Contemporary Authors

• The Fracking Debate: The Risks, Benefits, and Uncertainties of the Shale Revolution Columbia University Press (New York, NY), 2017

1. The fracking debate : the risks, benefits, and uncertainties of the shale revolution LCCN 2017024122 Type of material Book Personal name Raimi, Daniel, author. Main title The fracking debate : the risks, benefits, and uncertainties of the shale revolution / Daniel Raimi. Published/Produced New York : Columbia University Press, [2017] Projected pub date 1712 Description pages cm ISBN 9780231184861 (cloth : alk. paper)

• Resources for the Future Website - http://www.rff.org/people/profile/daniel-raimi

  Daniel Raimi
  Senior Research Associate
  202.328.5036 raimi@rff.org
  Download CV
  Topics of Interest
  Climate Change Energy and Electricity Environmental Economics Topics Water Cap and Trade Carbon Tax Electricity Markets and Regulation Groundwater Natural Gas Oil Policy Instruments and Evaluation Shale Gas Water Quality
  Daniel Raimi works on a range of energy policy issues with a focus on oil and gas systems, natural resource taxation, electricity systems, and climate change. He is particularly interested in the long-term implications of domestic oil and gas development for local communities, state governments, and federal climate policy. Between 2012 and 2015, he visited every major onshore oil and gas play in the United States, and in 2017 will publish a book based on those travels that examines key oil and gas policy issues.
  Raimi received his master’s degree in public policy from Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and his bachelor’s degree in music from Wesleyan University. He has published in academic journals including Science, Environmental Science and Technology, and the Journal of Economic Perspectives; popular outlets including the New Republic, Newsweek, and Fortune; and presented his research for policymakers, industry, and other stakeholders around the United States and internationally.
  Raimi is in RFF’s Energy and Climate Program.
  Education
  Master of public policy, Duke University, 2012
  BA in music, Wesleyan University, 2003

  CV: http://www.rff.org/files/profiles/cv/RFF_CV_Raimi.pdf

• Energy Institute, University of Michigan Website - http://energy.umich.edu/faculty/daniel-raimi

  Daniel Raimi

  Senior Research Associate, Resources for the Future
  Lecturer
  Ford School for Public Policy
  (734) 615-9060
  draimi@umich.edu
  (link sends e-mail)
  Ford School of Public Policy Profile
  Disciplines:
  Energy Policy, Policy and Social Impact
  Biography:
  Daniel Raimi is a Senior Research Associate for Resources for the Future
  (link is external)
  and a lecturer at the Ford School for Public Policy. He works on a range of energy policy issues with a focus on oil and gas systems, natural resource taxation, electricity systems, and climate change. He is particularly interested in the long-term implications of domestic oil and gas development for local communities, state governments, and federal climate policy. Between 2012 and 2015, he visited every major onshore oil and gas play in the United States, and in Fall 2017 will publish a book based on those travels that examines key oil and gas policy issues.
  Raimi received his master’s degree in public policy from Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and his bachelor’s degree in music from Wesleyan University. He has published in academic journals including Science, Environmental Science and Technology, and the Journal of Economic Perspectives; popular outlets including the New Republic, Newsweek, and Fortune; and presented his research for policymakers, industry, and other stakeholders around the United States and internationally. Raimi joined the Energy Institute from 2015-2016, helping to organize the social sciences and policy framework of the Beyond Carbon Neutral
  (link is external)
  Project.

• Amazon -

  Daniel Raimi is a senior research associate at Resources for the Future, focusing on energy and climate policy. He also teaches energy policy at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan, and is a faculty affiliate with the University of Michigan Energy Institute. Previously, Daniel worked as a musician in New York and Los Angeles.

  He has published in academic journals including Science, Environmental Science and Technology, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Energy Policy, and Annual Review of Resource Economics, and popular outlets including Slate, Business Insider, Fortune, Newsweek, The New Republic, and more. He holds a master's degree in public policy from Duke University's Sanford School and a bachelor's in music from Wesleyan University.

• Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan Website - http://fordschool.umich.edu/news/2018/daniel-raimi-s-fracking-debate-provides-evidence-context-around-shale-revolution

  Daniel Raimi’s The Fracking Debate provides evidence, context around shale revolution
  Wednesday, February 14, 2018

  From 2013-2016, Daniel Raimi traveled to every major oil and gas producing region of the United States to investigate the local impacts of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
  The stories he gathered from those trips were the beginnings of Raimi’s first book, The Fracking Debate: The Risks, Benefits, and Uncertainties of the Shale Revolution
  (link is external)
  , which was published by Columbia University Press last month.
  In The Fracking Debate, Raimi addresses the most commonly asked questions related to fracking, laying out the mechanics, economic impacts, and environmental and health risks of the “shale revolution.” Combining detailed information with the stories he collected from across the U.S., Raimi creates “a deft, fair analysis that clarifies the issues for both the general public and concerned policymakers,” according to Kirkus Reviews
  (link is external)
  .
  “His book manages to be both in depth and comprehensive, but at the same time readable and accessible,” said Catherine Hausman, introducting Raimi at the January 24 The Fracking Debate Book Talk event at the Ford School.
  Ultimately, The Fracking Debate shows that there are few easy answers when it comes to fracking.
  “The realities are complex,” Raimi noted at the book talk. “The issues are not going to go away any time soon. And governments, companies, and citizens need good information to make decisions. What this book does . . . is provide some of that information that I hope can help improve decisions, as well as to improve your understanding, and the public’s understanding, of this extremely important topic.”

• From Publisher -

  Daniel Raimi is a senior research associate at Resources for the Future, focusing on energy and climate issues. He teaches energy policy at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan and is a faculty affiliate with the University of Michigan Energy Institute.

• The Fracking Debate Website - https://www.thefrackingdebate.com/

  Daniel Raimi is a senior research associate at Resources for the Future, focusing on energy and climate policy. He also teaches energy policy at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan, and is a faculty affiliate with the University of Michigan Energy Institute. He received his master's in public policy from Duke University and his undergraduate degree in music from Wesleyan University.
  ​
  The Fracking Debate, his first book, is published by Columbia University Press as part of the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy series. Daniel lives in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

• The Conversation - https://theconversation.com/profiles/daniel-raimi-202057

  Daniel Raimi
  4
  Articles
  10
  Comments
  Senior research associate (Resources for the Future), Lecturer (University of Michigan Ford School of Public Policy), University of Michigan
  Profile
  Articles
  Activity
  Daniel Raimi is an energy policy researcher and analyst with expertise on issues including oil and gas markets and policy, regulation of unconventional oil and gas production, state fiscal policy design for oil and gas production, the climate implications of shale gas development, and federal climate policy design. He has published in academic journals including Science, Environmental Science and Technology, Journal of Economic Perspectives, and the Annual Review of Resource Economics, and made numerous presentations for policymakers, industry and other stakeholders around the United States. He received his master’s degree in public policy from Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and his bachelor’s degree in music from Wesleyan University. Daniel teaches "Oil and Gas Policy in the United States," at the Ford School. His first book, The Fracking Debate, will be published by Columbia University Press in December, 2017.
  Experience
  –present
  Lecturer on Public Policy, University of Michigan

• Failure - http://failuremag.com/article/the-fracking-debate

  The Fracking Debate
  Daniel Raimi, author of “The Fracking Debate” on the risks, benefits and uncertainties of the shale revolution.
  Jason ZaskyApr 25, 2018

  The cover of Daniel Raimi's book, “The Fracking Debate.” Image courtesy of Daniel Raimi.

  It can be a challenge for the public to get good unbiased information about the impact of hydraulic fracturing and the rest of the oil and gas production process. If you really want to understand fracking, “think about adding the Permian basin, Utica shale, or another [oil and gas] producing region to your list of travel destinations,” begins Daniel Raimi, a senior research associate at Resources for the Future. “A few days of driving through oil and gas country, coupled with conversations across a barstool, can teach you as much as dozens of journal articles and research reports.”
  But if you can’t make oilfield visits a part of your next vacation, reading Raimi’s book “The Fracking Debate: The Risks, Benefits, and Uncertainties of the Shale Revolution” (Columbia University Press), is the next best thing. Part of the Center on Global Energy Policy Series, “The Fracking Debate” can be regarded as the definitive book about fracking and the impact of the shale revolution—a revolution that has allowed U.S. natural gas production to reach all-time highs and reinvigorated domestic oil production.
  To produce the book, Raimi conducted in-person interviews in more than twenty oil and gas producing regions around the United States, including the Eagle Ford (pronounced EE-gull-ferd) shale play in southern Texas, the Bakken region of North Dakota, and the Marcellus shale in Pennsylvania. Then he reconciled what he saw and heard with the available scholarly research. As a result, “the Fracking Debate” gives the reader a balanced and accessible look at the world of oil and gas development in the U.S., one which allows the reader to finally make sense of the issue.
  Why is fracking and oil and gas production so important? There are now hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells in the United States and tens of thousands of new wells being drilled each year. So American shale development—which has already had an effect on energy consumers worldwide by reducing the price of oil and gas—is going to be a big part of this country’s future, for better and worse.
  In the following long form Failure Interview, Raimi discusses the concerns of those who live near oil and gas fracking sites, the potential health benefits of natural gas displacing coal for electricity production, why it’s so challenging to assess the overall impact of fracking, and the feedback he has received from industry and environmentalists alike.
  What is the goal of “The Fracking Debate”?
  The goal of the book is to provide a resource that is thorough and accessible but also balanced in the way it tries to look at all of the evidence. A lot of the information one gets about oil and gas development is cherry-picked by both sides of the debate. “The Fracking Debate” incorporates all of the evidence and helps readers with where the weight of the evidence lies on each issue.
  How were you able to visit so many different oil and gas producing regions?
  I was lucky to travel to all of these places through a research project that aimed to find out how increased oil and gas development is affecting the ability of local governments to provide services and raise revenue. Local governments don’t publish a lot of information on their Web sites and it can be difficult to get hold of local government officials remotely, so the best approach is to go to them and sit down for structured interviews.
  I ended up going to twenty-one different regions in sixteen different states, a number of which I visited multiple times. Once the workday had come to a close and I was done with my interviews, I had time to go to bars and restaurants and talk to people and learn about their experiences with the oil and gas industry.
  What I tried to do is to integrate those conversations—both the formal ones and the informal ones—with reviews of the research on the topics I cover in the book. The lessons one can draw come both from bottom-up sources, the people who live in these regions, and also from the research viewpoint.
  In the book you highlight how the term fracking is often used to refer to the entire oil and gas production process, and not specifically the hydraulic fracturing aspect. Why is this distinction important?
  It’s important because from a policy perspective, if you want to design policies that reduce the risks of a given activity you have to understand what activity it is you’re concerned about. When people refer to the entire process of oil and gas production as fracking, it’s not helpful from a policy perspective because many of the most substantial risks associated with oil and gas development do not come directly from fracking. Instead, they come from other parts of the process, and I talk about those in the book.
  For instance, impacts to groundwater resources are typically not caused by hydraulic fracturing but can be caused by improper well cementing and casing. Other risks are associated with spills of wastewater at the surface or spills from the pits and ponds that store oil and gas wastewater.
  If you think about those risks as being fracking, you are not going to be able to accurately or effectively reduce the risks from those specific activities. So if you’re coming at this from a policy perspective, it’s important to understand the specific activities that cause the specific risks and then work to mitigate those risks in a more careful way.
  Why is assessing the impact of fracking—and related processes—so challenging?
  Two things come to mind. First, the application of these technologies on a large scale is relatively new. And researchers often require years—if not decades—of data to come up with reliable research results on any given topic.
  Another challenge is that oil and gas development in the shale era is taking place in regions where the impacts are somewhat new. For most of the last 150 years, oil and gas development has taken place far away from where large numbers of people lived. There are a couple of exceptions. For example, Los Angeles has been an oil producing region for a long time.
  But some of the places where the shale revolution is most pronounced—such as Fort Worth or north of Denver along the Front Range—these are places where oil and gas development is now taking place in close proximity to large numbers of people.
  So the direct impact—on drinking water sources, through air emissions associated with oil and gas development, and through other pathways—wasn’t studied in great depth because so much of the activity occurred in rural areas. But now that fracking has become a relatively hot topic there is a lot more interest and researchers are doing their best to understand the impacts.
  The most common worries about fracking seem to be associated with other parts of the process, not hydraulic fracking itself.
  That’s right. One of the first big concerns was that the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids were going to infiltrate water supplies and have major negative consequences for people living downstream or near oil and gas development.
  But over the last ten years we really have not seen any large scale contamination of water sources from hydraulic fracturing chemicals. One of the most important reasons is that hydraulic fracturing typically takes place far below the surface and it is vanishingly unlikely that the chemicals are going to migrate up to the surface and affect groundwater supplies.
  However, there are other risks to water supplies, and as you suggested they are typically not directly related to hydraulic fracturing.
  One of the most common problems with any oil and gas development concerns the integrity of wells. If there are problems with the steel and cement that constitutes a well then fluids or gases that should stay inside the well could get out and into the environment, including groundwater.
  We have hundreds of cases in Pennsylvania alone where problems with the integrity of oil and gas wells have led to accumulations of methane in groundwater. If enough of it accumulates in a water source in an enclosed location it can be an explosive hazard. There have been cases where structures—including homes—have exploded because of methane accumulation.
  What are the primary concerns of those who live near oil and gas fracking sites?
  When I spoke with people around the country and asked them what the problems were for those living around the industry, environmental health risks were rarely mentioned. That’s not to say they are not important or that they are not real, but the most common concerns expressed to me about living in or around the industry related to quality of life issues. Truck traffic in particular was a big concern of pretty much everyone I spoke with in very active regions.
  Other concerns were related to the changing character of the communities. For example, in rural North Dakota several cities in the Bakken region expanded rapidly over the last ten years because of the influx of oil and gas activity. For people who have lived in that region for a long time, they have conflicting views about that development.
  On one side of the coin, the economic benefits have been enormous and many people are very happy about the economic opportunities. At the same time, they recognize that the composition of the cities has changed quite a bit. The cities are busier, there is a lot more traffic, and there are a lot more hassles.
  What are the challenges of assessing the health risks of fracking, as well as the potential health benefits of natural gas largely displacing coal?
  There are two things to think about when it comes to health risks and health benefits of the shale revolution.
  At the local level there are health risks of living near oil and gas production. The research on this topic is still quite limited but what some of the best studies suggest is that there are health risks from living within one kilometer of an oil and gas well.
  Because the research on this topic is so new, we don’t know the specific cause of those health risks. We don’t know if the risks are primarily from air pollution or from stress. The stress of living near industrial activity might in and of itself cause negative health impacts.
  So we don’t know the mechanism of the health impacts but we know that the impacts are real. We are still trying to quantify how big they are and how close you need to be to the well to actually experience those impacts. That’s the negative side of things at the local level.
  If you zoom out to the national level there are substantial public health benefits of increased natural gas production displacing coal in the electric power sector. Coal-fired electricity emits a variety of criteria pollutants that contribute to thousands of premature deaths each year in the United States.
  Natural gas-fired electricity—as well as nuclear and renewable electricity—generally does not emit these criteria pollutants. So when natural gas, or any source of electricity, displaces coal that is a substantial health win for the population as a whole.
  The thing that is tricky is that the benefits of reduced coal-fired electricity are very diffuse; they are spread out across the country and it’s hard for people to notice their direct impact. Whereas the localized risks of oil and gas development are more apparent and tend to attract more attention.
  Do you see fracking as being good or bad in terms of climate change?
  Over the last ten years and over the next ten years or so I think the shale revolution will be a benefit in terms of climate change. The main reason for that is natural gas’s displacement of coal in the electric power sector.
  Natural gas, when used for electricity, generates about half of the carbon dioxide emissions of a similar coal-fired power plant. Over the last five years we have seen natural gas grow dramatically and we’ve seen coal decline dramatically in the electricity sector. Today we are down to 1990s levels of carbon dioxide emissions; more than any other reason that is because of the shale revolution.
  But this issue is a little more complicated than just the carbon dioxide story because there are also methane emissions. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, and when methane escapes from a well or a pipeline or from any other piece of equipment, its greenhouse gas impacts are substantially more powerful than those of carbon dioxide.
  So there has been quite a bit of research about how much methane is being emitted from oil and gas systems and whether those methane emissions are large enough to offset the benefits of natural gas’s displacement of coal. My analysis of the full body of work suggests that methane emissions from natural gas are not high enough to negate the benefits we get from coal displacement [in the short term].
  The longer term story is more complicated and over the long term I think natural gas is probably not a climate villain and probably not a climate hero when it comes to the impact on climate change. That’s because natural gas doesn’t just compete with coal in the electric power sector, it also competes with investments in wind and solar and with existing nuclear plants, all of which are potentially zero carbon.
  At the same time, the shale revolution has dramatically reduced the prices of both natural gas and oil and when prices go down people use more. And because of lower oil and natural gas prices, energy consumption is likely to increase, which would increase carbon dioxide emissions.
  When you smash all of these factors together and analyze them over the next couple decades and compare the world with the shale revolution to the world without the shale revolution, most research shows that those worlds don’t look very different in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.
  So in the short term it has been beneficial for the fight against climate change. Over the next twenty or thirty years it will only be beneficial if we enact meaningful climate change policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, not just from coal but also from natural gas, oil and other fuels.
  What are the prospects for fracking making the U.S. energy independent?
  Energy independence is a popular term that’s been around for a few decades but I don’t think it’s particularly helpful. When I hear the word independence I think about the United States not being engaged in global markets for energy trade. If that’s the goal then energy independence would do more harm than good. There is enormous value to being integrated into the global energy trading system.
  For example, the Gulf of Mexico is a major oil producing region and there are many oil refineries along the Gulf of Mexico that refine crude oil into gasoline and diesel and the other products we use every day. If a hurricane comes along—as it does every few years—and disrupts oil production in the Gulf or disrupts refineries in Houston, then the U.S. needs access to international energy markets. Or if there are disruptions in oil or natural gas pipelines it’s valuable to have access to international markets. Without access to those international markets, prices would spike far more than they already do when we have a natural disaster or unanticipated outage.
  At the same time, producers of oil and natural gas want access to the biggest markets possible. They want access to those who will pay higher prices for their products. So integrating into the international energy system is the strategy I think we want to pursue and the shale revolution has actually increased U.S. energy interdependence.
  With new oil and gas production growing rapidly, the U.S. is now exporting natural gas around the world through liquefied natural gas export terminals. We are also exporting more crude oil than we ever have before. The shale revolution has made us more integrated into the global energy market and I think that’s a good thing. Independence is not really a desirable goal.
  Could fracking turn a country or some unexpected part of the world into an oil and gas superpower?
  I don’t know if it could turn an unexpected part of the world into a superpower but it certainly could make parts of the world more important to the international energy system. North Dakota is a good example.
  In the 1990s, western North Dakota produced very little oil. Today it produces more than a million barrels of oil each day. That’s more than some OPEC counties.
  North Dakota is not Saudi Arabia or Russia or the United States as a whole, but if other counties are able to develop oil and gas from shale it certainly could make them more important players in the international energy scene. But I think it’s unlikely that we are going to see a fundamental restructuring of energy markets in other countries anytime soon.
  Having said that, the U.S. has become a more important player in terms of global energy production; we were already a large producer of oil and natural gas, but we are now quickly becoming the largest producer of oil and natural gas.
  What kind of feedback have you received from environmentalists and people in the oil and gas industries?
  I have gotten the responses that I was anticipating, which is that some in the industry and in environmental groups think that the book is really helpful and useful by providing evidence on these topics. But I have also gotten negative reactions from the extremes of those communities. Those who are vehemently anti-fracking and vehemently pro-fracking have criticized parts of the book.
  Typically the very pro-industry folks aren’t necessarily happy with my discussions about climate change or the real risks of oil and gas development on human health and water sources. At the same time, the very anti-fracking organizations are not happy with my discussion of the very real economic benefits that people experience. They are also not happy with how I characterize the impacts of the shale revolution on climate change and some other environmental risks. But these are criticisms that I expected and the response has been more positive than negative.

Raimi, Daniel: THE FRACKING DEBATE

Kirkus Reviews. (Oct. 15, 2017):
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2017 Kirkus Media LLC
http://www.kirkusreviews.com/
Full Text:
Raimi, Daniel THE FRACKING DEBATE Columbia Univ. (Adult Nonfiction) $30.00 12, 26 ISBN: 978-0-231-18486-1
An examination of the pros and cons and the unknowns of the shale revolution, bringing much-needed light to the hot topic of fracking.
Raimi (Energy Policy/Univ. of Michigan) is a research associate at Resources for the Future, an organization that focuses on natural resource and environmental issues. In his first book, the author aims to address the most important issues of the debate surrounding hydraulic fracturing, or fracking as it is commonly called, and he draws on the expertise of state regulators, environmental lawyers, leaders in the gas and oil industry, working scientists, and academics. In addition, he traveled widely around the United States, talking to people who live near fracking sites. The result is a highly readable account with straightforward explanations of what is involved in extracting oil and gas from shale. Numerous simple black-and-white charts and tables back up the narrative, and each chapter concludes with a brief summary of the issues covered. These include the mechanics of fracking, its effects on the environment and the health of those living nearby or working at a drill site, the risk of earthquakes, the effect on the economy and on climate change, and the manner in which the industry is regulated. The take-home message is that the shale revolution is here to stay and that neither proponents nor opponents have all the right answers. As Raimi makes clear, there are no easy answers to some of the complex issues involved. The final chapter gives the book a personal touch, as the author reveals the feelings of people living close to fracking sites. From his conversations with them, he concludes that they may not like the noise, dirt, traffic, and changes to their landscapes, but the money and the jobs are generally welcomed.
A deft, fair analysis that clarifies the issues for both the general public and concerned policymakers.
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"Raimi, Daniel: THE FRACKING DEBATE." Kirkus Reviews, 15 Oct. 2017. General OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A509244117/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=ITOF&xid=9ac355e3. Accessed 17 May 2018.

Gale Document Number: GALE|A509244117

"Raimi, Daniel: THE FRACKING DEBATE." Kirkus Reviews, 15 Oct. 2017. General OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A509244117/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=ITOF&xid=9ac355e3. Accessed 17 May 2018.

• Science
  http://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/2017/11/28/the-fracking-debate/
  Word count: 857

  A straightforward guide offers a nuanced look at unconventional fossil fuel extraction
  By Miriam R. Aczel 28 November, 2017

  The Fracking Debate: The Risks, Benefits, and Uncertainties of the Shale Revolution
  Daniel Raimi
  Columbia University Press
  2017
  280 pp.
  Purchase this item now
  At a time when everything from an otherwise unremarkable scientific report to a seemingly innocuous news item can be subject to intense scrutiny and mistrust, The Fracking Debate, a balanced guide to the contentious discussion on fracking, is a welcome resource. Daniel Raimi has compiled several years’ worth of research, including conversations with key figures in the shale gas industry, experts in environmental science and law, state regulators, members of the public, and advocates on both sides of the debate. In an easy-to-read, conversational tone, he first describes the technical process of shale development, using a hypothetical company and helpful illustrations to describe the complete cycle of well development from site selection to active production. Then he takes the reader through the history of unconventional fossil fuel extraction technology.
  Uncertainty is a central theme in the fracking debate. Even the very terminology used to describe the process of unconventional oil and gas extraction is contentious. The term “fracking” correctly refers only to hydraulic fracturing or the breaking of shale rock—just one step in the process’s many stages. But the term is often used to denote the entire process, and often further complicates a convoluted issue, especially when it is used to refer to contamination of water by fracking.
  Raimi devotes a chapter to each of the sticky questions that form the core of the fracking debate, providing nuanced analyses of cases using both scientific data and anecdotes. “Does fracking contaminate water?” he asks, for example. He then discusses the “flaming faucets” phenomenon, famously highlighted in the 2010 documentary Gasland. The technical explanation for how this can happen is that “stray gas” can migrate through improperly constructed wells up to the surface, he reveals. After enough pressure builds, it can seep into the water supply.
  There is also considerable uncertainty surrounding the potential health effects of fracking. Anecdotes and available scientific research show that emissions from well sites may lead to respiratory irritation and endocrine disruption that might cause developmental or neurological harm with exposure over months or years. But increased use of natural gas has reduced dependence on coal, and the health benefits associated with this change must also be taken into account.
  Raimi discusses how fracking is regulated predominantly through state governments, meaning that regulation and enforcement are variable. He then asks: “Is fracking good or bad for climate change?” His answer is nuanced. Methane gas, a more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, may leak, and these methane emissions are difficult to measure. But Raimi asserts that we must also take into account the potential climate benefits of gas replacing coal, because natural gas burns “cleaner” than coal, with lower greenhouse gas emissions.
  As for the economic impacts of the shale revolution, although fracking has spurred economic growth and jobs, the volatile nature of oil and gas prices makes communities that rely on this industry vulnerable to financial instability. Oil and gas production, therefore, is not an economic panacea, as some have tried to argue.

  EYE UBIQUITOUS/ALAMY STOCK PHOTO
  A fracking site looms near a water source on the edge of the Bakken Shale play in southern Alberta, Canada.
  Turning his attention to those who live near production facilities, Raimi reveals that “stories of people living through the booms and busts are rarely simple.” He has talked to some who have praised the shale revolution and the economic restoration it has brought to regions that had been in economic decline, but others describe increased crime and traffic and an uneasiness about the changes that have come with the arrival of this new industry and new workers.
  Raimi acknowledges that even during the writing of this book, many of the technologies, markets, and policies surrounding shale extraction have shifted in unexpected ways. For example, oil prices dropped dramatically between August 2014 and February 2016, leading to uncertainty about how the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) would respond. Shale gas prices, too, dropped dramatically, leading producers to develop technologies to maximize production, including longer horizontal drilling and mobile drilling rigs that can move from site to site without being disassembled.
  The future will likely bring more change. However, the lessons learned in this book can be applied to future developments and changes as they occur.
  Issues such as market volatility, the rapid pace of the shale revolution, and breakthroughs in technology, as well as the decisions made by the current U.S. administration, are all key sources of potential change in a contested issue already fraught with uncertainty. Raimi concludes that, despite these unknowns, we must be willing to listen to the opposition and to compromise on “thorny and complex trade-offs.”
  About the author

  The reviewer is at the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.

• Natural Gas Intel
  http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/113529-in-the-fracking-debate-author-carefully-treads-into-caustic-terrain
  Word count: 1021

  In ‘The Fracking Debate,’ Author Carefully Treads into ‘Caustic Terrain'
  Jamison Cocklin February 28, 2018 0 Comments

  Email / Print

  | More

  / Text Size+

  Related Articles
  EQT Steps Into New Era, As Separation of Midstream, Upstream Businesses Begins
  Five Missing After Natural Gas Drilling Rig Explodes in Oklahoma
  Pennsylvania NatGas Severance Tax Debate All Talk, No Action
  Ask anyone familiar with the oil and natural industry, and he or she is likely to agree that the middle ground can sometimes be hard to find in the argument for or against high-volume hydraulic fracturing (fracking), let alone the thin line that often separates fact and fiction.
  Daniel Raimi, a senior researcher at Resources for the Future and a professor of energy policy at the University of Michigan, acknowledges as much in the opening pages of his new book, “The Fracking Debate,” released in December by Columbia University Press. Before taking on the project, Raimi admits he was “hesitant to wade into the caustic terrain that characterizes much of the debate over fracking.”
  Given the protests, courtroom battles, truth-stretching on both sides and the real world implications of unconventional development, “caustic terrain” might even be an understatement. Despite that, Raimi visited nearly every major oil and gas producing region in the United States between 2013 and 2015 to learn more about the issues that have defined the debate and what could come next as it unfolds.
  The result is a meticulously researched, yet simplified and thoughtful book that lends a balanced tone to an expansive, complex and polarizing topic. It’s unlike some of the other well-received books that have cropped up in recent years to give an in-depth account of unconventional production’s meteoric rise and the personalities that have factored into that.
  The book is broken into 12 straightforward chapters that set out to answer -- or at least provide more clarity -- on some of the unconventional revolution’s most pervasive and bedeviling questions, such as whether fracking contaminates water and how it might affect climate change. Raimi doesn’t wade so much into the debate as he tries to parcel out the issues to shine more light on them. While there’s not much new information for those with a deep knowledge of the industry, the book is a well-rounded refresher and a fine primer for anybody new to the debate, or for those simply seeking more information.
  From the outset, Raimi is clear that he doesn’t have a crystal ball and states clearly that his goal is to present “a full view of shale development,” reminding us as the book’s subtitle does, that fracking has its “risks, benefits and uncertainties.”
  Raimi points out through much of the book that when it comes to something as complex as oil and natural gas extraction, and what that means for the nation’s economy, energy portfolio, environment and politics, that the truth, or some version of it anyhow, does not appear in black and white, but rather in a more nuanced shade of gray.
  For many involved in the energy industry, some of the subject matter treads over well-worn ground. He notes, for example, that the source rock often targeted by unconventional drilling is thousands of feet below the earth’s surface, while freshwater supplies are but a few hundred feet below it. On the in-between are various layers of impermeable rock, making it virtually impossible for fracking to contaminate water. On the flip side, although it’s rare, if a well is cased and cemented improperly, it is possible for methane to migrate into the water supply.
  When it does happen, fracking is often falsely maligned by its opponents for contaminating water. While the word is tossed about as the catchall culprit, no distinction is made between how stimulation works and a poorly constructed well that’s expected to be engineered to the highest standards.
  Raimi also writes that the economic effects of the shale boom “have been enormous,” saying the boom has brought “big money” to many regions across the United States. He acknowledges that natural gas has also had a hand in displacing coal, which produces roughly twice as much carbon dioxide when it’s burned for power.
  But the benefits might not always be so cut and dry. The economic impacts, which have included lower consumer energy prices, encourage more consumption and the possibility of higher emissions, especially in areas where less carbon-intensive power sources, such as renewables or nuclear, are being displaced.
  However, Raimi cautions that the issue of scale in the debate is a crucial one to consider when it comes not just to emissions, but to water contamination, earthquakes, regulations, economics and other issues.
  “With the hundreds of thousands of existing oil and gas wells in the United States and the additional tens of thousands that are drilled and fracked each year, it is virtually inevitable that some scale of environmental damage will occur,” Raimi writes. “But how large are those risks, how widespread are the damages when they occur?
  “Based on existing evidence, it looks as though fracking is unlikely to cause water contamination at a scale that would affect entire cities,” he continues. “After over 100 years of companies drilling and blowing stuff up underground, the evidence of contamination affecting thousands or millions of people simply isn’t there.”
  No matter how profound the benefits, or exactly how much risk comes with steady shale development, Raimi stresses that fracking is likely to continue well into the future, barring some widespread and unforeseen change in public policy.
  Moreover, as fracking is still very much “being defined in the public imagination,” Raimi consistently implores his reader to remember that both the debate and the policymaking process should be well informed. His book goes a long way toward aiding that goal.
  The book, published as part of Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy Series, is available in hardcover and electronic format on the publisher’s website and elsewhere online.

Word Count