{"id":22217,"date":"2012-12-14T13:08:59","date_gmt":"2012-12-14T19:08:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/?p=22217"},"modified":"2012-12-14T15:57:51","modified_gmt":"2012-12-14T21:57:51","slug":"the-number-of-fracking-trade-secrets-in-texas-will-likely-surprise-you","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/12\/14\/the-number-of-fracking-trade-secrets-in-texas-will-likely-surprise-you\/","title":{"rendered":"The Number of Fracking Trade Secrets in Texas Will Likely Surprise You"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Photo by Matthew Lloyd\/Getty Images<\/p>

Engineers on the drilling platform of the Cuadrilla shale fracking facility on October 7, 2012 in Preston, England.<\/p><\/div>\n

What’s in the water? Or, to be precise, what’s in the mix of water, sand and chemicals that oil and gas drillers are sending deep underground in the drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking?”<\/p>\n

The answer? We still really don’t know. While Texas passed a law last December<\/a> that new wells using fracking to drill have to disclose the ingredients of the 4-6 million gallons on average of fluid they send underground, there’s a loophole: trade secret exemptions.<\/p>\n

Because each company’s exact mix is proprietary, drilling companies argued during the rule making that fully disclosing the amount of each chemical in its fracking fluid would help the competition. Drillers argue that only 5 percent of the fluid on average consists of chemicals.<\/p>\n

But extrapolate 5 percent of 5 million gallons, as the Dallas Morning News<\/em> did in an analysis earlier this year<\/a>, and you get as many as 55,000 pounds of chemicals. What’s more, drilling companies may be exempting far more information than they agreed to under the new rule.<\/p>\n

Scott Anderson of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)\u00a0says there are “bugs” in the system<\/a>:<\/p>\n

“… People have begun to wonder whether the disclosure rules are accomplishing what was intended. The question is important because rules that aren\u2019t working need to be changed. A good regulatory system is based on a process of continual improvement, not a naive idea that the rulebook can be written in a way that will never need changing.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, judging from early press reports, there are quite a few bugs in the system. To be fair, the reporting requirements are quite new and still being implemented \u2014 and analysis of the data has barely begun. But problems are emerging. The issue receiving the most media attention is the sheer number of trade secret claims.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Anderson decided to look at Texas well data for the month of July disclosed online at FracFocus.org<\/a>, the clearinghouse for drilling disclosure. This is what he found:<\/p>\n