Fracking studies

Activism

 * Union of Concerned Scientists, Toward an Evidence-Based Fracking Debate, 2013.

Air Pollution

 * 2012 Uinta Basin Winter Ozone and Air Quality Study, Utah Department of Environmental Quality; EPA; the Bureau of Land Management; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Utah State University; the University of California; the University of Colorado, Boulder; and the Western Energy Alliance, Feb 1, 2013. Measured pollution in the Uinta Basin in Utah during the winter of 2011-2012, which indicated that 98 to 99 percent of the volatile organic compounds and 57 to 61 percent of the nitrogen oxides in the region came from oil and gas operations.
 * Colborn T, Schultz K, Herrick L, and Kwiatkowski C. An exploratory study of air quality near natural gas operations. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal (November 9, 2012) - found that a set of chemicals called non-methane hydrocarbons, or NMHCs, are in the air near drilling sites even when fracking is not in progress. According to the study, more than 50 NMHCs were found near gas wells in rural Colorado, including 35 that affect the brain and nervous system. Some were detected at levels high enough to potentially harm children who are exposed to them before birth.
 * Lisa M. McKenziea, Roxana Z. Wittera, Lee S. Newmana, John L. Adgatea, Human Health Risk Assessment of Air Emissions from Development of Unconventional Natural Gas Resources, Science of the Total Environment, 2012 - Estimated health risks for exposures to air emissions from a gas drilling project in Garfield County, Colorado. Found that air pollution caused by fracking may contribute to acute and chronic health problems for those living near natural gas drilling sites, as monitoring found a number of potentially toxic and carcinogenic petroleum hydrocarbons in the air near oil/gas wells, including known carcinogens such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene. Other chemicals included heptane, octane and diethylbenzene but information on their toxicity is limited. The greatest health impact corresponds to the relatively short-term, but high emission, well completion period. The effects could include eye irritation, headaches, sore throat and difficulty breathing.
 * Earthworks, Reckless Endangerment While Fracking the Eagle Ford Shale, September 19, 2013.

Campaign contributions

 * Natural Cash: How the fracking industry fuels Congress, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Nov 2013 - found industry contributions from districts and states home to House and Senate candidates rose over 230 percent between the 2004 and 2012 election cycles (in contrast, industry contributions to candidates from nonfracking districts rose by 131 percent over the same time period).
 * Political donations by national gas companies, Common Cause, 2011.

Chemical disclosure

 * Kate Konschik, Legal Fractures in Chemical Disclosure Laws: Why the Voluntary Chemical Disclosure Registry FracFocus Fails as a Regulatory Compliance Tool, Harvard Law, April 2013.
 * State Hydraulic Fracturing Disclosure Rules and Enforcement: A Comparison, NRDC, 2012.
 * The Right to Know, the Responsibility to Protect: State Actions Are Inadequate to Ensure Effective Disclosure of the Chemicals Used in Natural Gas Fracking, OMB Watch, 2012.

Earthquakes

 * Won-Young Kim, Induced seismicity associated with fluid injection into a deep well in Youngstown, Ohio, Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 118, Issue 7, pages 3506–3518, July 2013 - concludes that "the recent earthquakes in Youngstown, Ohio were induced by the fluid injection at a deep injection" and that the data "may indicate that the earthquakes were directly caused by the pressure buildup and stopped when pressure dropped."
 * William L. Ellsworth, Injection-Induced Earthquakes, Science, July 2013 - notes that after decades of a steady earthquake rate (average of 21 events/year), U.S. activity increased starting in 2001 and peaked at 188 earthquakes in 2011. States that human-induced earthquakes are at least partially responsible for the increase, and updated regulations are needed for wastewater injection wells.
 * Emily E. Brodsky and Lia J. Lajoie, Anthropogenic Seismicity Rates and Operational Parameters at the Salton Sea Geothermal Field, (sub req) Science, July 11, 2013 - authors conclude there is a clear correlation between the amount of water extracted and injected into the ground, and the number of earthquakes. Study based on analysis of a Californian geothermal energy site, which showed that for a net injection of 500 million gallons of water into the ground per month, there is an earthquake on average every 11 days. Authors say number of earthquakes can be predicted, but not their size. Also found major earthquakes thousands of miles away can trigger reflex quakes in areas where fluids have been injected.
 * Katie M. Keranen, Heather M. Savage, Geoffrey A. Abers, and Elizabeth S. Cochran, Potentially induced earthquakes in Oklahoma, USA: Links between wastewater injection and the 2011 Mw 5.7 earthquake sequence, Geology, 2013 - The study links Oklahoma's 5.7 earthquake to underground injection of wastewater from nearby oil and gas production -- the largest quake ever linked to injection. According to the researchers: "We use the aftershocks to illuminate the faults that ruptured in the sequence, and show that the tip of the initial rupture plane is within ∼200 m of active injection wells and within ∼1 km of the surface."
 * Investigation of Observed Seismicity in the Horn River Basin, BC Oil and Gas Commission, August 2012 - Found that "Evidence strongly suggests that all [seismic] events were triggered by fluid injection [fracking] at adjacent stages."
 * USGS, Are Seismicity Rate Changes in the Midcontinent Natural or Manmade? USGS, 2012. - The USGS study found that a "remarkable increase in the rate of M 3 and greater earthquakes is currently in progress in the US midcontinent" and "the acceleration in activity that began in 2009 appears to involve a combination of source regions of oil and gas production, including the Guy, Arkansas region, and in central and southern Oklahoma." The study concludes: "While the seismicity rate changes described here are almost certainly manmade, it remains to be determined how they are related to either changes in extraction methodologies or the rate of oil and gas production."
 * Minimizing and Managing Potential Impacts of Induced Seismicity from Class II Disposal Wells: Practical Approaches, US Environmental Protection Agency Draft Report, November 27, 2012.
 * Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Preliminary Report on the Northstar 1 Class II Injection Well and the Seismic Events in the Youngstown, Ohio Area, March 2012. - Found "a number of co-occurring circumstances strongly indicating the Youngstown area earthquakes were induced." There were 134 earthquakes in the region in 2011 measuring 3.0 or higher on the Richter scale – six times the average annual rate for any given year in the 20th century.
 * Austin Holland, Examination of Possibly Induced Seismicity from Hydraulic Fracturing in the Eola Field, Garvin County, Oklahoma, Oklahoma Geological Survey Open-File Report, 2011. - Examined a cluster of earthquakes in Oklahoma and found "that shortly after hydraulic fracturing began small earthquakes started occurring, and more than 50 were identified, of which 43 were large enough to be located. Most of these earthquakes occurred within a 24 hour period after hydraulic fracturing operations had ceased."

Economics

 * Long-Term Energy Development Has Negative Impacts on Western Counties, Headwater Economics, December 2013.
 * '''America’s New Energy Future: The Unconventional Oil and Gas Revolution and the US Economy," IHS CERA, Sep 2013 - found that fracking increased household disposable income in the U.S. by more than $1,200 in 2012, and that the industry supports 2.1 million jobs. Critics note that page 3 of the report states that "This research was supported by the American Chemistry Council, America’s Natural Gas Alliance, the American Petroleum Institute, the Fertilizer Institute, the US Chamber of Commerce – Institute for 21st Century Energy, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Natural Gas Supply Association, Rio Tinto, and the Society of the Plastics Industry."

Jobs

 * Exaggerating the Employment Impacts of Shale Drilling: How and Why, Multi-State Shale Research Collaborative, November 2013 - found drilling in the six states that span the Marcellus and Utica Shale formations has produced much fewer new jobs than the industry and supporters claim.

Exports

 * Carbon Footprint of BC LNG Boom Could Rival Oilsands, The Tyee, January 2014 - analysis of government targets for natural gas exports from British Colombia (four to six trillion cubic feet of shale gas per year) could have a carbon footprint 2/3 that of oil sands by 2020.
 * Wallace E. Tyner, James Ackerman, Lois Ackerman, and Kemal Sarica, Comparison of Analysis of Natural Gas Export Impacts from Studies Done by NERA Economic Consultants and Purdue University, Energy Policy, 2013.
 * Look Before the LNG Leap: Why Policymakers and the Public Need Fair Disclosure Before Exports of Fracked Gas Start, Sierra Club, 2012.
 * Drill Here, Sell There, Pay More: The painful price of exporting natural gas, Natural Resources Committee, 2012.
 * North American LNG Import/Export Terminals: Proposed/Potential, FERC, updated Feb. 28, 2012.

Externalities

 * Natural Capital at Risk: The Top Externalities of Business, Trucost, April 2013.

Finance

 * Unburnable carbon 2013: Wasted capital and stranded assets, Carbon Tracker and the Grantham Research Institute, April 2013.

General

 * Fracking by the Numbers: Key Impacts of Dirty Drilling at the State and National Level, Environment America, Oct 2013.
 * Myths And Facts About Natural Gas, Media Matters, June 2012.
 * Ernest Moniz: Industry Partner or Industry Puppet? Public Accountability Initiative, March 2013.
 * Fracking by the Numbers, Environment America, October 3, 2013.

GHG emissions and methane leakage

 * Eric Larson, Natural Gas & Climate Change, Climate Central, May 2013 - examines greenhouse gas benefits of switching from coal to gas based on various methane leakage rates of 2%, 5%, and 8%. Found that, at an average annual conversion rate of electricity from coal to gas of 2.5 percent, the reductions at a 2 percent methane leak rate would be 29 percent by 2050, and a 5 percent leakage rate would have benefits of 12 percent by 2050. With an 8 percent leak rate, GHG emissions would be greater than with coal for more than 50 years before a benefit begins to be realized.
 * Reducing Upstream GHG Emissions from U.S. Natural Gas Systems, World Resources Institute, April 2013.
 * GHGRP 2011: Reported Data, EPA, released Feb. 2013. - The EPA's accounting of emissions that cause global warming from stationary sources found that emissions from drilling, including fracking, and leaks from transmission pipes totaled 225 million metric tons of carbon-dioxide equivalents during 2011, second only to power plants, which emitted 2,221 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2011.
 * Has US Shale Gas Reduced CO2 Emissions? Examining recent changes in emissions from the US power sector and traded fossil fuels, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, October 2012 - compares drop in US CO2 emissions with increases in US coal exports. Concludes that more than half of the emissions avoided in the US power sector from natural gas may have been negated through coal exports (exports equivalent to 340 MtCO2 emissions elsewhere in the world, i.e. 52% of the 650 MtCO2 of potential emissions avoided within the US).
 * Ramón A. Alvareza, Stephen W. Pacalab, James J. Winebrakec, William L. Chameidesd, and Steven P. Hamburge, Greater focus needed on methane leakage from natural gas infrastructure, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, February 2012 - introduces the idea of “technology warming potentials” (TWPs) to reveal “reveal time-dependent tradeoffs inherent in a choice between alternative technologies.” Using this approach, the potent warming effect of methane (CH4) emissions undercuts the value of fuel switching in the next few decades; the study finds that a big switch from coal to gas would only reduce TWP by about 25% over the first three decades—not the 50% drop in CO2 emissions often claimed. The conclusion is based on “EPA’s latest estimate of the amount of CH4 released because of leaks and venting in the natural gas network between production wells and the local distribution network” of 2.4%. Many experts believe the leakage rate is higher than 2.4% for fracking.
 * Nathan Myhrvold and Ken Caldeira, |utmccn=%28referral%29|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/coal/&__utmv=-&__utmk=43167398 Greenhouse gases, climate change and the transition from coal to low-carbon electricity, Environmental Review Letters 7 014019, February 2012 - looked at switching from one terawatt of coal power plants to natural gas-or to solar panels, or wind, or nuclear, or other options. In the natural gas scenario, the study calculated a range of warming trajectories for warming 100 years from now, with temperatures 17 to 25 percent lower than they would be if the world stuck with coal. The cut in the warming trajectory was far sharper for a switch to energy sources with near-zero emissions—such as nuclear, wind, or solar energy. The reduction in the temperature increase was 57 to 81 percent, according to the study models.
 * Tom Wigley, Coal to gas: the influence of methane leakage, Climatic Change, 2011 - found that unless leakage rates for new methane can be kept below 2%, substituting gas for coal is not an effective means for reducing the magnitude of future climate change: "We consider a scenario where a fraction of coal usage is replaced by natural gas (i.e., methane, CH4) over a given time period, and where a percentage of the gas production is assumed to leak into the atmosphere. The additional CH4 from leakage adds to the radiative forcing of the climate system, offsetting the reduction in CO2 forcing that accompanies the transition from coal to gas."
 * Robert W. Howarth, Renee Santoro, and Anthony Ingraffea, Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations: A letter, Climatic Change, March 2011 - estimates that as much as 8 percent of the methane in shale gas leaks out into the air during the lifetime of a hydraulic shale gas well, making it a higher greenhouse gas emitter than conventional gas, oil, or even coal. Argues that if there is leakage of 2.5% or more of methane, gas is worse than coal in terms of effect on climate.
 * Leaking Profits: The U.S. Oil and Gas Industry Can Reduce Pollution, Conserve Resources, and Make Money by Preventing Methane Waste, NRDC, March 2012.

Natural gas transmission

 * America Pays for Gas Leaks: Natural Gas Pipeline Leaks Cost Consumers Billions, Senate.gov, Aug 1, 2013 - found "gas distribution companies in 2011 reported releasing 69 billion cubic feet of natural gas to the atmosphere, almost enough to meet the state of Maine’s gas need for a year” yet gas companies have little incentive to replace leaky aging pipes because they are able to pass along the cost of lost gas to consumers. Also noted that, from 2000 through 2012, there were several hundred explosions which killed 116 people.

Carbon dioxide

 * Using the Clean Air Act to Sharply Reduce Carbon Pollution from Existing Power Plants, NRDC, 2012.

Health effects
For more on this topic, go to Fracking and health effects
 * Lisa M. McKenzie, Ruixin Guo, Roxana Z. Witter, David A. Savitz, Lee S. Newman, and John L. Adgate, "Birth Outcomes and Maternal Residential Proximity to Natural Gas Development in Rural Colorado," Environ Health Perspect, Jan 2014 - In rural Colorado, the researchers observed an association between density and proximity of natural gas wells within a 10-mile radius of maternal residence and prevalence of congenital heart defects (CHDs) and neural tube defects (NTDs).
 * Gas Patch Roulette: How Shale Gas Development Risks Public Health in Pennsylvania, Earthworks, 2012.
 * Judi Krzyzanowski, Environmental pathways of potential impacts to human health from oil and gas development in northeast British Columbia, Canada, Environmental Reviews, June 2012.
 * Laura N. Vandenberg, Theo Colborn, Tyrone B. Hayes, Jerrold J. Heindel, David R. Jacobs, Jr., Duk-Hee Lee, Toshi Shioda, Ana M. Soto, Frederick S. vom Saal, Wade V. Welshons, R. Thomas Zoeller, and John Peterson Myers, Hormones and Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals: Low-Dose Effects and Nonmonotonic Dose Responses, Endocrine Reviews, June 2012 - Although the report doesn't specifically mention hydraulic fracturing, a separate peer-reviewed study released in September 2012 identified 649 chemicals used during natural gas production and found that at least 130 of those could affect the endocrine system. They include petroleum distillates, methanol and other, more obscure compounds with names like dibromoacetonitrile and ethoxylated nonylphenol.
 * Colborn, T.; Kwiatkowski, C.; Schultz, K., and Bachran, M., Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: an International Journal, September 2012, 17(5):1039-1056.
 * Michelle Bamberger and Robert E. Oswald, The Impacts of Gas Drilling on Human and Animal Health, New Solutions, Vol. 22(1) 51-77, 2012.
 * Ronald E. Bishop, Ph.D., CHO, Chemical and Biological Risk Assessment for Natural Gas Extraction in New York, State University of New York, March 28, 2011.

Pipelines

 * Government Accountability Office, Collecting Data and Sharing Information on Federally Unregulated Gathering Pipelines Could Help Enhance Safety, GAO-12-388, Mar 22, 2012.
 * A 2012 Transportation Department report obtained by the Associated Press concluded that pipeline spills caused by flooding and riverbed erosion released 2.4 million gallons of crude oil and other hazardous liquids into U.S. waterways over the past two decades.

Terminals
For more information, go to LNG Terminals
 * North American LNG Import/Export Terminals: Proposed/Potential, FERC, updated Feb. 28, 2012.

Livestock

 * Michelle Bamberger and Robert Oswald, Impacts of Gas Drilling on Human and Animal Health, New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy Vol. 22(1) 51-77, 2012 - compiled 24 case studies of farmers in six shale-gas states whose livestock experienced neurological, reproductive and acute gastrointestinal problems after being exposed – either accidentally or incidentally – to fracking chemicals in the water or air. According to the authors: "The findings illustrate which aspects of the drilling process may lead to health problems and suggest modifications that would lessen but not eliminate impacts. Complete evidence regarding health impacts of gas drilling cannot be obtained due to incomplete testing and disclosure of chemicals, and nondisclosure agreements."

Exports

 * Lorne Stockman, Should it stay or should it go? The case against U.S. crude oil exports, Oil Change International, Oct 2013.

Public perceptions

 * Hilary Boudet, Christopher Clarke, Dylan Bugden, Edward Maibach, Connie Roser-Renouf, Anthony Leiserowitz, 'Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing, Energy Policy, 2013.

Regulations
For more information, go to Fracking and regulations

General

 * '''The Law and Policy of Hydraulic Fracturing: Addressing the Issues of the Natural Gas Boom," Case Western Law Review, May 2013.
 * Key Environmental and Public Health Requirements, GAO Report 12-874, Sep. 2012.
 * A Review of Shale Gas Regulations by State, Center for Energy Economics and Policy, 2012.
 * Renee Lewis Kosnik, The Oil and Gas Industry’s Exclusions and Exemptions to Major Environmental Statutes, Oil and Gas Accountability Project, 2007 Report.

Pipeline Inspections

 * Government Accountability Office, Collecting Data and Sharing Information on Federally Unregulated Gathering Pipelines Could Help Enhance Safety, GAO-12-388, March 22, 2012. - Report estimates 240,000 miles of U.S. gas/oil pipeline are not regulated by the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, as the federal agency does not oversee pipeline that is not within 220 yards of at least 10 homes. The report indicates government officials do not know where all the pipelines are, including those in residential areas. Much of the pipeline going through more rural areas has never been seen by any federal, state, or local inspectors. Ultimately, only about 10 percent of the pipelines carrying natural gas or other hazardous chemicals used in the fracking process fall under federal regulatory auspices. For pipeline that is not regulated, natural gas and oil companies using the pipelines are not required to report any accidents, injuries, fatalities, or dangerous releases from them.


 * After the Marshall Spill: Oil Pipelines in the Great Lakes Region, A Legal Analysis, National Wildlife Federation, 2012 Report.

Enforcement

 * Breaking All the Rules: The Crisis in Oil & Gas Regulatory Enforcement, Earthworks Action, 2012.

Self-Reporting
Legal Fractures in Chemical Disclosure Laws, Harvard Law School, April 23, 2013.

Reserves

 * U.S. Energy Insecurity: Why Fracking for Oil and Natural Gas Is a False Solution, Food and Water Watch, November 2012.

Subsidies and externalities

 * The Costs of Fracking: The Price Tag of Dirty Drilling’s Environmental Damage, Environment Texas, Fall 2012.
 * In the Shadow of the Marcellus Boom, PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center, 2012.
 * The Costs of Fracking, Environment America Research & Policy Center, September 2012.
 * Do Tax Subsidies Influence Domestic Oil Production? Geology, Technology, and Price Drive Industry; By Comparison Production and Drilling Tax Incentives Have Little Impact, Headwater Economics, May 2012 Report.

Taxes and Tax Loopholes

 * Piping profits: the secret world of oil, gas and mining giants, PWYP Norway, September 2011 - found that ten of the world’s largest oil, gas, and mining companies own over 6,000 subsidiaries, with over a third of them based in secrecy jurisdictions like Delaware and the Netherlands that make it easier to avoid tax obligations.

General

 * Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Resources: Separating the Frack from the Fiction, Pacific Institute, 2012. Focuses on surface spills and leaks during production, improper drilling well casings, wastewater disposal, water usage, and air emissions. The report is based on a literature review, as well as interviews with 16 representatives from state and federal offices, industry and nonprofit groups.

Groundwater contamination

 * Evan Hansen, Dustin Mulvaney, and Meghan Betcher. Water Resource Reporting and Water Footprint from Marcellus Shale Development in West Virginia and Pennsylvania Down Stream Strategies, October 30, 2013 - This report is a comprehensive investigation of water used and waste generated by Marcellus Shale gas extraction operations in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. The report found that more than 90% of the water injected underground to frack gas wells never returns to the surface, meaning it is permanently removed from the water cycle. This could have huge repercussions in water-poor states.
 * Brian E Fontenot, Laura R Hunt, Zacariah Louis Hildenbrand, Doug D Carlton, Hyppolite Oka, Jayme L Walton, Dan Hopkins, Alexandra Osorio, Bryan Bjorndal, Qinhong Hu, and Kevin Albert Schug, An evaluation of water quality in private drinking water wells near natural gas extraction sites in the Barnett Shale Formation, Environ. Sci. Technol., July 25, 2013 - Study of 100 private water wells in and near the Barnett Shale in Texas showed elevated levels of potential contaminants such as arsenic and selenium closest to natural gas extraction sites.
 * Alternatives for Managing the Nation’s Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites, National Research Council, 2012 - concludes that groundwater contamination is extensive but remediation methods are improving, although "[t]here is general agreement among practicing remediation professionals ... that there is a substantial population of sites where, due to inherent geologic complexities, restoration within the next 50-100 years is likely not achievable."
 * Hydraulic Fracturing Can Potentially Contaminate Drinking Water Sources, NRDC, 2012.
 * Nathaniel R. Warner, Robert B. Jackson, Thomas H. Darraha, Stephen G. Osbornc, Adrian Downb, Kaiguang Zhaob, Alissa Whitea, and Avner Vengosha, Geochemical evidence for possible natural migration of Marcellus Formation brine to shallow aquifers in Pennsylvania, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, May 2012 - found that naturally occurring brine fluids traveled thousands of feet up from Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale rock to overlying shallow aquifers, suggesting fracking fluids could do the same, although there is still uncertainty over the time period.
 * Tom Myers, Potential Contaminant Pathways from Hydraulically Fractured Shale to Aquifers, Groundwater, April 17, 2012 - using computer modeling, the study concludes that natural faults and fractures in the Marcellus Shale, exacerbated by the effects of fracking itself, could allow chemicals to reach the surface in as little as hundreds to tens of years -- challenging the argument that impermeable layers of rock would keep fracking fluid, which contains benzene and other dangerous chemicals, safely locked nearly a mile below water supplies.
 * Energy Institute, Separating Fact from Fiction In Shale Gas Development, February 15, 2012 - found no evidence of aquifer contamination from hydraulic fracturing chemicals in the subsurface by fracturing operations, and observed no leakage from hydraulic fracturing at depth. Critics say that proponents of hydraulic fracturing have erroneously reported that the study found no environmental contamination, when the study found that all steps in the process except the actual injection of the fluid (which proponents designated "hydraulic fracturing") have resulted in environmental contamination. It was later reported that the lead researcher Charles Groat was a paid board member of PXP: company filings indicated that in 2011, he received more than $400,000 in compensation from the company, which has fracking operations in Texas.
 * Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, June 3, 2013 - According to the report published in PNAS, researchers tested drinking water from 141 different wells scattered throughout Pennsylvania. The scientists tested 141 water wells, ‘examining natural gas concentrations and isotopic signatures with proximity to shale gas wells.’ As the abstract reads, "Methane was detected in 82% of drinking water samples, with average concentrations six times higher for homes <1 km from natural gas wells (P = 0.0006). Ethane was 23 times higher in homes <1 km from gas wells (P = 0.0013); propane was detected in 10 water wells, all within approximately 1 km distance (P = 0.01)."

Methane leakage

 * Robert B. Jacksona, Avner Vengosha, Thomas H. Darraha, Nathaniel R. Warnera, Adrian Downa, Robert J. Poredac, Stephen G. Osbornd, Kaiguang Zhaoa, and Jonathan D. Karra, Increased stray gas abundance in a subset of drinking water wells near Marcellus shale gas extraction, PNAS, June 3, 2013.
 * Stephen G. Osborn, Avner Vengoshb, Nathaniel R. Warnerb, and Robert B. Jacksona, Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing, PNAS, April 14, 2011 - found "systematic evidence for methane contamination" of drinking water associated with shale gas extraction. Water wells half a mile from drilling operations were contaminated by methane at 17 times the rate of those farther from gas developments.

Radioactivity

 * A February 2011 study in the NY Times, based upon thousands of internal documents obtained by The Times from the Environmental Protection Agency, state regulators, and drillers, found never-reported studies by the EPA and a confidential study by the drilling industry that both concluded that radioactivity in drilling waste cannot be fully diluted in rivers and other waterways. The Times found that of more than 179 wells producing wastewater with high levels of radiation, at least 116 reported levels of radium or other radioactive materials 100 times as high as the levels set by federal drinking-water standards. At least 15 wells produced wastewater carrying more than 1,000 times the amount of radioactive elements considered acceptable.

Regulations

 * Watered Down, Western Organization of Resource Councils, Nov 2013 - examines the dangers to water quality posed by oil and gas production in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming.

State Investigations

 * Dominic C. DiGiulio, Richard T. Wilkin, Carlyle Miller, and Gregory Oberley, Investigation of Ground Water Contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming, EPA Draft report, December 2011 - concludes that contaminants including benzene found in central Wyoming were likely caused by the fracking drilling process. Benzene exposure is strongly associated with childhood leukemia.

Wastewater

 * Aurana Lewis, Wastewater Generation and Disposal from Natural Gas Wells in Pennsylvania, Duke University, May 2012.
 * Rebecca Hammer, Jeanne VanBriesen, and Larry Levine, In Fracking's Wake: New Rules are Needed to Protect Our Health and Environment from Contaminated Wastewater, Natural Resources Defense Council, May 2012 report.
 * Nathaniel R. Warner, et al Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania Environmental Science & Technology, October 2, 2013.

Water Use

 * Hydraulic Fracturing & Water Stress: Water Demand by the Numbers, Ceres, Feb 2014.
 * Water Constraints on Energy Production: Altering our Current Collision Course, Civil Society Institute, September 12, 2013.
 * Gone for good: Fracking and water loss in the West, Western Organization of Resource Councils, 2013.
 * Wendy Wilson, Travis Leipzig & Bevan Griffiths-Sattenspiel, Burning Our Rivers: The Water Footprint of Electricity, River Network Report, April 2012.
 * Fracking: The New Global Water Crisis, Food and Water Watch Report, March 2012.

Well casing failures

 * The Sky is Pink: Annotated Documents, Gasland, 2012.

US States

 * The Fracking Debate: A Policymaker's Guide, National Conference of State Legislatures report, 2012.
 * A Research Guide to the Marcellus and Utica Shales, Carnegie Mellon and the PA State Association of Boroughs, accessed Sep 2013.

California and fracking

 * Dirty Water: Fracking Offshore California, Environmental Defense Center, 2013.
 * Robert Collier, A New California Oil Boom? Drilling the Monterey Shale - Part 1: Distracted by Fracking? The Next Generation, August 2013.
 * California, Here They Come: Now Is the Time to Ban Fracking, Food and Water Watch, May 2012.
 * Renée Sharp and Bill Allayaud, California regulators: See no fracking, speak no fracking, Environmental Working Group, February 2012.

Colorado and fracking

 * Lisa Sumi, Inadequate enforcement means current Colorado oil and gas development is irresponsible, Earthworks Report, March 2012.
 * Lisa M. McKenziea, Roxana Z. Wittera, Lee S. Newmana, John L. Adgatea, Human Health Risk Assessment of Air Emissions from Development of Unconventional Natural Gas Resources, Science of the Total Environment, 2012 - Estimated health risks for exposures to air emissions from a gas drilling project in Garfield County, Colorado. Found that air pollution caused by fracking may contribute to acute and chronic health problems for those living near natural gas drilling sites, as monitoring found a number of potentially toxic and carcinogenic petroleum hydrocarbons in the air near oil/gas wells, including known carcinogens such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene. Other chemicals included heptane, octane and diethylbenzene but information on their toxicity is limited. The greatest health impact corresponds to the relatively short-term, but high emission, well completion period. The effects could include eye irritation, headaches, sore throat and difficulty breathing.
 * A 2012 study to be published in the Journal of Geophysical Research and led by researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the University of Colorado, Boulder, estimated that natural-gas producers in an area known as the Denver-Julesburg Basin in Colorado are losing about 4% of their natural gas to the atmosphere — not including additional losses in the pipeline and distribution system. This is more than double the official inventory of methane leakage.

Michigan and fracking

 * Hydraulic Fracturing in the Great Lakes Basin: The State of Play in Michigan and Ohio, National Wildlife Federation, 2012.

New Mexico and fracking

 * Earthworks' Oil & Gas Accountability Project, New Mexico Oil Conservation Division: Inadequate enforcement guarantees irresponsible oil and gas development, 2012 Report.

New York and fracking

 * Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets in New York State, Common Cause, Jan 2014 - found pro-fracking interests contributed a total of $15.4 million from 2007 to July 2013, with nearly $48.9 million of that lobbying in New York State.
 * Manhattan Natural Gas Pipeline Emissions, DCS, 2013 - The gas industry and Con Edison estimate 2.2% leakage in its distribution systems, but the study found an average cumulative leakage of over 5% in natural gas production and delivery.
 * Mark Z. Jacobson, Ph.D, et al Examining the Feasibility of Converting New York State's All-Purpose Energy Infrastructure to One Using Wind, Water and Sunlight Stanford University, February 18, 2013.
 * Ronald E. Bishop, Ph.D., CHO, Chemical and Biological Risk Assessment for Natural Gas Extraction in New York, State University of New York, March 28, 2011.

Massachusetts and fracking

 * Nathan G. Phillips, Robert Ackley, Eric R. Crosson, Adrian Down, Lucy R. Hutyra, Max Brondfield, Jonathan D. Karr, Kaiguang Zhao, and Robert B. Jackson, Mapping urban pipeline leaks: Methane leaks across Boston, Environmental Pollution, Volume 173, February 2013, Pages 1–4.

Ohio and fracking

 * Fracking, Fairness and the Future: Making Sure Ohio Taxpayers and Workers Share in Benefits, Innovation Ohio, 2012.


 * Hydraulic Fracturing in the Great Lakes Basin: The State of Play in Michigan and Ohio, National Wildlife Federation, 2012.

Pennsylvania and fracking

 * Pittsburgh Regional Environmental Threats Analysis, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health's Center for Healthy Environments and Communities, Nov 2013.
 * Pennsylvania: State Dirty Energy Money Analysis, Oil Change International, accessed Nov 2013 - finds that the fracking boom in Pennsylvania has coincided with a large rise in campaign contributions to state legislature members from the fossil fuel industry.
 * Evan Hansen, Dustin Mulvaney, and Meghan Betcher, Water Resource Reporting and Water Footprint from Marcellus Shale Development in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, Downstream Strategies and Earthworks, Oct 30, 2013.
 * The Spreading Shadow of the Shale Gas Boom: Fracking's Growing Proximity to Day Cares, Schools and Hospitals, PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center, September 24, 2013 - found that permitted well sites exist within one mile of more than 400 day care facilities, schools and hospitals.
 * The Social Costs of Fracking, Food & Water Watch, Sep 24, 2013.
 * Nadia Steinzor, Wilma Subra and Lisa Sumi, Gas Patch Roulette: How Shale Gas Development Risks Public Health in Pennsylvania, Earthworks, October 18, 2012.
 * Aurana Lewis, Wastewater Generation and Disposal from Natural Gas Wells in Pennsylvania, Duke University, May 2012.
 * In the Shadow of the Marcellus Boom, PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center, 2012.
 * Landscape Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in Bradford and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, 2004-2010 USGS, 2012.
 * [http://www.msetc.org/docs/EconomicImpactFINALAugust28_000.pdf '''Economic  Impacts  of  Marcellus  Shale  in  Pennsylvania:   Employment  and  Income  in  2009,'''] Marcellus  Shale  Education  &  Training  Center at Penn State, 2011.

Texas and fracking

 * Sharon Wilson, Lisa Sumi, and Wilma Subra, Reckless Endangerment While Fracking the Eagle Ford Shale: Government fails, public health suffers and industry profits from the shale oil boom, Earthworks, September 19, 2013.
 * Brian E Fontenot, Laura R Hunt, Zacariah Louis Hildenbrand, Doug D Carlton, Hyppolite Oka, Jayme L Walton, Dan Hopkins, Alexandra Osorio, Bryan Bjorndal, Qinhong Hu, and Kevin Albert Schug, An evaluation of water quality in private drinking water wells near natural gas extraction sites in the Barnett Shale Formation, Environ. Sci. Technol., July 25, 2013 - Study of 100 private water wells in and near the Barnett Shale in Texas showed elevated levels of potential contaminants such as arsenic and selenium closest to natural gas extraction sites.
 * Emily A Grubert, Fred C Beach, and Michael E Webber, Can switching fuels save water? A life cycle quantification of freshwater consumption for Texas coal- and natural gas-fired electricity, Environ. Res. Lett. 7, 2012. - Evaluated water intensity at three major stages of coal and natural gas fuel cycles: fuel extraction, power plant cooling, and power plant emissions controls. Found that "[r]eplacing Texas' coal-fired power plants with natural gas combined cycle plants (NGCCs) would reduce annual freshwater consumption in the state by an estimated 53 billion gallons per year, or 60% of Texas coal power's water footprint, largely due to the higher efficiency of NGCCs."
 * The Costs of Fracking: The Price Tag of Dirty Drilling’s Environmental Damage, Environment Texas, Fall 2012.
 * Eduardo P. Olaguer, The potential near-source ozone impacts of upstream oil and gas industry emissions, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, Volume 62, Issue 8, 2012. - Using computer models, the Houston Advanced Research Center estimated that emissions from natural gas compressor stations and flares may be contributing significant amounts of ground-level ozone and formaldehyde in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
 * Natural Gas Flowback: the Dark Side of the Boom: How the Texas gas boom affects community health and safety, Earthworks, April 14, 2011.

Utah and fracking

 * Anna Karion et al., Methane emissions estimate from airborne measurements over a western United States natural gas field, Geophysical Research Letters, 2013 - used atmospheric measurements in a "mass balance approach" to estimate methane emissions from a natural gas and oil production field in Uintah County, Utah on one day (February 3, 2012). Calculated a leakage rate of 6.2-11.7%.
 * 2012 Uinta Basin Winter Ozone and Air Quality Study Utah Department of Environmental Quality; EPA; the Bureau of Land Management; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Utah State University; the University of California; the University of Colorado, Boulder; and the Western Energy Alliance, Feb 1, 2013. Measured pollution in the Uinta Basin in Utah during the winter of 2011-2012, which indicated that 98 to 99 percent of the volatile organic compounds and 57 to 61 percent of the nitrogen oxides in the region came from oil and gas operations.

West Virginia and fracking

 * Evan Hansen, Dustin Mulvaney, and Meghan Betcher, Water Resource Reporting and Water Footprint from Marcellus Shale Development in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, Downstream Strategies and Earthworks, Oct 30, 2013.
 * Major Tax Responsibilities of Coal and Natural Gas Producers in Wyoming and West Virginia, West Virginia Center for Budget Policy, 2012.

Wyoming and fracking

 * A Seven Point Plan to Protect Groundwater: Unconventional Oil & Gas Development Requires Wyoming State Action, Powder River Basin Resource Council, January 2013.

Canada

 * Shallow Frac Incidents, Alberta Environment and Water, 2012.

European Union

 * Potential Risks for the Environment and Human Health Arising from Hydrocarbons Operations Involving Hydraulic Fracturing in Europe, EU Joint Research Centre, 2012 - identifies eight areas in which fracking could pose a "high risk" to the environment, raising concerns over air pollution, ground water contamination, and biodiversity impacts. The report outlined a series of options for the EU to improve the regulatory framework, ranging from extending existing regulations or applying them in a different way through to introducing entirely new regulations.
 * Climate Impact of Potential Shale Gas Production in the EU, EU Joint Research Centre, 2012 - calculated that shale gas produced in the EU "causes more GHG emissions than conventional natural gas produced in the EU, but - if well managed - less than imported gas from outside the EU, be it via pipeline or by LNG due to the impacts on emissions from long-distance gas transport."
 * Unconventional Gas: Potential Energy Market Impacts in the European Union, EU Joint Research Centre, 2012 - found that a best-case scenario for shale gas drilling in the EU would only "help the EU maintain energy import dependency at around 60 per cent," adding that there is "considerable uncertainty about recoverable volumes, technological developments, public acceptance, and access to land and markets."

Related SourceWatch articles
For state-by-state information on fracking click on the map below:

External Resources

 * "A Research Guide to the Marcellus and Utica Shales: Bibliography on natural gas extraction by hydraulic fracturing," Carnegie Mellon University.