent months as the Pro-fracking Professor who did a U-turn. Originally optimistic about shale gas extraction, van Tonder backtracked in June to warn that fracking would severely impact underground water supplies. Together with his doctoral student, Fanie de lange, they looked at the Soekor wells in order to anticipate the outcomes of shale gas extraction in the same region. In the area that Shell, Falcon and Bundu, have applied for drilling rights, there are 14 Soekor holes. Thus far, five of those are leaking fluids to the surface.

How is this possible? Don’t fluids stay put underground the way
well-behaved dinosaur juice should?

Strangely enough it seemed as though few had yet to put two and two together in the fracking debate. To fracture the rock and release the gas, companies would be drilling horizontally at depths of around 3-5 km, using roughly 22 – 26 million litres of water per frack job, tons of fine grain silica sand (declared a “Health Alert” by US government agencies who are warning workers that exposure could lead to silicosis, an incurable lung disease, and the mining of which is a enormous issue in itself) and 60 – 330 tons of chemicals…and here’s the pickle: doing all of that into an artesian basin.

Artesian basins are formed when underground water is stored under pressure and if drilled into, wells would naturally produce an upward flow of fluid. In some cases you find a luxurious natural hot spring like those in Calitzdorp or Aliwal North, in other cases, the rising water would be unfit for human, animal or plant consumption because it contains high salt concentrations and possible heavy metal or radioactive elements inherent in the deep rock.

The SA 1/66 Soekor well is a prime example of the latter and a case study of what Van Tonder and de Lange are highlighting. Found on Sjambokkraal, a farm outside Merweville, drilling started on this well in 1966 but, unsuccessful in finding oil at 11 000ft, Soekor closed the well with a large steel tap and moved on.

 A few weeks ago, I joined van Tonder to visit and reopen SA 1/66 which is an eyesore on the Karoo veld. The natural vegetation which was cleared for the well pad has never fully restored itself for a large radius around the well. Within seconds after Oom Boetie Botes, the farmer on Sjambokkraal, threw his strength behind the rusty tap, a burst of air shot through the pipe and was followed by lukewarm, grey foul-smelling water. We held a matchstick to the end of the tap and a large flame formed on the water. Judging by the heat of the water and the strength of the flame, the contents spewing out of the pipe emerged from deep below the earth’s surface.

Water samples revealed a salt reading of 8029 ppm for the old Soekor well.  While boreholes closer to the farmhouse read 780 and 800 ppm, a borehole situated downstream from the Soekor hole, roughly  1km away, read 5480 ppm. With a salt concentration more than 8 times that of other boreholes further away on the farm, van Tonder is convinced the Soekor well is leaking and impacting the surrounding water source. Working with his students, van Tonder plans on carrying out further water analysis in the area. Thus far, it seems that they are onto something. Remember the aforementioned Skietfontein borehole near Aberdeen?  The water well closest to the Soekor borehole has double the salt concentration compared to others on the property and the farmer has complained that his sable get sick when grazing in the fields surrounding the hole.

So, what is the significance behind these revelations? Essentially, the companies who are seeking to exploit possible shale gas reserves in the Karoo have just been dealt another enormous hurdle in any attempt to safely extract gas.

Household water containing glutaraldehyde, a powerful biocide used in drilling operations in Pennsylvania. (© Jolynn Minnaar)

Let us quickly look at all those hurdles.

Here is a quick checklist that outlines how to best avoid contaminating underground water resources upon which the entire Karoo so heavily depends:

• SURFACE SPILLAGE OR EXPOSURE 

With the list of additives including chemicals that are capable of contaminating millions of litres of water in minute concentrations and others that are carcinogenic or known to impact the nervous and endocrine system, it would be best to avoid any possibility of these chemicals reaching the ground or being dispersed in the air.

While most of the water remains in the shale, around 30-60% of the fluid returns to the surface once the well has been drilled and fracked. This flowback is laced with the injected chemicals and elements found naturally in the shale: concentrated salts; heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, barium and naturally occurring radioactive materials including uranium, radium and radon. In addition – because there’s always more to the fracking footprint – a triple whammy is formed in a chemical interaction between added chemicals and compounds found in the shale. As nasty to human health as it is complicated to pronounce, 4-nitroquinoline-1-oxide (4-NQO) is one of the most potent carcinogens known to man and while it is not a chemical additive nor a shale resident, it has been discovered in shale flowback fluids.

The effective rehabilitation of this fluid to its original standard has yet to be achieved and companies are still experimenting with possible disposal methods. Thus far, attempts have yet to prove successful.  Storing the fluid in enormous open ponds has led to severe health impacts.  Sewerage systems are not designed to treat the chemical compounds or radioactive elements.  Efforts of injecting the fluid back into the earth immediately reintroduces a major risk of contaminating water sources while this process of deep well injection has induced earthquakes in areas such as Ohio, Oklahoma and Texas.

• ALTERNATIVE UNDERGROUND PATHWAY

No chemicals or hazardous elements found in the rock should find an alternative pathway via a natural fracture in the rock or, a possible curveball unique to the Karoo that the gas industry is yet to encounter elsewhere in the world: the hefty dolerite dykes and sills.

• UNDERGROUND MOVEMENT OF WATER

It would also not be ideal for foreign fluids to wind up catching a surf in the natural horizontal movement of underground water that many geologists, Karoo farmers and the aforementioned, Andre Els, will attest to. The slightest accident on one out of a thousand wells will not be isolated to that area. Unfortunately, according to independent hydrologists, it seems as though reservoir engineers working in the oil and gas industry fail to take this risk into account. According to Professor Shlomo Neuman from the Department of Hydrology and Water Resources at the University of Arizona, one could open any reservoir engineering text and “find nothing about leaky aquifers or cross-formation flow”. Perhaps a reservoir engineer with this departure point contributed to the governmental task team because the Executive Summary Report states that “potable aquifers are expected to be far removed from shale gas target formations and safe from contamination from injected fracking fluids because the latter are immobile under normal conditions”.

Alarmed, I am tempted to say something about the blind leading the blind but I am not going to.

• ARTESIAN AREAS

The artesian geology introduces a further risk of encountering vertical movements of brine to the surface. As was seen on SA1/66, Van Tonder is most concerned about this upward migration once the well is abandoned and pressure increases in the reservoir resulting in the fluid rising toward water sources. By this stage, the company has abandoned the area just as, 44 years after Soekor’s activities, Boetie Botes is left with a barren area around the wellhead and salt concentrations 10 times beyond what is considered safe for human or animal consumption.

• LEAKAGE AROUND THE WELLHEAD

The cement and steel casing around the wellhead, where the borehole meets the surface, needs to be designed and implemented to ensure that no drilling additives, brine or hydrocarbons exit the well – not while drilling or fracking or when producing gas or when the well is declared exhausted and forever abandoned. Current capping technology uses steel that will rust away and concrete that breaks down over time in the same way that roads or bridges do. But, while the latter are maintained and monitored, old oil and gas wells become a forgotten series of ticking time bombs.

According to Dr Ron Bishop, the US Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 1 out of 6 abandoned oil and gas wells are already leaking toxins to the surface. In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, EcoHearth commissioned accomplished journalist Steven Kotler to investigate the extent of the problem on land and across the planet. Kotler found that out of a minimum of 2.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells littering the US and an estimated 20-30 million around the world, due to fatally flawed capping technology and lax industry and government oversight, hundreds and thousands are “hemorrhaging oil, brine and greenhouse gases into the environment”. James Northrup, a former energy investor and planning manager for Atlantic Rich Field, agrees: “All gas wells will eventually rust out and leak; it is not a matter of if, only a matter of when and how much.”

When the previous government embarked on the Soekor exploration in the 60s, many probably anticipated considerable reserves, economic prosperity and widespread employment opportunities. Fifty years later the Karoo is left with deteriorating well casings, possible underground water contamination and roads and well pads that have never disappeared in the semi-arid veld.

Would the shale gas industry introduce the same scenario and perhaps even raise the stakes? Would it present a short term energy solution that eventually dissolves into thousands of abandoned wells? Would economic gain and temporary job creation come at the longterm expense – health costs, permanent environmental damage, disruption to local economies and decreasing property values – of those in the Karoo and outlying areas? And outside of groundwater contamination and failed cement casings, what if the shale gas is not a heralded ‘transition fuel’ and merely a distraction from responsibly transitioning to a low carbon future and a threat to the growing concerns of irreversible climate change?

It is of upmost importance that the many governments around the world who are currently considering shale gas extraction adopt this longterm perspective. While global priorities seem focussed on repairing struggling economies and favoring the first venture that touts job creation, we cannot afford to invest in today by sacrificing tomorrow.

Remnants of Soekor activity on Skietfontein outside Aberdeen.

Jolynn Minnaar is the director of Unearthed, an upcoming independent feature documentary that investigates the global shale gas boom and the potential plans for gas extraction in South Africa. Committed to thorough research and widespread consultation, Jolynn has interviewed over 400 people on all sides of the fracking debate while filming across South Africa, Canada, the US and UK in order to gain an international perspective on the matter. At the forefront of information on the topic, while the film is in post-production, Jolynn has presented her findings at various meetings both locally and abroad. 

Other pieces by Jolynn Minnaar:

The Hidden Cost of Fracking

The Secrecy and Seclusion around Shale Gas

Contact: 
unearthedproduction@gmail.com
or follow @jolynnminnaar on Twitter.

The ever enterprising Zootee Studios, the powerhouse behind Unearthed, has recently completed the installation of solar panels with the help of Southern Sun Solar.  This is one of the first grid-tie solar projects in South Africa and Zootee is the first solar-powered film studio in the country. With Eskom recently announcing a 16% tariff increase and concerns around climate change reach boiling point, Zootee Studios welcomes this significant shift and joins growing international investment in the renewable sector.

The Middle East is actively pursuing renewable energy:  Quatar has just announced a solar target of 1.8 GW by 2014; Djibouti anticipates 100% renewable energy by 2030 and Saudi Arabia is aiming for 41 GW of solar by 2032. With plans to transition to renewables entirely, Prince Turki of the Saudi Royal Family has stated that Saudi Arabia‘s oil reserves may be better put to use in devotion to the manufacture of materials such as polymers, plastics and fertilisers rather than simply being used for fuel and that the transition to large scale renewable generation could facilitate this. Prince Turki recently announced:

“Oil is more precious for us underground than as a fuel source. If we can get to the point where we can replace fossil fuels and use oil to produce other products that are useful, that would be very good for the world.”

Similarly, Laith al-Mamury of the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity remarked: “It is true that we are an oil country, but we should save oil for the coming generation not only sell it or burn it.” As such, Iraq, a country with an ailing electricity grid, is set to invest $1.6 billion in solar and wind power over the next three years.

In Europe, Denmark is already one fifth of the way to energy independence on solar energy while it plans to be running entirely on renewable sources by 2050. Scotland has set the same goal. Germany is has broken records and already harness renewable sources for 25% of its energy needs. Germany has also successfully decentralized its energy feed with three quarters of the investment coming from small private investors.  The generation capacity of 20 nuclear plants has been provided by small-scale investors and citizen-led cooperatives becoming the country’s “renewable energy revolutionaries“. While South Africa is caught depending sorely on one national power utility, in Germany, energy is distributed across the country, from the Black Forest to the Baltic coast, with over a million people involved as energy producers or investors in energy production. This dispersion — shifts in power from top to bottom, from the center to the peripheries — have enormous implications for German democracy because the enormous public investment wants to see the “Energiewende” succeed.

While shifting to cleaner energy is no overnight switch and requires considerable investment and infrastructure development, it seems clear that global attention is shifting away from fossil fuel systems. Unearthed is immensely proud to harness the sun’s energy for post-production and be a part of the renewable energy revolution in South Africa. As Bloomberg recently reported, solar power is ready, we just need the political will to enable the important transition.

One of the most anticipated topics was the “Great Fracking Debate” that was chaired by Professor Bruce Rubidge (Wits University and KDF Trustee).

Here are the opening statements made by each of the six panelists participating in the discussion:

1. Mr Doug Stern

- Karoo farmer

http://www.un-earthed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Doug-stern_mp3.mp3

* Apologies for missing the first few minutes. Unearthed was busy wrapping up the preceding presentation.

Having travelled to the US to learn more about fracking, Stern argues against a shale gas industry in the Karoo. Unable to see extraction taking place in an environmentally sensitive manner, Stern calls for a shift from fossil fuels and the responsible custodianship of the land.

2. Mr Jonathan Deal
- Chairman of the Treasure the Karoo Action Group (TKAG)

http://www.un-earthed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Jonathan-Deale_mp3.mp3

Deal argues that exploration will “add nothing of value but rather expose us to the same risks as would full scale production in the Karoo”. Deal criticizes the way in which the socioeconomic status of those in the Karoo have been abused in promoting the shale gas industry.

3. Ms Christy Bragg
- Endangered Wildlife Trust

http://www.un-earthed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Chirsty-Bragg_mp3.mp3
Brigg describes various environmental impacts that could be accompanied by shale gas extraction in the Karoo. She weighs the promise of shale gas in light of future energy and climate outlooks.

4. Dr David Fig
- Research Associate, Environmental Evaluation Unit, UCT.

http://www.un-earthed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/David-Figg_mp3.mp3

An experienced writer and researcher, Fig covers the “resource curse” phenomenon, explores sustainable economic development, questions the viability of the shale gas industry and, on the grounds of a lack of information, experience and legislation, calls for the precautionary principle to be followed.

5. Ms Carin Bosman

- Director of Carin Bosman Sustainable Solutions, former director of Water Resource Protection and Waste Management portfolio for Department of Water Affairs

http://www.un-earthed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Carin-Bosman_mp3.mp3

One of the leading professionals in water resource and waste management in South Africa, Bosman speaks of her experience in environmental governance. Looking at the “politics of pollution”, Bosman questions whether or not the South African government is capable of responsibly pursuing shale gas extraction.

6. Prof. Maarten de Wit
- Geologist, director of Africa Earth Observatory Network

http://www.un-earthed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Maarten-de-Wit_mp3.mp3

In supporting shale gas exploration, de Wit compares the benefits of a possible unconventional gas reserve in the Karoo to successfully securing the SKA project . De Wit welcomes the fresh knowledge of Karoo geology that will accompany drilling for gas. De Wit withdraws from the discussion to defend science from what he called a “vitriolic” debate.

“In a history of 60 years, after nearly a million wells drilled, there are no documented cases that prove that hydraulic fracturing has contaminated water supplies.”

Featuring some of our US interviewees: Prof. Anthony Ingraffea, Lou Allstadt, James Northrup, Dr Ronald Bishop and community members from Pennsylvania.

We have no words to express our sincere gratitude.