Three oil service companies last month signed a voluntary agreement with the US Environmental Protection Agency to stop adding diesel fuel to hydraulic fracturing fluids used in coalbed methane production. BJ Services Co., Halliburton Energy Services Inc., and Schlumberger Technology Corp.—which perform about 95% of the hydraulic fracturing in the US—signed the memorandum of understanding Dec. 15. The companies said they do not necessarily agree that hydraulic fracturing fluids containing diesel endanger underground drinking water. Nevertheless, they signed the agreement because they recognize there continues to be public concern over the practice. The agreement is not expected to raise drilling costs.
Bill Whitsitt, president of the Domestic Petroleum Council, said producers don't use that much diesel now anyway.
"Diesel itself had been used so rarely and so specifically in formations that are not classified as drinking water sources, and there has been no evidence of any contamination of water because of diesel or its use in fracturing fluids," he said.
"But this should go further toward eliminating even the hypothetical concern raised in the EPA's August 2002 draft study, reinforcing already powerful conclusions about the environmental compatibility of this process that is well-regulated by states." Either EPA or a participating company may terminate the nonbinding agreement within 30 days by providing written notice to the other parties.
Another study
In a related move, EPA is expected to soon release a final study that evaluates the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on underground drinking water sources.
Agency and industry sources who have seen the report predicted the final version will reiterate what the draft report found: that while the threat to public health from hydraulic fracturing appears to be low, industry should still consider using injection fluids that are water-based in deference to some stakeholder concerns over other chemicals.
EPA conducted the study largely in response to pending litigation and pressure from Congress. Lawmakers wanted EPA to collect more information to evaluate public health risks associated with hydraulic fracturing. Environmentalists, and their advocates in Congress, later criticized the resulting draft. They said the report was incomplete because the agency did not actually test any groundwater to reach its findings, instead relying on existing work by state oil and gas commissions.
Suspicions, recriminations
Environmentalists also are suspicious of EPA's latest action. Green groups active in the Powder River basin, for example, speculated that the agency's voluntary arrangement with industry over diesel fuel use is meant to divert attention from a proposed energy bill before Congress. They say last year's bill included a provision that would let hydraulic fracturing operators avoid federal clean water rules. Green groups also say that without strong federal oversight, hydraulic fracturing fluids—even those not containing diesel—might still be toxic.
Industry disagrees, arguing that the provision only sought to clarify inconsistent federal regulations that have been the subject of lengthy litigation.
