8.0 Earthquake in Loreto Peru Caused by FRACKING Site

A Very Odd Earthquake Indeed

During the same month of this rare earthquake, PetroTal reported that it began drilling operations on May 7^th, for a second oil production well in the Brittany field in Block 95, in Loreto, which was producing at least 2,250 barrels of crude oil per day. Keep in mind that the deep drilling operation started on May 7 and can take up to 10 days  … they drilled over 3 km down into the earth. Within 2 weeks later, the 8.0 magnitude earthquake struck, in the same region …

 Peru, was hit by a 8.0 magnitude earthquake on May 25^th at 2:40 am Lima time. It left at least one person dead, 11 people injured and several hundred buildings damaged. The earthquake was so strong that it was felt through most of the country, and even sent vibrations as far as Ecuador, Colombia and Brazil. 

The quake - the biggest to strike the country in 12 years – originated in northern Peru the Pacaya Samiria National Reserve Park, deep in the Amazonian jungle, precisely where fracking is conducted by oil and gas companies. Lot 8 is only one example, producing more than 5,000 barrels of crude oil per day.  The epicentre of where  this earthquake occurred is also surrounded by Lot 95 and Lot 103, all of which are well within 50 miles.

During the week prior to this rare earthquake, PetroTal was drilling for a second oil production well in the Brittany field in Block 95, in Loreto, not far from where the earthquake had struck. Now you may be asking, what does fracking have to do with earthquakes? Well, a lot. With the evidence coming in from one study after another, scientists are now more certain than ever that oil and gas drilling is causing hundreds upon hundreds of earthquakes across the U.S., each year … and it makes you wonder… what about Peru and other places around the world?


The 8.0 earthquake that struck Amazon on May 25^th in the region of Loreto, close to the Pacaya Samiria reserve is definitely no hot spot for earthquakes. What is strikingly odd about this earthquake is that this area in the Amazon has never been known to receive earthquakes and the locals living there found it very unusual. 

The IGP (Geophysical Institute of Peru) downplayed the intensity of this earthquake, declaring: sismo de Loreto no fue un terremoto, sino un movimiento "de gran intensidad”. In other words, the Loreto earthquake was not an earthquake, but a movement "of great intensity". They claim this, based on the lack of damage caused by this earthquake, in an area that is not very populated – but can you imagine if that same earthquake struck in the area of Lima, with the same intensity? We’re talking about an area of over 9 million people, crowded with buildings and high rises. Can you imagine how much damage it would have caused?

Statistics dating from the 1900’s  to 2015 show that this area around Pacaya Samiria in Loreto is not prone to any seismic activity. However, due to increased fracking and seismic exploration over previous years, this has started to change. People living in other areas are noticing changes and experiencing unusually large temblors. Oil and gas companies have been injecting huge amounts of chemicals and oil well wastewater into the ground, building up immense pressure, and altering rock formations underneath the ground. Eventually something is going to give, and when it does, it results in seismic activity – in other words, an earthquake. 

Fracking and Earthquakes

Human activities that change stresses in Earth’s surface—like hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) and wastewater disposal—are known to cause earthquakes, even in areas where earthquakes are not historically common.

Hydraulic fracturing involves drilling a long steel pipe — a vertical wellbore — into the earth until it hits a rock formation layer containing oil or natural gas. The wellbore then turns and extends horizontally, before “fracking fluid” is pumped through the pipe at high pressure.

In hydraulic fracturing, a slurry of water, sand, and toxic chemicals are pumped through the ground at high pressures, cracking open rocks to release oil and natural gas. This produces earthquakes. Disposing of wastewater by injecting it into the crust can also trigger quakes: As the increased fluid pressure migrates away from the well, it can reach a well-oriented fault that is close to breaking and cause it to slip, triggering deep and shallow earthquakes. Since these deeper faults are often larger, they are capable of producing larger earthquakes.

Research scientists who work for the Geological Survey of Canada, tell us that when you inject into the ground and you elevate the pore pressure, the pore pressure can prime a fault, to prime it to slip,". Even once a fracking operation has ceased, the pressure remains and can still induce future seismic activity.

The relationship between fracking, oil drilling, and anything for that matter that disturbs the rock formation below can cause earthquakes, minor or large, sometimes with the slightest stress or with prolonged stress over time - Earthquakes occur when a crack underground — a fault — pulls apart. 

Guess what’s been happening since December 2018 until now ….

On December 1, the exploitation phase of Lot 95 began, located in the province of Requena, southeast of the Loreto region, which will be in charge of Petrotal Perú SRL. This operation will increase the current production of oil in the country by more than 25%, at its peak moment.

The operation will start with extended tests of the current well and then continue drilling new wells in 2019. The company reported that the objective is to drill up to 11 oil wells and four wells for production water disposal, in the next two to three years.

Now you can simply guess what they were doing during the Month of May, when this large earthquake struck … you guessed it – drilling deep underground oil wells, possibly even conducting seismic exploration – all resulting in disturbance of the rock formations below, which could very well have caused the earthquake on May 25th….

Fracking and Drilling Can Activate Dormant Faults

It is now a fact: Oil and gas drilling triggers man-made earthquakes. And this has been seen in at least eight US states, with findings from the USGS. More than a dozen areas in the US have been shaken in recent years by small earthquakes triggered by oil and gas drilling, according to government reports.

Experts tell us that the spike in seismic activity in the US is mainly caused by the oil and gas industry injecting wastewater deep underground, which can activate dormant faults. A few instances stem from hydraulic fracturing, in which large volumes of water, sand and toxic chemicals are pumped into rock formations in order to free oil or gas. Quakes could continue even if injections were stopped because pressure changes already induced in deep rock can migrate for years, possibly encountering faults.


PetroTal Drilling the Week Prior to Earthquake

During the same month of this rare earthquake, PetroTal reported that it began drilling operations on May 7^th, for a second oil production well in the Brittany field in Block 95, in Loreto, which was producing at least 2,250 barrels of crude oil per day. Keep in mind that the deep drilling operation started on May 7 and can take up to 10 days  … Within 2 weeks later, the 8.0 magnitude earthquake struck, in the same region …

PetroTal is projected to produce 39.8 million barrels of reserves with a production peak of up to 10,000 barrels per day, in the next 3 years. It should be noted that Petrotal Peru SRL (formerly Gran Tierra Energy Peru SRL) is the owner of 100% of the License Contract for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons in Block 95.

This oil and gas project will then be painted with a false pretense of animal conversation efforts and employment opportunities, in order to convince the public that they care about human health and environment.

And as if this isn’t enough already, communities living in Loreto have already been dealing with contaminated waters and oil spills. The Regional Emergency Operations Center (COER) Loreto reported to date there are 331 people affected by the recent outcrop of hydrocarbons from an abandoned oil well in the Miraflores town center, located on the banks of the Tigre River, province and department of Loreto. This is only one example of the many communities that are suffering, especially for remote indigenous communities who rely on the environment for their survival.

The apu Edison Flores said that the oil spill was an untenable situation and that humanitarian aid is an obligation of the Peruvian state to serve the communities that have been victims of oil exploitation for more than 40 years.

A study conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey finds the largest earthquake ever recorded in Kansas was linked to wastewater injection into deep underground wells — a process known as fracking. The November 12, 2014 earthquake, occurred 40 miles southwest of Wichita near the town of Milan. It registered almost 5 on the Richter scale and was felt as far away as Memphis. According to the USGS, the epicenter of the quake was located in an area were seismic activity is extremely rare but was adjacent to known fracking operations

How Fracking Caused Oklahoma's Biggest Earthquake Ever

Oklahoma has experienced a major increase in earthquakes in recent years, including a 5.7-magnitude temblor that injured residents and damaged 200 buildings in November 2011. Swarms of quakes have continued in 2015.

A new study in the journal Geology is the latest to tie a string of unusual earthquakes, in this case, in central Oklahoma, to the injection of wastewater deep underground. Researchers now say that the magnitude 5.7 earthquake near Prague, Okla., on Nov. 6, 2011, may also be the largest ever linked to wastewater injection. Felt as far away as Milwaukee, more than 800 miles away, the quake—the biggest ever recorded in Oklahoma--destroyed 14 homes, buckled a federal highway and left two people injured. Small earthquakes continue to be recorded in the area.

The sudden and violent increase in earthquakes in Oklahoma since 2008 has been well documented: in 2009, the state recorded 50 earthquakes; in 2015, that number exploded to 6,479. Historically, Oklahoma is not a state known for its seismic activity. From 1975 to 2008, Oklahoma averaged only one to three 3.0 magnitude (or greater) earthquakes annually, but from 2009 to mid-2013, this annual average grew to about 40.

Oklahoma is now the most seismically active state in the continental United States – more than California. That’s not a record Oklahomans should be happy to claim. And now, Oklahoma is breaking new ground: an earthquake in the state on September 3 was the strongest ever recorded there, with a magnitude of 5.8.

From 2009 to 2014, as earthquake activity increased drastically, wastewater injection volumes grew by about 43 percent.

Oil Drilling Could Be to Blame for Devastating 1933 California Quake and Others

Research published in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America suggests that several earthquakes in the Los Angeles area between 1920 and 1933 may be attributable to oil and gas drilling in the region, reports Annie Sneed for Scientific American.

They found that oil and gas drilling occurred near the epicenters of four major quakes in the LA area, and could have played a role in setting off the temblors. In all cases, the drilling extended down at least 3,000 feet, which was particularly deep for that day and age.

And the quakes were not minor. Sneed points out that the 1933 Long Beach earthquake was 6.4 magnitude, killing 120 people and causing $50 million in damage. The other quakes in the study include the 1920 Inglewood quake, 1929 incident in Whittier and 1930 Santa Monica earthquake.

Texas Sinkholes: One Example out of Many

Several cases throughout the 20th century have demonstrated how withdrawal of oil, gas and associated water from underground reservoirs could lower the land elevation, and cause earthquakes, and activate faults. In 1980, residents of the West Texas town of Wink awoke one morning to find a 370-foot wide, 110-foot deep sinkhole a couple of miles north of downtown. Geologists suspect the sinkhole formed as a result of oil extraction in the area whereby extractors pumped saltwater out from underneath the surface and left a large void that the above layer of earth eventually collapsed into. A second, even bigger sinkhole opened up nearby in 2002.

No matter which way you look at it, extracting water or oil from underground reserves will alter the porosity of rock formations, the underlying pressure, and cause chunks of land to become displaced, collapse, or activate faults, resulting in temblors and larger-sized earthquakes over time. It is a dangerous practice. This, along with injecting rock-dissolving chemicals and water at high pressure, will cause rock formations to fracture, creating new faults, or igniting already present faults. And when all this added pressure does release, it causes temblors and earthquakes.

Offshore Oil Drilling near Tectonic Plates and Earthquakes

Can you guess what happens when you start drilling for oil out in the ocean, near seismicially active subduction zones and ocean trenches? You guessed it ... more earthquakes.

Since the start of offshore oil drilling just around the early 1900s up until now, there have been more than 10,000 “strong” earthquakes—with magnitudes of 6 or greater—around the world, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Between 2004 and 2014, 18 earthquakes with magnitudes of 8.0 or more rattled subduction zones around the globe. That's an increase of 265 percent over the average rate of the previous century, which saw 71 great quakes, according to a report to the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America this week in Vancouver, British Columbia.

When you look at the charts, you see earthquake frequency increasing, along with oil production and offshore drilling – imagine how much disturbance and pressure changes we are causing in oceans and deep underground, as we suck out all those reserves of oil, and inject the ground with wastewater and rock-dissolving toxic chemicals. The whole tectonically-active coast of Peru and Chile has been getting drilled for oil and gas offshore, especially in the recent 10 years. What makes this worse is that many oil and gas reserves are located close to faults, and that is where much of  the oil and gas extraction is taking place – setting off more earthquakes  … And it’s only getting worse folks … 

The whole coast of Peru, Equator, and Chile is has been zoned for oil and gas extraction, right along active tectonic plate boundaries and it is full of active oceanic faults. This western coast of South America is full of offshore drilling sites, which have been increasing activity over the past 10 years. You can just guess what that means for earthquakes …

Keep in mind that no drilling site is never fully leak-proof, and there will always be unknown incidents of ocean contamination, killing off marine life. If we look around the world and see how many fish, whales, and other sea-life are washing up ashore DEAD in the thousands, it makes you question offshore drilling. These toxic chemicals that are being released from deep underground should stay underground. They are wrecking havoc on land and in our oceans. Can you imagine what our beautiful beaches and oceans will become in the next 30 years? 

One sign for us is the BP oil spill disaster - an oil spill that has been quietly leaking millions of barrels into the Gulf of Mexico has gone unplugged for so long that it now verges on becoming one of the worst offshore disasters in U.S. history. Between 300 and 700 barrels of oil per day have been spewing from a site 12 miles off the Louisiana coast since 2004. 

Another problem is the abandoning of wells. When you break large holes into areas of pressurized ocean crust, you to deal with the problem of patching it back up. More than 27,000 abandoned oil and gas wells lurk in the hard rock beneath the Gulf of Mexico, an environmental minefield that has been ignored for decades. No one -- not industry, not government -- is checking to see if they are leaking, an Associated Press investigation shows.

The oldest of these wells were abandoned in the late 1940s, raising the prospect that many deteriorating sealing jobs are already failing. There's ample reason for worry about all permanently and temporarily abandoned wells -- history shows that they often leak. Wells are sealed underwater much as they are on land. And wells on land and in water face similar risk of failure. Plus, records reviewed by the AP show that offshore wells have failed.

Deepsea Mining

Experts predict that removing a sizeable portion of the seafloor could cause a major disturbance. Deep-sea mining may release toxic plumes of sediment from mining machinery, degrading or killing the seabed's filter-feeding organisms vital to the vent food chain. Deep-sea mining can reopen naturally closed vents and release sulfur and methane compounds toxic to surrounding ecosystems. Some predict the mining could cause sub oceanic landslides, while others fear the equipment will produce enough noise and vibration in the floor-to-surface water column to disrupt the lives of marine mammals that live there. As conservationist Charles Clover said, "The potential for conflict between commerce and conservation is huge."

Fracking the Amazon

Look at the oil spilled in the world's 2nd 'Best Place for Wildlife'

Since 2016, more than 20,000 barrels of petroleum have spilled from the critical Peruvian oil pipeline, and 5,600 barrels have sprung leaks because of corrosion or operative failures ... this is only reported incidents.  

Well over half of the Peruvian Amazon is Leased for Petroleum Development. “These include American companies Occidental, ConocoPhillips, Barrett, Harken, Hunt, and Amareda Hess.” In addition, Pluspetrol of Argentina, Petrobras of Brazil, Repsol of Spain, Petrolifera of Canada, and Sipet and CNPC of China are all operating multiple concessions. Most new oil concession contracts establish a seven year exploration phase consisting of seismic studies and the drilling of several exploratory wells in remote jungle areas. 

The hydrocarbon industry's push into the Tropical Andes and Amazon, along with oil spills and environmental damage, is something that that is rarely mentioned in the media. Media attention has turned on crop, logging and cattle threats to the Brazilian Amazon. But recent oil and gas finds are turning the eastern slopes of the Andes Mountains and the adjacent Amazonian lowlands of Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia into a hydrocarbon hotspot.

In Peru and Ecuador, where biodiversity levels peak and activists say Big Oil has penetrated public institutions, the problem is especially concerning: Over half of Peru's pristine rainforests are now being explored for oil and gas, and they are not alone, as other countries nearby are experiencing the same problems.  

Look at the oil spilled in the world's 2nd 'Best Place for Wildlife'. Decades of exploration and exploitation has led to severe contamination in the Pacaya Samiria National Reserve in Peru’s Amazon. “Pacaya-Samiria”, as it’s dubbed, extends for just over two million hectares and is the second largest of Peru’s 170 “protected natural areas.” “Located near the Amazon headwaters in Peru,” “the reserve is home to some of the biggest wildlife populations in the Amazon.” Pacaya-Samiria is “by far the largest fisheries reproduction area in western Amazonia”.

However, don’t be misled by Pacaya-Samiria’s “protected natural area” status. Oil companies have been there for decades, and have now actively been fracking. Major operations are in the north-central part of the reserve which forms part of a concession called Lot 8, one of the top four most productive oil concessions in the country. In the 1970s, it was Peru’s own Petroperu working there, but since 1996 it has been Pluspetrol, initially leading a consortium but since 2003 partnered by the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC). Lot 8 is known to produce more than 5,000 barrels of crude oil per day. 1 barrel of oil is about 160 L. 5000 barrels is nearly 800,000 L per day. Back in April, 2019, at Lot 8, 200 demonstrators attacked Pluspetrol's oil operation.

Roughly 10 years ago, Lot 164 and 154 on the outskirts of the southern side of Pacaya Samiria was purchased by Talisman from the government to conduct oil and gas operations. Currently, Talisman owns Lot 103, to the south west; and Gran Tierra owns lot 95 to the south east.

Pluspetrol also operates in the Marañón basin, in the Peruvian Amazon, Lote 1AB in Andoas and Lote 8, where the largest oil production in Peru is located, which represents a formidable logistical challenge due to its remote and semi-isolated location. It can only be reached by plane to Alfredo Bauer Airport, a small regional airport or by barge sailing the Amazonian rivers

In 2013, following the establishment of a government Cross-sector Commission the year before, several ministries entered Pacaya-Samiria to test the water, soil and sediment as part of a wider investigation of the Maranon basin and other rivers in Peru’s northern Amazon. The results were released in January 2014 and led to the Environment Ministry declaring 221,000 hectares of the Maranon basin - including most of the Lot 8 area in Pacaya-Samiria - to be an “environmental emergency” zone.

In November 2015 researchers from the Autonomous University of Barcelona, the Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies, and the Erasmus University Rotterdam released a report on contamination in Pacaya-Samiria. Based on a survey of 73 technical reports by public and private institutions analysing 420 water samples and 145 soil samples in the reserve, the report found that concentrations of lead, arsenic, nickel and cadmium in the water exceed legal limits, and also found evidence of contamination by TPHs and oils, which are unregulated. In addition, it found levels of TPHs, barium and lead in the soil exceeding legal limits - with the worst-hit zones near the centre of oil operations in the reserve, called “Bateria 3”, and along the pipeline running north to the River Maranon.

The researchers stated that in recent years Pluspetrol began to “reinject” its toxic production waters into the ground rather than dumping them into the reserve’s rivers, but claimed that “contamination connected to oil activities” has continued.

In the North Peruvian province of Loreto is home to both the Peruvian Amazon and 27 Indigenous tribes that have coexisted with and relied on the rainforest for centuries. However in the seventies, whilst the world was watching the Vietnam war, a small company called Apple was founded, and an ambitious new film series set in a galaxy far away was released, oil extraction moved into the Peruvian Amazon and grew to produce approximately 30% the Peruvian GDP. Since then, several oil corporations have been active in the region, companies such as OXY, Pluspetrol, China National Petroleum Corporation, and Petroperú, all participating in a relay race of dirty legacies.

Conclusion

We mustn’t tolerate the dangerous and literally earth-shattering effects of fracking any longer. The oil and gas industry has already shown its willingness to put profits over the health and safety of the people living in affected communities. And unless we stop fracking and keep fossil fuels in the ground right now, cities around the world can count on more environmental problems, less clean water, and likely worse, earthquakes.

If this fracking madness doesn't stop, pretty soon we'll be saying goodbye to our clean water reserves.

“There’s been no doubt in my mind what’s causing these earthquakes,” “Sadly, it’s really taken a long time for people to come around. Our lives are being placed at risk. Our homes are being broken. Our forests are being destroyed, our water contaminated, and our land poisoned, all in the name of economy, petrodollars, and the World Bank – to feed oil and gas giants.

Sources:

http://adventuresportsjournal.com/does-oil-drilling-cause-sinkholes-or-earthquakes/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/earthquakes-triggered-by-fracking

https://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/2010/07/27000_abandoned_oil_and_gas_we.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-14-year-long-oil-spill-in-the-gulf-of-mexico-verges-on-becoming-one-of-the-worst-in-us-history/2018/10/20/f9a66fd0-9045-11e8-bcd5-9d911c784c38_story.html?utm_term=.47e4f9d9503d

http://www.alertdiver.com/Hydrothermal_Vents

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/worldwide-surge-great-earthquakes-seen-past-10-years-n233661

https://www.citylab.com/environment/2015/10/mapping-100-years-of-earthquakes-in-3d/409894/

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/oil-drilling-may-have-caused-some-20th-century-quakes-la-180960986/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/drilling-for-earthquakes/?redirect=1

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/23/oil-gas-drilling-triggers-man-made-earthquakes-usgs

https://gestion.pe/economia/operaciones-petrotal-afectadas-sismo-alto-amazonas-268242

http://petrotal-corp.com/petrotal-announces-first-quarter-financial-results-and-operations-update/

https://desdeadentro.pe/main/al-dia/inicia-explotacion-en-lote-95

https://elcomercio.pe/peru/loreto/entregan-ayuda-damnificados-derrame-petroleo-loreto-noticia-615346

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/27/scientists-certain-that-drilling-is-causing-earthquakes.html

https://cosmosmagazine.com/geoscience/man-made-earthquakes-cause-seismic-rumblings

http://www.villageearth.org/global-affiliate-network/half-the-peruvian-amazon-leased-for-petroleum-development/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-peru-oil-spill-idUSKCN1NX2LK

https://pulitzercenter.org/projects/south-america/perus-petroleum-play-amazon-oil-and-politics

Monthly reports:
https://www.perupetro.com.pe/wps/portal/corporativo/PerupetroSite/prensa/informe%20mensual%20detallado%20de%20actividades/!ut/p/z1/04_Sj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMAfIjo8zi_YxcTTw8TAy93AN8LQwCTUJcvEKADC8PQ_1wsAIDHMDRQD8Kt_5AIzOofjwWROE3Plw_ipASL_2o9Jz8JIhvHPOSjC3S9aOKUtNSi1KL9EqLgMIZJSUFxVaqBqoG5eXleun5-ek5qXrJ-bmqBti0ZOQXl-hHoKrUL8gNjTDQjUqqLHdUBACkDz7G/dz/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/andes-to-the-amazon/2016/jan/14/look-at-the-oil-spilled-in-the-worlds-2nd-best-place-for-wildlife

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1132208/earthquake-peru-today-latest-update-USGS-magnitude-8-tsunami-warning-centre-lacunas

https://gestion.pe/economia/lote-8-200-manifestantes-atacaron-operacion-petrolera-pluspetrol-264387

https://eos.org/research-spotlights/more-earthquakes-may-be-the-result-of-fracking-than-we-thought

https://planetsave.com/2016/10/16/largest-earthquake-kansas-caused-fracking/

https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/news/how-fracking-caused-oklahomas-biggest-earthquake-ever

http://www.marcotradenews.com/noticias/pluspetrol-extrae-petroleo-de-zonas-selvaticas-con-tecnicas-off-shore-61058

The Hidden Costs and Dangers of Fossil Fuels

The true costs of coal, natural gas, and other fossil fuels aren’t always obvious—but their impacts can be disastrous.

We’ve all paid a utility bill or purchased gasoline. Those represent the direct costs of fossil fuels; money paid out of pocket for energy from coal, natural gas, and oil.

But those expenses don’t reflect the total cost of fossil fuels to each of us individually or to society as a whole. Known as externalities, the hidden costs of fossil fuels aren’t represented in their market price, despite serious impacts to our health and environment.

Externalities are sometimes easy to see, such as pollution and land degradation, and sometimes less obvious, such as the costs of asthma and cancer, or the impacts of sea level rise. Many consequences are far removed from our daily lives and may only affect a minority or marginalized subset of the population.

Costs accrue at every point of the fossil fuel supply chain. Extraction processes can generate air and water pollution, and harm local communities. Transporting fuels from the mine or well can cause air pollution and lead to serious accidents and spills. When the fuels are burned, they emit toxins and global warming emissions. Even thewaste products are hazardous to public health and the environment.

Understanding these impacts is critical for evaluating the true cost of fossil fuels—and for informing our choices around the future of energy production.

Extracting fossil fuels

There are two main methods for removing fossil fuels from the ground: mining anddrilling. Mining is used to extract solid fossil fuels, such as coal, by digging, scraping, or otherwise exposing buried resources. Drilling methods help extract liquid or gaseous fossil fuels that can be forced to flow to the surface, such as conventional oil and natural gas. Both processes carry serious health and environmental impacts.

Coal mining

Over the past several decades, there has been a gradual shift from underground coal mining to surface mining in the United States. Surface mining, which is only effective for shallow deposits, often employs highly invasive techniques, including area strip mining and mountaintop removal.

Underground mining

The most obvious and severe cost of underground coal mining is the threat it poses to the health and safety of coal miners. Many coal miners are injured, sometimes fatally, on the job each year; according to the Mine Safety and Health Administration, fatalities at underground coal mine sites in the United States totaled 77 from 2010 to 2013, including a 2010 explosion at the Upper Big Branch coal mine in West Virginia that killed 29 miners [1, 2].

In addition to job site accidents, coal mining can lead to chronic health disorders. Black lung disease (pneumoconiosis) continues to be a common ailment among coal miners. The disease was responsible for the deaths of approximately 10,000 former miners between 1990 and 2000, and continues today [3].

Adverse impacts to the environment are another significant cost of underground coal mining. Mines can collapse or gradually subside, affecting surface and subsurface water flows. Mine fires also occur, particularly in abandoned mines. And acid mine drainage at underground coal mines can be a long term environmental management issue; according to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), if active and abandoned coal mines are not properly managed, water can sometimes flow through the mine and become highly acidic and rich in heavy metals. The resulting drainage water is detrimental to human, plant, and animal life [4].

Surface mining

Surface mining involves removing the overlaying soil to access the coal below, devastating local environments. Mountaintop removal, a particularly destructive form of surface mining, involves stripping all trees and other vegetation from peaks and hilltops, and then blasting away hundreds of feet of the earth below with explosives.

More than 500 mountaintop removal sites exist throughout the Appalachia region, impacting nearly 1.4 million acres of land [5].

The process results in both short- and long-term environmental impacts. In the short term, huge volumes of excess rock and soil are typically dumped into adjacent valleys and streams, altering their ecosystems and diverting the natural flow of streams.

In the long term, coal removal sites are left with poor soil that typically only supports exotic grasses. Buried valleys are similarly slow to rebound. The EPA reports that as of 2010, mountaintop removal coal extraction had buried nearly 2,000 miles of Appalachian headwater streams, some of the most biologically diverse streams in the country [6].

Surface mining can also directly impact the health and safety of surrounding communities. Mudslides, landslides, and flashfloods may become more common. And depending on the chemical makeup of the coal deposit, mines can pollute local drinking water sources with toxic chemicals like selenium, arsenic, manganese, lead, iron, and hydrogen sulfide [7].

A Harvard University study, which assessed the life cycle costs and public health effects of coal from 1997 to 2005, found a link to lung, cardiovascular, and kidney diseases—such as diabetes and hypertension—and an elevated occurrence of low birth rate and preterm births associated with surface mining practices. The total cost? An estimated $74.6 billion every year, equivalent to4.36 cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity produced—about one-third of the average electricity rate for a typical US home [8].

Oil and gas drilling

The environmental and health costs of onshore and offshore oil and gas drilling are also significant, and often unseen. The impacts of unconventional extraction methods, such as natural gas hydraulic fracturing (commonly called fracking) have received much attention, but all methods of oil and gas extraction carry hidden costs.

Water impact

When oil and gas are extracted, water that had been trapped in the geologic formation is brought to the surface. This “produced water” can carry with it naturally-occurring dissolved solids, heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and radioactive materials in concentrations that make it unsuitable for human consumption and difficult to dispose of safely [9].

When hydraulic fracturing methods are used, the total amount of waste water is amplified by the large volume of water and chemicals involved in the process. Drilling and fracking shale gas formations (like the Marcellus Shale) typically requires 3 to 6 million gallons of water per well, and an additional 15,000-60,000 gallons of chemicals, many of which are undisclosed to Federal regulators [10, 11]. One government-sponsored report found that, from 2005 to 2009, 14 oil and gas companies used 780 million gallons of hydraulic fracturing products containing 750 chemicals and other components [12]. Another study identified 632 chemicals contained in fracking products used in shale gas extraction.

Researchers could track only 353 chemicals from that larger list and found that 25 percent of those chemicals cause cancer or other mutations, and about half could severely damage neurological, cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune systems [13].

Land use

A large amount of land is disturbed by the drilling wells, access roads, processing facilities, and pipelines associated with oil and gas drilling operations. In particular, noise and habitat fragmentation can harm wildlife populations. For example: one study found an 82 percent decline in the population of Powder River Basin sage grouse between 2001 and 2005, which was directly linked to the area’s coal bed methane production [14].

The advent of horizontal drilling technology, used extensively in unconventional gas production, has greatly reduced the surface footprint of drilling operations by allowing multiple wells to be drilled from a single well pad. However, much of the development of the US shale gas resources is occurring in locations where oil and gas production has not previously taken place (in some cases in wilderness areas), requiring extensive infrastructure development and land degradation [15].

Global warming emissions

Natural gas’s climate emissions are not only generated when it’s burned as a fuel at power plants or in our homes. The full global warming impact of natural gas also includes methane emissions from drilling wells and pipeline transportation.

Methane, the main component of natural gas, is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide—some 34 times more effective at trapping heat over a 100-year timescale and 86 times more effective over a 20-year timescale [16]. Preliminary studies and field measurements show that these so-called “fugitive” emissions range from 1 to 9 percent of total natural gas lifecycle emissions. Methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal [17].

Oil drilling can also produce methane. Although it can be captured and used as an energy source, the gas is often either vented (released) or flared (burned). Vented methane contributes greatly to global warming, and poses a serious safety hazard. Flaring the gas converts it from methane to carbon dioxide, which reduces its impact but still releases additional greenhouse gases to into the atmosphere. The World Bank estimates that 5.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, the equivalent of 25 percent of total US consumption, is flared annually worldwide, generating some 400 million tons of unnecessary carbon dioxide emissions [18].

Offshore drilling

Offshore oil and gas drilling poses many of the same risks as onshore drilling; however, these risks are amplified due to the remote location of offshore drilling sites and the complicated engineering required. In 2010, an explosion at the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico killed 11 workers and led to the release of approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil over 87 days [19]. The accident was unique in terms of its scale, but environmental and safety incidents are common in the offshore oil and gas industries. Between 2008 and 2012, offshore drilling rigs experienced 34 fatalities, 1,436 injuries, and 60 oils spills of more than 50 barrels each [20].

Unconventional sources

As easily-accessed sources of oil dry up, so-called “new” sources of oil are introducing new problems. For example, tar sands—an extremely viscous oil with the consistency of peanut butter—requires significantly more energy to mine and refine, emitting up to three times more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil in the process. These and other additional emissions mean that the dirtiest sources of oil can add as much as an extra ton of pollution per year for the average car.

Transporting fossil fuels

Depending on where fossil fuels are extracted and used, the resource itself may need to travel across long distances—but transporting fuel can generate its own pollution, and increase the potential for catastrophic accidents.

Coal

In most cases, coal is transported from mines to power plants. In 2014, approximately 68 percent of the coal used for electric power in the US was transported by rail: 13 percent was transported on river barge and another 11 percent by truck [21]. Train cars, barges, and trucks all run on diesel fuel, a major source of nitrogen dioxide and soot, which carry substantial human health risks [22]. Transporting coal can also produce coal dust, which presents serious cardiovascular and respiratory risks for communities near transportation routes [23].

Natural gas

Natural gas is transported over long distances by transmission pipelines, while distribution pipelines deliver gas locally to homes and businesses. But natural gas is also highly flammable, making the process of transporting it from wellhead to homes and businesses dangerous. Between 2008 and 2015, there were 5,065 significant safety incidents related to natural gas pipeline transmission and distribution, leading to 108 fatalities and 531 injuries [24].

In addition to safety concerns, natural gas leaks from transmission and distribution pipelines are a significant source of methane emissions. A recent study, which mapped urban pipeline leaks in Boston, found 3,356 separate leaks under the city streets. The study noted that Boston is not unique; other cities, like New York and Washington DC, have aging natural gas distribution infrastructures, and similar methane leaks are likely widespread [25].

Large leaks from natural gas infrastructure also occur. Beginning in 2015, the Southern California Gas Company's Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility was the site of the largest methane leak in US history, with a total of 94,500 tons of methane was released between October 23, 2015 and February 11, 2016 [26, 27].

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is natural gas that has been cooled and condensed into a liquid form. As of 2016, there were 13 LNG import/export terminals in the United States [28]. The growth in LNG shipments has provoked safety concerns, particularly where LNG terminals are situated near densely settled areas. In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, LNG deliveries have faced tight security and stricter regulations as policy makers have debated the risks of an attack on LNG facilities or ships [29].

Oil

Oil is transported across the ocean in supertankers, and it is moved over land by pipeline, rail, and truck. In every case, the risk of oil spills poses a serious environmental threat.

The infamous 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill released 262,000 barrels of oil into the Prince Williams Sound in Alaska, but was only the 35th largest marine oil tanker spill since 1967. While major oil spills have decreased, they still occur: three large oil spills released more than 5,000 barrels of oil each in 2013 alone [30, 31].

Spills and leaks from onshore oil pipelines also continue to be a major risk. Examples of recent pipeline spills in the US include the 2010 Enbridge spill that released approximately 20,100 barrels into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River and the 2011 ExxonMobil spill that released some 1,000 barrels of oil into Montana’s Yellowstone River [32, 33].

Burning fossil fuels

Some of the most significant hidden costs of fossil fuels are from the air emissions that occur when they are burned. Unlike the extraction and transport stages, in which coal, oil, and natural gas can have very different types of impacts, all fossil fuels emit carbon dioxide and other harmful air pollutants when burned. These emissions lead to a wide variety of public health and environmental costs that are borne at the local, regional, national, and global levels.

Global warming emissions

Of the many environmental and public health risks associated with burning fossil fuels, the most serious in terms of its universal and potentially irreversible consequences is global warming. In 2014, approximately 78 percent of US global warming emissions were energy-related emissions of carbon dioxide. Of this, approximately 42 percent was from oil and other liquids, 32 percent from coal, and 27 percent from natural gas [34].

Non-fossil fuel energy generation technologies, like wind, solar, and geothermal, contributed less than 1 percent of the total energy related global warming emissions. Even when considering the full lifecycle carbon emissions of all energy sources, coal, oil, and natural gas clearly stand out with significantly higher greenhouse gas emissions [35].

The use of fossil fuels in transportation contributes almost 30 percent of all US global warming emissions, rivalling—and likely to surpass—the power sector [36].

Air pollution

Burning fossil fuels emits a number of air pollutants that are harmful to both the environment and public health.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions, primarily the result of burning coal, contribute to acid rain and the formation of harmful particulate matter. In addition, SO2 emissions can exacerbate respiratory ailments, including asthma, nasal congestion, and pulmonary inflammation [37]. In 2014, fossil fuel combustion at power plants accounted for 64 percent of US SO2 emissions [38].

Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions, a byproduct of all fossil fuel combustion, contribute to acid rain and ground-level ozone (smog), which can burn lung tissue and can make people more susceptible to asthma, bronchitis, and other chronic respiratory diseases. Fossil fuel-powered transportation is the primary contributor to US NOx emissions [39].

Acid rain is formed when sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides mix with water, oxygen, and other chemicals in the atmosphere, leading to rain and other precipitation that is mildly acidic. Acidic precipitation increases the acidity of lakes and streams, which can be harmful to fish and other aquatic organisms. It can also damage trees and weaken forest ecosystems [40].

Particulate matter (soot) emissions produce haze and can cause chronic bronchitis, aggravated asthma, and elevated occurrence of premature death. In 2010, it is estimated that fine particle pollution from US coal plants resulted in 13,200 deaths, 9,700 hospitalizations, and 20,000 heart attacks. The impacts are particularly severe among the young, the elderly, and those who suffer from respiratory disease. The total health cost was estimated to be more than $100 billion per year [41].

Coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury emissions to the air in the United States [42, 43]. As airborne mercury settles onto the ground, it washes into bodies of water where it accumulates in fish, and subsequently passes through the food chain to birds and other animals. The consumption of mercury-laden fish by pregnant women has been associated with neurological and neurobehavioral effects in infants. Young children are also at risk [44].

A number of studies have sought to quantify the health costs associated with fossil fuel-related air pollution. The National Academy of Sciences assessed the costs of SO2, NOx, and particulate matter air pollution from coal and reported an annual cost of $62 billion for 2005 —approximately 3.2 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) [45]. A separate study estimated that the pollution costs from coal combustion, including the effects of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and ozone, was approximately $187 billion annually, or 9.3 cents per kWh [46].

A 2013 study also assessed the economic impacts of fossil fuel use, including illnesses, premature mortality, workdays lost, and direct costs to the healthcare system associated with emissions of particulates, NOx, and SO2. This study found an average economic cost (or “public health added cost”) of 32 cents per kWh for coal, 13 cents per kWh for oil, and 2 cents per kWh for natural gas [47]. While cost estimates vary depending on each study’s scope and assumptions, together they demonstrate the significant and real economic costs that unpriced air emissions impose on society.

Fossil fuel transportation emissions represent the largest single source of toxic air pollution in the U.S., accounting for over a third of carbon monoxide (CO) and NOx emissions.

Water use

Across the United States, the demand for electricity is colliding with the need for healthy and abundant freshwater. Nationwide, fossil fuel and nuclear power plants have been found to withdraw as much water as all farms and more than four times as much as all residences. More than 80 percent of this power plant cooling water originates in lakes and rivers, directly impacting local ecosystems and often competing with other uses, such as agriculture and recreation. As of 2008, about 20 percent of U.S. watersheds were experiencing water-supply stress. Power plants substantially contributed to the water stress in one-fifth of these watersheds [48].

Power plants that return water to nearby rivers, lakes, or the ocean can harm wildlife through what is known as “thermal pollution.” Thermal pollution occurs due to the degradation of water quality resulting from changes in water temperature. Some power plants have large impacts on the temperature of nearby water sources, particularly coal plants with once-through cooling systems. For a typical 600-megawatt once-through system, 70 to 180 billion gallons of water cycle through the power plant before being released back into a nearby source. This water is much hotter (by up to 25°F) than when the water was initially withdrawn. Because this heated water contains lower levels of dissolved oxygen, its reintroduction to aquatic ecosystems can stress native wildlife, increasing heart rates in fish and decreasing fish fertility.

Fossil fuel waste

Although fossil fuels contain large amounts of energy, they’re rarely found in a pure, unadulterated state. Instead, they are typically refined and purified into a usable form, leaving excess waste material that requires disposal. The handling and disposal of this waste results in costly environmental and community health challenges.

Coal waste

Coal is known for being a dirty fuel, not just because of its high carbon content compared with other fossil fuels but also because it contains a large amount of toxic heavy metals and other chemicals.

If the coal contains high levels of sulfur—as does most coal from the eastern US—it must be cleaned and refined before it’s burned in a power plant. This process involves crushing and washing the coal to remove waste materials. The purified coal is then transported to its final destination, leaving behind coal slurry, a watery waste that contains arsenic, mercury, chromium, cadmium, and other heavy metals. As much as 50 percent of pre-processed coal materials can end up as highly toxic waste [49].

Others harmful materials remain as excess waste when the coal is burned. After combustion, the material left behind is known as coal ash, consisting of fly ash and bottom ash. Fly ash is the material that is captured by pollution control equipment in the coal plant’s smokestacks. If the plant does not have pollution control equipment, this waste is emitted directly as air pollution. Bottom ash is the substance that remains at the bottom of the furnace. Both fly ash and bottom ash contain large amounts of toxic heavy metals and require careful—and costly—disposal.

Coal slurry (pre-combustion waste) and coal ash (post-combustion waste) are stored in large reservoir impoundments. There are over a thousand coal slurry impoundments and coal ash waste sites in the US, many of which contain hundreds of millions of gallons of waste [50, 51].

If the reservoirs are unlined (as are at least 42 percent of US coal combustion waste ponds and landfills) or if lined reservoirs are not properly maintained, harmful chemicals can leach into surface and groundwater supplies. The presence of toxic heavy metals in drinking water has been found to cause cancer, birth defects, reproductive disorders, neurological damage, learning disabilities, and kidney disease [52].

The EPA has identified 53 coal ash ponds that are classified as a “high hazard”, meaning that a failure at one of these impoundments would cause serious property damage, injuries, illness, and death [53]. Over the last several decades, there have been several dozen spills at such reservoirs in Appalachia, including the 2000 Martin County Coal Company spill, the 2008 Tennessee Valley Authority spill, and the 2014 Duke Energy Dan River Spill [54].

Oil and gas wastewater

When oil and gas are extracted, water previously trapped within geologic formations is brought to the surface. This “produced water” can carry with it dissolved solids, heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and naturally occurring radioactive materials in quantities that make it unsuitable for human consumption and difficult to dispose of safely [55]. Extraction companies often temporarily store this water in open-air pits with impermeable liners to avoid seepage, but heavy rain can cause these pits to overflow. Covered holding tanks offer a more secure temporary storage option [56].

Oil and gas wastewater can also impact aquatic wildlife. Oil and grease leaked into water systems can adhere to fish and waterfowl and destroy algae and plankton, disrupting the primary food sources of fragile aquatic ecosystems. And heavy metals in the wastewater can be toxic to fish, even in low concentrations, and may be passed through the food chain, adversely affecting humans and larger animals [57].

The future of energy

Burning coal, oil, and natural gas has serious and long-standing negative impacts on public health, local communities and ecosystems, and the global climate. Yet the majority of fossil fuel impacts are far removed from the fuels and electricity we purchase, hidden within public and private health expenditures, military budgets, emergency relief funds, and the degradation of sensitive ecosystems. We don’t pay for the cost of cancer, or the loss of fragile wetlands, when we pay our electricity bill—but the costs are real.

Renewable energy—such as wind and solar power—carries far fewer negative impacts at increasingly competitive prices. The Union of Concerned Scientists has worked for decades on transforming the electricity and transportation sectors, and is committed to policies and practices that encourage clean energy.

Source: https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/hidden-cost-of-fossils#.Wx86LdQrLiw