Greens pounce on research linking drilling to quakes

Green groups and lawmakers are seizing on new government research linking earthquakes to oil and gas drilling as evidence of the need for tougher federal regulations.

States are currently responsible for oversight of most drilling and hydraulic fracturing in the United States, though environmentalists have long pushed Congress and federal agencies to impose stronger restrictions.  Their concerns about fracking have generally focused on the chemicals used in the process.

But a government report released in April raised a new issue: wells meant for disposing wastewater in oil and gas production are causing small earthquakes in drilling fields across the country.

“We feel there is pretty much a preponderance of evident now that these earthquakes in Kansas and Oklahoma and Texas, Colorado, are being triggered by this wastewater injection,” said Bill Leith, the senior science adviser for earthquake hazards at the United States Geological Survey.

Oklahoma put out a statement of its own, acknowledging that the hundreds of quakes it’s experienced over the last few years can be tied to its oil and gas operations.

The new research is tied to traditional oil and gas drilling, but it raised a red flag for those opposed to fracking, a process by which liquids are injected at high-pressure into the ground to release oil and gas.

Food and Water Watch is releasing a report of its own on fracking-induced earthquakes next week and Emily Wurth, the group’s water program director, said the new research “has kind of really become conclusive and it does call for some kind of larger action at the federal level.”

At least for now, that doesn’t look likely to happen. The Environmental Protection Agency sets what Leith called a “foundational level” of regulations on disposal wells but it delegates most of the enforcement to the states. The EPA released new disposal well placement guidelines in February, but at an event last week, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy brushed off a question about whether the earthquake report would lead to any new federal oversight.

“I was pretty proud of Oklahoma, standing up and recognizing the challenge,” she said. “They have some excellent people working in that state, and they’re prepared for this challenge, as are we. I think they have every reason to be able to address this challenge themselves.”

But pro-environment lawmakers on Capitol Hill said federal regulators should do more.

“This would be, certainly, a new issue of concern that should make them reopen some of the conversations,” said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), who said members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus had recently met with Obama administration officials and pushed them on fracking issues.

Oil and gas operations are exempt from provisions in certain laws, including one that deals with the disposal of toxic chemicals. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-N.M.) said he’s writing a bill to close those exemptions.

“Setting a benchmark, nothing wrong with that,” he said. “It’s not about more regulation, it’s about the carve-outs and the lack of capacity on the part of states to monitor, evaluate, control and prevent some of those things.”

Regulations at the state level are a patchwork of different standards. Arkansas, for example, put a moratorium on disposal wells in an area that saw earthquake activity in 2010-11. It included seismic activity standards in its disposal well permitting process in 2012.

In Texas, operators applying for new disposal wells need to search a database of seismic activity to see if there is a history of earthquakes around a well site. Regulators there have the right to shut down a well if they determine it contributed to seismic activity.

Last year, after a fracking-related earthquake, Ohio instituted new regulations requiring seismic monitors at injection wells or fracking sites linked to earthquakes over magnitude 2.0. Any further quake there over magnitude 1.0 leads to a well shutdown and inspection.

The state also requires monitors on any new drilling near fault lines or areas of seismic activity.

“We have had multiple instances where they’ve proven useful, but we’ve also been very proactive about it,” said Eric Heis, a spokesman for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

Heis said oil and gas companies have generally accepted the regulations, even installing several seismic monitors of their own to feed information to the state.

After the USGS report came out last week, the American Petroleum Institute said, “experts in our industry contributed to this report, and we support continuous efforts to study any new geological data that can be used to manage risk factors related to seismicity.”

Amy Mall, a senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said it’s usually easier for states to update their regulations than for the federal government, given their proximity to the drilling set-ups. But she said, “they still haven’t gone far enough” to strengthen their standards.

“That doesn’t mean that federal action is not vitally crucial, because there are loopholes in numerous federal environmental laws that should be closed,” she said. “The federal laws should be the backstop, wherever you are in the country.”

Any new law is unlikely this Congress. Republicans are comfortable with giving states the lead role in regulating their own oil and gas operations.

“Experts with knowledge of regional geology are best suited to minimize any potential risks,” said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), the chairman of the House Science Committee. “States have demonstrated that they have the expertise and track record to successfully administer federal regulations on their own.”

 “If you’re talking about more regulation from the federal government? Overreach. They’ll screw it up,” House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) added. “But do the states need to do that? Yeah, they do. Do they need to make sure they are dealing with fault lines? Yeah, they are. But they can easily handle it.”