Carroll writes: "The practice has been criticized in the state, which is suffering from a drought so severe that Governor Jerry Brown announced the first-ever mandatory 25 percent statewide reduction in water use on Wednesday."
A pump jack in a field being developed for drilling next to a farm near Lost Hills, California. (photo: David McNew/Getty Images)
As Drought Deepens, California Sees Millions of Gallons of Water Used for Fracking
05 April 15
Amounts of water used in fracking vary according to well type and geographic location. However, an overwhelming amount of data indicates that the figures for the amount of water used in California may be above the 100,000 gallons stated in this article. Estimates given by Steven Bohlen, the state oil and gas supervisor at the California Department of Conservation, regarding the average amount of water used per fracked well contradict national data from the federal government, which reports�averages of approximately 2 to 4 million gallons of water�used per well for shale fracking. A 2013 Ceres report also gave a�higher figure for California wells. JA/RSN
alifornia oil producers used 214 acre-feet of water, equivalent to nearly 70 million gallons, in the process of fracking for oil and gas in the state last year, less than previously projected, state officials told Reuters on Thursday.
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, occurs when water and some chemicals are injected deep underground at high pressure to break up rock and release oil and gas into wells.
The practice has been criticized in the state, which is suffering from a drought so severe that Governor Jerry Brown announced the first-ever mandatory 25 percent statewide reduction in water use on Wednesday.
�Hydraulic fracturing uses a relatively small amount of water � the equivalent of 514 households annually,� said Steven Bohlen, the state oil and gas supervisor.
About 100,000 gallons of water is used on average, he said.
Previous industry estimates said that fracking used about 100 million gallons of water in California a year.
Bohlen said that not all of the water used for fracking is fresh water. Some portion of it is �produced� water, or water that comes to the surface during oil drilling that is not suitable for drinking or agricultural use.
The industry brought 387,000 acre-feet of produced water to the surface last year, Bohlen said. Of that, two-thirds was put back into the aquifers from which it came or was used to produce more oil through drilling techniques including steam flooding and cyclic steam injection.
The remaining third was put into underground injection, evaporated in surface ponds, or cleaned up for beneficial use, he said.
About 25,000 acre-feet of produced water is used for beneficial use in the San Ardo, Cawelo, and Arvin water districts, he said.
A law passed last year requires oil producers to report the sources of water used in all oil and gas extraction as well as where the water goes.
The first data report is due April 31 and will be made public soon after, Bohlen said.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
As to the alleged "value" of certain information, that is irrelevant. The point is not that someone "could" (allegedly) have sold the information in question. The point is that Bradley Manning did nothing of the sort.
The covering up of war crimes is itself a crime. The Bradley Manning court martial is itself a crime.
Not ruling on Manning's guilt or innocence at the moment, it is clear that the military establishment itself is profoundly guilty, and that no judgment by this court can be legitimate in the slightest.
We could start referring to Manning, with Wikileaks, Assange, Snowden and other courageous whistle blowers who will emerge to shine the unwelcome light of truth on the Military-Corpor ate state with it's decades-long violations of human rights and dignity, collectively as the "New White Rose" and their judge(s) as "Friesler the Latter"!
Spread it around folks.
clip Someone attending a pre-trial hearing recorded a plea statement Manning made accepting responsibility for 10 of the 22 charges against him. Lind registered her strong displeasure with that action, a violation of courtroom rules, but did not significantly alter security procedures.
Don't know what else to do. It feels feeble, but I am so let down by the official bias against whistle-blowers / whistle-blowing . I agree with Snowden's father that Attorney General Holder's promising that Snowden wouldn't get the death penalty and wouldn't be tortured if he returns to the U.S. - already shows bias and assumption of guilt. As Snowden's Dad said, Holder should have been voicing "rule of law," and "trial by peers," etc. "Presumption of innocence until proven guilty." Why is Holder so uninformed as to go with the bias he shows? Have we no adults left on the scene? Well, young adults Manning and Snowden certainly earn "adult" label. They've voluntarily put themselves into the scene.
--- umm, is Bradley Manning being charged with releasing for free information that could have been sold (by whom) to a foreign intelligence service? Or, is he charged with releasing for free information which would save the foreign intelligence $1.9 million to acquire via their own efforts? Or, is he charged with releasing for free information that the foreign intelligence could then use to save itself $1.9 million in military efforts? What is the crime and what does the dollar value of the information refer to? How does it relate to the safety of American citizens or residents of the United States? It has never been clear what danger Bradley Manning's releases ever posed to the safety of our country, of our citizens, or of the residents of this United States.
Aye, only to those who are the real traitors, finks and nepotists. Wonder if he's had any information through his hands about the Iraq "missing billions"?
I'll bet my kilted toosh that KBR/Haliburton/ Cheyn-gang/Dimw its/Blair want him shut up!