Will Fracking Suck California Dry?

New technologies have expanded oil production, but they’re adding another thirsty mouth to the state’s tight water market.

Oil pumps in operation at an oilfield near central Los Angeles.
National Journal
Patrick Reis
Oct. 20, 2013, 10:07 a.m.

In Cali­for­nia, every drop of wa­ter counts, and every drop is con­tested.

The state’s fish­ers and farm­ers have been at war over wa­ter for dec­ades, bat­tling over how to di­vide the wa­ter between river beds and farm fields. And North­ern Cali­for­ni­ans — whose wa­ter sup­plies are more plen­ti­ful — live in fear of the desert neigh­bors to the south march­ing on the San Fran­cisco Bay Delta with pipelines and straws. And then there are mu­ni­cip­al­it­ies, which are all jock­ey­ing to se­cure sup­plies for Cali­for­nia’s nearly 40 mil­lion res­id­ents.

But now, they’ll all have a new con­tender to jostle with: the frack­ing boom.

Oil shale de­vel­op­ment is tak­ing off in Cali­for­nia, thanks in large part to hy­draul­ic-frac­tur­ing, or frack­ing, tech­no­lo­gies for oil and gas ex­trac­tion that have opened pre­vi­ously in­ac­cess­ible fields to de­vel­op­ment. In or­der to get at those de­pos­its, however, frack­ing uses tre­mend­ous quant­it­ies of wa­ter.

For oil de­velopers, it’s an is­sue not to be taken lightly: Cali­for­ni­ans, hail­ing from a state known for its green eth­os, are already nervous about the im­pacts of frack­ing, and if oil com­pan­ies step on too many toes, it could de­rail the the en­ergy boom they’re so eagerly an­ti­cip­at­ing.

“The fact is that there is some am­bi­val­ence over frack­ing,” said Dav­id Hayes, Pres­id­ent Obama’s former deputy In­teri­or sec­ret­ary who re­cently left Wash­ing­ton for a Stan­ford Uni­versity pro­fess­or­ship. “It’ll de­pend on how the wa­ter is handled, but it’s cer­tainly an ad­di­tion­al chal­lenge.”

Cali­for­nia’s struggles re­veal a dark­er as­pect of Amer­ica’s en­ergy boom: Tech­no­lo­gies have vastly ex­pan­ded the coun­try’s en­ergy-de­vel­op­ment op­tions, but they have not — in many cases — ex­pan­ded the abil­ity to deal with im­pacts from that de­vel­op­ment. They haven’t pro­duced new in­fra­struc­ture to carry hy­dro­car­bons to mar­ket or new pol­lu­tion-con­trol tech­no­lo­gies to re­duce the ef­fects on cli­mate change, and above all, they haven’t found a way to main­tain or in­crease wa­ter sup­plies for Cali­for­nia.

So how do Cali­for­nia’s de­velopers in­tend to in­crease pro­duc­tion without suck­ing the state dry?

Frack­ing in­volves drilling deep be­low the sur­face and in­ject­ing chem­ic­als and wa­ter to re­lease oil and gas de­pos­its trapped in geo­lo­gic­al form­a­tions. In North Dakota, at the heart of the coun­try’s most re­cent en­ergy boom, frack­ing wells ac­coun­ted for 5.5 bil­lion gal­lons worth of wa­ter us­age last year, ac­cord­ing to state es­tim­ates.

But de­velopers in­sist that frack­ing in Cali­for­nia is dif­fer­ent from the frack­ing done farther east. Much of the state’s drilling op­er­a­tions are aimed at ac­cess­ing shale oil rather than nat­ur­al gas, and be­cause of the state’s geo­logy less wa­ter is needed.

Dave Quast, Cali­for­nia dir­ect­or for oil and gas de­vel­op­ment ad­voc­ate En­ergy in Depth, says that frack­ing wells in Cali­for­nia on av­er­age use a little more than 100,000 gal­lons of wa­ter, com­pared with oth­er wells to the east that guzzle gal­lons by the mil­lions. And Hayes noted that there are ways for de­velopers to cut down their wa­ter foot­print, in­clud­ing pro­grams that re­cycle some or all of the wa­ter used in op­er­a­tions.

“But,” Hayes cau­tioned, “that’s not the cus­tom­ary ap­proach yet where frack­ing is re­quired.”

For now, the state’s reg­u­lat­ors are tak­ing a wait-and-see ap­proach. SB 4, the Cali­for­nia’s land­mark frack­ing law signed last month by Demo­crat­ic Gov. Jerry Brown, con­tains little in the way of re­stric­tions on wa­ter us­age. In­stead, the law con­tains strict dis­clos­ure re­quire­ments. Un­der SB 4, drillers must pub­licly dis­close their wa­ter us­age start­ing in 2014.

Cali­for­nia’s en­vir­on­ment­al com­munity will be watch­ing when the re­ports start go­ing on­line. “One of the big prob­lems is we don’t have a handle on how much wa­ter is be­ing used. There’s a big data gap,” said An­drew Grin­berg, an Oak­land-based oil and gas policy ex­pert for Clean Wa­ter Ac­tion. But once the in­form­a­tion is pub­licly avail­able, Cali­for­nia res­id­ents will be bet­ter able to gauge how frack­ing im­pacts the state’s wa­ter­sheds, aquifers, and reser­voirs — and gauge how ef­fect­ively their reg­u­lat­ors are deal­ing with it, Grin­berg said.

“There’s def­in­itely a big role for the pub­lic and non­profits,” he ad­ded. “If we see any­thing, we need to be pre­pared to take ac­tion.”

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×