There are two broad components to the fluid that is brought out of the ground in drilling for natural gas: the fluids that are pumped underground to fracture the shale rock, which is almost entirely water and sand, and a small amount of chemicals (0.5 to 2 percent)¹; and naturally occurring materials that are present deep underground including, of course, the natural gas.

With regards to the hydraulic fracturing fluid, the Environment Agency must approve chemicals that are used, and will only approve those that are non-hazardous to groundwater.²

The chemicals used vary depending on a number of factors such as the geology, the process and the operator. The fluids most commonly used for hydraulic fracturing are water-based, with sand added to the mix to keep rock fractures open. There are also very small amounts of additives used, such as friction reducers.

To date only one chemical has been used in hydraulic fracture fluids in the UK, and this was a non-hazardous chemical. At Preese Hall, only polyacrylamide friction reducer (0.04%) and a miniscule amount of salt have been used in hydraulic fracturing fluid. Polyacrylamide is a non-hazardous, non-toxic substance which is also used extensively in other industries to remove suspended solids in drinking and wastewater plants, and pollutants or contaminants from soils.

The UK shale gas industry has committed to the full public disclosure of fracture fluid via the following guidelines, on a well-by-well basis. Information for fluid disclosure should include:

• Any EA/SEPA authorisations for fluids and their status as hazardous/non-hazardous substances.
• Material Safety Data Sheets information.
• Volumes of fracturing fluid, including proppant, base carrier fluid and chemical additives.
• The trade name of each additive and its general purpose in the fracturing process.
• Maximum concentrations in percent by mass of each chemical additive.
• The Public Disclosure of Fracture Fluid Form is shown in appendix 2 and will be downloadable from www.ukoog.org.uk.”³
  

With regards to naturally occurring waste materials, hydraulic fracturing fluid typically comes back to the surface containing Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material, known as NORM. These radioactive substances exist in all natural forms including soils, rocks, water and in air. They are also found in foods such as bananas and Brazil nuts. Shale rock is no different and contains NORM similar to those found in other rock types.

NORM management is not unique to shale gas extraction. In its review of the potential health impacts of shale gas, Public Health England considered Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM). It made the point that it is common for waste from oil and gas production to contain NORM.

There is a comprehensive regulatory regime for managing NORM; compliance with this regime should ensure that any public health impact is minimised. Even if a very large number of wells were drilled in the UK, the amount of radioactive materials produced would be a tiny fraction of that produced by work in the medical sector and universities.

In the UK, an environmental permit is required for accumulating, disposing of or receiving naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) wastes that exceed very low concentrations. The Radioactive Substances act of 1993 and Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 and the Radioactive Substances Exemption (Scotland) Order 2011 provide regulation for the management of NORM.

Professor Philip Thomas of City University London told us that: “the UK has built up considerable knowledge of how to deal with low level radioactive waste safely as a result of 60 years' experience producing electricity from nuclear energy.”

Firstly, we should make it clear that no radioactive material is used in the extraction of shale gas. However, water that is used in hydraulic fracturing typically comes back to the surface containing Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material, known as NORM. These radioactive substances exist in all natural forms including soils, rocks, water and in air. They are also found in foods such as bananas and Brazil nuts.

The shale gas industry is still in its infancy in the UK. However, two existing industrial waste treatment facilities have received and successfully processed material containing NORM in trials organised by Remsol in the summer of 2012, using material stored for this purpose by Cuadrilla Resources at its Preese Hall shale gas well in Lancashire.

However, it is also important to bear in mind that hydraulic fracturing flowback is very similar to wastewaters that arise in other extractive processes, such as Titanium Dioxide production and China Clay mining, and that are routinely processed in industrial treatment facilities around the UK including in Humberside, Yorkshire and Cornwall.

Produced water, also containing NORM and that arises in offshore oil and gas extraction, is regularly landed at Great Yarmouth and subsequently processed successfully in the same industrial treatment plants. There is no reason to believe that wastewater from shale gas extraction cannot be safely and effectively treated at these and other facilities.

Regulations enforced by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) require an independent well examiner to assess the design, construction and maintenance of the well.¹

The well examiner is required to be sufficiently separate from the immediate line management of the well operations he or she is examining. The examiner’s task is to review the proposed and actual well operations to check that the well is designed and constructed, and is maintained, so that in so far as is reasonably practicable, there can be no unplanned escape of fluids from the well, and risks to the health and safety of persons are as low as is reasonably practicable.

The HSE may also send its inspectors to check on well operations. 

With regard to responsibility for monitoring of well integrity after operations have ceased, the well remains the responsibility of the operator whilst it continues to hold the relevant petroleum licence. When the licence comes to an end, ownership of the well transfers back to Government, via the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). DECC will from then on be the party responsible for ensuring the well’s continued integrity.

The Health and Safety Executive has responsibility for well regulation, and requires operators to appoint an independent well examiner to produce regular reports to the HSE on well integrity¹. So, the results are held by both the individual operator and the government regulator, not UKOOG.

Regulations over well construction and operation are critical to health, safety and the environment. They relate to the prevention and mitigation of environmental releases of fluids and gases from wells and associated surface equipment.

The main UK legal regulations covering well design, construction and decommissioning are:

Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction Etc) Regulations 1996 (DCR)
Borehole Sites & Operations Regulations 1995 (BSOR)
Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR)
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER)

Amongst other areas, these rules exist to:

“ensure that a well is so designed, modified, commissioned, constructed, equipped, operated, maintained, suspended and abandoned that –

a. so far as is reasonably practicable, there can be no unplanned escape of fluids from the well; and

b. risks to health and safety of persons from it or anything in it, or in strata to which it is connected, are as low as reasonable practicable.”

To support this, operators have to assess the geological strata, fluids within them and any hazards within the rock - and in their assessments take into account all designs and operations. In addition, the regulations ensure independent well examinations take place.

Dr James Verdon, Research Fellow at the University of Bristol, explains that casing the well is exactly the same process whether a well is for conventional drilling or for drilling for shale. He highlights research which shows that out of 2,000 wells drilled in the UK, there has only been one incident of cementing problems.²

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “Well integrity regulations are stronger in the UK than in other countries. For example, over the interval of the aquifer there are generally three cylinders of steel casing cemented together to prevent any leakage. A detailed study of hundreds of wells from the four main shale gas horizons in the USA shows that several thousands of feet separate the topmost fractures from the bottom of the overlying aquifer.”³

We simply won’t know how many wells will appear, because we don’t have an accurate take on how much of the shale gas that is in the ground can be recovered economically. John Williams of Pöyry told the recent House of Lords inquiry into shale gas that “we have not drilled sufficient test wells anywhere in Europe to have a good understanding’.¹ It is also important to consider that each well pad and rig can support numerous horizontal wells deep underground.

The Institute of Directors’ scenario is for 1,000 vertical wells, each with four horizontal sections (i.e. 4,000 horizontal wells), to be² drilled from 100 above-ground well pads, each one around 2 hectares in size. Similarly, a study by Ricardo-AEA Technology found that anywhere between 580 and 12,500 wells could be drilled between 2015 and 2035 depending on shale resources – again, the number of above-ground well pads would be an order of magnitude lower.³

¹ http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/economic-affairs/EnergyPolicy/EAC-energy-ev-vol.pdf

Water use depends on a number of factors – geology, amount of shale to be extracted, size of the well, and so on. However, an estimate by Simon Moore of Policy Exchange is 5 million US gallons, or 19,000 cubic metres of water is required to run a shale well for a decade.

Policy Exchange said this is equivalent to ‘the amount needed to water a golf course for a month, the amount needed to run a 1000 MW coal-fired power plant for 12 hours [and] the amount lost to leaks in United Utilities’ region in northwest England every hour’.¹

According to the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM), “Compared to other fossil fuels, experience from the US has shown that water intensity is relatively low… for shale gas.”²

In November 2013, Water UK, which represents the water industry, and UKOOG, the onshore oil and gas industry’s representative body, announced they would work together to help minimise the impact of onshore oil and gas development in the UK on the country’s water resources. They came to an agreement to give the public greater confidence and reassurance that everything will be done to minimise the effects on water resources and the environment.

Dr Jim Marshall, Policy Advisor for Water UK said: “Demands for a single well should be readily met in normal circumstances by the water available locally, but that proper planning would need to take place should many sites be operating within the same supply area simultaneously.”

Beyond the agreement with Water UK, UKOOG is working with the water industry, scientists and academics to look in detail at how water resources can be managed efficiently throughout all stages of shale gas development. 

Wells could be situated on current industrial sites, but it would not be sensible to limit them to those sites only. Shale gas can only be extracted near where it is found, which means it wouldn’t be economically viable to limit it to a few existing sites, which also may not have the capacity to set up new wells.

Some areas of the UK have reserves of natural gas stored in shale rock formations and some do not. Furthermore, Professor Peter Styles of Keele University added that “the presence of shale in itself, is not sufficient; the rock must have had a depth of burial which has been at just the right temperature (the “Goldilocks effect”!) as if it is too hot the oil and gas will have turned to tars and if too cold will not have been produced at all. Companies will assess this likelihood before biding for particular areas to explore.”

With regards to water treatment, it can potentially be treated locally and reused later in the process. The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) says that this would be the most sustainable option as up to 80% of water used could be reused.¹ However, in cases where it cannot be reused it will need to be properly treated and disposed of, and this means transporting it to a dedicated water treatment centre. 

According to the Ernst & Young (EY) report Getting ready for shale gas, “After the hydraulic fracturing process has been completed, a proportion of that fluid will flow back up the well and will most likely require some treatment. This could be for bacteria or chemicals present in the original fluid mix, and, in some cases, for small amounts of naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM).” The report adds that: “Operators are keen to explore a mix of on-site water treatment technologies to help reduce traffic to and from sites and to improve operational efficiency, in particular for costs related to storage and off-site treatment.”

Potential shale gas ‘pads’ vary in size, and wells will also vary in the amount of water that they use, therefore it is hard to give a definitive answer to your question. Operators can also pipe water in, as an alternative to using vehicles.

In the Eagle Ford shale play in the US, an average of 13,600 cubic metres of water is used to hydraulically fracture each well.  With a truck capacity of 30 m³, this equates to 453 two-way truck journeys per well to bring the water in.  For a site with 40 horizontal wells, this would equate to around 18,000 truck journeys.  This would be spread over several years, though, so average daily movements would be much lower – around 10 a day over five years. For comparison, in rural areas 370,000 truck journeys are made each year to transport milk produced by dairy farms.¹

There will of course be additional truck movements to bring in equipment and other materials, and to transport away waste, but water is by far the largest source of truck journeys.  If operators can pipe water in, they can reduce truck traffic dramatically. 

Professor David MacKay, former chief scientific adviser to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, has compared truck movements for shale gas, wind farms and solar parks, and said that “all three energy facilities require lots.” He added that, if water is piped on site “the shale gas pad might require the fewest truck movements.” However, he also said that, if water is trucked in “the shale-gas facility would require the most truck movements.”

According to Professor Richard Selley of Imperial College London: “Water usage for shale gas is one of the lowest for any energy source.”

There is absolutely no evidence that shale gas extraction will affect fruit and vegetable growth. The only way that fruit and vegetable growth could potentially be affected would be if water became contaminated as a result of leakage.

The risk of water contamination is prevented by making well integrity a high priority. The main UK legal regulations covering well design, construction and decommissioning are:

Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction Etc) Regulations 1996 (DCR)

Borehole Sites & Operations Regulations 1995 (BSOR)

Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR)

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER)

Amongst other areas, these rules exist to:

“ensure that a well is so designed, modified, commissioned, constructed, equipped, operated, maintained, suspended and abandoned that –

a)       so far as is reasonably practicable, there can be no unplanned escape of fluids from the well; and

b)       risks to health and safety of persons from it or anything in it, or in strata to which it is connected, are as low as reasonable practicable.”

To support this, operators have to assess the geological strata, fluids within them and any hazards within the rock - and take their assessments into account in all designs and operations. In addition, the regulations ensure independent well examinations take place.

According to a Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering report, at the time the report was produced, the available evidence indicates that the risk of water contamination is very low provided that shale gas extraction takes place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres – which would be the case here in the UK¹.

The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) also agree that risks to groundwater quality are generally considered to be low in the UK where the shale rock in question often exists at considerable depths below aquifers and gas would be required to migrate many hundreds of metres between source rock and sensitive groundwater.²

Also relevant to this question is whether there is any risk of surface spills at shale sites, and whether such spills could contaminate water. The Environment Agency has investigated this issue and judged that the environmental risks at each individual stage of exploratory shale gas operation, after proper management and regulation, are “low”³.

It is important that natural gas does not leak from the well and escape into the environment. The key to this is good well design and constant monitoring. Simon Talbot, Managing Director of Ground Gas Solutions told us that:

“To ensure that methane leakage from a well is prevented, the existing methane concentrations in the near surface soils and groundwater are measured before operations commence as part of a Baseline Monitoring Survey.”

“Methane leakage from a well can then be prevented by a well construction design that includes multiple layers of casing which is checked by the Health and Safety Executive and then integrity tested before operation commences. Then during and after operations independent environmental monitoring will be carried out to check that no leakage has occurred.”

“UKOOG (the representative body for the UK onshore oil and gas industry) is developing guidelines for comprehensive baseline monitoring of soil, air and water before and during operations. These will be mandatory for UKOOG members. These guidelines will be published soon. Once these guidelines have been published, UKOOG will develop guidelines for the monitoring of the local environment after wells have been decommissioned.”

Natural gas, extracted through onshore drilling or otherwise, is mostly methane. Methane naturally occurs in the ground and is formed by the decomposition of organic rich soils and peat as well as from deeper rock formations. Once extracted, this methane is used to generate heat and electricity, which produces CO2. It is interesting to note that burning gas for electricity produces about half as much CO2 as using coal.

However, as your question suggests, it is important to prevent methane from escaping into the atmosphere during extraction. To ensure the process of energy production is as efficient as possible, as much methane as possible should be converted into electricity and heat. In addition, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency: “Pound for pound, the comparative impact of methane on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period.”¹

To safeguard the environment, the Government’s Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) insists that operators must minimise the release of gas into the atmosphere and, when gas can’t be economically used, it must be captured and “flared” to reduce its global warming emissions’.² Beyond exploration, operators will have a commercial incentive not to flare gas, as the gas could otherwise be sold.

It is also important that methane does not leak from the well, and escape into the environment that way. Simon Talbot, Managing Director of Ground Gas Solutions, told us that:

“To ensure that methane leakage from a well is prevented, the existing methane concentrations in the near surface soils and groundwater are measured before operations commence as part of a Baseline Monitoring Survey.

“Methane leakage from a well can then be prevented by a well construction design that includes multiple layers of casing which is checked by the Health and Safety Executive and then integrity tested before operation commences. Then during and after operations independent environmental monitoring will be carried out to check that no leakage has occurred.

“UKOOG (the representative body for the UK onshore oil and gas industry) is developing guidelines for comprehensive baseline monitoring of soil, air and water before and during operations. These will be mandatory for UKOOG members. These guidelines will be published soon. Once these guidelines have been published, UKOOG will develop guidelines for the monitoring of the local environment after wells have been decommissioned.”

With regards to good well design, Professor Richard Selley of Imperial College London told us that: “There are generally three cylinders of steel casing cemented over the interval of the aquifer and, when a well is decommissioned, it is plugged and cemented to prevent the release and escape of methane and any other fluids.”

Finally, the shale gas industry in the UK is developing “green completion” based on industry best practice, to reduce the emissions of gases into the air, and this is emphasised in UKOOG’s “UK Onshore Shale Gas Well Guidelines”³. This involves using specialist equipment to collect and separate the initial flow of water, sand and gas, so the gas can be prevented from escaping. According to Professor David MacKay, (DECC’s Chief Scientific Advisor), and Dr Timothy Stone (the Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State), “green completions” should be adopted at all stages following exploration.⁴ According to the Government’s Department of Energy and Climate Change “Green completions and flaring can reduce methane emissions by as much as 95% versus venting straight into the atmosphere.”⁵

There are a number of options for sourcing the water needed to produce natural gas from shale. According to the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM), operators can abstract water from the environment, buy it from a water company, or eventually recycle a proportion of their own water.   

In November 2013, Water UK, which represents the water industry, and UKOOG, the onshore oil and gas industry’s representative body, announced they would work together to help minimise the impact of onshore oil and gas development in the UK on the country’s water resources. They came to an agreement to give the public greater confidence and reassurance that everything will be done to minimise the effects on water resources and the environment. 

Water UK has reviewed recent reports into shale gas extraction and believes that, while there are potential risks to water and waste water services, these can be mitigated given proper enforcement of the regulatory framework. Under the agreement, members of UKOOG and Water UK will work together to identify and resolve risks around water or waste water including:

• Baseline monitoring requirements to assess impacts of onshore oil and gas development on the quality and quantity of local water resources

• Plans relating to site water management, especially water reuse, to improve understanding of local impacts

• Onshore oil and gas company development plans, including scenarios for expansion of exploration and development within a local area and what this means for short and long-term demand for water at specific locations

• The expected volumes and chemical and biological composition of waste water as well as preferred disposal routes

Dr Jim Marshall, Policy Advisor for Water UK said: “Demands for a single well should be readily met in normal circumstances by the water available locally, but that proper planning would need to take place should many sites be operating within the same supply area simultaneously.”

Beyond the agreement with Water UK, UKOOG is working with the water industry, scientists and academics to look in detail at how water resources can be managed efficiently throughout all stages of shale gas development.  

¹ http://www.ciwem.org/media/1023221/Shale%20Gas%20and%20Water%20WEB.pdf  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Lincs has a fragile water table. How can we be sure about there being enough water to drink? And what will happen to the waste water following fracking?

• Will shale extraction use significant quantities of water - enough to increase the occurrence of drought ( hosepipe etc ) orders in the NW ?

• Where will the water come from?

• Where are the huge amounts of water required coming from and how will this be sustained given the amount of wells planned ? Can you guarantee that the aquifers will not be polluted and how will the toxic waste water be disposed of?  No water no life.

• Where is the water for Fracking in the UK going to come from and what guarantees that it remains unpolluted for drinking? Given that we have hosepipe bans anyway in the summers? Where is the toxic waste from the wells going to be disposed of safely?

• How will you extract shale gas when there are water restrictions in place?; How will you protect the water supply from contamination which you have been unstable to achieve in the US?; How can you be trusted when it is all about profit?

• Lincolnshire is an area of low rainfall. We rely on groundwater and rivers for supply. Where will you get water? How much in M3? Will water be fit to drink after?

• Every year the UK experiences periods of drought. How on earth can we even consider "fracking" when our water supplies are always so unpredictable? Also having experienced first hand, the earth tremor casued by the experimental attempt at fracking in the Fylde area, I am totally oppsed to any further proliferation.

• How can you even consider fracking, especially in water short Eastern-Engand, when a single drilling site uses over 10 million gallons of clean water, which is then too contaminated with toxic chemcials to return to the water cycle?

• What happens if by some incredible chance of bad luck, the water does get contaminated ? What happens when there is a water shortage? What happens when the water gets contaminated, and there is a water shortage? What happens the contaminated water?

• How much water is used and where will it come from?

• How will contaminated water used in the process of fracking be dealt with safely and in light of water being an increasingly finite resource should this water be taken out of the ecosystem for the extraction of gas?

• Where are the millions of gallons of water required to come from and where will it go after use?

• How harmful is additional burning of fossel fuel going to be to the environment? Where is the replacement water coming from? How will you cleanse and dispose of dirty water after fracking?

No activity is 100% risk-free, although the Environment Agency (which regulates shale extraction) has investigated this issue in detail and judged that the environmental risks at each individual stage of exploratory shale gas operation, after proper management and regulation, are “low”¹. The Environment Agency, will not permit activities if they are close to drinking water sources, such as groundwater from aquifers, or where there is a risk that pollution to groundwater will occur.

According to the joint Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering report, at the time the report was produced, the available evidence indicates that the risk of water contamination is very low provided that shale gas extraction takes place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres – which would be the case here².

The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) also agree that risks to groundwater quality are generally considered to be low in the UK where the shale rock in question often exists at considerable depths below aquifers and gas would be required to migrate many hundreds of metres between source rock and sensitive groundwater.³

With regards to interaction between shale and overlaying aquifers, a study by the ReFINE (Researching Fracking in Europe) project found that there was a less than 1% chance of a stimulated hydraulic fracture propagating upwards more than 350 metres, and that the maximum recorded distance was 588 metres. This study recommended that all horizontal fracking wells are drilled at least 600m below aquifers to minimize the risk of stimulated hydraulic fractures providing a pathway for natural gas to migrate upwards and contaminate aquifers⁴.

Professor Ernest Rutter of the University of Manchester said: “It is also worth noting that a typical depth for shale gas extraction is between 2 and 3 km, about 20 times deeper than typical aquifers. In fact, the deeper the better, because deep shale stores the gas at higher pressure meaning that there is more of it.”

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “For the fluids used in hydraulic fracturing to flow up from the fractured shale to contaminate an aquifer would require a change in the law: the laws of physics. Because the density of fracking fluid is greater than that of fresh water they will not move up under buoyancy.”

Also relevant to this question, for both water and soil, is whether there is any risk of surface spills at shale sites, and whether such spills could contaminate water. As part of measures to mitigate risk, operators will place a thick, impermeable membrane across the site to prevent any potential spillage of water of other chemicals used in drilling and hydraulic fracturing from getting into nearby soil or groundwater.

Dr James Verdon of the University of Bristol said: “Multiple studies in the USA have confirmed that the hydraulic fracturing process itself has not caused contamination of aquifers. That’s not to say there have been zero accidents or incidents in the USA, but that on the few occasions that problems have been recorded, it’s been due to other drilling-related issues, and not due to fracking.”

We have received a series of questions under the heading of the impact of shale gas on health and air quality. Like all industrial processes, shale gas development will result in emissions. However, given that burning natural gas produces far fewer harmful particulates than using coal and diesel as a fuel, a move towards greater gas use in the UK could result in an overall reduction of emissions.

Public Health England (part of the Department of Health) has completed a comprehensive review of the potential health impact of shale gas extraction. The review found that the potential risks to public health from exposure to the emissions associated with shale gas extraction will be low if the operations are properly run and regulated¹. In their study, which reviews evidence from the US, PHE list the main sources of air pollutants from shale gas operations. These include the release of natural gas into the atmosphere, which will be minimised, as well as the emissions of on-site surface equipment, such as transport, engines to power drilling and compressors.

In the US, where some states do not have as tough environmental rules as the UK, there has been a documented impact on air quality which could impact on health. The US Environmental Protection Agency says, for example, that there have been well-documented air quality impacts in areas with active natural gas development, with increases in emissions of methane, volatile organic compounds and hazardous air pollutants. The Colorado School of Public Health has also documented that “preliminary results indicate that health effects resulting from air emissions during development of unconventional natural gas resources are most likely to occur in residents living nearest to the well pads and warrant further study.”²

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “Whilst there are cases of ill health in the USA related to hydraulic fracturing for shale gas, these result from unsafe practices, such as storing flow back fluids in open pits; and using them to de-ice roads; practices that would never be allowed in the UK.”

Various pieces of research have been conducted in Europe and the UK to identify which practices are resulting in pollution, in order to prevent this happening in the UK. The European Parliament found that “possible health effects are mainly caused by the impacts of the relevant emissions into air or water,” but added that these are “potential effects” with actual effects “rarely documented”.³ Another European Parliament report concluded that: “No official or other reputable sources have demonstrated any systematic connection between shale gas and shale oil extraction and human or animal health."⁴ A report produced for the Scottish Government concluded that: “Although there are potential threats to the environment and the individual from unconventional hydrocarbon extraction, there are considerable legislative safeguards to ensure these threats are not realised.”⁵

Public Health England (PHE) also noted that shale gas extraction could lead to an increase in the release of radon, which is naturally present in soils and rocks and has been linked to lung cancer. PHE has previously mapped the areas of the UK where the risk of natural seepage of radon is greatest and where house occupiers are advised to consider taking steps to mitigate the risk to their health.   However, PHE concluded that in relation to shale gas extraction: “Radon released in this manner is not likely to lead to significant public radiation exposure.”

It is also important to bear in mind the net effect of shale gas development on air quality as shale gas can, overall, lead to a reduction in various pollutants being emitted as reliance on coal power stations is reduced. In Pennsylvania, where shale gas development is widespread, air pollution dropped significantly between 2008 and 2011 (see table below). The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection said that this is “a direct result of air quality regulations and the increased use of natural gas in the power generation sector.”⁶ At present, in the UK, we get 40% of our electricity in this country from burning coal and we need to reduce this figure considerably in order to meet targets to reduce our impact on the environment. Greater availability of natural gas could also make gas-powered vehicles more economical, and thus able to replace some diesel engines, particularly for lorries and buses. According to Frank Kelly, professor of environmental health at King's College London, diesel fuel burned in vehicles could be responsible for a quarter of all air pollution deaths in the UK.⁷

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Why are fetal abnormalities 30% higher within 1 km of fracking wells in Pennsylvania? Doctors have been telling pregnant women to move away to save their babies.

• Other countries are banning shale gas development due to the known health and safety risks and the risk to the environment, so why is the UK not protecting its citizens and banning it to?  

• Why are we totally ignoring the dangers to health, which is well documented from the States and Australia. Should you not be honest and at least agree to look into this rather than burying tour heads in the sand.

• What studies have been conducted on the effects of shale gas extraction by hydraulic fracturing on public health?

• With mounting evidence from the US and prestigious health organisations (such as Breast Cancer UK) expressing health concerns can you categorically say that fracking will be 100% safe and have no adverse impacts on people's living close to sites

• Potentially, how many lives are at risk?

• Is it harmful to children?

• How's it going to affect other similar industries? Is it really safe? And healthy?

• What are the health risks? Safety risk.

• Is there any evidence that suggests potential health problems to residents living close to the frackling site? And has there been any studies done on this? Who has funded them?

• Why is David Cameron trying to kill his own people? Fracking makes people very sick.

• Has it not been pointed out in the past by the community that people living in the Fylde are very concerned about the health risks caused by fracking and especially about tremors and minor earthquakes that are being experienced?
  
  
• Are we heading for a health hazard?

No activity is 100% risk-free, but there are numerous measures in place to make sure that water supplies are not contaminated. These include regulations set by local councils, the national Government and the European Union.

The risk of water contamination is prevented by making well integrity a high priority. According to a Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering (in the UK) report, at the time the report was produced, if a well is designed, constructed and abandoned according to best practice, the probability of well failure is low¹.

A recent report from Ohio University found some instances of water contaminated with natural gas in the US and concluded that this was caused by faulty wells, not by the rock fracturing process². This means that water contamination can be prevented with strict regulation from Government and good well design and build.

The main UK legal regulations covering well design, construction and decommissioning are:

Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction Etc) Regulations 1996 (DCR)
Borehole Sites & Operations Regulations 1995 (BSOR)
Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR)
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER)

Amongst other areas, these rules exist to:

“ensure that a well is so designed, modified, commissioned, constructed, equipped, operated, maintained, suspended and abandoned that –

a)       so far as is reasonably practicable, there can be no unplanned escape of fluids from the well; and

b)       risks to health and safety of persons from it or anything in it, or in strata to which it is connected, are as low as reasonable practicable.”

To support this, operators have to assess the geological strata, fluids within them and any hazards within the rock - and take their assessments into account in all designs and operations. In addition, the regulations ensure independent well examinations take place.

According to Dr James Verdon of Bristol University “these are as much issues for conventional oil wells as they are for shale gas wells. Therefore we can look at how the UK industry has dealt with well cement/casing, and waste fluid disposal, in the 2,000 existing onshore wells in the UK. We find a very strong track record, where environmental issues are rare to non-existent.”

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “Onshore exploration for gas has gone on in the UK for over 100 years without aquifer pollution. Concern has been expressed about contaminating the chalk across southern England aquifer in southern England. For over 30 years over 200 wells have been drilled through the chalk to penetrate deeper petroleum producing horizons without contaminating the chalk aquifer.”

Also relevant to this question is whether there is any risk of surface spills at shale sites, and whether such spills could contaminate water. The Environment Agency has investigated this issue and judged that the environmental risks at each individual stage of exploratory shale gas operation, after proper management and regulation, are “low”³.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Can you give a 100% assurance that there is absolutely no possibility of water contamination?

• Is there a guarantee that aquifers will not be contaminated during the process of unconventional gas extraction?

• How does water reinjection work and remain safe, without water passing to other strata

•  also want to know how you will prevent contamination of drinking water, aquifers and water courses? 

• How can you guarantee that our water wont get contaminated?

• Where are the huge amounts of water required coming from and how will this be sustained given the amount of wells planned ? Can you guarantee that the aquifers will not be polluted and how will the toxic waste water be disposed of?  No water no life.

• Where is the water for Fracking in the UK going to come from and what guarantees that it remains unpolluted for drinking? Given that we have hosepipe bans anyway in the summers? Where is the toxic 

• How will you extract shale gas when there are water restrictions in place?; How will you protect the water supply from contamination which you have been unstable to achieve in the US?; How can you be trusted when it is all about profit?

• How can you be sure that fracking will not cause unanticipated damage to underground water streams and faults? We seem to experience increased tremors.

• How deep is the gas? Will it affect the ground water in this area?

• Does it affect the water?

• Is this really safe for water contamination?. Is there any danger of causing seismic tremors and causing possible earthquakes?

• What about water pollution? Is it true that all wells leak over time?

• Is it going to affect our ground water?

• Is it safe? Does it pollute water? What benefits will there be when firms drilling are foreign?

• What about the water table? Re drinking water.

• Why will it poison the water? It shouldn't happen!

• How are you going to safeguard water pollution? How will be in charge of it? What chemicals will be used and what are the effects?
  
  
• How safe is our drinking water? What environmental damage is done underground? Can you guarantee house prices will not be devalued?
  
  
• How much testing has been done with regards to water contamination?
  
  
• We are worried about flames coming out of taps like they have in America. We do not trust the companies. 

Shale gas extraction will not make your water smell. First of all, the familiar smell of natural gas in the home is due to a small amount of smelly gases being deliberately added to it, to make it easier for people to detect leaks. It is not the natural smell of gas produced from underground.

In order for natural gas to have any effect on drinking water, the gas would have to migrate upwards many hundreds of feet to aquifers where drinking water is sourced. Furthermore, Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London told us that said: “For the fluids used in hydraulic fracturing to flow up from the fractured shale to contaminate an aquifer would require a change in the law: the laws of physics. Because the density of fracking fluid is greater than that of fresh water they will not move up under buoyancy.”

According to the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering (in the UK) report, at the time the report was produced, the available evidence indicates that the risk of water contamination is very low provided that shale gas extraction takes place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres – which would be the case here¹.

The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) also agree that risks to groundwater quality are generally considered to be low in the UK where the shale rock in question often exists at considerable depths below aquifers and gas would be required to migrate many hundreds of metres between source rock and sensitive groundwater.² A ReFINE study has recommended that all horizontal fracking wells are drilled at least 600m below aquifers to minimize the risk of stimulated hydraulic fractures providing a pathway for natural gas to migrate upwards and contaminate aquifers³.

The Environment Agency will not permit activities if they are close to drinking water sources, such as groundwater from aquifers, or where there is a risk that pollution to groundwater will occur. Professor Mike Stephenson of the British Geological Survey says that most geologists find it very hard to imagine contamination could occur because shale is exploited much deeper than aquifers.

Professor Ernest Rutter of the University of Manchester said: “It is interesting to note that a typical depth for shale gas extraction is between 2 and 3 km, about 20 times deeper than typical aquifers. In fact, the deeper the better, because deep shale stores the gas at higher pressure meaning that there is more of it.”

You may also be interested to know that, in England and Wales, two-thirds of drinking water comes from surface water, including reservoirs, lakes and rivers, and the rest from groundwaters or aquifers.⁴

The Health and Safety Executive has responsibility for well regulation, and requires operators to appoint an independent well examiner to produce regular reports to the HSE on well integrity¹.

Regulations over well construction and operation are critical to health, safety and the environment. They relate to the prevention and mitigation of environmental releases of fluids and gases from wells and associated surface equipment.

The main UK legal regulations covering well design, construction and decommissioning are:

Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction Etc) Regulations 1996 (DCR)
Borehole Sites & Operations Regulations 1995 (BSOR)
Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR)
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER)

Amongst other areas, these rules exist to:

“ensure that a well is so designed, modified, commissioned, constructed, equipped, operated, maintained, suspended and abandoned that –

1. so far as is reasonably practicable, there can be no unplanned escape of fluids from the well; and
2. risks to health and safety of persons from it or anything in it, or in strata to which it is connected, are as low as reasonable practicable.”

To support this, operators have to assess the geological strata, fluids within them and any hazards within the rock - and take their assessments into account in all designs and operations. In addition, the regulations ensure independent well examinations take place.

A report published by the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering pointed out that the UK’s regulatory regime is much stricter than in other countries, particularly when it comes to well integrity².

Dr James Verdon, Research Fellow at the University of Bristol, explains that casing the well is exactly the same process whether a well is for conventional drilling or for drilling for shale. He highlights research which shows that out of 2,000 wells drilled in the UK³, there has only been one incident of cementing problems.⁴

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “Well integrity regulations are stronger in the UK than in other countries. For example, over the interval of the aquifer there are generally three cylinders of steel casing cemented together to prevent any leakage.”

This answer was peer reviewed by Professor Philip Thomas of City University London.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Evidence from other countries says it contaminates eco system and water supply. How will this be stopped so it is safe for all?

• What contingency plans are in a place for water table contamination? Will the drilling benefit the local population, e.g. guaranteed utility bill reduction?

• Could damage water supplies. It's all for the greedy government.

• Will my water supply be affected?

• What happens to the slick water when the well casing eventually fails - as concrete does?

• The integrity of the well is paramount. Why are cement bond logs not mandatory? Why are independent inspection not made? Is it right that we rely on the company to do its own monitoring?

• "does UKOOG require checks on integrity to be carried out before abandonment ? If so, are the results held by the govt or by UKOOG ?"

• How will fracking affect my grandchildren? My concerns are that the wells will all leak eventually.

• Is it true that all oil/gas wells leak eventually?
• If a leak occurs what will an operator do to identify it and fix it?

Whilst there is no specific regulation covering this, a ReFINE study has recommended that all horizontal wells are dug at least 600m below the overlaying aquifer to prevent natural gas contaminating aquifers¹. That, said, we have been told that, in reality, the distances will be much greater than this.

Professor Richard Selley told us that a detailed study of hundreds of wells from the four main shale gas horizons in the USA shows that several thousands of feet separate the topmost rock fractures from the bottom of the overlying aquifer.²

Professor Selley added that: “Horizontal drilling can only take place below about 1500 feet, which is the sufficient depth to allow the pipe to curve from vertical to horizontal. This is generally below the depth of most aquifers, as shale gas horizons are generally many thousands of feet beneath the aquifer.”

There will be no impact to water quality over time as long as the regulations that are in place are properly adhered to. After production, wells must be properly decommissioned with cement plugs and/or mechanical barriers in the wellbore to eliminate the pathway to the surface or freshwater sources.

According to the Chartered Institute for Water and Environmental Management, restoring a shale gas pad will require suitable decommissioning materials for the entire length of the well and appropriate techniques to provide assurance that cross contamination of different aquifers (particularly in the long term) will be prevented¹.

UKOOG, the industry body, recommends using a completed borehole log (a record of the actual geology of the exploration borehole as drilled), rather than a prediction of the geological layers. This enables a better design of the decommissioning phase to protect the groundwater environment.

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “So long as the robust regulations mentioned above are policed, there should be no change in water quality. For instance concern has been expressed about contaminating the chalk aquifer in southern England. For over 30 years over 200 wells have been drilled through the chalk to penetrate deeper petroleum producing horizons without contaminating the chalk aquifer.”

The industry is developing guidelines for monitoring of wells post-decommissioning, which will be published within a year.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Please name the chemicals that are mixed with the water used to cause the fracking. How is the liquid disposed of after fracking

• What will be the overall effect of the chemicals pumped in on the water table and water quality over time and  what are the chemicals that are pumped in? Thank you

No. Shale gas extraction is not more likely to pollute aquifers than conventional oil and gas extraction. According to James Verdon, Geophysicist at the University of Bristol, the risk of leakage from a shale gas well is similar to the risk from a conventional well.

The main risk of pollution would be if cracks appear in the well casing, resulting in a leak, and this is as much of an issue for conventional gas as it is for shale gas. Multiple studies in the USA have confirmed that the hydraulic fracturing process itself has not caused contamination of aquifers. That’s not to say there have been zero accidents or incidents in the USA, but that on the few occasions that problems have been recorded, it’s been due to other drilling-related issues, and not due to fracking.

James Verdon added that:

“There are two main pollution risks during oil and gas extraction, which are the same whether it is a conventional reservoir, or a shale gas operation. In both types of operation, waste water returns to the surface with the oil or gas. This water must be treated, and should not be allowed to spill. The existing UK onshore industry handles over 70 million barrels of this water ever year, and spills are very very rare, which gives us confidence that existing regulations are doing a good job of covering this aspect of operations.

“The other concern is cracks in the cement and steel casing of the well, which could result in underground leaking of natural gas (methane). The wells drilled for shale gas are constructed in the same manner as conventional wells, so the risk of leaks occurring in this way is basically the same. In the UK we have drilled approximately 2,000 onshore wells. A study by ReFINE found there has only been one incidence of a well leakage in the onshore UK. This case was quickly identified by on-site monitoring, and the leak was fully repaired. Again, the strong record of the existing onshore UK industry in this respect gives us confidence that our rules for guaranteeing well integrity are very effective.”

A study by the ReFINE (Researching Fracking In Europe) project found that there was a less than 1 percent chance of a stimulated hydraulic fracture propagating upwards more than 350 metres, and that the maximum recorded distance was 588 metres. To minimize the possibility of a stimulated hydraulic fracture connecting a gas-bearing shale with an overlying aquifer, therefore, ReFINE researchers recommended that all horizontal fracking wells are drilled at least 600m below the aquifer¹. Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London assed that: “These methods have been tried and tested worldwide for many decades.”

¹ http://refine.org.uk/research/hydraulic-fractures-rb-source/fractures-rb-source.aspx

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• I have heard scare stories about contamination of water supplies in the context of fracking but not normal gas or oil extraction. Is there any difference in the well passing through aquifers between 'normal' and fracking wells?

The transportation, treatment and storage of waste water is organised according to a Waste Management Plan, agreed between the Environment Agency (EA) and the operator. This sets out how the operator will manage, minimise, reuse, recycle, dispose safely of and monitor extractive waste.

Typically between 20-40 per cent of the water returns to the surface in the first few days to a week¹, and is stored in holding and treatment tanks, although sites vary depending on local conditions and waste type. The Environment Agency therefore assesses on a case by case basis, though there are three standard options for disposal:²

• Discharge of pre-treated water into a surface environment. This requires a permit from the Environment Agency
• Disposal back into the ground it was extracted from
• Offsite treatment at a separate facility, which operates under an environmental permit

When applying for permission to drill with the local authority, operators must conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment. There are currently two live planning applications for exploratory drilling for shale gas in the UK. Both are near Blackpool. According to the Environmental Impact Assessments for these, the waste water issues are not unique to shale gas but must be dealt with properly to prevent waste products entering the environment. These Environmental Impact Assessments set out that:

“On reaching the surface all flow back fluids will be passed through an enclosed treatment system that allows solids, liquids, and gases to be separated for optimal waste recovery and management. This process will separate out wastes including residual sand and flowback fluid initially for temporary storage in enclosed and bunded tanks and then subsequent removal to an EA approved licenced waste treatment facility.”^3 4

It is important to bear in mind that hydraulic fracturing flowback is very similar to wastewaters that arise in other extractive processes, such as Titanium Dioxide production and China Clay mining, and that are routinely processed in industrial treatment facilities around the UK including in Humberside, Yorkshire and Cornwall.

Produced water that arises in offshore oil and gas extraction is also regularly landed at Great Yarmouth and subsequently processed successfully in the same industrial treatment plants. There is no reason to believe that wastewater from shale gas extraction cannot be safely and effectively treated at these and other facilities.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Where will all the waste water be treated, will it be returned to the water cycle?
  
  
• How soes the industry plan to deal with the radioactive flowback water?
  
  
• Where are the designated waste sites to deal with flowback water?
  
  
• What happens to all the dangerous chemicals which are pumped underground?
  
  
• Where does the "dirty water go? Hopefully not in the sea Blackpool area?
  
  
• Where will the fracking water be disposed?
  
  
• Where is the flowback water going to be treated?
  
  
• Can you tell me whether UKOG advocates reusing/re-injecting flow back fluid into the ground? If so what is the process for this? As the fluid is already contaminated will re-using it not actually make it even more toxic?
  
  
• How many water treatment companies in the UK have successfully removed carcinogenic and radioactive substance from used frac fluid?
  
  
• Where do the operators plan to dispose of the waste frack water?
  
  
• You are already drilling for shale gas, it is too late to start asking the public for their views. However, injecting toxic chemicals into the rock formations is immoral. These chemicals will have to go somewhere. Where is somewhere?
  
  
• It is my understanding that high pressure water is pumped into the well to release gas so what happens to the water after this process?
  
  
• What happens to the water when they have finished with it where does it go to.
  
  
• Lincs has a fragile water table. How can we be sure about there being enough water to drink? And what will happen to the waste water following fracking?
  
  
• How will contaminated water used in the process of fracking be dealt with safely and in light of water being an increasingly finite resource should this water be taken out of the ecosystem for the extraction of gas?
  
  
• Please confirm how you intend to deal with the radioactive wastr produced by fracking. the answer needs to include the expected total qty of waste each year, whats is the chemical make-up of the waste, where is going to be treated and how.
  
  
• "What happens if by some incredible chance of bad luck, the water does get contaminated ?
  
  
• What happens when there is a water shortage?
  
  
• What happens when the water gets contaminated, and there is a water shortage?
  
  
• What happens the contaminated water?"
  
  
• how do you propose to deal with the radioactivity in the flowback water. as current wastewater treatment plants arent capable of treating radioactive waste?
  
  
• Please name the chemicals that are mixed with the water used to cause the fracking. How is the liquid disposed of after fracking
  
  
• How harmful is additional burning of fossel fuel going to be to the environment? Where is the replacement water coming from? How will you cleanse and dispose of dirty water after fracking?
  
  
• Where is the water for Fracking in the UK going to come from and what guarantees that it remains unpolluted for drinking? Given that we have hosepipe bans anyway in the summers? Where is the toxic waste from the wells going to be disposed of safely?
  
  
• Will the used frack water (or processed water) be disposed of by injecting it into porous rocks underground?

The fluids most commonly used for hydraulic fracturing are water-based, with sand added to the mix to keep rock fractures open. A small percentage – between 0.05 and 2 per cent – of the fluid is chemical additives.¹ The Environment Agency must approve chemicals that are used in hydraulic fracturing fluids, and will only approve those that are non-hazardous to groundwater.²

The chemicals used vary depending on a number of factors such as the geology, the process and the operator. The UK industry has agreed to publish fully the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing on UKOOG’s website.

To date only one chemical has been used in hydraulic fracture fluids in the UK, and this was a non-hazardous chemical. At Preese Hall, only polyacrylamide friction reducer (0.04%) and a miniscule amount of salt have been used in hydraulic fracturing fluid.

Polyacrylamide is a non-hazardous, non-toxic substance which is also used extensively in other industries to remove suspended solids in drinking and wastewater plants, and pollutants or contaminants from soils.

The UK shale gas industry has committed to the full public disclosure of fracture fluid via the following guidelines:

“Operators will disclose, either on their own websites and/or the UKOOG website, www.ukoog.org.uk, the chemical additives of fracturing fluids on a well-by-well basis. Information for fluid disclosure should include:

·         Any EA/SEPA authorisations for fluids and their status as hazardous/non-hazardous substances.

·         Material Safety Data Sheets information.

·         Volumes of fracturing fluid, including proppant, base carrier fluid and chemical additives.

·         The trade name of each additive and its general purpose in the fracturing process.

·         Maximum concentrations in percent by mass of each chemical additive.

The Public Disclosure of Fracture Fluid Form is shown in appendix 2 and will be downloadable from www.ukoog.org.uk.”³

¹ http://www.ciwem.org/media/1023221/Shale%20Gas%20and%20Water%20WEB.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• What chemicals into our water supply in future years…. How likely is it?

• What chemicals do you use 

• What are the chemicals that are pumped into the ground?

• What Chemicals ( by name ) do you inject into the ground as part of shale gas extraction ? 

• How many toxic and radioactive chemicals are used during the fracking process?

• Please list all the poisons that you plan to inject into the ground during the fracking process.

• What will be the overall effect of the chemicals pumped in on the water table and water quality over time and  what are the chemicals that are pumped in? Thank you

• What chemicals radiation or other contaminants are in the waste water? How much water will be waste and how will this be transported and where will it be disposed? 

• Please name the chemicals that are mixed with the water used to cause the fracking. How is the liquid disposed of after fracking

• How are you going to safeguard water pollution? How will be in charge of it? What chemicals will be used and what are the effects?
  
  
• What are the chemicals used and how could they affect the environment?
  
  
• What is the chemical composition of frac fluid? 

Firstly, we should make it clear that no radioactive material is used in the extraction of shale gas.

However, water that is used in hydraulic fracturing typically comes back to the surface containing Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material, known as NORM. These radioactive substances exist in all natural forms including soils, rocks, water and in air. They are also found in foods such as bananas and Brazil nuts. Shale rock is no different and contains NORM similar to those found in other rock types.

NORM management is not unique to shale gas extraction. NORM is present in waste fluids from the conventional oil and gas industries, as well as mining industries such as coal and potash.

In its review of the potential health impacts of shale gas, Public Health England considered Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM). It made the point that it is common for waste from oil and gas production to contain NORM. There is a comprehensive regulatory regime for managing NORM; compliance with this regime should ensure that any public health impact is minimised.

Even if a very large number of wells were drilled in the UK, the amount of radioactive materials produced would be a tiny fraction of that produced by work in the medical sector and universities.

In the UK, an environmental permit is required for accumulating, disposing of or receiving naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) wastes that exceed very low concentrations. The Radioactive Substances act of 1993 and Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 and the Radioactive Substances Exemption (Scotland) Order 2011 provide regulation for the management of NORM.

Professor Philip Thomas of City University London said "It may be helpful to realise that the UK has built up considerable knowledge of how to deal with low level radioactive waste safely as a result of 60 years' experience producing electricity from nuclear energy."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown 

• I understand there are 10 essential health and safety regulations to set up Fracking pads. Will these be in place before they drill into the Fylde and Ribble area? How will drilling down impact on nuclear waste which I believe is store underground
  
  
• I understand the fracking process can bring back NORMs Naturally Occurring Radioactive Minerals from deep underground. What is done with this stuff to make it safe.

• will there be any radioactivity in any gas from shale?, how do you plan to remove it? are you planning storage facilities?

• how do you propose to deal with the radioactivity in the flowback water. as current wastewater treatment plants arent capable of treating radioactive waste?

• Explain why radioactive waste needs to be re-injected back into the ground - the risks and the benefits and other options, thanks,

According to the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering report, at the time the report was produced, the available evidence indicates that the risk of water contamination is very low provided that shale gas extraction takes place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres – which would be the case here¹.

 The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) also agree that risks to groundwater quality are generally considered to be low in the UK where the shale rock in question often exists at considerable depths below aquifers and gas would be required to migrate many hundreds of metres between source rock and sensitive groundwater.²

A study by the ReFINE (Researching Fracking In Europe) project found that there was a less than 1 percent chance of a stimulated hydraulic fracture propagating upwards more than 350 metres, and that the maximum recorded distance was 588 metres. The study recommended that all horizontal fracking wells are drilled at least 600m below aquifers to minimize the risk of stimulated hydraulic fractures providing a pathway for natural gas to migrate upwards and contaminate aquifers³.

Also relevant to this question, for both water and soil, is whether there is any risk of surface spills at shale sites, and whether such spills could contaminate water. The Environment Agency (which regulates shale extraction) has investigated this issue and judged that the environmental risks at each individual stage of exploratory shale gas operation, after proper management and regulation, are “low”⁴. The Environment Agency, will not permit activities if they are close to drinking water sources, such as groundwater from aquifers, or where there is a risk that pollution to groundwater will occur.

As part of measures to mitigate risk, operators will place a thick, impermeable membrane across the site to prevent any potential spillage of water of other chemicals used in drilling and hydraulic fracturing from getting into nearby soil or groundwater.

The Environment Agency will not permit activities if they are close to drinking water sources, such as groundwater from aquifers, or where there is a risk that pollution to groundwater will occur. Professor Mike Stephenson of the British Geological Survey says that most geologists find it very hard to imagine contamination could occur because shale is exploited much deeper than aquifers.

Professor Ernest Rutter of the University of Manchester said: “In addition to this information, you may also be interested to know that a typical depth for shale gas extraction is between 2 and 3 km, about 20 times deeper than typical aquifers. In fact, the deeper the better, because deep shale stores the gas at higher pressure meaning that there is more of it.”

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “For the fluids used in hydraulic fracturing to flow up from the fractured shale to contaminate an aquifer would require a change in the law: the laws of physics. Because the density of fracking fluid is greater than that of fresh water they will not move up under buoyancy.”

Dr James Verdon of the University of Bristol said: “Multiple studies in the USA have confirmed that the hydraulic fracturing process itself has not caused contamination of aquifers. That’s not to say there have been zero accidents or incidents in the USA, but that on the few occasions that problems have been recorded, it’s been due to other drilling-related issues, and not due to fracking.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Is money worth the asking price of your conscience and that of the greater impact to aquifers and land?

• Does anything pumped into and disturbed from the ground enter into the water course

• Will it affect the water supply?

• How will it affect the water table and home insurance?

• What about our water? Far more important than anything.

• How does fracking affect water drawn from aquafers i.e polluted water.

• As 6% of wells fail on first frack and aquifers become carbon tetra chloride  are you going to supply each home with their own water supply? This costs $38000 per house in the States.
• is it to pollute farm land in the name of capitalism as it dose state you need to remove the abilaty to feed and provide for yourselfs to force total capitalism on a self sustained population

The Environment Agency will be responsible for deciding whether to pursue the person it considers to be responsible for any damage, using its powers under environmental regulation for the protection of surface water bodies such as rivers and groundwater.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below: 

•  If the digging for shale damages the aquifer  who will be responsible ? and what steps will be taken to prevent such damage

To answer this question there needs to be a distinction made between the process of designing, drilling and testing a well (well integrity) and the physical fracturing process.

Hydraulic fracturing

There has been no evidence of the hydraulic fracturing process causing water contamination.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (who set standards for drinking water in the United States) concluded that there was no significant evidence that the drinking water found in aquifers was being affected by fracking.¹

According to the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering report, at the time the report was produced, the available evidence indicates that the risk of water contamination in the UK is very low provided that shale gas extraction takes place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres – which would be the case here.²

The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) also agrees that risks to groundwater quality are generally considered to be low in the UK where the shale rock in question often exists at considerable depths below aquifers - meaning that the gas would be have to migrate many hundreds of metres between the source rock and overlaying aquifers.³

A study by the ReFINE (Researching Fracking In Europe) project found that there was a less than 1 percent chance of a stimulated hydraulic fracture propagating upwards more than 350 metres, and that the maximum recorded distance was 588 metres. To minimize the possibility of a stimulated hydraulic fracture connecting a gas-bearing shale with an overlying aquifer, therefore, ReFINE researchers recommended that all horizontal fracking wells are drilled at least 600m below the aquifer.⁴

Dr James Verdon of the University of Bristol said: “Multiple studies in the USA have confirmed that the hydraulic fracturing process itself has not caused contamination of aquifers. That’s not to say there have been zero accidents or incidents in the USA, but that on the few occasions that problems have been recorded, it’s been due to other drilling-related issues, and not due to fracking.”

Well integrity

There have been a few instances of water contamination in the US - a recent report from Ohio University found some instances of water contaminated with natural gas. However, this was caused by faulty wells, not by the hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) process.⁵ This indicates that water contamination can be prevented with strict regulation from Government and good well design and construction.

Surface operations

Also relevant to this question is whether there is any risk of surface spills at shale well sites, and whether such spills could contaminate water. The Environment Agency has investigated this issue and judged that the environmental risks at each individual stage of exploratory shale gas operation, provided that there is proper management and regulation, are “low”.⁶

Professor Richard Selley from Imperial College London said: “Notorious cases of alleged contamination in the US, such as at Dimock in Pennsylvania (where brown water was used to illustrate contamination by fracking fluids) was revealed to be naturally occurring iron oxides in the ground water. The UK has a far more robust regulatory process for granting permission and monitoring all drilling operations than those of the USA.”

¹ http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy

² https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/shale-gas-extraction/2012-06-28-shale-gas.pdf

³ http://www.ciwem.org/media/1023221/Shale%20Gas%20and%20Water%20WEB.pdf

⁴ http://refine.org.uk/research/hydraulic-fractures-rb-source/fractures-rb-source.aspx

⁵ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140915095851.htm

⁶ https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296949/LIT_8474_fbb1d4.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to everyone who submitted questions similar to the one above. Questions we have received which are similar are shown below:

• Will it cause water pollution

• How do you justify using our water to extract shale, which is then full of chemicals and will pollute?

• I would like to know what Cuadrilla will do when the water is contaminated in Lancashire. After 840 wells have been fracked over the 16 years.

• How can they insure that the water supply is not contaminated when extracting shale gas?

• What guarantee have we our water supply will not be polluted?

• As Lincoln's water supply comes entirely from underground systems is there 100% assurance that fracking will not pollute our water supply?

• I've seen videos on the internet of flammable water coming through the gaps from fracking. Is this real? If so what is going to be done to prevent it
  
  
• If fracking is safe then why has there been hundreds of cases of water contamination in the US?
  
  
• How many instances of water problems were reported in Pennsylvania recently by the state Environmental Protection Agency?
  
  
• What is the number of water issues that Pensylvania has reported due to shale? Why are you not putting this in your information?
  
  
• How many times has fracking been the cause of fresh water contamination in the USA?
  
  
• Why do shale when in USA where they have done shale gas come thorugh there taps with the water
  
  
• What research has been done in America on contamination of water and gas leaks?
  
  
• Faulty gas wells in USA marcellus shale - proof of polluted water. How can you explain this?
  
  
• As 6% of wells fail on first frack and aquifers become carbon tetra chloride  are you going to supply each home with their own water supply? This costs $38000 per house in the States.

A study by the ReFINE (Researching Fracking In Europe) project found that there was a less than 1 percent chance of a stimulated hydraulic fracture propagating upwards more than 350 metres, and that the maximum recorded distance was 588 metres. To minimize the possibility of a stimulated hydraulic fracture connecting a gas-bearing shale with an overlying aquifer, therefore, ReFINE researchers recommended that all horizontal fracking wells are drilled at least 600m below the aquifer¹.

Professor Richard Selley told us that a detailed study of hundreds of wells from the four main shale gas horizons in the USA shows that several thousands of feet separate the topmost rock fractures from the bottom of the overlying aquifer.²

Professor Selley added that: “Horizontal drilling can only take place below about 1,500 feet, which is the sufficient depth to allow the pipe to curve from vertical to horizontal. This is generally below the depth of most aquifers, as shale gas horizons are generally many thousands of feet beneath the aquifer.”