Disclosure of the Chemicals Used in Fracking & Shale Gas Exploitation Opening up the Discussion by Suggesting the Gas Industry Ask for the Public’s Help in Making the Fracking Fluid or the Fracking Process Safer Tag Words: Hydraulic Fracturing, Fracking, toxic chemicals, Gas Drilling Industry Authors: Daniel John, Yangxi Qi and Julie M. Fagan, Ph.D. Summary Hydraulic Fracturing, or “Fracking” for short is a very controversial method of extracting natural gas. While some might argue that it opens up many job opportunities and decreases our dependence on foreign energy imports, there are many health concerns associated with these methods. Most of these concerns lie within the chemicals used in extracting the gas. If alternate, less harmful, compounds were used and other current fracking processes were made safer/less toxic, this would advance fracking and change the public’s perspectives on the practice. We have written to the major gas drilling companies in the US and China to suggest that they seek the public’s help for ideas on how to make the fracking process safer. Video Link: http://youtu.be/As86ppqZqM4 The Shale Gas Boom (YQ) Shale gas development boom is sweeping the globe, but whether shale gas mining process, especially hydraulic fracturing, will lead to serious environmental pollution become a dispute among government departments and experts. The shale gas extraction technology/practices and effects in the U.S. and in China will be discussed. The potential environmental pollution listed below: (1) consume a lot of water; (2) contaminate groundwater; (3) methane leaked; (4) trigger earthquakes. For China, due to geographical constraints and inadequate environmental regulation, fracking is more likely to cause significant environmental pollution. Thus, in the process of shale gas exploration and development, we should pay great attention to shale gas exploitation and its environmental impact assessment, trying to reduce its environmental impact and prevent environmental pollution risks by technological progress and related environmental legislation. Overview of shale gas resources (YQ) Shale gas, which exists in shale in unbound state, is unconventional nature gas. Great resource potential and long period of exploiting and production cycle are its advantages. Unlike conventional natural gas, shale gas has its unique occurrence and accumulation mechanism, it can only be mined under certain conditions. Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technology is the core technology for shale gas exploitation. Horizontal drilling technology can make better use of natural fractures in the reservoir. Besides, the wellbore pass through more
reservoirs to increase seepage area, resulting in improving shale gas recovery. Hydraulic fracturing technology uses high-pressure liquid to crack the rock formation, proppant in high pressure liquid hold cracks, so oil and gas can escape from the cracks. Extensive use of multistage fracturing technology in horizontal wells makes the low yield or no airflow shale gas wells more industrial value. U.S. Energy Information Administration [EIA] 2011.4 data show that current the global (excluding Russia and Middle East countries) exploitable shale gas resources reached 189 trillion cubic meters. EIA estimates China's shale gas reserves is about 100 trillion cubic meters (two times than conventional natural gas resources in China), which can be mined resources 36 trillion cubic meters. Shale gas exploration and development has been booming in North America, Asia, Europe, South America, Oceania and other regions. From the current perspective, in addition to the distribution of shale gas in Sichuan, Ordos, Bohai Bay, Songliao, Jianghan, Tuha, Tarim and Junggar basins where is petroliferous, it also widely distributed in marine shale strata, paralic shale strata and continental coal-bearing strata. The United States has successfully achieved commercial scale shale gas exploration, with shale gas production surging yearly, the U.S. natural gas supply and demand is changed, influencing the U.S. energy structure, and even having a significant impact on world energy structure. Due to the huge success of the U.S. shale gas exploitation, abundant reserves that showed by EIA data, and the great consumer demand for energy. Exploitation of shale gas in China is not only faced with the rapid expansion of environmental pollution problems, but also the geographical constraints and inadequate environmental legislation. Ministry of Land and Resources issued Notice No. 30 of 2011, the State Council approved shale gas as a new independent minerals, and comprehensively promote shale gas development. However, shale gas development also has brought increasingly prominent environmental problems to the United States, which caused controversy around the world. It is an unavoidable problem for these countries who is or will develop the shale gas. Impact of shale gas extraction on the environment (YQ) In the process of oil and gas extraction, more or less it causes environment pollution, such as noise, waste water, waste gas and other pollution caused by mining accidents. Many experts and environmentalists claim that the special exploit process of shale gas will increased environmental pollution. In 2011 the hottest environmental issues is exploiting shale gas by hydraulic fracturing, shale gas wells in some areas have been temporarily closed due to environmental issues. In France and Bulgaria, the government issued a ban on the use of hydraulic fracturing in shale gas exploitation, which shows their negative attitude to shale gas exploitation in the current technical conditions. But so far, no government authority can provide evidence that shale gas exploitation pollute the environment, which evokes more intense argument. Based on available information and case studies, there are four possible environmental problems of shale gas exploitation: consume a lot of water, pollution of groundwater layer, methane leakage and trigger earthquakes. (1) Consume a lot of water The fracturing fluid used in hydraulic fracturing is mainly composed of high-pressure water, sand and chemical additives, water and sand content is above 99%. Exploitation of shale gas need great mount of water, each shale gas wells need to spend four or five million gallons (1
gallon or about 3.78 liters) of water to make shale fracture. Dr. Xia Yujiang studied the U.S. environmental issues caused by shale gas exploitation, he believes shale gas drilling consume a lot of surface water or groundwater, which is likely to affect the survival of local aquatic organisms and fisheries, it also affected urban and industrial water. Shale gas industry is trying to reduce the effect of gas well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. For example, after each fracturing is completed, 30% -70% of the water is recycled, but it still can not change the fact that hydraulic fracturing consumes a lot of water resources. (2) Groundwater contamination Some petroleum company regards fracturing fluid used in the hydraulic fracturing as business secret and not to publish it. However, it is these chemicals that may cause groundwater pollution. In hydraulic fracturing process, chemicals may directly get through the fracture and move upward from deep underground until to shallow surface. Moreover, chemicals may be leaked into the underground water, rivers, lakes and aquifer because of production pipeline broken with bad quality or improper operation. After the completion of the hydraulic fracturing process, the majority of the fracturing fluid is returned to the ground, where the fracturing fluid is not only those substances, but also radioactive substances and various salts. This toxic effluent is stored in the first scene, and then transferred to a sewage treatment plant or recycled. But in the transportation, chemicals may infiltrate into underground water. (3)Methane leakage Methane is a more powerful green house gases than carbon dioxide, methane escapes into the atmosphere contribute to global warming, methane infiltrating into aquifers will cause groundwater contamination. Methane is the main component of shale gas and it leaked more into air is than conventional wells. Methane leakage from shale gas extraction could be cause by deliberate exhausting, equipment leaks or hydraulic fracturing processes. (4) Cause earthquakes In Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Oklahoma and other regions of the widespread where exploit shale gas using hydraulic fracturing technology, a series of minor earthquakes occur in these areas, in theory, it show that hydraulic fracturing and earthquakes is relevant, but the exact cause has not been identified. Experts said the earthquake is not necessarily caused by the hydraulic fracturing process, but could be caused by a large number of fracturing fluid. When pressed deep into the ground it will lead to the formation stress microseismic instability occurs. Of course, whether the process of hydraulic fracturing causes earthquakes is still controversial, and it is remained to be proved by more evidence. The method of extracting this natural gas (DJ) Hydraulic Fracturing is a method of extracting natural gas, petroleum and even water which is stored in rocks (typically shale) which lie an average of 7000 feet underground. “Sedimentary rocks are both porous and permeable, and their pore spaces are almost invariably occupied by fluids, usually water, at some pressure” (Reference 3) In order to extract these resources first a vertical well is dug up. After this, horizontal veins are created off of this well, and then these horizontal wells are pumped full of highly pressurized water, sand, and various chemical additives (this is where most of the controversy lies). This process creates cracks in the rocks
down under and they tend to branch off thus releasing gas, oil, or even water into these created cracks. Then the products (oils and gases) are forced to flow into horizontal wells and flow into storage tanks with the water that comes back up. (Reference 2)
Pros There are many notable pros which go along with fracking. For one, natural gas is a much cleaner energy source than typical fossil fuels such as coal and oil due to its reduced carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and sulfur oxide emissions.(Reference 2) Also in the case of the United States, areas such as the Marcellus Shale are rich in natural gas thus granting us our own domestic energy sources. This is beneficial because it lessens our country's dependence on foreign energy imports. Another benefit of the natural gas market is that it opens up a good amount of domestic job opportunities on top of acting as a cleaner energy source that coal or crude oil. Along with the openings in the job market, fracking also brings with it a lot of money in the industry which leads to a significant payout financially. (Reference 2) Cons Along with the good sides, there are many downsides that go along with hydraulic fracturing. Although fracking has its economical benefits, it's environmental impact is one major drawback worth taking note of. The first noteworthy con of fracking ties into the wastewater that re sults from the process. To explain, fracking requires millions of gallons of water and the wastewater that comes up is not usable anymore. As a result all of that water used in the initial process is wasted and turns into hazardous waste. In fact, companies fracking in New York and Pennsylvania were starting to dump this waste in the state of New Jersey, but a group I worked for this summer called Food and Water Watch helped get a bill passed in the assembly to ban the dumping of this waste in New Jersey. The waste associated with fracking is toxic and sways many people away from the idea of fracking. Another huge problem that is associated with fracking is the contamination of groundwater reserves on and near fracking sites. This contamination ties in with the chemical additives that are used in the fracking process. These additives make up about .5 to 2% of the fracking fluid. (Reference 2) The chemicals and the waste associated with them then stays in the groundwater after the fracking process thus leaving it contaminated. Also the waste pollutes wherever the companies responsible choose to dump it.
Chemicals Used The following is a list of typical chemicals used with their various functions in hydraulic fracturing retrieved from fracfocus.org. “Chemical Name
Chemical Purpose
Product Function
Hydrochloric Acid
Helps dissolve minerals and initiate cracks in the rock
Acid
Glutaraldehyde
Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products
Biocide
Quaternary Ammonium Chloride
Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products
Biocide
Quaternary Ammonium Chloride
Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products
Biocide
Tetrakis HydroxymethylPhosphonium Sulfate
Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products
Biocide
Ammonium Persulfate
Allows a delayed break down of the gel
Breaker
Sodium Chloride
Product Stabilizer
Breaker
Magnesium Peroxide
Allows a delayed break down the gel
Breaker
Magnesium Oxide
Allows a delayed break down the gel
Breaker
Calcium Chloride
Product Stabilizer
Breaker
Choline Chloride
Prevents clays from swelling or shifting
Clay Stabilizer
Tetramethyl ammonium chloride
Prevents clays from swelling or shifting
Clay Stabilizer
Sodium Chloride
Prevents clays from swelling or shifting
Clay Stabilizer
Isopropanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent
Corrosion Inhibitor
Methanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent
Corrosion Inhibitor
Formic Acid
Prevents the corrosion of the pipe
Corrosion Inhibitor
Acetaldehyde
Prevents the corrosion of the pipe
Corrosion Inhibitor
Petroleum Distillate
Carrier fluid for borate or zirconate crosslinker
Crosslinker
Hydrotreated Light
Carrier fluid for borate or zirconate crosslinker
Crosslinker
Petroleum Distillate Potassium Metaborate
Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Crosslinker
Triethanolamine Zirconate
Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Crosslinker
Sodium Tetraborate
Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Crosslinker
Boric Acid
Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Crosslinker
Zirconium Complex
Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Crosslinker
Borate Salts
Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Crosslinker
Ethylene Glycol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Crosslinker
Methanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Crosslinker
Polyacrylamide
“Slicks” the water to minimize friction
Friction Reducer
Petroleum Distillate
Carrier fluid for polyacrylamide friction reducer Friction Reducer
Hydrotreated Light Petroleum Distillate
Carrier fluid for polyacrylamide friction reducer Friction Reducer
Methanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Friction Reducer
Ethylene Glycol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Friction Reducer
Guar Gum
Thickens the water in order to suspend the sand Gelling Agent
Petroleum Distillate
Carrier fluid for guar gum in liquid gels
Gelling Agent
Hydrotreated Light Petroleum Distillate
Carrier fluid for guar gum in liquid gels
Gelling Agent
Methanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Gelling Agent
Polysaccharide Blend
Thickens the water in order to suspend the sand Gelling Agent
Ethylene Glycol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Gelling Agent
Citric Acid
Prevents precipitation of metal oxides
Iron Control
Acetic Acid
Prevents precipitation of metal oxides
Iron Control
Thioglycolic Acid
Prevents precipitation of metal oxides
Iron Control
Sodium Erythorbate
Prevents precipitation of metal oxides
Iron Control
Lauryl Sulfate
Used to prevent the formation of emulsions in the fracture fluid
NonEmulsifier
Isopropanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
NonEmulsifier
Ethylene Glycol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
NonEmulsifier
Sodium Hydroxide
Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers
pH Adjusting Agent
Potassium Hydroxide
Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers
pH Adjusting Agent
Acetic Acid
Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers
pH Adjusting Agent
Sodium Carbonate
Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers
pH Adjusting Agent
Potassium Carbonate
Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers
pH Adjusting Agent
Copolymer of Acrylamide and Sodium Acrylate
Prevents scale deposits in the pipe
Scale Inhibitor
Sodium Polycarboxylate
Prevents scale deposits in the pipe
Scale Inhibitor
Phosphonic Acid Salt
Prevents scale deposits in the pipe
Scale Inhibitor
Lauryl Sulfate
Used to increase the viscosity of the fracture fluid
Surfactant
Ethanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Surfactant
Naphthalene
Carrier fluid for the active surfactant ingredients Surfactant
Methanol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Surfactant
Isopropyl Alcohol
Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent.
Surfactant
2-Butoxyethanol
Product stabilizer
Surfactant” (Reference 1)
Alternatives to Harmful Chemicals (DJ) There are a good amount of safer substitutes that can be used for the different areas of hydraulic fracturing. These are some examples of substitutes retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7282/T3J1012Q Acid - Sub acid for Emerald Safe Breaker - Sub Sodium Chloride with Calcium Magnesium Acetate Biocide - Sub glutaraldehyde with Sterilox Friction reducer - Sub Boric Acid with Lactic Acid Gelling Agent - Use Tara Gum Non emulsifier - Sub Sodium Laureth Sulfate with Sodium Coco Sulfate Ph adjusting agent - Sub Acetic Acid with Citric Acid
Disclosure of Chemicals Used in Fracking (DJ) Why were hydraulic fracturing chemicals exempt from disclosure laws in the first place? The reason for this is because of language in a 2005 federal law known as the “Halliburton Loophole” which exempts drillers from the Clean Water Act. (Ref 6) Another issue that is observed in these disclosure laws is that drilling companies are claiming that their fluid is proprietary information and that disclosure of their contents would give unfair advantages to other companies. In the United States today, different states have different standards and regulations for hydraulic fracturing. Some are more lax about the process with their regulations, and others are very strict about almost every aspect in fracking. Some states require the public disclosure of fracking fluids along with the volumes of chemicals used. This information is then sent to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEP). The first of these states to do so was Wyoming in September 2010, and shortly thereafter Colorado, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Texas (Ref 5).
(Ref 4)
Although these states require full disclosure there is still one loophole that exists, and this loophole is through allowing the protection of trade secrets. Some states have certain requirements about these trade secrets, but others have given special treatment to the oil and gas industry and allow them trade secret exemptions without any oversight. (Ref 4) As of 2011, there is an online voluntary disclosure program known as Frac Focus. Although this is a great first step in disclosure as a whole, many companies only partially disclose the contents of their fluids still leaving a bit of a mystery as to what other harmful elements their fluids could contain. Earlier in 2014, drilling company Baker Hughes had vowed to disclose the contents of their fracking fluid. This vow of disclosure is a huge step in the right direction. However, this is said to take several months to do so. Not only will Baker Hughes be the first drilling company to publicly disclose their entire fracking recipe, but this also puts pressure on other drilling companies such as Halliburton and Schlumberger to do the same. (Ref 7) Recently a Halliburton spokeswoman said that the company would study the results of Baker Hughes disclosure and consider a similar policy. (Ref 8) Like the old saying goes “All it takes is one”.
(Ref 4) Reactions of the Public and Industry to Hydraulic Fracturing (DJ) Currently, the public’s reactions to fracking are somewhat mixed. The differences in their reactions varies by occupation as well as where in the United States they live. For example, people in occupations such as investment banking are generally either unopposed to fracking or supportive due to the money that it brings in for the country. On the other hand people who live near where fracking takes place are highly likely to be opposed to it due to the fact that it is known contaminate ground water in their area on top of polluting and destroying the landscape. A personal example I have of people opposed to fracking goes back to when I was chatting with a resident when I was canvassing Bridgewater, New Jersey for a group called Food and Water Watch. A good amount of Bridgewater residents primarily depend on ground water, and the resident I was talking to was completely opposed to fracking due to that reason. The industry over the last couple of years has been seemingly insistent on guarding their company formulas, but recently with Baker Hughes’s disclosure seems to be taking a turn for the better. Once more companies start disclosing their complete fracking fluid ingredients the industry might have some hope of regaining the public’s trust despite all the loopholes they always seem to find. Conclusion/Moving Forward
There is still a lot that needs to be done in terms of reforming and rethinking the fracking process, and stricter regulations must be made nationally. First, there needs to be a degree of trust between the industry and the public. Cutting out all the deceptive loopholes by the industry and government, and providing full disclosure of what is in fracking fluids can gain this trust. With that being said the industry can keep a competitive degree of secrecy by not providing the concentrations publicly. However the industry should still have the responsibility of reporting the concentrations to experienced chemists and medical professionals in order to assess the impacts of these ingredients. Also the industry should exhibit common courtesy to the residents of the areas they are fracking in by giving them at least a 30 days notice prior to the drilling. The industry also has the responsibility of properly disposing of the waste caused by fracking, as well as bettering their formulas with safer substitutes in order to make the process less environmentally harmful. If there is a degree of cooperation and trust between the industry and the public, then greater strides can be made in terms of bettering a very flawed process. *Community Action – Getting the Gas Industry to Ask for the Public’s Help in Making the Fracking Fluid or the Fracking Process Safer (JF) *note – because no “community action plan” was included by the student authors, I have begun this section to be completed in the next few days. JF Realizing the power behind the adage “People support what they help create”, we are sending a letter to the major natural gas companies to request that they challenge the public (to include established chemists, engineers, researchers) to come up with viable alternatives to problems facing the gas industry, such as: a) Swapping out the toxic chemicals for alternative, more environmentally friendly ones b) Altering the fracking process to reduce air and water pollution c) Lessen the negative effects to the surrounding community (road traffic, housing, encroaching on private property to build gas pipelines) d) Creative solutions to processing the fracking fluid e) Reducing the occurrence of earthquakes that sometimes follow fracking f) Rethinking the process by which natural gas is obtained from shale Companies would put up money to acquire the best solutions for each of the problems above and the companies would award individuals for their solutions. A platform that does just this – offering financial awards to individuals for problems or better ideas that are of interest to companies or organizations. One such platform is called “Innocentive” (www.innocentive.com). Since 2001, Innocentive has given out over 1500 awards totaling over $40 million to provide ideas to and solutions for “important business, social, policy, scientific, and technical challenges”. 33% of the solvers reside in the US while 19 % reside in China. Over eighty percent of solvers had at least 4 years of college, `25% were employed by academic institutions; and 20% were professors or researchers. From Innocentive: “InnoCentive is the global leader in crowdsourcing innovation problems to the world’s smartest people who compete to provide ideas and solutions to important business, social, policy, scientific, and technical challenges. Our global network of millions of problem solvers, proven
challenge methodology, and cloud based technology combine to help our clients transform their economics of innovation through rapid solution delivery and the development of sustainable open innovation programs. For more information, visit www.innocentive.com, email
[email protected] or call 1 855 CROWDNOW (US) or 44 (0) 2079350827 (International).”
An example of a current challenge is below that is somewhat related to one of the problems facing the fracking industry; treating the waste fracking fluid so that it can be disposed of in an environmentally sustainable way: https://usmg5.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=etirbijhir73d#4241293842 “Novel Treatment of Water to Remove Salt and Boron Low cost methods are sought for removing high concentrations of boron, salts and other minerals from millions of gallons of water per day. Existing industrial scale engineering approaches for treating saline water (including filtration, sedimentation, distillation, reverse osmosis, flocculation, activated carbon, and ultraviolet light) have been examined closely by the Seeker and are unsatisfactory because of high cost or low throughput. This is an Ideation Challenge with a guaranteed award for at least one eligible submission. Challenge 9933569 Deadline: August 23, 2014 Reward: $30,000 Source: InnoCentive
Challenge ID: 9933569
Challenge Overview Low cost methods are sought for removing high concentrations of boron, salts and other minerals from millions of gallons of water per day. Existing industrial scale engineering approaches for treating saline water (including filtration, sedimentation, distillation, reverse osmosis, flocculation, activated carbon, and ultraviolet light) have been examined closely by the Seeker and are unsatisfactory because of high cost or low throughput for repurpose or reuse. This Challenge is focused on finding new, non-traditional chemical, physical or biological methods for removing the boron and salt from water at a substantially lower cost than existing solutions so that the water can be reused for other purposes. Within the details of the Challenge the Solver will be provided the full chemical composition, temperature and volume of the water as well as the target levels of “clean” as defined by the Seeker. The source of the water is a deep underground aquifer. Seeker is open to all treatment ideas, including potential solutions at any point before, during or after the water is surfaced. This is an Ideation Challenge, which has the following unique features:
There is a guaranteed award for at least one eligible submission. Eligibility is defined as meeting the requirements in the Challenge Specific Agreement and Solver Terms of Use as well as having the rights and ability to provide a license to the Seeker. The awards will be paid to the best submission(s) as solely determined by the Seeker. The total payout will be $30,000, with at least one award being no smaller than $10,000 and no award being smaller than $5,000. This Ideation Challenge has several other features, including: A posting period of 30 days. Forwarding your submissions to the Seeker once you submit your proposal, instead of at the end of the Challenge. Please make sure you upload only a finished proposal. You can submit an updated version of your proposal only as a new submission. The Solvers are not required to transfer exclusive intellectual property rights to the Seeker. Rather, by submitting a proposal, the Solvers grants to the Seeker and its assignee a royalty-free, perpetual, and non-exclusive license to have, use, and create derivative works of any information included in this proposal. After the Challenge deadline, the Seeker will complete the review process and make a decision with regards to the Winning Solution(s). All Solvers that submitted a proposal will be notified on the status of their submissions; however, no detailed evaluation of individual submissions will be provided.”
In an inquiry dated July 29, 2014 to Innocentive: Submitted on 07/29/2014 - 6:52pm Submitted by anonymous user: [50.32.198.254] Submitted values are: First Name: julie Last Name: fagan Title: Assoc Professor Company: Rutgers University City: New Brunswick State: NJ How Did You Hear About Us?: other Subject: sample letter to company seeking a solution Message: I would like to send out a letter to a particular industry to request that they seek the public’s help in solving some of the industry’s problems. They would not likely have heard of or thought of using "Innocentive" since this industry is shrouded in secrecy. Do you have a sample letter that I could modifiy and send to them? Please send it to me as an attachment if you could to: < redacted> Feel free to call as well < redacted >Thank you, Julie M. Fagan, Ph.D. Thank You
Phone: Email: Preferred Contact Method: Phone Interested In?: - InnoCentive as an Enterprise Solution - InnoCentive@Work - InnoCentive Challenge Marketplace Innocentive was called the following day. They said they did not have a sample letter or material in letter form that would be sent out to industry’s interested in posting a challenge. They said that the industry usually reaches out to them by phone or email, and Innocentive works with the company to set up and post the challenge. They sent the pdf below about Innocentive: https://webmail.rci.rutgers.edu/src/download.php?startMessage=1&passed_id=39621&mailbox= INBOX&ent_id=3&passed_ent_id=0. The letter to follow was sent to the top ten gas drilling companies in the US http://www.propublica.org/article/who-are-americas-top-10-gas-drillers and the top gas drillers in China Letter not yet written Contact info for the gas drilling companies is needed (DJ) I figure we could send the emails to 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/company/contact-us/email-us http://www.chk.com/Contact/Pages/Information.aspx
[email protected] http://www.dvn.com/global/Pages/contacts.aspx#terms?disclaimer=yes http://www.conocophillips.com/Pages/contact-us.aspx (under Ethics helpline)
DJ References Ref 1 Chemicals Used: http://fracfocus.org/chemical-use/what-chemicals-are-used Ref 2 How it Works and Different Views on Fracking: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/hydraulic-fracking.htm
(Ref 3) Mechanics of Fracking: http://www.depts.ttu.edu/gesc/Fac_pages/Yoshinobu/4361_5361_Folder/2013readings/Hubbert%20and%20Willis,%201972%20mechanics%20of%20hydr%20frac.pdf
Ref 4 http://www.nrdc.org/energy/files/Fracking-Disclosure-IB.pdf Ref 5
http://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/fracking-update-what-states-are-doing.aspx Ref 6 http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/tag/fracking-disclosure/ Ref 7 http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorensteffy/2014/04/25/will-baker-hughes-fracking-fluid-policywin-publics-trust/ Ref 8 http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/04/28/baker-hughes-to-disclose-all-chemicals-ituses-in-fracking/
Letter to the Editor To whom it may concern, Hydraulic Fracturing or fracking is a good solution for acquiring energy domestically, but there is a lot about this process that needs to be addressed and worked on. Fracking has proven to be very harmful to the environment and the people who reside near sites of fracking. Instead of outlawing the practice entirely the process should be improved and some common ground must be met. Shale has proven to be the best reservoir for extracting natural gas in the United States, and it has the potential to yield a great amount of gas. However, as the public we should know and understand the chemicals in the fracking process that work so far and which safer alternatives have been tried and proven not to work as well. A lot of the chemicals used in fracking contaminates water and aquifers near the fracking sites. The next step in improving this method is to look for safer alternative substitutes for the toxic chemicals that are being used. It is our responsibility as the public as well as the energy companies responsible to find ways of improving and even rethinking the fracking process altogether, and to look for safer alternatives that do not have as negative of impacts on people and the environment. Sincerely, Dan John
