Industry oriented mini project

on
Hydraulic Fracturing and Its Impact On
Environment
Submitted

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

Under

JNTU Hyderabad

Submitted by

MOHAMMED JANI 15M21A2734

MOHD ATIF 15M21A2740
SHAIK KHALED AHMED 15M21A2756

Under the guidance of

Mr. RANGAPANDU CHAITANYA

Assistant professor

Department Of Petroleum Engineering

Lords Institute Of Engineering And Technology

(Accredited by NAAC, Accredited NBA, Approved by AICTE & Affliated to JNTU, Hyderabad )

Survey no. 32, Himayath Sagar, Hyderabad-500019

2019
 i

Declaration

We hereby declare that the thesis entitled Hydraulic Fracturing and

Its Impact On Environment. This is being submitted by us in partial
fulfillment for the award of Bachelor of Technology in the Department of
Petroleum Engineering at the Lords Institute of Engineering and
Technology,Telangana-500019,is the result of investigation carried out by us
under the Guidance of Department of Petroleum Engineering and Mr. M.S.N
Prasad Reddy professor and HOD, Department of Petroleum Engineering
and Mr. Ranga Pandu Chaitanya, Assistant Professor, supervisor, Lords
Institute of Engineering and Technology.

The work is original and has not been submitted for any
degree/diploma for this or any other university.

MOHAMMED JANI 15M21A2734

MOHD ATIF 15M21A2740
SHAIK KHALED AHMED 15M21A2756
 ii

Lords Institute Of Engineering And Technology

Department Of Petroleum Engineering

Certificate
This is to certify that the Project report entitled Hydraulic Fracturing and
Its Impacts on Environment is record of the work successfully completed and
submitted by

MOHAMMED JANI 15M21A2734

MOHD ATIF 15M21A2740
SHAIK KHALED AHMED 15M21A2756

Under the guidance of Mr. M.S.N PRASAD REDDYHOD, Assistant

professor Mr. RANGA PANDU CHAITANYA, Petroleum Engineering
Department, for the requirement of partial fulfillment of the award of the
degree of Bachelor of Technology in Petroleum Engineering during the
academic year 2015-2019from JNTU Hyderabad.

Mr. Msn Prasad Reddy Mr. Ranga Pandu Chaitanya

Head of Department Assistant Professor

Dr. Mohammed Yousuf Ali

Principal R&D Director

External Examiner
 iii

Acknowledgment

MOHAMMED JANI MOHD ATIF SHAIK KHALED AHMED

15M21A2734 15M212A2740 15M21A2756
Mohammedjani56@gmail.co atifmohd367@gmail.Co Khaledahmed6672@gmail.co
m m m
8801079221 9177788884 8686827002

In the name of Almighty, the most beneficent and most merciful, we

thank the lord for helping us in the all the stages of this thesis work. We
sincerely thank our Research and Development Director, and our guide
Mr. RANGA PANDU CHAITANYA and HOD Mr. M.S.N PRASAD REDDY,
Department of Petroleum Engineering for helping us in every step towards
completion of our project and their timely suggestion. It has been a great
experience under their close supervision.
We are obliged to principal of Lords Institute of Engineering and
Technology who has always been supportive in all respects. We thank both
teaching and non-teaching staff members of Petroleum Engineering
Department for their kind cooperation and all sorts of help to bring out this
project work successfully.
Lastly we derive great pleasure and we would like to specially thank
our parents for their patience, continuous encouragement, support and love
given towards completion of our research work

MOHAMMED JANI 15M21A2734

MOHD ATIF 15M21A2740
SHAIK KHALED AHMED 15M21A2756
 iv

Project Assessment Process

Course outcomes: C424 Industry Oriented Mini project

C0.1. To Put The Engineering Ideas Into A Real Time

Application
C0.2. To Make The Student Judge On What Was Actually
Achieved Rather Than What Was ‘Meant’.
C0.3. Involve Student In Identifying Standards And /Or
Criteria To Apply Their Work And Making Judgment
About The Extent To Which They Have Met This Criteria
And Standards
C0.4. To Analyze Innovative Approach With Respect To R&D
C0.5. To Recognize The Innovated Ideas And implement

Peo’s:
Peo 1: Shall Apply Fundamental And Advance Knowledge Skills
in Basic And Engineering Science And In Petroleum Engineering
To Find Suitable Solution To Technological Challenges And
Problems In Various Areas Of Engineering And Real life Areas
Using Modern Tools

Peo 2: Shall Practice Petroleum Engineering In A Responsible,

Professional, And Dedicated Manner By Functioning Effectively
Either As An Individual Or As A Member Plenty And Disciplinary
Team For The Benefit Of The Industry Society At Large Without
Detriment To Environment And Sustainable development.

Peo 3: Shall Acquire Good Job Opportunities in Industries Or

Pursue Higher Studies

Pe0 4: Shall Develop The Ability To Engage in Lifelong Learning,

Research, And Development in a Responsible, Professional,
Dedicated, And Ethical Manner For The Benefit Of Industry And
Society And large.
 v

Abstract

In today’s time where the entire world is dependent on energy, it is

very difficult to envision life, industrial operations and private activity
without oil and gas. Oil and gas reserves are limited and new innovations
are created to extract more from these limited oil and gas resources. One
such technology to develop oil and gas fields from the unconventional
resources is Hydraulic Fracturing, which is debatable because of its
potential impacts on the environment. In the recent years, though the
natural gas industry has witnessed huge growth in production through the
use of Hydraulic fracturing in shale and tight formations, yet the widespread
impacts on the environment cannot be neglected. Ground water resources
contamination, surface spills of chemicals causing soil pollution, noise
pollution due to the continuous running of engines or pumps used and the
prolonged contact with chemicals can cause various health hazards. This
project work mainly emphasizes on the environmental impacts as well as
human health risks of hydraulic fracturing and an attempt to create ways
and means to reduce its impact on the environment.
 vi

Contents Page No.

Declaration i
Certificate ii
Acknowledgment iii
Project Assessment iv
Abstract v
Content vi-vii
List of figure viii
List of tables ix
Nomenclature x
Abbreviation xi

Chapter 1. Introduction 1

1. Introduction 2-3
1.1. Stages of Hydraulic Fracturing 3-4
1.2. Properties of Hydraulic Fracturing 4-5
1.3. Common Fracking Fluid Used In Industry 5
1.4. List of Disadvantages of Fracking 5-7
1.4.1. Harmful to the environment and people 5
1.4.2. Water wastage 6
1.4.3. Problems of Water Contamination 6
1.4.4. Unhealthy Workers 6-7
Chapter 2. Literature Review 8

2. Literature Review 9
2.1. Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids Composition and Shale Gas and
Its Additives 10-15
2.1.1. Shale gas 13
2.1.2. Extraction of shale gas 14
Chapter 3. Hydraulic Fracturing 16

3. Hydraulic fracturing 17-18

 vii
3.1. Common Fracking Fluids Used In Industry 18
3.1.1. Water-Based Fluids 18-20
3.1.1.1. Non Dispersed 19
3.1.1.2. Dispersed 19-20
3.1.2. Oil-Based Fluids 20-21
3.1.3. Synthetic-Based Drilling Fluids 22-28
3.1.3.1. Pneumatic drilling fluids 23-24
3.1.3.2. Specialty products 24
3.1.3.3. Lost circulation materials 24-25
3.1.3.3. Spotting fluids 25
3.1.3.4. Lubricants 25
3.1.3.3. Corrosion, inhibitors, biocides, and scavengers 26-28
3.2. Impacts on Environment 28
3.2.1. Air Pollution 28-32
3.2.1.1. Regional Pollution 30-32
3.2.2. Ground Water Contamination 32-34
3.2.3. Noise Pollution 34-36
3.2.4. Seismic Activity 36-37
Chapter 4. Health Risk 38
4.1. Health Risk 39-40
4.1.1. Annoyance
4.1.2. Sleep Disturbance
4.1.3. Cardiovascular Health
4.2. Methane Emission Effects on Environment And Human 40-41
Health
4.3. Silica Exposure & Permissible Exposure to Silica Effects
on Drinking Water Resources 41-42
Chapter 5. Risk Assessment 43

5. Risk Assessment 44-45

Chapter 6. Conclusions 46

6. Conclusions 47
References 48
 viii

List of figure

Fig: 2.1. Pie chart of fracking fluid contain various compounds 11

and its composition
Fig: 3.2.1 Bar diagram of Methane Emission 28

Fig: 3.1.2. Groundwater Protection 34

Fig: 3.2.4. Seismic Activity 36

 ix
List of tables

Table No. 2.1. Typical fracturing fluid Composition` 9

Table no. 3.1.3. Fracking Fluid 27

 x
Nomenclature

% - percentage

°F - Degree Farhenheit

FT - Feet

PH - Power of Hydrogen

PPB - Parts Per Billion

PPG - Pounds Per Gallon

PPM - Parts Per Million

SCF - Square Cubic Feet

 xi
Abbreviations

AL - Aluminium

BTEX - Benzene Toulene Ethylene Xylene

CA - Calcium

CO2 - Carbon Dioxide

EDF - Environment Defense Fund

EIA - Energy Information Administration

FE - Ferrum

H2S - Hydrogen Sulphide

HAP - Hazardous Air Pollutant

HCL - Hydro Choloric Acid

LCM - Lost Circulation Material

MG - Magnesium

NAOH - Sodium Hydrooxide

NIOSH - National Institute of Occupational Safety And Help

NORM - National Radioactive Material

OBF - Oil Based Fluid

OBM - Oil Based Mud

PPE - Personal Protective Equipmmet

ROP - Rate Of Penetration

UIC - Underground Injection Control

US - united state

USD - United State Dollar

VOC - Volatile Organic Compound

WST - Well Stimulation

1

Chapter 1
Introduction
 2

1. Introduction

Well stimulation is a process used in oil industry for using high pressure
water and sand to crack a rock formation deep underground. By pumping
this fluid into a drilled well, we are able to open up tiny fissures, up to
several tenths of an inch wide, which then allow oil and natural gas
resources trapped in tight rocks to flow back through our pipes and up to
the surface where we capture them for energy use.

Well stimulation is a highly technical, precise and proven method. It

allows us to more efficiently and effectively extract oil and natural gas, and
with Continental technique, we can drill and stimulate four wells on a single
location, using the same roads, power lines and pipelines for all four wells.
Producing more energy while using fewer resources makes good economic
sense and reflects the responsibility we feel toward the communities and
environment in which we operate.

This section provides an assessment of potential direct environmental

effects from the use of well stimulation. Direct environmental effects include
potential impacts to water supply, water quality, air quality due to emissions
of hazardous air contaminants and climate forcing pollutants, induced
seismicity, and other miscellaneous impacts. This assessment considers
potential effects from the stimulation process itself, as well as potential
effects from transportation of stimulation supplies to the site and disposal of
flow back produced waters following the stimulation. Examples of direct
environmental effects of well stimulation reviewed in this assessment are
emission of air pollutants from diesel engines operating the pumps injecting
the stimulation fluid, and spills of hydraulic fracturing fluid. The approach
taken is literature review and data mining to infer potential impacts based
on a wide foundation of knowledge and experience for well stimulation
operations across the US However, the interpretation of hazards and risks
associated with well stimulation techniques, and more broadly oil and gas
development is beyond the scope of this document. Well stimulation
 3
technology can enable new or expanded production of oil. Consequently,
indirect effects of well stimulation such as additional emissions of air
pollutants or methane due to expanded production or combustion of oil
produced subsequent to stimulation, potential contamination due to leaks
or spills that may occur during storage and transportation of oil, and
ecological disruption from oil fields under production can result from oil and
gas production that has been enabled by WST. Indirect effects occur with all
oil and gas production, whether or not well stimulation techniques have
been used, and these will not be comprehensively evaluated in this
assessment.

The placement of hydraulic fracturing treatments underground is

sequenced to meet the particular needs of the formation. The sequence
noted below from a Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania is just one example.
Each oil and gas zone is different and requires a hydraulic fracturing design
tailored to the particular conditions of the formation. Therefore, while the
process remains essentially the same, the sequence may change depending
upon unique local conditions. It is important to note that not all of the
additives are used in every hydraulically fractured well the exact blend and
proportions of additives will vary based on the site-specific depth, thickness
formation.

1.1. Stages of hydraulic fracturing

1. An acid stage, consisting of several thousand gallons of water mixed with

a dilute acid such as hydrochloric or muriatic acid: This serves to clear
cement debris in the wellbore and provide an open conduit for other frac
fluids by dissolving carbonate minerals and opening fractures near the
wellbore.

2. A pad stage, consisting of approximately 100,000 gallons of slick water

 4
without proppant material The slick water pad stage fills the wellbore with
the slick water solution opens the formation and helps to facilitate the flow
And placement of proppant material.

3. A prop sequence stage, which may consist of several sub stages of water
combined with proppant material consisting of a fine mesh sand or ceramic
material, intended to keep open, or prop the fractures created or enhanced
during the fracturing operation after the pressure is reduced This stage may
collectively use several hundred thousand gallons of water. Proppant
material may vary from a fine particle size to a coarser particle size
throughout

4. A flushing stage, consisting of a volume of fresh water sufficient to flush

the excess proppant from the wellbore.

1.2. PROPERTIES OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

Hydraulic fracturing is one of major methods to increase reservoir

production. The success or failure of a fracture treatment heavily depends
on the fracturing fluids and additives used in the treatment. Choosing the
correct fluid and additives is extremely important to ensure that the
formation is not damaged, proppant is placed in formation as designed, and
the fluid breaks and cleans up properly.

Fracturing fluids are used to create fractures and to transport

proppant down the tubular goods, through the perforations, and deep into
the fracture. To pump a successful fracture treatment, an ideal fracturing
fluid should have the following characteristics.

 The fluid should be compatible with the formation and the reservoir
fluids.
 The fluid should be able to maintain sufficient viscosity at reservoir
temperature, so it can suspend proppant and transport it deep into
the fracture.
 5
 The fluid should be capable of developing the necessary fracture width
to accept proppants or to allow deep acid penetration.
 The fluid should have low fluid loss properties or high fluid efficiency.
 The fluid should be easy to remove from the formation and have
minimal damaging effects on both the proppant and the formation.
 The fluid should be easily pumped down the wellbore and exhibit
minimal friction pressure losses in both the pipe and the fracture.
 The fluid should be easy to prepare and safe to use.
 The fluid should be low cost.
Currently available fracturing fluids seldom satisfy all of the above
requirements. Of these, however, the most important requirements that we
have to consider when selecting a fracturing fluid are the ability to maintain
sufficient viscosity at reservoir temperature and compatibility with the
formation and reservoir fluids.

1.3. COMMON FRACKING FLUIDS USED IN INDUSTRY

Fracture fluids can be divided into three groups: water based fluids, oil
based fluids & synthetic based fluids. They are most often used.

1.3.1. List of Disadvantages of Fracking

1.3.2. Harmful to the Environment and the people

Despite the apparent reduced carbon emissions brought about by fracking,
setbacks are still present like water and noise pollution. Fracking itself
might not be emitting carbon in the air but the 400 tankers that are on the
roads, going to and from the site still burn fossil fuel and emit carbon. The
people living in the perimeter of the site will be subjected to noise caused by
the drilling and also the gas emissions coming from tankers. These tankers
are also flammable and in case of accidents, explosions and deaths are
possible.
 6
1.4.2. Water wastage
Even if the supposedly benefit of fracking is reduced water consumption
due to the replacement of fossil fuel with natural gas, this is not the case
while the drilling is still on going. Millions of gallons of water are needed in
just a single fracking activity and this will definitely affect water supply.
Moreover, some parts of the country are experiencing drought and which is
not a good thing.

1.4.3. Problems of Water Contamination

Leaving aside from the imminent hazards to the environment,
environmentalists are angry at the possibility that these fracking activities
can contaminate drinking water and can cause health hazards as well to the
people of the community. Accidents can happen, including the accidental
seeping of the chemicals to water pipes and drain buried underground if the
drilling equipment hits and breaks these pipes. There have already been
reports that residents of certain communities are becoming sick due to the
presence of drilling activities. Moreover, there have been reports from
homeowners that there are traces of chemicals found in their water pipes.

1.4.4. Unhealthy Workers

There are over 600 carcinogenic chemicals used in the mixture of the
fracturing liquid and this can affect the health of the hundreds of workers
employed in the fracking sites. Not all companies comply with the rules and
regulations when it comes to safety in the workplace and the workers
themselves are also not wearing Personal Protective equipment PPE because
some find it inconvenient to wear gloves or are simply careless about
wearing them.
Despite the promising economic future and independence of the US when it
comes to oil supply, there are still obvious setbacks in fracking. Aside from
the above-mentioned disadvantages, some seismic activities are also
attributed to this activity. It is important for the leaders of the world who see
 7
fracking ideal for the boost of their nation economies to also consider the
implications of these activities to the people on a global scale.
8

Chapter 2
Literature Review
 9
2. Literature Review

Since Stanolind Oil introduced hydraulic fracturing in 1949, close to 2.5

million fracture treatments have been performed worldwide. Some believe
that approximately 60% of all wells drilled today are fractured. Fracture
stimulations not only increases the production rate, but it is credited with
adding to reserves 9 billion of oil and more than 700 scf of gas added since
1949 to US reserves alone which otherwise would have been uneconomical
to develop. The first experimental treatment to hydrafrac a well for
stimulation was performed in the Hugoton gas field in Grant County,
Kansas, in 1947 by Stanolind Oil.
A total of 1,000 gallon of naphthenic acid and palm oil napalm
thickened gasoline was injected, followed by a gel breaker, to stimulate a gas
producing limestone formation at 2,400 ft. Deliverability of the well did not
change appreciably, but it was a start. In 2008, more than 50,000 frac
stages were completed worldwide at a cost of anywhere between USD 10,000
and USD 6 million. It is now common to have from eight to as many as 40
frac stages in a single well.
Since the introduction of hydraulic fracturing for stimulation of well in
1949, fracturing fluids have enjoyed an interesting history. The first several
hundred fracturing treatments which were conducted consisted of relatively
small volumes of oil based fluids to carry graded sand into the fractures
created. Initial treatments were conducted using lease crude oil to check the
compatibility of the fluid with the producing formation. Because of its
availability following the Second World War and the applicability of the
gelled fluid technology, napalm became the first second generation
fracturing fluid.
Variations in the quality of the gelling agent used to prepare the napalm
based gel caused inconsistent gelling rates and gel properties, which made it
difficult to use. Then the use of large volumes of low cost, water based fluid
pumped at very high rates proved to be an effective and economical
procedure for fracturing Hugoton wells.
 10
2.1. Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids Composition
For the preparation of Hydraulic Fracturing fluid, water is mixed with
sand and chemicals are added. The composition may vary from 90-99%
water, 1-9% sand and 1-2% chemicals such as acids, salts and organic
compounds. The Composition and number of chemical additives depends on
the type of well being fractured, the service company performing the
fracturing job and the chemical suppliers.
Around 150 different organic compounds are used in hydraulic
fracturing like soap, surfactants and fatty acids, but all are not used at a
time. In a specific well 4-10 of these organic compounds are used as an
ingredients and the most commonly used are glycols, methanol and hydro
treated distillates.

The table below gives an idea about the typical composition of fracturing
fluids.
Table No. 2.1 Typical fracturing fluid Composition

Total Composition Others i.e. 0.44% Include (%)

Fracturing
Fluid
Water 90.60% Acid 0.11

Sand 8.96% Breaker 0.01

Other 0.44% Bactericide/Biocide 0.00

Clay 0.05
Stabilizer/Controller
Corrosion Inhibitor 0.00

Crosslinker 0.01

Friction Reducer 0.08

Gelling Agent 0.05

Iron Control 0.00

Scale Inhibitor 0.04

Surfactant 0.08

pH adjusting Agent 0.01

 11
Environmental impacts of Hydraulic fracturing on the broader level
includes: Water pollution, Air pollution, health risk, noise pollution.

It is estimated that, to fracture 35,000 wells each year in United

States, 70-140 billion gallons of water is used. The same water could have
fulfilled the annual requirement of water of 40-80 cities with a Population of
50,000 Coal Bed Methane wells used 50,000 to 35000 gallons of water per
well for fracturing treatment while deep shale reservoir required 2 to 10
million gallons of water to fracture individual well. The use of water for
Hydraulic Fracturing can divert the water from stream flow, ground water,
and surface water can be driven from municipalities, industries like power
generation. Such large amount of water withdrawals is an area of concern
as it may impact local drinking water availability and quality.

There are five stages in water cycle of hydraulic fracturing fluid that
can contaminate drinking water resources. These include
 Water Acquisition
 Chemical Mixing
 Well Injection
 Flow Back and Produced Water
 Wastewater treatment and water disposal

Also, the chemical used during the fracturing get injected to

groundwater sources, the injection of these chemicals have long term
impact, as 20 to 80% of these chemicals remain may remain in formation.
Groundwater methane contamination has an adverse effect on drinking
water quality and in worst case it may even lead to explosion. When
fracturing fluid flow back to the surface, sometimes it contains not only the
chemical used for fracturing but also heavy metals, radioactive materials
like uranium, thorium, radium, radon, volatile organic compounds VOC and
hazardous air pollutants HAP such as benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and
xylene BTEX. On site mixing, storage and pumping of fracturing fluid may
cause accidental leaks onto the surface may cause
 12
release of leaked fluids into the surface water sources or may filtrate into the
soil contaminating ground water resources. It may also occur due to
equipment failure or improper pit containment which may lead to surface
water pollution. There has been a continuous increase in levels of radium,
uranium and benzene in rivers and stream due to improper treatment of
wastewater before discharging into surface water.

Fig: 2.1. pie chart of fracking fluid contain various compounds and its
composition

Glycol ethylene & propylene about 14.30%, hydro treated distillates

about 10.30%, methanol about 9.30%, and other various compounds
contains 15.10%
Soap and surfactant 0.70%, acrylamidies and polycrylamides 1.50%,
citric acid 1.70%, 2-Amino-2-methyl1-1-propanol 1.80%, hemicelluloses
enzymes and isopropanol 2.30%, guar gum 2.70%, 1,1-dibromo-3-
nitrilopropionamide 2.80%, carbohydrates 3.10%, quaternary ammonium
compounds 3.60%, glutaraldehyde 3.60%, organic phosphate 3.70%,
propargyl alcohol 5.40%, ethoxylated compounds 6%, Di & Tri
methyloxazolidine 3.70%, other alcohol 2.30% & other polymers 2.50%
 13
Many oil and gas region has degraded air quality. Methane is a major
greenhouse effect gas, which has 25 times potent to trap the heat than
carbon monoxide. Around 4% of methane produced by the well is escaped to
the atmosphere. Shales contain many organic hydrocarbons, these
hydrocarbons are brought to the surface in flow back which may enter into
impoundment where the waste water off gas its organic compounds into the
air which results to air pollution. Emission of volatile organic compound
VOC like methanol from open pits, tanks, or impoundments which accept
flow back waste from wells also leads to air pollution.

Modern oil and gas development techniques such as directional

drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking produce noise at levels that
may increase the risk of adverse effects on human health, including sleep
disturbance, cardiovascular disease and other conditions that are negatively
impacted by stress, according to a study by authors at the nonprofit science
and policy research institute Healthy Energy and West Virginia University. It
is the first peer reviewed study to analyze the potential public health
impacts of ambient noise related to fracking operations.

People living near oil and gas development may bring up concerns like
air pollution, traffic and groundwater safety, but many also complain about
noise, said Jake Hays, director of the Environmental Health Program at PSE
Healthy Energy, and lead author of the paper, which was published
December 9 in Science of the Total Environment. But until now, most of the
research relevant to public health has focused on the impacts of air and
water pollution Hays said.

2.1.1 Shale gas

Shale gas is a form of natural gas mostly methane found underground in

shale rock. It is classified as unconventional because it is found in shale, a
less permeable rock formation than sandstone, siltstone or limestone in
which conventional gas is found
 14

2.1.2 Extraction of shale gas

The process used to extract shale gas. Deep holes are drilled down into the
shale rock, followed by horizontal drilling to access more of the gas reserves,
as shale reserves are typically distributed horizontally rather than vertically.
Fracking fluids containing sand, water and chemicals are then pumped at
high pressure into the drilled holes, to open up fractures in the rock,
enabling the trapped gas to flow through the fractures into collection wells.
From there it is piped away for commercial use. Recovery rates for shale gas
are much lower than for conventional gas

In addition to friction reducers, other additives include biocides to

prevent microorganism growth and to reduce biofouling of the fractures;
oxygen scavengers and other stabilizers to prevent corrosion of metal pipes;
and acids that are used to remove drilling mud damage within the near-
wellbore area. These fluids are used not only to create the fractures in the
formation but also to carry a propping agent often silica sand or
sintered bauxite which is deposited in the induced fractures.

The makeup of fracturing fluid varies from one geologic basin or

formation to another. A list of potential additives is given. Evaluating the
relative volumes of the components of a fracturing fluid reveals the relatively
small volume of additives that are present. Overall the concentration of
additives in most slick water fracturing fluids is a relatively consistent 0.5%
to 2% with water making up 98% to 99.5%.

It provides a summary of the additives, their main compounds, the

reason the additive is used in a hydraulic fracturing fluid, and some of the
other common uses for these compounds. Hydrochloric acid is the single
largest liquid component used in a fracturing fluid aside from water; while
the concentration of the acid may vary, a 15% HCl mix is a typical
concentration. A 15% HCl mix is composed of 85% water and 15% acid,
therefore, the volume of acid is diluted by 85% with water in its stock
 15

Solution before it is pumped into the formation during a fracturing

treatment.

Once the entire stage of fracturing fluid has been injected, the total
volume of acid in an example fracturing fluid from the Fayetteville shale was
0.123%, which indicates the fluid had been diluted by a factor of 122 times
before it is pumped into the formation. The concentration of this acid will
only continue to be diluted as it is further dispersed in additional volumes of
water that may be present in the subsurface. Furthermore, if this acid
comes into contact with carbonate minerals in the subsurface, it would be
neutralized by chemical reaction with the carbonate minerals producing
water and carbon dioxide as a byproduct of the reaction.
16

Chapter 3
Hydraulic Fracturing
 17

3. Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic fracturing was first experimented in the year 1950. As of

2012 2.5 million frac jobs has been performed worldwide on oil and gas
wells from which 1 million from US alone. It has commercially been
successful in various countries for the extraction of crude oil and gas while
other countries were benefiting from it there were some countries that
banned it regarding the concern of the environment. It was a threat to water
contamination and can be possibly responsible for earthquakes keeping this
in notice some countries banned the hydraulic fracturing. It was a
prominent reason for the leakage of methane. Alone in US in Pennsylvania
during extensive testing an analysis was found to be approximately a 10% or
over 5 time.

The Environmental Defense Fund EDF has recently announced a

satellite mission to further locate and measure methane emission. Fracking
is shorthand for hydraulic fracturing a type of drilling that has been used

commercially for 67 years. Today, the combination of advanced hydraulic

fracturing and horizontal drilling employing cutting edge technologies is
mostly responsible for surging US oil and natural gas production.

Hydraulic fracturing involves safely tapping shale and other tight rock
formations by drilling a mile or more below the surface before gradually
turning horizontal and continuing several thousand feet more. Thus, a
single surface site can accommodate a number of wells. Once the well is
drilled, cased and cemented, small perforations are made in the horizontal
portion of the well pipe, through which a typical mixture of water 90
percent, sand 9.5% and additives 0.5% is pumped at high pressure to create
micro fractures in the rock that are held open by the grains of sand.
Additives play a number of roles, including helping to reduce friction thereby
reducing the amount of pumping pressure from diesel powered sources,
 18
which reduce air emissions and prevent pipe corrosion, which in turn help
protect the environment and boost well efficiency.

Safe hydraulic fracturing is the biggest single reason America is

having an energy revolution right now, one that has changed the US energy
picture from scarcity to abundance. Fracking is letting the US tap vast oil
and natural gas reserves that previously were locked away in shale and
other tight rock formations. Up to 95 percent of natural gas wells drilled in
the next decade will require hydraulic fracturing. Hydraulic fracturing also
is being used to stimulate new production from older wells. Because of shale
and fracking, the International Energy Agency projects that the US could
become the world’s leading oil producer by 2015. As for natural gas, the
United States is the leading producer in the world, according to the US
Energy Information Administration.

EIA estimates total US gas production from 2012 to 2040 will increase
56 percent, with natural gas from shale the leading contributor. The shale
gas shares of total US. Production will increase from 40% in 2012 to 53% in
2040, EIA projects. Simply put, fracking is the engine in the US energy
revolution.

3.1. Common Fracking Fluids Used In Industry

Fracture fluids can be divided into four groups:

3.1.1. Water Based Fluids

Water based fluid WBF are used to drill approximately 80% of all
wells. The base fluid may be fresh water, seawater, brine, saturated brine, or
format brine. The type of fluid selected depends on anticipated well
conditions or on the specific interval of the well being drilled. For example,
the surface interval typically is drilled with a low-density water or seawater
 19

based mud that contains few commercial additives. These systems

incorporate natural clays in the course of the drilling operation. Some
commercial bentonite or attapulgite also may be added to aid in fluid-loss
control and to enhance hole cleaning effectiveness. After surface casing is
set and cemented, the operator often continues drilling with a WBF unless
well conditions require displacing to an oil or synthetic based system.

WBF fall into two broad categories non dispersed and dispersed.

3.1.1.1. Non Dispersed Sytems

Simple gel and water systems used for top hole drilling are non
dispersed, as are many of the advanced polymer systems that contain little
or non bentonite. The natural clays that are incorporated into non dispersed
systems are managed through dilution, encapsulation, and flocculation. A
properly designed solids-control system can be used to remove fine solids
from the mud system and help maintain drilling efficiency. The low solids,
non dispersed LSND polymer systems rely on high and low molecular weight
long chain polymers to provide viscosity and fluid loss control. Low colloidal
solids are encapsulated and flocculated for more efficient removal at the
surface, which in turn decreases dilution requirements. Specially developed
high temperature polymers are available to help overcome Gelation issues
that might occur on high pressure, high temperature wells. With proper
treatment, some LSND systems can be weighted to 17.0 to 18.0 ppg and run
at 350°F and higher.

3.1.1.2. Dispersed systems

Dispersed systems are treated with chemical dispersants that are

designed to deflocculate clay particles to allow improved rheology control in
higher density mud. Widely used dispersants include lignosulfonates,
 20

lignite additives, and tannins. Dispersed systems typically require additions

of caustic soda Naoh to maintain a pH level of 10.0 to 11.0. Dispersing a
used dispersed muds include lime and other cationic systems. A solids
laden dispersed system also can decrease the rate of penetration
significantly and contribute to Hole erosion.

Formation damage commonly is caused by:

 Pay zone invasion and plugging by fine particles

 Formation clay swelling
 Commingling of incompatible fluids
 Movement of dislodged formation pore-filling particles
 Changes in reservoir rock wettability
 Formation of emulsions or water blocks

Once a damage mechanism has diminished the permeability of a

reservoir, it seldom is possible to restore the reservoir to its original
condition.

3.1.2. Oil based fluids

Oil based systems were developed and introduced in the 1960s to help
address several drilling problems

 Formation clays that react, swell, or slough after exposure to WBF

 Increasing down hole temperatures
 Contaminants
 Stuck pipe and torque and drag

Oil based fluids OBF in use today are formulated with diesel, mineral oil,
or low toxicity linear olefins and paraffins. The olefins and paraffins are
often referred to as synthetics although some are derived from distillation of
crude oil and some are chemically synthesized from smaller molecules. The
electrical stability of the internal brine or water phase is monitored to help
ensure that the strength of the emulsion is maintained at or near a
 21

Pre determined value. The emulsion should be stable enough to incorporate

additional water volume if a down hole water flow is encountered.

Barite is used to increase system density, and specially treated

organophilic bentonite is the primary viscosifier in most oil based systems.
The emulsified water phase also contributes to fluid viscosity. Organophilic
lignitic, asphaltic and polymeric materials are added to help control High
pressure High temperature fluid loss. Oil wetting is essential for ensuring
that particulate materials remain in suspension. The surfactants used for oil
wetting also can work as thinners. Oil based systems usually contain lime to
maintain an elevated pH, resist adverse effects of hydrogen sulfide H2S and
carbon dioxide CO2 gases, and enhance emulsion stability.

Shale inhibition is one of the key benefits of using an oil based system.
The high salinity water phase helps to prevent shales from hydrating,
swelling, and sloughing into the wellbore. Most conventional oil based mud
OBM systems are formulated with calcium chloride brine, which appears to
offer the best inhibition properties for most shales.

The ratio of the oil percentage to the water percentage in the liquid phase
of an oil based system is called its oil and water ratio. Oil based systems
generally function well with an oil and water ratio in the range from 65-35 to
95-5, but the most commonly observed range is from 70-30 to 90-10.

The discharge of whole fluid or cuttings generated with OBF is not

permitted in most offshore drilling areas. All such drilled cuttings and waste
fluids are processed, and shipped to shore for disposal. Whereas many land
wells continue to be drilled with diesel based fluids, the development of
synthetic based fluids in the late 1980s provided new options to offshore
operators who depend on the drilling performance of oil based systems to
help hold down overall drilling costs but require more environmentally
friendly fluids. In some areas of the world such as the North Sea, even these
fluids are prohibited for offshore discharge.
 22

3.1.3. Synthetic based drilling fluids

Synthetic based fluids were developed out of an increasing desire to

reduce the environmental impact of offshore drilling operations, but without
sacrificing the cost effectiveness of oil based systems.

Like traditional OBF, SBF can be used to

 Maximize rate of penetration ROP

 Increase lubricity in directional and horizontal wells
 Minimize wellbore stability problems, such as those caused by reactive
shales

Field data gathered since the early 1990s confirm that provide
exceptional drilling performance, easily equaling that of diesel and mineral
oil based fluids.

In many offshore areas, regulations that prohibit the discharge of

cuttings drilled with OBF do not apply to some of the synthetic based
systems. SBF cost per barrel can be higher, but they have proved
economical in many offshore applications for the same reasons that
traditional OBF have fast penetration rates and less mud related non
productive time NPT. SBF that are formulated with linear Alpha olefins and
Isomerized olefins exhibit the lower kinematic viscosities that are required in
response to the increasing importance of viscosity issues as operators move
into deeper waters. Early ester based systems exhibited high kinematic
viscosity, a condition that is magnified in the cold temperatures encountered
in deepwater risers. However, a shorter chain length, low viscosity ester that
was developed in 2000 exhibits viscosity similar to or lowers than that of the
other base fluids, specifically the heavily used systems. Because of their
high biodegradability and low toxicity, esters are universally recognized as
the best base fluid for environmental performance.

By the end of 2001, deepwater wells were providing 59% of the oil being
produced in the Gulf of Mexico. Until operators began drilling in these
 23

Deep water locations, where the pore pressure fracture gradient margin is
very narrow and mile long risers are not uncommon, the standard synthetic
formulations provided satisfactory performance. However, the issues that
arose because of deepwater drilling and changing environmental regulations
prompted a closer examination of several seemingly essential additives.

When cold temperatures are encountered, conventional SBF might

develop undesirably high viscosities as a result of the organophilic clay and
lignite additives in the system. The introduction of SBF formulated with zero
or minimal additions of organophilic clay and lignite products allowed
rheological and fluid loss properties to be controlled through the fluid
emulsion characteristics. The performance advantages of these systems
include

 High, flat gel strengths that break with minimal initiation pressure
 Significantly lower equivalent circulating densities
 Reduced mud losses while drilling, running casing, and cementing

All oil fluids normally, the high-salinity water phase of an invert-emulsion

fluid helps to stabilize reactive shale and prevent swelling. However, drilling
fluids that are formulated with diesel or synthetic based oil and no water
phase are used to drill long shale intervals where the salinity of the
formation water is highly variable. By eliminating the water phase, the all oil
drilling fluid can preserve shale stability throughout the interval.

3.1.3.1. Pneumatic drilling fluids

Compressed air or gas can be used in place of drilling fluid to circulate

cuttings out of the wellbore. Pneumatic fluids fall into one of three categories

 Air or gas only

 Aerated fluid
 Foam
 24

Pneumatic drilling operations require specialized equipment to help

ensure safe management of the cuttings and formation fluids that return to
surface, as well as tanks, compressors, lines, and valves associated with the
gas used for drilling or aerating the drilling fluid or foam.

Except when drilling through high pressure hydrocarbon- or fluid-laden

formations that demand a high density fluid to prevent well-control issues,
using pneumatic fluids offers several advantages

 Little or no formation damage

 Rapid evaluation of cuttings for the presence of hydrocarbons
 Prevention of lost circulation
 Significantly higher penetration rates in hard rock formations

3.1.3.2. Specialty products

Drilling-fluid service companies provide a wide range of additives that are

designed to prevent or mitigate costly well construction delays. Examples of
these products include

 Lost circulation material LCM that help to prevent or stop down hole
mud losses into weak or depleted formations
 Spotting fluids that help to free stuck pipe
 Lubricants for WBF that ease torque and drag and facilitate drilling in
high angle environments
 Protective chemicals example scale and corrosion inhibitors, biocides,
and H2S scavengers that prevent damage to tubular and personnel

3.1.3.3. Lost circulation materials

Many types of LCM are available to address loss situations:

 Sized calcium carbonate

 Mica
 Fibrous material
 25

 Cellophane
 Crushed walnut shells

The development of deformable graphitic materials that can continuously

seal off fractures under changing pressure conditions has allowed operators
to cure some types of losses more consistently. The application of these and
similar materials to prevent or slow down the physical destabilisation of the
wellbore has proved successful. Hydratable and rapid set lost circulation
pills also are effective for curing severe and total losses. Some of these fast
acting pills can be mixed and pumped with standard rig equipment, while
others require special mixing and pumping equipment.

3.1.3.3. Spotting fluids

Most spotting fluids are designed to penetrate and break up the wall
cake around the drill string. A soak period usually is required to achieve
results. Spotting fluids typically are formulated with a base fluid and
additives that can be incorporated into the active mud system with no
adverse effects after the pipe is freed and or circulation resumes.

3.1.3.4 Lubricants

Lubricants might contain hydrocarbon based materials, or can be

formulated specifically for use in areas where environmental regulations
prohibit the use of an oil based additive. Tiny glass or polymer beads also
can be added to the drilling fluid to increase lubricity. Lubricants are
designed to reduce friction in metal to metal contact, and to provide lubricity
to the drill string in the open hole, especially in deviated wells, where the
drill string is likely to have continuous contact with the wellbore.
 26

3.1.3.3. Corrosion, inhibitors, biocides, and scavengers

Corrosion causes the majority of drill pipe loss and damages casing, mud
pumps, bits, and down hole tools. As down hole temperatures increase,
corrosion also increases at a corresponding rate, if the drill string is not
protected by chemical treatment. Abrasive materials in the drilling fluid can
accelerate corrosion by scouring away protective films. Corrosion, typically,
is caused by one or more factors that include

 Exposure to oxygen, H2S and CO2

 Bacterial activity in the drilling fluid
 High temperature environments
 Contact with sulfur containing materials

Drill string coupons can be inserted between joints of drill pipe as the
pipe is tripped in the hole. When the pipe next is tripped out of the hole, the
coupon can be examined for signs of pitting and corrosion to determine
whether the drill string components are undergoing similar damage. H2S
and CO2 frequently are present in the same formation. Scavenger and
inhibitor treatments should be designed to counteract both gases if an influx
occurs because of underbalanced drilling conditions. Maintaining a high pH
helps control H2S and CO2, and prevents bacteria from souring the drilling
fluid. Bacteria also can be controlled using a micro biocide additive.
 27

Table no. 3.1.3. Fracking Fluid

Compound Purpose Common Application

Acids Helps dissolve minerals and Swimming pool cleaner

initiate fissure in rock pre
fracture
Allows a delayed breakdown
of the gel polymer chains
Sodium Chloride
Minimizes the friction
between fluid and pipe
Polyacrylamide
Prevents scale deposits in
the pipe
Ethylene Glycol
Maintains fluid viscosity as
Borate Salts
temperature increases
Maintains effectiveness of
other components, such as
Sodium and Potassium
Carbonate crosslinkers
Eliminates bacteria in the
water
Glutaraldehyde
Thickens the water to
suspend the sand
Guar Gum
Prevents precipitation of
Table salt
Water treatment, soil
conditioner
Automotive anti freeze,
deicing agent, household
cleaners
Laundry detergent, hand
soap, cosmetics
Washing soda, detergent,
soap, water softener,
glass, ceramics
Disinfectant, sterilization
of medical and dental
equipment
Thickener in cosmetics,
baked goods, ice cream,
toothpaste, sauces
Additive in food and

Citric Acid metal oxides beverages

Isopropanol Used to increase the Glass cleaner,

viscosity of the fracture antiperspirant, hair
coloring
 28
After the wells on a pad are drilled, cased and cemented, a device
perforates the horizontal part of the production pipe to make small holes in
the casing, exposing the wellbore to the shale. Then a mixture, commonly
known as fracking fluid, of water 90%, sand 9.5% and chemicals 0.5% is
pumped into the well under high pressure to create micro-fractures in the
shale and free the natural gas or oil.
The sand in fracking fluid keeps the fractures open after the pressure is
released, and the chemicals are chiefly agents to reduce friction and prevent
corrosion.
The chemical disclosure registry provides information on hydraulic
fracturing fluid used in over 117,600 wells. Industry activity is subject to a
number of federal and state laws, including the Safe Drinking Water Act, the
Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the National Environmental Policy
Act

3.2. Impacts Of Hydraulic Fracturing

3.2.1. Air pollution

Air Pollution from Fracking a comprehensive literature review

identified 15 different oil and gas development processes and sources
including the drilling process, wastewater, and condensate tanks that can
release air contaminants the authors conclude that there is legitimate
concern that local air pollution may produce adverse effects in individuals
who live near the high emitting site or processes.

The rapid expansion of fracking, both in areas with existing oil and
gas operations and previously undrilled areas, can lead to an increase in the
type of pollution generally found at conventional oil and gas development
and to other pollutants.
 29
Specific to fracking, such as silica sand, fracking chemicals, and flow back
waste water. Local Impacts Diesel Emissions Diesel emissions originate from
the combustion engines of heavy trucks and machinery used during well
site preparation, drilling, and production. Exhaust from diesel engines
contains hundreds of toxic chemicals. Of greatest concern is the fine diesel
soot particles, which can lodge deep within the lungs, increasing health
risks including emergency room visits, hospital admissions, asthma
attacks, cardiopulmonary disease including heart attack and stroke
respiratory disease, adverse birth outcomes, and premature death from
pneumonia, heart attack, stroke and lung cancer. Researchers are
concerned about local residents increased risk of exposure to diesel exhaust.

A study of regional air quality impacts from natural gas extraction in

Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale included diesel emissions from truck traffic,
well drilling and hydraulic fracturing, gas production, on site combustion,
and compressor stations in the monetary damage calculations. The National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health NIOSH expressed concern
about the levels of diesel particulate matter measured at 11 oil and gas sites
in Colorado, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Texas, and North Dakota.

Toxics air pollutants originate from direct and fugitive emissions of

hydrocarbons at the well and from associated infrastructure such as
condensate tanks, dehydrators, wastewater impoundment pits, and
pipelines. The fracking process involves dozens of chemicals and the process
returns oil, gas, fracking chemicals, formation brines, and mobilized
compounds, including heavy metals and naturally occurring radioactive
materials NORM to the surface. Hydrogen sulfide H2S is a toxic and
explosive gas that may be present in oil and gas formations and is produced
along with the hydrocarbons. It is damaging to the central
 30
3.2.1.1. Regional Pollution

Ozone smog Fracking related processes and other stages of the oil and
gas production process release nitrogen oxides and VOC, which react in the
presence of sunlight to form ozone smog. Exposure to ozone is associated
with a variety of respiratory and cardiovascular effects, including shortness
of breath, reduced lung function, aggravated asthma and chronic respiratory
disease symptoms, inflammatory processes, and premature death. A
growing number of studies have attributed emissions of ozone precursors
from rapidly growing oil and gas development to significantly elevated ozone
concentrations in Wyoming, 36 Colorado, 37 Utah, 38-40 Pennsylvania,
41&42 Texas, 43&44 Oklahoma. In the study on Wyomings Sublette
County, tight gas production activities caused winter ozone levels46 to spike
above the EPA 8 hour ozone standard of 75 parts per billion 13 times
between February 14 and March 15, 2011. 47 In Utah’s Uintah Basin
ambient 1-hour ozone levels exceeded 150 ppb twice the federal standard.48
Workers Not Protected In addition to the community health concerns from
fracking, worker safety at oil and gas production sites is also coming under
increased scrutiny, in part because the oil and gas industry is one of the
most dangerous occupational sectors in the country.
According to statistics released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics there
were 545 fatalities at US oil fields between 2008 and 2012, of which 216
occurred in Texas. At this level, the industry’s fatality rate is 2.5 times
higher than the accident-prone construction sector and more than 8 times
higher than the industrial sector as a whole. A major contributing factor to
the industries high fatality rate is traffic accidents, which also impact
neighboring communities. On site toxic exposures present another health
hazard to oil and gas workers. In 2010, at least four worker deaths may be
linked to chemical and petroleum vapor exposure at or near flow back tanks
at oil well sites in North Dakota and Montana.

Air samples collected by NIOSH in the personal breathing zone of

workers at six flow back sites in Colorado and Wyoming identified benzene
 31
as the primary VOC of concern, especially near the hatches of the flowback
tanks. Of the 17 samples, met or exceeded the NIOSH Recommended
Exposure Limit of 0.1 ppm. The unprotected inhalation of silica dust and
diesel fumes also threatens worker health and may lead to cancers and
other illnesses many years after exposure. Workers may even bring
contaminated clothes and boots home, putting their families at risk.

Fig: 3.2.1 Bar diagram of Methane Emission

While natural gas production has risen, methane emissions have

actually declined slightly thanks to the oil and natural gas industries
investment in new technologies.
Recent EPA data shows that industry initiatives to capture methane
are effective. The EPA annual draft inventory of US greenhouse gas
emissions report released in April shows those methane emissions from all
petroleum systems decreased by over 28% since 1990 including a decrease
of emissions from petroleum production of around 8 percent from 2014
levels. EPA attributed this improvement to reductions in emissions from
associated gas venting and flaring. From 2005 to 2015 production of natural
gas increased nearly 50%, while methane emissions from natural gas
systems remained relatively flat, increasing by just 1.7% Furthermore,
 32
methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry make up just 4%
of total US greenhouse gas emissions.

3.1.2. Ground Water contamination

The use of horizontal wells and hydraulic fracturing is so effective that

it has been called disruptive. That is, it threatens the profitability and
continued development of other energy sources, such as wind and solar,
because it is much less expensive and far more reliable. Not only that, but
compared with coal, natural gas produces only half the carbon dioxide and
almost no sulfur, nitrous oxides, or mercury.

Those demonstrable benefits over both traditional and alternative

energy draw monetary and political attacks. Some university and media
reports have focused on two main environmental concerns about using
hydraulic fracturing to recover shale gas Groundwater contamination by
methane or chemicals Escape of methane gas to the atmosphere. These
risks come from well construction, transportation of chemicals and fluids to
the well site, and operation of the wells and the gas transport system. This
is an abbreviated analysis of a larger document on factual information about
the purported risks of hydraulic fracturing

 Deep-well hydraulic fracturing does not travel through the rock far
enough to harm fresh water supplies. Thousands of field monitoring tests
and millions of fracturing jobs have confirmed this point.

 In the deep, properly constructed wells that produce most US shale gas,
the chance of even minor water contamination from fracturing chemicals
is less than one event in a million fracture treatments, based on
statistical analysis. When compared with the frequency of pollution from
chemical dumps, acid mine drainage, general manufacturing, oil refining,
and other energy or product producing activities, natural gas from
 33
Conventional and unconventional sources generate more energy with the
least impact and fewest problems.

 Even as underground fractures grow mostly outward with limited upward

and downward growth, the total fracture extent remains thousands of
feet below the deepest fresh water sands. The height of any fracture is
limited by rock stresses, leakage of fracturing fluids within the target
fracturing zone, and the hundreds of natural rock barriers that border
the shale zone. Typical fracture height is 100 to 300 ft and separation
between the top of the fracture and the deepest fresh water sands ranges
from 3000 to over 5000 ft.

 Water contamination due to spilled industrial chemicals occurs rarely

and even less so for fracturing chemicals and comes exclusively from
careless road transport, on site storage and surface mixing, or well
construction. These failings can be addressed successfully with existing
technology and effective regulations. It is interesting to note that the
states with the fewest problems are those with strong state regulations.
Appropriate regulations already exist in most producing states and work
very effectively to protect the environment
 34

Fig: 3.1.2. Groundwater Protection

The key to protecting groundwater is proper well construction, and the

oil and gas industry has developed detailed standards for this based on field
experience and significant advances in drilling and construction techniques.
In fact, there have been no confirmed cases of groundwater contamination
from hydraulic fracturing itself in the at least 2 million wells fracked over
the past 68 years.
A typical natural gas well uses 3 million pounds of steel and cement.
Each layer of steel casing is cemented in place to create an air tight seal.
Alternating layers of cement and steel casings designed to ensure well
integrity as it passes through groundwater levels thousands of feet down to
the energy holding layers of rock.

3.2.3. Noise pollution

Modern oil and gas development techniques such as directional
drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking produce noise at levels that
may increase the risk of adverse effects on human health, including sleep
 35
disturbance, cardiovascular disease and other conditions that are negatively
impacted by stress, according to a study by authors at the nonprofit science
and policy research institute Healthy Energy and West Virginia University. It
is the first peer-reviewed study to analyze the potential public health
impacts of ambient noise related to fracking operations.
People living near oil and gas development may bring up concerns like
air pollution, traffic and groundwater safety, but many also complain about
noise said Jake Hays, director of the Environmental Health Program at PSE
Healthy Energy, and lead author of the paper, which was published
December 9 in Science of the Total Environment. But until now most of the
research relevant to public health has focused on the impacts of air and
water pollution Hays said.
Fracking technologies have unlocked oil and gas deposits from
formations like shale and tight sands that previously were not considered
economically viable. But the environmental and public health effects of such
operations are still emerging. To understand whether noise from fracking
might impact the health of surrounding communities, PSE Healthy Energy
researchers gathered all available data and measurements of noise levels at
oil and gas operations and compared the information to established health
based standards from the World Health Organization and other groups.
Compound or synergistic effects also may be at play, Shonkoff said. For
example, noise reduction technology may lower negative impacts, and
synergistic effects of noise and air pollution may create a new health threat
or amplify an existing one.
However, initial evidence suggests that policies and mitigation
techniques are warranted to limit human exposure to unsafe noise levels
from fracking. Policies can specify setbacks from residents and communities
in particular vulnerable populations such as schools and hospitals noise
mitigation techniques such as perimeter sound walls, and location siting
decisions that make use of natural noise barriers like hills and trees.
Michael McCawley , the interim chair of the Occupational and
Environmental Health Department at West Virginia University, was also a
coauthor on the study, titled Public health implications of environmental
 36
noise associated with unconventional oil and gas development. Physicians,
Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy is a nonprofit research institute
dedicated to supplying evidence based scientific and technical information
on the public health, environmental and climate dimensions of energy
production and use.

3.2.4. Seismic Activity

Fig: 3.2.4. Seismic Activity

Seismicity Associated with Wastewater Disposal Wells

Industry takes seriously earthquake incidents that may be associated with
the disposal of produced water from energy development salty brines and
other fluids that come to the surface during oil and natural gas production.
On average, about 10 barrels of brine are produced with each barrel of
crude oil. Once separated from the oil, brine typically is returned to the
underground formation it came a similar formation via disposal wells
managed under EPA Class II Underground Injection Control UIC
regulations. In the US there are roughly 35,000 active Class II wells used to
dispose of these fluids that are a byproduct of oil and natural gas
production. These are a subset of more than 800,000 permitted UIC wells
nationwide that serve the needs of many different industries and
governmental entities. The majority of disposal wells in the United States do
not pose a hazard for induced seismicity, but under some geologic and
 37
reservoir conditions a limited number of injection wells have been
determined to be responsible for induced earthquakes with felt levels of
ground shaking. Hydraulic fracturing itself is not the issue here. It is
understood that certain unique and limited geologic conditions combined
with hydraulic fracturing may induce an earthquake felt at the surface of
the earth but such events have been rare To evaluate the need for mitigation
and management of the risk of induced seismic events, it is important to
understand the science.
38

Chapter 4
Health Risk
 39
4.1. Health risk

They found that noise from fracking operations may contribute to adverse
health outcomes in three categories
4.1.1. Annoyance
Sustained noise may produce a host of negative responses such as feelings
of anger, anxiety, helplessness, distraction, and exhaustion, and may
predict future psychological distress.
4.1.2. Sleep Disturbance
Awakening and changes in sleep state have after effects that include
drowsiness, cognitive impairment and long term chronic sleep disturbance.
4.1.3. Cardiovascular Health
Studies have found positive correlations between chronic noise exposure
and elevated blood pressure, hypertension and heart disease.

Environmental noise is a well documented public health hazard.

Numerous large scale epidemiological studies have linked noise to adverse
health outcomes including diabetes, depression, birth complications and
cognitive impairment in children. Noise exposure, like other health threats,
may disproportionately impact vulnerable populations such as children, the
elderly and people with chronic illnesses. High decibel sounds are not the
only culprits; low level sustained noises can disturb sleep and concentration
and cause stress.

Oil and gas operations produce a complex symphony of noise types,

including intermittent and continuous sounds and varying intensities, said
PSE Healthy Energy Executive Director Seth Shonkoff, who is also a visiting
scholar at UC Berkeley Department of Environmental Science, Policy and
Management and an affiliate of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
For example, compressor stations produce a low rumble drilling a horizontal
well is a loud process that can take four to five weeks 24 hours per day to
complete; and using large volumes of water at high pressure results in
 40

Pump and fluid handling noise. Researchers note that data collection
methodologies varied across public and private entities and types of drilling
operations, requiring some estimates in the data. They say additional
research is needed to determine the level of risk to communities living near
oil and gas operations.

4.2. Methane Emission

Methane Emissions plays a major role for Greenhouse gas emissions.

The methane which is produced by microorganisms is called biogenic and
process is known as Methanogenesis. The methane which is produced by
rocks and soil is called Abiogenic

Methane, the primary component of natural gas, it is a short-lived

greenhouse gas. The principal contributor to manmade climate change the
problem starts when gas burned gets into the atmosphere but no one is sure
exactly where the leaks and releases are or how much escapes

One of the main sources of methane into the environment is the

natural decomposition of plant and animal matter in airless conditions. It
occurs in marshes, rice paddies and the waste of animals. It is also released
during the mining and distribution of fossil fuels coal, oil and gas.

4.2.1. The effect on environment

On a local scale, when the methane poses an explosion hazard which
can result in evacuation of areas over old landfills or mines. Compared to
volatile organic compounds VOC methane does not contribute a significant
formation of ground level ozone or photochemical smog. The methane has
the main on the global scale, as a greenhouse gas. The levels of methane in
the environment are comparatively low, it has a high global warming
potential 21 times that of carbon dioxide ranks it amongst the worst of the
greenhouse gases.
 41

4.2.2. Exposure it effect on human health

At normal environmental concentrations, there are no impacts of
methane on human health. If it has extremely high artificial concentrations
In an enclosed space the reduction in oxygen levels could lead to
suffocation.

4.3. Effect of silica on groundwater

Silicon is the most abundant solid element, being second only to

oxygen. It makes up more than 25% of the earth’s crust. The three most
common crystalline forms are quartz, cristoballite and tridymite which are
inter related under different conditions of temperature and pressure. The
most common of the quartz silica is the alpha quartz, which is a major
component of igneous rocks - granite and pegmatites. They are also found in
sedimentary rocks sandstones, slate and shale Due to the abundance of
silica in the tropical regions, it has become a major chemical constituent of
natural water bodies. the primary source of dissolved silica in natural
waters is the chemical breakdown of silicate minerals in rock and sediments
by chemical weathering process However, the presence of multivalent ions
such as Al3+, Ca2+ , Mg2+, Fe3+ and others affects silica solubility thus
silica plays an important role in the ecology of aquatic systems.

4.3.1. Exposure to silica dust

Silicosis is a serious lung disease caused by the accumulation of silica
dust in the lungs The scarring of the lungs causes stiffening and this
eventually obstruct breathing and cause shortness of breath. This can lead
to permanent heart and lung disease. Silicosis development is directly
associated with workplace exposure to silica dust. Workers who are most at
risk include those engaged in dust generating activities such as tunneling
and digging work, road construction, all forms of demolition activities,
mining and pottering
 42
It is a widely known air pollutant in these industries where it has wrecked
many havoc on the health of the workers Based on amount of exposure and
length of time, silicosis can be chronic, accelerated or acute. Silica dust
causes irritation of the eyes, nose and throat like most other dust. However,
if excessive amounts of silica dust are breathed into the lungs over a period
of time, it can cause damage to the lung tissue. Humans exposed to the
dissolved silica in drinking or potable water.

Silica dust causes irritation of the eyes, nose and throat like most other
dusts. If excessive amounts of silica dust are breathed into the lungs over a
period of time, it can cause damage to the lung tissue. The health impacts of
this silica exposure on the residents of the community are under
observation.
43

Chapter 5
Risk Management
 44
5.1. Risk Assessment

Identification of risk, the potential for occurrence of an event and

impact of that event, is the first step in improving a process by ranking risk
elements and controlling potential harm from occurrence of an event.
Hydraulic Fracturing has become a hot environmental discussion topic and
a target of media articles and University studies during development of shale
gas near populated areas. The fracturing and frac waste disposal was largely
driven by lack of chemical disclosure. The spectacular increase in North
American natural gas reserves created by shale gas development makes
shale gas a disruptive technology, threatening profitability and continued
development of other energy sources. Introduction of such a disruptive
force as shale gas will invariably draw resistance, both monetary and
political, to attack the disruptive source, or its enabler hydraulic fracturing.

Some anti frack charges in media articles and university studies are
based in fact and require a state by state focused improvement of well
design specific for geology of the area and oversight of overall well
development. Other articles have demonstrated either a severe
misunderstanding or an intentional misstatement of well development
processes, apparently to attack the disruptive source. Transparency requires
cooperation from all sides in the debate. To enable more transparency on
the oil and gas side, both to assist in the understanding of oil and gas
activities and to set a foundation for rational discussion of fracturing risks,
a detailed explanation of well development activities is offered in this paper,
from well construction to production, written at a level of general public
understanding, along with an initial estimation of frac risk and alternatives
to reduce the risk, documented by literature and case histories. This
discussion is a starting point for the well development descriptions and risk
evaluation discussions, not an ending point different risk assessment
techniques applicable to onshore unconventional oil and gas production to
determine the risks to water quantity and quality associated with hydraulic
fracturing and produced water management.
 45
Water resources could be at risk without proper management of
water, chemicals, and produced water. Previous risk assessments in the oil
and gas industry were performed from an engineering perspective leaving
aside important social factors. Different risk assessment methods and
techniques are reviewed and summarized to select the most appropriate one
to perform a holistic and integrated analysis of risks at every stage of the
water life cycle. Constraints to performing risk assessment are identified
including gaps in databases, which require more advanced techniques such
as modeling. Discussions on each risk associated with water and produced
water management, mitigation strategies, and future research direction are
presented. Further research on risks in onshore unconventional oil and gas
will benefit not only the US but also other countries with shale oil and gas
resources.
46

Chapter 6
Conclusions
 47

Conclusions

Since the mid 2000s, a new era of US oil and gas production have
been driven by the advent of modern hydraulic fracturing. The process of
hydraulic fracturing uses several million gallons of water and perhaps tens
of thousands of gallons of chemical additives per production well to create
fracture that enhance the flow of oil and gas from unconventional reserves.
Throughout the life of production well, perhaps a half millions of flow back
and produced water also flow to the surface as a byproduct of oil and gas
production, Reservoir Geology Operator practices influences the amount of
water and mixed of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing process as well
as the amount and composition of flow back and produced water generated
during production.
 48
References
Fracking Fumes: air pollution from hydraulic fracturing threatens public
health and communities

SPE 165692 hydraulic fracturing and organic compounds uses, disposals

and challenges Kimberly E. Carter, J. Alexandra Hakala and Richard W.
Hammack, National Energy Technology Laboratory US Department of energy

Osborn, Stephen G, Vengosh, Avner, Warner, Nathaniel R, Jackson, Robert

B. (17 may 2011). Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying
gas well drilling and hydraulic fracturing proceeding of the national
academy of science of USA.108(20):81728176.
Doi:10.1073/Pnas.1100682108. PMC 3100993. PMID 21555547. Retrieved
14 October 2011

Waltz James, Decker, Tim L (1981), hydro fracturing offers many benefits,
Jhonson drillers journal (2nd quarter)

Hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas: Impacts from the hydraulic fracturing
water cycle on drinking water resources in US. United States Of
Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Protection Agency
Retrieved 17 December 2016.

Alex Wayne (4 January 2012). Health Effects of Fracking need study, says
CDC Scientist. Bloomberg Business week. Archived from the original on 13
March 2012 Retrieved 29 February 2012.