Share this article:
No Fracking Clue!
Without coming down on one side or the other, I cannot be the only person with a technical background who despairs at the standard of evidence in the debate around issues like fracking.
There is however a current engineer’s view on fracking: The Royal Academy of Engineering concluded in 2012 that shale gas extraction by fracking could be managed safely in the UK if best practice was followed.
As discussed in a previous post, in sustainability issues, all too often on one side we have pressure groups who believe in the strong form of the precautionary principle and on the other, the sort of free-wheeling capitalists who would like us to just trust them to care more about the environment than profit.
The alliance of NIMBYs, muddle-headed arts graduates, and clicktivists who seem to make up the bulk of those who oppose fracking seem willing to believe any propaganda which they think might support a return to an imagined past of gentle people with flowers in their hair.
On the other side, the companies with strong links to our party of government who want to carry out fracking seem equally willing to twist facts to suit their case, in order that they can make pots of money in a lightly regulated, and ideally subsidised environment.
So let’s look at the claims made against fracking. Greenpeace’s website says that fracking operations are always aesthetically unpleasing, cause earthquakes, water pollution and climate change. Let’s take these in turn.
Plants can be made as unobtrusive as designers would like them to be, it just cost money. A balance has to be struck between the duty of the directors of fracking companies to maximise company profit and the reasonable expectations of those who live near and visit the areas in which fracking will take place. This is a feature of every development in an area with any aesthetic value, with a well-established control mechanism. Status: a reasonable concern, but capable of management through existing processes.
Earthquakes sound exciting, but the tremors which happened after fracking at the Preese Hall site in Lancashire were very weak, caused no damage, and were not out of the ordinary for the UK. Cuadrilla’s website dispute that the fracking caused the quakes, and quote the British Geological Survey as saying that tremors capable of causing damage cannot be produced by shale, as it is too weak a rock to build up significant stored energy. The BGS are however reported elsewhere as saying that further small quakes might occur at the site, so monitoring should be undertaken, and injection rates reduced if necessary to control any quakes which occur. Status: scaremongering with emotive language about a small and manageable risk
There are a number of water pollution concerns. Pollution of groundwater, aggravation of water shortages, and discharge of untreated fracking fluids to environment. To take these in reverse order:
Fracking companies will not be allowed to discharge untreated fracking fluid or any other pollutant to the environment at levels which will cause harm. They will be regulated just like every other business in the UK, even those owned by people who went to school with government ministers. Status: reasonable concern, but we have it covered.
Water shortages? Have these people been to the North-West of England? This is a reasonable concern elsewhere in the world, but it does not apply in the UK. We have no overall shortage of water in the UK, though we do sometimes have areas with local shortages. Status: Not generally applicable to the UK.
Pollution of groundwater is clearly something we might be concerned about, but the Society of Petroleum Engineers stated in their investigation of the issue based on thirty years of experience of fracking that
“Downhole environmental risks to fresh water supplies from fracturing in shale development greater than 500ft below the water sand is literally as close to zero as can be established from engineering analysis using the reported and documented results available from at least 10,000 shale wells covered by the literature and searched for this paper.”
Status: theoretical concern, practical non-issue when managed properly.
Will fracked gas cause climate change? Sure it will. Will it cause more climate change than if we didn’t obtain it? Why would it? Even Greenpeace admit that it will burn cleaner than other fuels. They just want us to leave all fossil fuels in the ground. Status: Trojan horse for another argument.
So as an engineer, I am personally agnostic on the issue. If it is properly managed, and meets the IChemE sustainability guidelines at a particular site by bringing jobs and other benefits, why not frack for gas?
Both that is of course just my opinion. People can believe anything they like, but I would argue that engineers are obliged to look beyond surface appearances, and to arrive at logically defensible positions, even on issues such as this.
About the author
Professor Moran is a Chartered Chemical Engineer with over twenty years’ experience in process design, commissioning and troubleshooting and is regarded as the ‘voice of chemical engineering’. He started his career with international process engineering contractors and worked worldwide on water treatment projects before setting up his own consultancy in 1996, specializing in process and hydraulic design, commissioning and troubleshooting of industrial effluent and water treatment plants.
Whilst Associate Professor at the University of Nottingham, he co-ordinated the design teaching program for chemical engineering students. Professor Moran’s university work focused on increasing industrial relevance in teaching, with a particular emphasis on process design, safety and employability.
Most of the major scientific challenges of the 21st century — including sustainable energy resources, water quality issues, and process efficiency in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries — revolve around chemical engineering. Elsevier’s broad content in this area examines topics such as bioprocessing, polymer nano-composites, biomass gasification and pyrolysis, computational fluid dynamics, industrial proteins, catalysis, and many others with great significance and applicability to researchers today. Our books, eBooks, and online tools provide foundational information to students, and cutting-edge coverage to advance corporate research and development. Learn more about our Chemical Engineering books here.