Halliburton takes 5 days to provide chemical information at Ohio fracking explosion that killed 70,000 fish
![Amy Mall](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/dentonfracking/20141030155257im_/http://switchboard.nrdc.org/media/photo-amall-contributor.jpg)
Posted July 21, 2014 in Health and the Environment, Saving Wildlife and Wild Places
Last week I blogged about explosions and a spill at a fracking operation in Ohio. More details are now available, and the reports offer a cautionary tale of all the things that can go wrong on a fracking site. Here are key conclusions from news reports and a U.S. EPA emergency response report:
- "Federal and state EPA officials had to wait five days before they were given a full list of the fracking chemicals" used at the site by Halliburton. While the company gave information to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (DNR) two days after the disaster, it is reported that ODNR did not share this information with U.S. EPA or the Ohio EPA.
- The disaster was caused by a break in a hydraulic line that sprayed chemicals onto hot equipment, caused 20 trucks and more to catch on fire, and led to more than 30 explosions. The sequence of events began at around 9:00 a.m. on June 28. While the fire department left that day at around 7:00 p.m., the well was not shut in until after midnight--more than 15 hours past the initial reports of problems. Fracking flowback continued to be released for those 15 hours until the well was shut in. Fires continued to rekindle through July 2, and a tank was still burning on July 5--a week later.
- The chemicals ran into a small tributary of Opossum Creek, which then runs into the Ohio River. The location where Opossum Creek runs into the Ohio River is 1.7 miles upstream of a public water intake for West Virginia residents. It is estimated there were 70,000 fish killed by the chemical spill along 5 miles of stream before the Ohio River. Other animals, such as salamanders, frogs and crayfish, were also found dead. Officials say at this point that no drinking water has been contaminated and that air monitoring detected normal air quality.
- This major fracking operation was allowed to take place on a site where two slopes of the well pad had previously failed--the southern slope and the western slope. A landslide had already affected the creek in 2011 and the site had been found in significant non-compliance. Runoff from this most recent incident left the pad at multiple locations on the south and west sides of the pad--where the problems had occurred in the past. This appears to have been an unsafe location for such an intense industrial operation if there are unstable slopes so close to a body of water.
- Nearby families were evacuated until the site was safe enough for them to return home. Two families live within 600 feet of the well pad. Another 23 families live within a one mile radius. Fortunately, no one was injured by the fires or explosions.
- Chemicals detected in runoff include: acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, toluene, and more. These are chemicals that can have serious health effects. Next steps include an ecological assessment and remediation planning, and identifying the potentially responsible parties.
With so many troubling aspects of this disaster, we hope that important lessons are learned regarding the safeguards and regulations that need to be in place to reduce the risks of fracking to human health and the environment, including:
- Public disclosure of fracking chemicals before fracking is allowed to begin, including chemicals that are in formulas claimed to be trade secrets, so that first responders and regulatory authorities have the information they need to protect the public and the environment.
- Greater setbacks from homes, schools and other priority areas to adequately protect human life and safety. Such large scale industrial operations involving dangerous chemicals and radioactive materials should not be occurring this close to where people live.
- Greater setbacks from streams and other water bodies. accounting for any steep slopes, to create protective buffers for clean water, aquatic habitat and drinking water supplies.
- More safety restrictions for sites including avoidance of steep and unstable slopes and the highest level of runoff prevention measures.
- Comprehensive baseline testing of air and water before any fracking in order to to fully understand environmental impacts after industrial operations and incidents. One positive lesson that comes out of this incident is that the operator of the well, Statoil, had "previously sampled all [water] wells within 5,000 feet of well head prior to commencing operations." We don't have any details regarding Statoil's baseline testing program but, in general, baseline testing should be mandatory everyplace.
Last year I blogged about an investigation by the U.S. Geological Survey into a fracking fluid spill and resulting fish kill in Kentucky. The USGS concluded: ""Our study is a precautionary tale of how entire populations could be put at risk even with small-scale fluid spills." I wrote that this Kentucky incident illustrates, among other things, the toxicity of fracking fluid and wastewater and why we need safe setbacks to protect important water sources.
Sadly, harmful incidents continue to occur. The good news is that no one was injured by this Ohio incident. The public will be closely watching regulators to see how the law is enforced, what penalties are imposed, and what regulations are put in place to stop this type of disaster from happening again in the future, putting people and the environment at risk.
Comments are closed for this post.
Comments
Michael Berndtson — Jul 21 2014 08:13 PM
From the Columbus Dispatch link, Haliburton is the fracking contractor. The well is owned by Statoil. I'm not sure if Haliburton hides the special sauce ingredients and how the 2005 Halliburton loophole impacts the situation - but the "owner" is typically ultimately responsible. It's never a good idea to give too much leeway to contractors. Unless that gives Statoil, a Norwegian company, an out, when doing business on American soil. Norges typically respond remorsefully to public shaming. It may be time to call them out on fracking. Statoil is also flaring the bejeezus out of the Bakken wells in North Dakota. Despite Norway having the world's most stringent flaring requirements (as in as little as possible). Maybe they'd like to have us build a Taco Bell, a McDonalds, Bob Evans and a Cracker Barrel on every highway exit in Norway, unencumbered by local zoning and historical and cultural preservation restrictions.
Amy Mall — Jul 22 2014 11:28 AM
Michael: Thanks for the comment. It is very unfortunate that companies typically only do the minimum required in each jurisdiction, rather than implementing best practices.
Michael Berndtson — Jul 23 2014 11:13 AM
Amy, by "best practices" do you mean whatever works to get the oil and gas out as quickly as possible, sell at the highest price, and burn as fast as possible, pursuant to local, state and federal allowable workarounds of country of origin? Or is there another definition of the term I'm unaware of? I'm sure a Statoil field engineer in North Dakota could scroll around his own companies intranet for "Standard Operating Procedures" or SOPs and apply whatever best or even pretty good practices Statoil uses off the coast of Norway to collect gas from drilling operations. Another field engineer in Appalachia could do the same and find related SOPs on operations safety, health and environmental protection practices pursuant to Statoil Corporate. What's Norway's sovereign fund? Something like $700 billion or there abouts. Or bring up hockey and climate change. Norwegians like hockey. Nobody likes slushy skating.
Amy Mall — Jul 23 2014 11:35 AM
Michael: The BLM uses this definition: "Best management practices (BMPs) are state-of-the-art mitigation measures applied to oil and natural gas drilling and production to help ensure that energy development is conducted in an environmentally responsible manner."
Michael Berndtson — Jul 23 2014 04:44 PM
Thanks, Amy. I was trying to be silly in the last reply. However, you steering me over to BLM and it's pursuit for fracking on federal lands got me curious. I forgot they were in the middle of writing or finalizing the fracking rules. I'm sure you blogged on it lately and I've just forgotten. I guess the next thing for me to look into is what's going on with finalization, how this applies to non BLM lands, and for drilling/production activities already in progress. These questions/issues are probably google-able.
Amy Mall — Jul 24 2014 10:49 AM
The most recent public statement is that the final BLM fracking rule will be issued by the end of the year. The rule would apply to all federal leases, whether on public land or beneath a private split estate.