Alaska is about to get fracked up

[n2doc]

BY SARAH LASKOW


Alaska’s been coasting on its stores of easy-access oil, but a new report from the U.S. Geological Survey shows that the state has a motherlode of shale oil and natural gas. You know what means — here come the frackers.

The numbers are impressive: as much as 80 trillion cubic feet of frackable natural gas and up to 2 billion barrels of shale oil. To put that in perspective, the natural gas resources are smaller than the Marcellus Shale, which underlays Pennsylvania and New York, and smaller than Texas’ Haynesville and Eagle Ford shale formations — but it’s still the fourth biggest parcel in the U.S. The oil shale is the second biggest deposit in the country; only North Dakota’s Bakken Formation has more.

If you’re inclined to look on the bright side about oil and gas fracking, there are a couple of positives here. These resources aren’t in developed areas, which minimizes the health risks that come with fracking. And for the most part, these resources are also outside of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, so fracking would be better for the local ecology than drilling for conventional oil in ANWR.



But oil and gas development always carries risks. Plus, if these natural gas resources are developed, Alaska will likely have to liquify the gas in order to ship it off and sell it. Creating liquified natural gas takes a ton of energy and helps wipe out natural gas’ carbon advantage over fuels like coal and oil.
http://grist.org/list/alaska-is-about-to-get-fracked-up/

[ellisonz]

1. That ain't cool, man.

The caribou are going to get all ornery!

[zeaper]

2. Most oil and gas wells have been fracked at least once.

Older wells are fracked several times during their life time, it is nothing new.

[grntuscarora]

3. My understanding is

that fracking of vertical wells to increase output has been done as far back as the 1940s. But the kind of horizontal fracking that they're doing all across my state of PA is relatively new--- within the past 8 years or so.
Please correct me if I'm wrong on this--- I'm trying to learn.

[joshcryer]

4. That is correct, horizontal fracking is the *only* way to get this fuel.

And it's not just a one shot or a two shot, like with vertical fracking. It's a near regular process and it's bound to fuck up.

[grntuscarora]

5. I thought so.

Last edited Thu Mar 1, 2012, 09:37 AM - Edit history (1)

That was then:

“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 (Fig. 1). A total of 1,000 gal 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.”

“With the advent in 1953 of water as a fracturing fluid, a number of gelling agents were developed.”

http://www.jptonline.org/index.php?id=481


This is now:
"Water is also used in hydraulic fracturing where a mixture of water and sand is injected into the formation at a high pressure to create small cracks in the rock allowing gas and oil to freely flow to the surface. Hydraulic fracturing of a typical Chesapeake horizontal deep shale natural gas or oil well requires an average of 4.5 million gallons per well."
http://www.hydraulicfracturing.com/Water-Usage/Pages/Information.aspx

1000 gallons of fluid per well in 1947 to 4.5 million gallons per well today. I don’t think this is grandma’s fracking we’re talking about anymore.

[joshcryer]

6. Very good stats, thank you. I knew it was far more but yeah.

And the thing is, the 1000 gallons in old wells was done once, twice, maybe three or four times but after that the wells were done.

With modern fracking of non-conventional sources (shale, sands, tight gas) it's almost continuous. For perspective, a modern well could pump 1000 gallons a day for 12 years (just divided 4.5 mil / 1000 / 365, not saying that they do, they might pump 5 times that for 3 years, etc).

This is an extremely intensive process and they've somehow made it profitable, and even greenwashed the technology to "support renewables."

[classifiedsbakken]

7. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)