What do you think?
Rate this book
The Boom: How Fracking Ignited the American Energy Revolution and Changed the World
384 English Simon & Schuster US Russell Gold. a brilliant and dogged investigative reporter at The Wall Street Journal. has spent more than a decade reporting on one of the biggest stories of our the spectacular. world-changing rise of . fracking Recognized as a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize and a recipient of the Gerald Loeb Award for his work. Gold has traveled along the pipelines and into the hubs of this country's energy infrastructure; he has visited frack sites from Texas to North Dakota; and he has conducted thousands of interviews with engineers and wildcatters. CEOs and roughnecks. environmentalists and politicians He has also sifted through reams of engineering reports. lawsuit transcripts. and financial filings The result is an essential book-a commanding piece.. of journalism. an astounding study of human ingenuity. and an epic...
384 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 2014
About the author
Russell Gold
23 books36 followersBorn: In Philly.
Married: Yes.
Kids: Yup.
Facial hair: Changes with the season.
Reads: Modern fiction (generally 1970+) and lots of nonfiction.
Other: Long-suffering Philadelphia sports fan.
Married: Yes.
Kids: Yup.
Facial hair: Changes with the season.
Reads: Modern fiction (generally 1970+) and lots of nonfiction.
Other: Long-suffering Philadelphia sports fan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 104 reviews
May 2, 2014
For those interested in buying this book, I'll lay out two key points to consider: First, this has to be one of the most definitive books on the history, development and processes involved in hydraulic fracturing of gas and oil wells ever written (while it's easily understandable by those of us not that familiar with the practice or the industry, though, don't expect to skim through it). Second, close to 40% of the book's 385 pages consists of comprehensive source material and an alphabetic index.
Personally, I commend the author - an investigative reporter at The Wall Street Journal who has covered the industry for many years - for including this information; as a journalist myself, I would have expected no less. I simply want potential buyers to know what they're getting. This is neither an expose nor an attempt to sway the vote in either direction; rather, it's a very thorough report on how the whole thing got started, where it's at now and, insofar as anyone can tell at this point, where it may go in the future.
There's little doubt "fracking" is here to stay, and I freely admit I haven't been all that happy about it since the volume has been turned up in and around my little part of northeastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania with exploration (some would insist the definitive word is "exploitation") of the vast area that contains Marcellus Shale. But I also admit to knowing little about how fracking really works, so I tried hard to keep an open mind as I read. Now that I've finished, I can't say my overall opinion has changed, but my perspective certainly has. In fact, my biggest worry - that too much fracking (cracking solid rock miles below the earth's surface with drills and highly pressurized water mixed with other chemicals) - will blow our home planet apart from the inside out has pretty much gone by the boards. But that view been replaced by other concerns that continuing this "boom" at the rate it's going now may not be what's best for generations to come.
There's no way to condense all the facts and figures here (nor would I presume to try). But here are a few tidbits I picked up along the way:
*The gas and oil industry certainly isn't new; the first petroleum engineering degrees were conferred by the University of Pittsburgh in 1915 on four students - one from New Castle, Pa., which is within what I consider my local area.
*Nearly every well drilled in the United States today is a fracked well. That's about 100 wells a day, maybe more, that are being drilled year-round. "Whether you fear fracking or celebrate it, that's a lot of holes in the ground," the author writes.
*Fracking is so common that some have dubbed the new United States "Frackistan."
*By 2030, the United States is poised to become an oil exporter.
*In 2012, Chesapeake Energy, one of the industry giants and a big player in the Ohio-Pennsylvania market, earned $20 billion; the company drills more than 1,000 wells each year, all of them fracked. From 2004 to 2011, Chesapeake drilled more wells than any other company in the world - an average of four every single day.
One point that stood out in my mind is that the energy industry spends about $105 billion annually on hydraulic fracturing; about $5 billion of that is spent on "cementing," or securing the pipes to ensure that gas or salty water stays in the rock and doesn't flow into another one. But it appears there's precious little evaluation to make sure the cement itself is leak proof; it if isn't, gas can seep into shallow aquifers and then contaminate residential water (no doubt you've heard stories from folks who live near fracked wells about being able to set the water that comes from their kitchen faucets on fire). No, the very few times that happens may not be a huge concern (although those who experience it will say once is too often, and their point is well taken). But in my mind, at least, the issue of whether or not we're doing enough to prevent it from happening at all is.
Personally, I commend the author - an investigative reporter at The Wall Street Journal who has covered the industry for many years - for including this information; as a journalist myself, I would have expected no less. I simply want potential buyers to know what they're getting. This is neither an expose nor an attempt to sway the vote in either direction; rather, it's a very thorough report on how the whole thing got started, where it's at now and, insofar as anyone can tell at this point, where it may go in the future.
There's little doubt "fracking" is here to stay, and I freely admit I haven't been all that happy about it since the volume has been turned up in and around my little part of northeastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania with exploration (some would insist the definitive word is "exploitation") of the vast area that contains Marcellus Shale. But I also admit to knowing little about how fracking really works, so I tried hard to keep an open mind as I read. Now that I've finished, I can't say my overall opinion has changed, but my perspective certainly has. In fact, my biggest worry - that too much fracking (cracking solid rock miles below the earth's surface with drills and highly pressurized water mixed with other chemicals) - will blow our home planet apart from the inside out has pretty much gone by the boards. But that view been replaced by other concerns that continuing this "boom" at the rate it's going now may not be what's best for generations to come.
There's no way to condense all the facts and figures here (nor would I presume to try). But here are a few tidbits I picked up along the way:
*The gas and oil industry certainly isn't new; the first petroleum engineering degrees were conferred by the University of Pittsburgh in 1915 on four students - one from New Castle, Pa., which is within what I consider my local area.
*Nearly every well drilled in the United States today is a fracked well. That's about 100 wells a day, maybe more, that are being drilled year-round. "Whether you fear fracking or celebrate it, that's a lot of holes in the ground," the author writes.
*Fracking is so common that some have dubbed the new United States "Frackistan."
*By 2030, the United States is poised to become an oil exporter.
*In 2012, Chesapeake Energy, one of the industry giants and a big player in the Ohio-Pennsylvania market, earned $20 billion; the company drills more than 1,000 wells each year, all of them fracked. From 2004 to 2011, Chesapeake drilled more wells than any other company in the world - an average of four every single day.
One point that stood out in my mind is that the energy industry spends about $105 billion annually on hydraulic fracturing; about $5 billion of that is spent on "cementing," or securing the pipes to ensure that gas or salty water stays in the rock and doesn't flow into another one. But it appears there's precious little evaluation to make sure the cement itself is leak proof; it if isn't, gas can seep into shallow aquifers and then contaminate residential water (no doubt you've heard stories from folks who live near fracked wells about being able to set the water that comes from their kitchen faucets on fire). No, the very few times that happens may not be a huge concern (although those who experience it will say once is too often, and their point is well taken). But in my mind, at least, the issue of whether or not we're doing enough to prevent it from happening at all is.
June 1, 2015
It took me nearly a year to read this book both because it's a little bit dry and also because it's a little bit depressing as well as because library books that had other people waiting for them kept coming in so I had to read those first. There was no one on hold for this the entire time I had it checked out. You're probably not surprised.
Hydraulic fracturing = Fracking. It's where you poke a hole in the earth (a well) and then jam all this water and chemical crap down it in order to split the rock at the end of the well open. Then you suck the water and chemicals back out and oil and gas follow.
I had to stop listening to Pandora radio for over a year because there were all these "Yay, frack the hell out of Colorado" ads running (that's not at all what the ads were saying, but they were pro-fracking) I'm not comfortable with that at all.
I first ever heard about fracking when I was in college. My BFF's dad, an engineer, told us all about it at dinner one night. While he's not a geo-engineer, he understood enough to explain it in basic terms and I was horrified because I like to equate the earth with my body. No, they're not the same at all but that doesn't stop me from making those correlations. Zits are volcanoes, cracked skin = fissures, other ailments are linked to other natural disasters, etc. So the thought of injecting water and chemicals under my skin in order to get stuff out seemed scary and unnecessary and like one of those crazy fads in which you get rid of toxins via self-abuse. I didn't like it.
But fracking hadn't been on the nation's general radar until much more recently. I have an automatic anger reaction when I hear about it but is that necessary? Am I making stuff up because of something I heard/made myself believe when I was 21? Now that I'm all grown-up (age-wise), I figured I should probably learn a little more about this mining process. But where to go to find out? There aren't a lot of unbiased sources on this subject, especially not now that it's such a hot topic.
This author comes close-ish, though. He's a reporter and has been covering energy news for a long time. He wasn't hesitant to show both sides of the story.
In essence, the crux of the problem is thus:
Fracking has unleashed more oil and natural gas than anyone thought possible. It is providing an abundance of domestic energy, helping to drive a rebirth of manufacturing, and easing dependence on overseas energy peddlers. Accessing this energy requires tens of thousands of new wells, each fracked with enough water to fill several thousands of Olympic swimming pools and hundreds of gallons of chemicals. It also requires turning whole counties into industrial zones, complete with fleets of trucks, air quality concerns, a disruption of nature, and fear that water aquifers will be poisoned. (p. 5)
And the question that needs to be answered: We are tearing down the old energy order and building a new one, but are we doing it responsibly?
And no, the author doesn't answer that question. He just shows different facets of fracking that lead the reader toward more research so that the reader can answer the question for him or herself.
I did learn a lot about the oil and gas industry, about wells and Texas and Oklahoma, about corrupt practices and leasing land, about our crazy dependence on energy, and about how we're not making strides in renewable energy fast enough for it to contend with dead creatures under the earth's surface energy.
This book suffers from being written by a journalist. That sounds mean but we've all heard the old complaint that journalists should stick to articles. That gripe holds up in this case. By chapter six, the story is meandering, there's some repetition going on, and the writing is falling apart as the cohesiveness crumbles. So while the conversational writing keeps this from sounding overly academic and boring, it also becomes unfocused and disjointed. By the end, I felt I'd read a series of articles put together in one volume, joined together by unnecessary filler. It was offputting that the author would be giving history on people, places, and rocks and then would suddenly insert himself into the narrative before jumping back out to continue with the report. Overall, it's easy-to-read, easy-to-understand, but choppily written.
Of course, now that there have been more reports on fracking in the past year or two, this volume has already become somewhat dated. The history of fracking is interesting but the current politics surrounding fracking is no longer adequately represented in this book.
My takeaway is that oil and gas is an asshole. I guess I knew that already. I'm not sure if the tradeoff for cheap energy is worth the waste (so much water that can't be cleaned afterward) and poisoning (not just water, but air poisoning, noise pollution, and the industrialization of small communities) entire counties across the States. It seems like a bad business based more on money than on creating jobs and helping people be able to afford their heating and cooling bills. It's one of those short-term vs. long-term scenarios in which I'm betting long-term is going to wonder just what in hell we were thinking.
Hydraulic fracturing = Fracking. It's where you poke a hole in the earth (a well) and then jam all this water and chemical crap down it in order to split the rock at the end of the well open. Then you suck the water and chemicals back out and oil and gas follow.
I had to stop listening to Pandora radio for over a year because there were all these "Yay, frack the hell out of Colorado" ads running (that's not at all what the ads were saying, but they were pro-fracking) I'm not comfortable with that at all.
I first ever heard about fracking when I was in college. My BFF's dad, an engineer, told us all about it at dinner one night. While he's not a geo-engineer, he understood enough to explain it in basic terms and I was horrified because I like to equate the earth with my body. No, they're not the same at all but that doesn't stop me from making those correlations. Zits are volcanoes, cracked skin = fissures, other ailments are linked to other natural disasters, etc. So the thought of injecting water and chemicals under my skin in order to get stuff out seemed scary and unnecessary and like one of those crazy fads in which you get rid of toxins via self-abuse. I didn't like it.
But fracking hadn't been on the nation's general radar until much more recently. I have an automatic anger reaction when I hear about it but is that necessary? Am I making stuff up because of something I heard/made myself believe when I was 21? Now that I'm all grown-up (age-wise), I figured I should probably learn a little more about this mining process. But where to go to find out? There aren't a lot of unbiased sources on this subject, especially not now that it's such a hot topic.
This author comes close-ish, though. He's a reporter and has been covering energy news for a long time. He wasn't hesitant to show both sides of the story.
In essence, the crux of the problem is thus:
Fracking has unleashed more oil and natural gas than anyone thought possible. It is providing an abundance of domestic energy, helping to drive a rebirth of manufacturing, and easing dependence on overseas energy peddlers. Accessing this energy requires tens of thousands of new wells, each fracked with enough water to fill several thousands of Olympic swimming pools and hundreds of gallons of chemicals. It also requires turning whole counties into industrial zones, complete with fleets of trucks, air quality concerns, a disruption of nature, and fear that water aquifers will be poisoned. (p. 5)
And the question that needs to be answered: We are tearing down the old energy order and building a new one, but are we doing it responsibly?
And no, the author doesn't answer that question. He just shows different facets of fracking that lead the reader toward more research so that the reader can answer the question for him or herself.
I did learn a lot about the oil and gas industry, about wells and Texas and Oklahoma, about corrupt practices and leasing land, about our crazy dependence on energy, and about how we're not making strides in renewable energy fast enough for it to contend with dead creatures under the earth's surface energy.
This book suffers from being written by a journalist. That sounds mean but we've all heard the old complaint that journalists should stick to articles. That gripe holds up in this case. By chapter six, the story is meandering, there's some repetition going on, and the writing is falling apart as the cohesiveness crumbles. So while the conversational writing keeps this from sounding overly academic and boring, it also becomes unfocused and disjointed. By the end, I felt I'd read a series of articles put together in one volume, joined together by unnecessary filler. It was offputting that the author would be giving history on people, places, and rocks and then would suddenly insert himself into the narrative before jumping back out to continue with the report. Overall, it's easy-to-read, easy-to-understand, but choppily written.
Of course, now that there have been more reports on fracking in the past year or two, this volume has already become somewhat dated. The history of fracking is interesting but the current politics surrounding fracking is no longer adequately represented in this book.
My takeaway is that oil and gas is an asshole. I guess I knew that already. I'm not sure if the tradeoff for cheap energy is worth the waste (so much water that can't be cleaned afterward) and poisoning (not just water, but air poisoning, noise pollution, and the industrialization of small communities) entire counties across the States. It seems like a bad business based more on money than on creating jobs and helping people be able to afford their heating and cooling bills. It's one of those short-term vs. long-term scenarios in which I'm betting long-term is going to wonder just what in hell we were thinking.
May 29, 2015
Want to get an accessible introduction to "fracking" (short for hydraulic fracturing)? This should do nicely. This is not a technical tome--far from it. It is a well written book aimed at a general audience. If you want a solid scientific analysis, this is not the book for you. But, if you wish to get a sense of what is at stake, this would be quite useful.
The author had family land in Pennsylvania in the Marcellus Shale region (a large pool of underground natural gas). This is a personal story of his effort to learn about fracking--its history, its positive economic effects, its effects on the environment, its effects on the land. One aspect of this work struck me as positive: it is a balanced work. Russell Gold, the author, does not take sides in an overt manner. By the end of this book, I felt that I had learned quite a bit about fracking as a technique and its effects (positive and negative).
In the process, one also gets a sense of the major figures in the development of the technique, such as Aubrey McClendon. There were quite a few swashbucklers, like McClendon, who tried to develop their companies as rapidly as possible. Others were more cautious. The examination of a series of key figures humanizes the book, giving us a sense of the personal side of this issue.
The final chapter tries to provide an even handed analysis of fracking and its effects. Whether the author succeeds will be up to the readers to decide.
The author had family land in Pennsylvania in the Marcellus Shale region (a large pool of underground natural gas). This is a personal story of his effort to learn about fracking--its history, its positive economic effects, its effects on the environment, its effects on the land. One aspect of this work struck me as positive: it is a balanced work. Russell Gold, the author, does not take sides in an overt manner. By the end of this book, I felt that I had learned quite a bit about fracking as a technique and its effects (positive and negative).
In the process, one also gets a sense of the major figures in the development of the technique, such as Aubrey McClendon. There were quite a few swashbucklers, like McClendon, who tried to develop their companies as rapidly as possible. Others were more cautious. The examination of a series of key figures humanizes the book, giving us a sense of the personal side of this issue.
The final chapter tries to provide an even handed analysis of fracking and its effects. Whether the author succeeds will be up to the readers to decide.
September 29, 2014
Gold seemingly set out to write a "centrist" book on fracking. And he did, with the problems that ensue.
First, one main good point. That is noting that many of the problems many people associate with fracking are most likely instead due to bad well casing.
But, while Gold shows us it would likely be relatively easy, and relatively inexpensive, for natural gas drillers to test their wellhead cement for integrity, he never directly asks a major, or minor, gas driller why they don't. In fact, while he interviews environmentalists, family landowners, etc., other than George Mitchell, his interviews with "players" in the gas or oil worlds are pretty slim.
Second, a couple of other errors.
And, given that Gold is at the Wall Street Journal, I'm taking them to be ideological ones.
The first is to hint strongly, although he will never directly say so, that "Peak Oil" prognosticator King Hubbert got it wrong.
The second is to hint strongly, although again without saying so, that the reason WHY Hubbert got it wrong is that he failed to account for unconventional drilling like fracking. (Why Gold doesn't attempt to bolster his case further by bringing in Alberta's tar sands and other unconventional oils, I don't know; the fact that he doesn't, though, even further weakens him.)
Reality? There's nothing in the new oil production world to indicate that we will overtop the 1970 US oil peak. And, the fact that worldwide production of "conventional" oil seems to have peaked in 2005 only reinforces that.
Beyond that, Hubbert did factor unconventional drilling processes, and unconventional oils, both into his calculations.
Gold wouldn't be senior energy reporter at the WSJ if he didn't have some knowledge of Hubbert's work. I am not sure whether he's still inadequately informed, or either out of naivete or hopelessness believes less charitable interpretations of Hubbert, or from working at the WSJ, if he's maybe deliberately being mendacious to some degree.
I had started at 3 stars, moved to 2, and finally dropped to 1.
Because, even though Gold does give a hat tip to environmentalism, and renewable energy, this is just too much.
And, per his most recent work in the WSJ, continuing to attack the idea of Peak Oil, Gold shows he well deserves this rating.
First, one main good point. That is noting that many of the problems many people associate with fracking are most likely instead due to bad well casing.
But, while Gold shows us it would likely be relatively easy, and relatively inexpensive, for natural gas drillers to test their wellhead cement for integrity, he never directly asks a major, or minor, gas driller why they don't. In fact, while he interviews environmentalists, family landowners, etc., other than George Mitchell, his interviews with "players" in the gas or oil worlds are pretty slim.
Second, a couple of other errors.
And, given that Gold is at the Wall Street Journal, I'm taking them to be ideological ones.
The first is to hint strongly, although he will never directly say so, that "Peak Oil" prognosticator King Hubbert got it wrong.
The second is to hint strongly, although again without saying so, that the reason WHY Hubbert got it wrong is that he failed to account for unconventional drilling like fracking. (Why Gold doesn't attempt to bolster his case further by bringing in Alberta's tar sands and other unconventional oils, I don't know; the fact that he doesn't, though, even further weakens him.)
Reality? There's nothing in the new oil production world to indicate that we will overtop the 1970 US oil peak. And, the fact that worldwide production of "conventional" oil seems to have peaked in 2005 only reinforces that.
Beyond that, Hubbert did factor unconventional drilling processes, and unconventional oils, both into his calculations.
Gold wouldn't be senior energy reporter at the WSJ if he didn't have some knowledge of Hubbert's work. I am not sure whether he's still inadequately informed, or either out of naivete or hopelessness believes less charitable interpretations of Hubbert, or from working at the WSJ, if he's maybe deliberately being mendacious to some degree.
I had started at 3 stars, moved to 2, and finally dropped to 1.
Because, even though Gold does give a hat tip to environmentalism, and renewable energy, this is just too much.
And, per his most recent work in the WSJ, continuing to attack the idea of Peak Oil, Gold shows he well deserves this rating.
June 23, 2014
I am SO GLAD that I read this book. The natural gas "revolution" has caught me totally off-guard. It seems like yesterday, the presidential candidates were debating ways to make the U.S. energy independent. Now it seems like a foregone conclusion that we ARE independent, thanks to fracking. I can now say that I understand the process better and I'm not as terrified of it as I was... but still not thrilled by it all. But now I'm educated about it. I'm not basing my opinions on myths and scare tactics of either side.
The book was a FUN read, too. Lots of great characters. I highly recommend it!
The book was a FUN read, too. Lots of great characters. I highly recommend it!
December 21, 2014
A very interesting book giving the reader an understanding of how Fracking works and the people involved.
The Drilling process, if done properly is benign although many people disagree and there are several Lawsuits pending here in Alberta and the Province of Quebec has banned Fracking completely. Readers may be interested in watching two documentaries, Gasland and Frack nation and try to find out which is playing with the truth. Great read.
The Drilling process, if done properly is benign although many people disagree and there are several Lawsuits pending here in Alberta and the Province of Quebec has banned Fracking completely. Readers may be interested in watching two documentaries, Gasland and Frack nation and try to find out which is playing with the truth. Great read.
July 20, 2017
Informative timeline of hydraulic fracking, the industry, market forces and debate for future energy.
- Natural gas is considered cheaper, releases significantly less carbon into the atmosphere. Gas plant can be turned on and off, can be run at lower capacity than wind.
- The author lays out several options regarding energy turn-around: Keep going the same way with coal and available sources or going full renewable or mixture of gas and renewable while minimize coal. The last option is argued the best comprise for the economy and climate.
- Safety issue is also highlighted. Tests are expensive, regulations needed to be made and enforced properly (there are instances of safety violations, gas leak into water system, offshore fracking explosion.. )
- Natural gas is considered cheaper, releases significantly less carbon into the atmosphere. Gas plant can be turned on and off, can be run at lower capacity than wind.
- The author lays out several options regarding energy turn-around: Keep going the same way with coal and available sources or going full renewable or mixture of gas and renewable while minimize coal. The last option is argued the best comprise for the economy and climate.
- Safety issue is also highlighted. Tests are expensive, regulations needed to be made and enforced properly (there are instances of safety violations, gas leak into water system, offshore fracking explosion.. )
September 19, 2023
A fantastic and well-researched book dedicated to the history of fracking and how that led to the economic boom that is still ongoing into the United States. As a scheduler of natural gas, brand new to the industry, it has given me a plethora of information on how the economic boom was started in the US and the players that played a crucial role in the development and implementation of this crucial substance. Worth a read!
May 8, 2017
Russell Gold is a Wall Street Journal reporter whose family had purchased a small Pennsylvania farm as a retreat from Philadelphia. His parents were approached by an oil company offering them $400,000 plus royalties for the right to drill under their land. Being old time sixties environmentalists they were reluctant but it’s a lot of money and since almost all their neighbors had bought in they figured they might as well. He returns to their story periodically throughout the book to highlight the personal conflicts people have.
Gold provides a riveting account of the development of fracking from its extraordinary technological success to its environmental impacts. It’s truly astonishing that this intricate technology has resulted in the United States becoming a net energy exporter barely a decade after “peak oil” had been proclaimed. The book mixes technical details with profiles of the major players, often focusing on the financial details, which can’t be easily separated from the evolution of oil drilling.
It’s perhaps ironic, that most of the anti-fracking environmental antagonism comes from geographical areas not affected by the drilling. Larger cities that depend on natural gas and heating, for example, have become hotbeds of anti-fracking activity, yet those people are little affected by the economic and environmental plusses and minuses of the activity except for lower prices for energy.
Some of the allegiances formed to promote fracking are interesting. The Sierra Club worked with Chesapeake Energy to fight the development of coal plants in Texas and elsewhere, arguing that global warming was a far greater threat.* That Chesapeake was giving them substantial amounts of money didn’t hurt either, but the environmental group has become split among those favoring just conservation opposed to some realists arguing that it’s better to focus on energy that reduces the carbon footprint like natural gas and nuclear power. Ironically, the shift to natural gas means the U.S., which hasn’t ratified the Kyoto protocols, will come closer to meeting the reduction in carbon emissions than any of the signatories.
Gold says that’s a very good thing and supports fracking (the reason why it’s now spelled that way as opposed to the more technically popular “fracing” is interesting) but notes the industry and regulators need to work on better sealing of the wells which is where most of the problems arise. Surprisingly, there was no mention of fracking-generated earthquakes, although perhaps being published in 2014, the concern had yet to be raised.
No energy generating process is unopposed. Dams drown villages; mines are dirty and dangerous; transporting fuel in pipelines, ships, and trains risks spills and fires; drilling is obnoxious, wind generators destroy the landscape and kill birds; and nuclear, in many ways the least harmful, suffers from ignorance of new technology and problems of early technology.
A very interesting read.
*Stewart Brand of Whole Earth Catalog fame has embraced GMOs, nuclear energy, and other technologies, arguing that global warming is the greatest threat. An interesting article detailing his evolution in thinking is http://e360.yale.edu/features/stewart...
Gold provides a riveting account of the development of fracking from its extraordinary technological success to its environmental impacts. It’s truly astonishing that this intricate technology has resulted in the United States becoming a net energy exporter barely a decade after “peak oil” had been proclaimed. The book mixes technical details with profiles of the major players, often focusing on the financial details, which can’t be easily separated from the evolution of oil drilling.
It’s perhaps ironic, that most of the anti-fracking environmental antagonism comes from geographical areas not affected by the drilling. Larger cities that depend on natural gas and heating, for example, have become hotbeds of anti-fracking activity, yet those people are little affected by the economic and environmental plusses and minuses of the activity except for lower prices for energy.
Some of the allegiances formed to promote fracking are interesting. The Sierra Club worked with Chesapeake Energy to fight the development of coal plants in Texas and elsewhere, arguing that global warming was a far greater threat.* That Chesapeake was giving them substantial amounts of money didn’t hurt either, but the environmental group has become split among those favoring just conservation opposed to some realists arguing that it’s better to focus on energy that reduces the carbon footprint like natural gas and nuclear power. Ironically, the shift to natural gas means the U.S., which hasn’t ratified the Kyoto protocols, will come closer to meeting the reduction in carbon emissions than any of the signatories.
Gold says that’s a very good thing and supports fracking (the reason why it’s now spelled that way as opposed to the more technically popular “fracing” is interesting) but notes the industry and regulators need to work on better sealing of the wells which is where most of the problems arise. Surprisingly, there was no mention of fracking-generated earthquakes, although perhaps being published in 2014, the concern had yet to be raised.
No energy generating process is unopposed. Dams drown villages; mines are dirty and dangerous; transporting fuel in pipelines, ships, and trains risks spills and fires; drilling is obnoxious, wind generators destroy the landscape and kill birds; and nuclear, in many ways the least harmful, suffers from ignorance of new technology and problems of early technology.
A very interesting read.
*Stewart Brand of Whole Earth Catalog fame has embraced GMOs, nuclear energy, and other technologies, arguing that global warming is the greatest threat. An interesting article detailing his evolution in thinking is http://e360.yale.edu/features/stewart...
October 20, 2014
As someone who has been working in the energy sector for more than 40 years, I am probably more familiar with the subject of drilling and fracking than the average citizen, but I still learned some things from Russell Gold's "The Boom." It is always healthy to look at an issue as sensitive as fracking from both points of view, and this is something that Gold does an admirable job of doing via this book.
The new fracking technology was originally intended to tap into the huge natural gas reserves that were until the last decade or so pretty much beyond the ability of contemporary drilling methods to recover. That technology has proved to be just as effective in the recovery of shale oil that had previously been way to expensive to recover and bring to market.
The question now is one of safety and environmental impact of the fracking techniques being used in so many thousands of wells each year. Economically, there is no doubt that fracking has had a huge beneficial impact on the country. Environmentally, the final judgement is yet to be reached because, while it is true that some water wells have been contaminated by natural gas leaking into the neighboring water systems, this has happened so few times that there is not great impact involved - so far. On the other hand, those who lease their property to drilling companies do often find their personal lives shattered and changed forever by all the drilling activity that suddenly springs up around their homes, farms, and ranches. Of course, they can always take the big money and run - and lots of them do - but that's not a welcome option for everyone.
Too, substituting natural gas in place of coal in the electricity-generating process cannot help but have an immediate, and positive, and positive impact on the environment. The U.S., in fact, is one of the few countries in the world (despite never signing the Kyoto Agreement) that has significantly cleaned up its air in during the past two decades. Many environmentalist have reluctantly come to the conclusion that natural gas is a "bridge fuel" that buys the world more time to develop alternative fuels that we can actually afford, ones that will actually provide ALL of the energy we need in this country and not just a tiny fraction of it.
So, love fracking or hate fracking. It's your choice - and "The Boom" might help you decide which side of the issue you favor.
The new fracking technology was originally intended to tap into the huge natural gas reserves that were until the last decade or so pretty much beyond the ability of contemporary drilling methods to recover. That technology has proved to be just as effective in the recovery of shale oil that had previously been way to expensive to recover and bring to market.
The question now is one of safety and environmental impact of the fracking techniques being used in so many thousands of wells each year. Economically, there is no doubt that fracking has had a huge beneficial impact on the country. Environmentally, the final judgement is yet to be reached because, while it is true that some water wells have been contaminated by natural gas leaking into the neighboring water systems, this has happened so few times that there is not great impact involved - so far. On the other hand, those who lease their property to drilling companies do often find their personal lives shattered and changed forever by all the drilling activity that suddenly springs up around their homes, farms, and ranches. Of course, they can always take the big money and run - and lots of them do - but that's not a welcome option for everyone.
Too, substituting natural gas in place of coal in the electricity-generating process cannot help but have an immediate, and positive, and positive impact on the environment. The U.S., in fact, is one of the few countries in the world (despite never signing the Kyoto Agreement) that has significantly cleaned up its air in during the past two decades. Many environmentalist have reluctantly come to the conclusion that natural gas is a "bridge fuel" that buys the world more time to develop alternative fuels that we can actually afford, ones that will actually provide ALL of the energy we need in this country and not just a tiny fraction of it.
So, love fracking or hate fracking. It's your choice - and "The Boom" might help you decide which side of the issue you favor.
November 18, 2017
Full disclosure part 1: I received this book as a First Reads Giveaway.
Full disclosure part 2: My husband works for an oil and gas company, though not one of the ones featured in this book.
I was both looking forward to and dreading reading this book. Cracking it open, I was mentally preparing myself for either a virulent anti-fracking campaign piece, or a self-aggrandizing, "drill baby drill" apologist bunk. I found neither, and I am exceedingly thankful to author Russell Gold for this book.
The first (and largest) portion of this book outlines the history of shale gas, and the industries that have risen up to exploit it. This, for me was the most enjoyable part, appealing to the historian in me. And the history of shale gas, in human terms is only about two centuries old, but encompasses some golden moments of human brilliance and creativity, as well as some moments of stunning dumbassery.
The latter part of the book focuses on the controversy surrounding natural gas, and the push and pull between industry lobbyists, environmentalists, ambitious businessmen, and scrambling politicians. The current state of natural gas is complex and shifting, and, unfortunately, becoming highly polarized between the "never" and the "without hesitation" camps.
Gold manages to tread back and forth between the far reaches of each camp, laying out the arguments on both sides, and presenting, to my mind, a fair picture of the pros and cons of our country's use of natural gas. In an ear where everything seems to have some underlying political agenda, I found this book to be refreshingly objective, especially considering the subject matter is one that currently lends itself to an "I'm right, and you're wrong" mentality.
In sum, Gold's book paints a fascinating picture of the Oil and Gas Industry from historical (and prehistorical) times through to the modern era. For anyone looking for a better grasp of the current debate, I feel he excels at laying out the argument from both sides without rancor or excessive judgement.
I am especially appreciative that he uses this history, and the current status of the industry to make an all important point: Natural gas is not Satan, but nor is it our savior. We must do the best we can with what we have now, and use this time to pursue new and better fuel sources that will sustain us through the centuries ahead.
Full disclosure part 2: My husband works for an oil and gas company, though not one of the ones featured in this book.
I was both looking forward to and dreading reading this book. Cracking it open, I was mentally preparing myself for either a virulent anti-fracking campaign piece, or a self-aggrandizing, "drill baby drill" apologist bunk. I found neither, and I am exceedingly thankful to author Russell Gold for this book.
The first (and largest) portion of this book outlines the history of shale gas, and the industries that have risen up to exploit it. This, for me was the most enjoyable part, appealing to the historian in me. And the history of shale gas, in human terms is only about two centuries old, but encompasses some golden moments of human brilliance and creativity, as well as some moments of stunning dumbassery.
The latter part of the book focuses on the controversy surrounding natural gas, and the push and pull between industry lobbyists, environmentalists, ambitious businessmen, and scrambling politicians. The current state of natural gas is complex and shifting, and, unfortunately, becoming highly polarized between the "never" and the "without hesitation" camps.
Gold manages to tread back and forth between the far reaches of each camp, laying out the arguments on both sides, and presenting, to my mind, a fair picture of the pros and cons of our country's use of natural gas. In an ear where everything seems to have some underlying political agenda, I found this book to be refreshingly objective, especially considering the subject matter is one that currently lends itself to an "I'm right, and you're wrong" mentality.
In sum, Gold's book paints a fascinating picture of the Oil and Gas Industry from historical (and prehistorical) times through to the modern era. For anyone looking for a better grasp of the current debate, I feel he excels at laying out the argument from both sides without rancor or excessive judgement.
I am especially appreciative that he uses this history, and the current status of the industry to make an all important point: Natural gas is not Satan, but nor is it our savior. We must do the best we can with what we have now, and use this time to pursue new and better fuel sources that will sustain us through the centuries ahead.
May 20, 2016
If you'd like a relatively balanced introduction to help you better understand the science, business and politics of hydraulic fracturing (aka fracking), I don't think you could do much better than this book. In his day job, Gold reports on energy for the Wall Street Journal. In this book, he tries hard to show all sides of this complex issue. And there are many sides to it.
There are the macro views. Energy gained from fracking makes us less dependent on foreign sources of oil and gas, which gives us greater national security. It also has been a boost to the economy providing new, high paying jobs in the energy industry while lowering energy costs for virtually all businesses across the country. The opposing macro view says that it's still a non-renewable resource, and while natural gas from fracking may pump out less carbon dioxide than coal, we're still pumping out more of this greenhouse gas than we should be - and at a horrible cost to environments from Texas to North Dakota, Oklahoma to Pennsylvania.
At the local level, the two opposing sides are often neighbors glaring at each other. Some hate the noise, fumes and other inconveniences of fracking while also fearing that their only sources of fresh water will be destroyed forever by the chemicals used by oil and gas companies. Others see members of their families, jobless for years, now employed by the energy industry. And of course, those who have allowed drilling on their properties see the royalty checks coming in giving some of them financial security they couldn't even have imagined.
Gold also gives a great history of the industry and some of the key individuals. It's been around longer than you may think.
The only thing that kept my rating to 4 stars rather than 5 is that the author never addresses the question of whether fracking might be causing the earthquakes some areas have experienced. There may be no connection, but the press has tried to make the connection, so it's something I think he should have touched on. All in all, though, I felt much more educated about the whole issue after finishing this book.
There are the macro views. Energy gained from fracking makes us less dependent on foreign sources of oil and gas, which gives us greater national security. It also has been a boost to the economy providing new, high paying jobs in the energy industry while lowering energy costs for virtually all businesses across the country. The opposing macro view says that it's still a non-renewable resource, and while natural gas from fracking may pump out less carbon dioxide than coal, we're still pumping out more of this greenhouse gas than we should be - and at a horrible cost to environments from Texas to North Dakota, Oklahoma to Pennsylvania.
At the local level, the two opposing sides are often neighbors glaring at each other. Some hate the noise, fumes and other inconveniences of fracking while also fearing that their only sources of fresh water will be destroyed forever by the chemicals used by oil and gas companies. Others see members of their families, jobless for years, now employed by the energy industry. And of course, those who have allowed drilling on their properties see the royalty checks coming in giving some of them financial security they couldn't even have imagined.
Gold also gives a great history of the industry and some of the key individuals. It's been around longer than you may think.
The only thing that kept my rating to 4 stars rather than 5 is that the author never addresses the question of whether fracking might be causing the earthquakes some areas have experienced. There may be no connection, but the press has tried to make the connection, so it's something I think he should have touched on. All in all, though, I felt much more educated about the whole issue after finishing this book.
September 21, 2014
This book was a very comprehensive review of fracking. I have always read that fracking was either our energy salvation or environmental doom. I am still not sure which it is, but now I have a framework for thinking about the technology.
May 15, 2015
The Boom was written by an investigative journalist and one who is very fair. Russell Gold primarily presents information and leaves conclusions to the reader. The author visited hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") sites across the country, interviewing key players like gas company CEO's and environmentalists as well as ordinary energy industry workers and people who live on or near land leased for drilling. The writing is smooth, reading more like a story, although the book is filled with facts and figures.
I found the historic background and detailed description of fracturing to be helpful and I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in current events on this basis alone. "Fracking" has become highly controversial; I've observed many people are downright emotional about the issue. My take is a fair number of people have little-to-no knowledge what hydraulic fracturing is, how long it's been in use (~150 years, ~70 years or ~40, depending on what level of drilling technology you define as fracking, or how widespread it is (over 100,000 wells). I've seen a lot of Facebook memes about fracking, and the reality is that it's a fairly complex technology with unique benefits, costs and risks.
The economic benefits include plentiful, cheap natural gas, a lot of surprisingly high wage jobs in the field (around $90K on average), and lease payments to property owners, many of whom are rural and of modest means. The environmental costs are industrializing scenic landscapes, increased truck traffic and noise in surrounding areas, and, in some cases, gas leaks which contaminate aquifers.
The earliest 1860's oil wells were drilled straight down and were dry unless they landed a direct hit in oil or gas. From the earliest days, some wildcatters tried to expand the underground footprint of their drilling with dynamite torpedoes being patented very early on. Geologists and petroleum engineers knew additional natural gas was trapped under shale rock. After World War II, the earliest hydraulic fracking was developed, using a high pressure mix of liquids and chemicals to blast fractures in the subterranean rock, allowing gas and oil to escape. But, the quantities were limited until enterprising, small energy companies like Mitchell and Chesapeake Energy developed new methods and technologies that made fracking economically feasible.
Fracked wells tend to run deep, usually about two miles. This takes many of them down through aquifers. In theory, this is no problem because the well piping is encased in concrete, allowing oil and gas to flow upwards for years with no underground leakage. But, as shown in the documentary Gasland, at times, energy companies (e.g. about 50 Mitchell Energy wells in Texas) violated state regulations and didn't concrete encase as much as mandated, leading to gas leaks into the water table, ruining drinking supplies. Even more problematic is that a properly encased well can allow gas to leak out if the concrete is bad (porous) when traversing through aquifers. A controversy rages over how common this is or isn't.
Most traditional Continental United States oil and gas fields are depleted. There are almost unimaginably large oil and natural gas reserves in shale in the United States and other nations. By the 1990's, the Barnett Shale, literally under Fort Worth, Texas, was drilled. Even larger deposits were found in Pennsylvania and North Dakota, turning these states into major oil and gas producers and converting tiny, forgotten communities into boom towns.
Gold considers also the above ground negatives. The wells are unsightly and trucks and pipes run through forests and fields.
But, natural gas is significantly cleaner than coal. Some environmentalists have supported fracking because it emits less carbon than the dirty coal that is still our #1 source of electricity. Gold profiles interesting doings at the Sierra Club, which supported fracking turning neutral-to-negative. The author is very reasonable, pointing out that the world has large and growing energy needs, and in the foreseeable future, most energy will need to come from some sort of carbon fuel. Natural gas has a smaller carbon footprint than coal or even oil.
Lastly, there are philosophical questions, especially in the realm of property rights. If a consenting property owner and an energy company agree to a drilling lease and the well is environmentally safe, do people a thousand miles away have the right to tell them what they can or can't do with their land? On the other hand, US mining law has, for centuries, all but ignored neighbors. You might live adjacent to a parcel that is being drilled, meaning you receive no royalties, but you may be impacted by noise, traffic and disturbed privacy. What of the unemployed or marginally employed Appalachian workers who have gained high wage jobs? What about the geopolitical benefits of energy independence, because United States foreign policy has long been influenced by a desire to secure energy? These and other questions aren't necessarily answered in Boom, but the facts and history here will help you form an educated and nuanced opinion.
I found the historic background and detailed description of fracturing to be helpful and I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in current events on this basis alone. "Fracking" has become highly controversial; I've observed many people are downright emotional about the issue. My take is a fair number of people have little-to-no knowledge what hydraulic fracturing is, how long it's been in use (~150 years, ~70 years or ~40, depending on what level of drilling technology you define as fracking, or how widespread it is (over 100,000 wells). I've seen a lot of Facebook memes about fracking, and the reality is that it's a fairly complex technology with unique benefits, costs and risks.
The economic benefits include plentiful, cheap natural gas, a lot of surprisingly high wage jobs in the field (around $90K on average), and lease payments to property owners, many of whom are rural and of modest means. The environmental costs are industrializing scenic landscapes, increased truck traffic and noise in surrounding areas, and, in some cases, gas leaks which contaminate aquifers.
The earliest 1860's oil wells were drilled straight down and were dry unless they landed a direct hit in oil or gas. From the earliest days, some wildcatters tried to expand the underground footprint of their drilling with dynamite torpedoes being patented very early on. Geologists and petroleum engineers knew additional natural gas was trapped under shale rock. After World War II, the earliest hydraulic fracking was developed, using a high pressure mix of liquids and chemicals to blast fractures in the subterranean rock, allowing gas and oil to escape. But, the quantities were limited until enterprising, small energy companies like Mitchell and Chesapeake Energy developed new methods and technologies that made fracking economically feasible.
Fracked wells tend to run deep, usually about two miles. This takes many of them down through aquifers. In theory, this is no problem because the well piping is encased in concrete, allowing oil and gas to flow upwards for years with no underground leakage. But, as shown in the documentary Gasland, at times, energy companies (e.g. about 50 Mitchell Energy wells in Texas) violated state regulations and didn't concrete encase as much as mandated, leading to gas leaks into the water table, ruining drinking supplies. Even more problematic is that a properly encased well can allow gas to leak out if the concrete is bad (porous) when traversing through aquifers. A controversy rages over how common this is or isn't.
Most traditional Continental United States oil and gas fields are depleted. There are almost unimaginably large oil and natural gas reserves in shale in the United States and other nations. By the 1990's, the Barnett Shale, literally under Fort Worth, Texas, was drilled. Even larger deposits were found in Pennsylvania and North Dakota, turning these states into major oil and gas producers and converting tiny, forgotten communities into boom towns.
Gold considers also the above ground negatives. The wells are unsightly and trucks and pipes run through forests and fields.
But, natural gas is significantly cleaner than coal. Some environmentalists have supported fracking because it emits less carbon than the dirty coal that is still our #1 source of electricity. Gold profiles interesting doings at the Sierra Club, which supported fracking turning neutral-to-negative. The author is very reasonable, pointing out that the world has large and growing energy needs, and in the foreseeable future, most energy will need to come from some sort of carbon fuel. Natural gas has a smaller carbon footprint than coal or even oil.
Lastly, there are philosophical questions, especially in the realm of property rights. If a consenting property owner and an energy company agree to a drilling lease and the well is environmentally safe, do people a thousand miles away have the right to tell them what they can or can't do with their land? On the other hand, US mining law has, for centuries, all but ignored neighbors. You might live adjacent to a parcel that is being drilled, meaning you receive no royalties, but you may be impacted by noise, traffic and disturbed privacy. What of the unemployed or marginally employed Appalachian workers who have gained high wage jobs? What about the geopolitical benefits of energy independence, because United States foreign policy has long been influenced by a desire to secure energy? These and other questions aren't necessarily answered in Boom, but the facts and history here will help you form an educated and nuanced opinion.
July 24, 2014
This is a good summary of fracking and all the controversy surrounding it. The book opens with the author's narration about his parents being approached by an energy company that wants to lease their land, fondly referred to as "The Farm" in rural Sullivan county, Pennsylvania. What follows is an introduction to fracking. How it's done: they inject a mixture of water, chemicals and sand at high pressure deep underground into shale rocks. The high pressure mixture cracks the rock which in turn releases the gas or oil which flows out. The sand serves to prop these fissures open so the flow continues unabated. See the infographic below.
After this introduction, what follows is a brief history/narration of how oil/gas exploration evolved to today's practices. Early efforts included using machines to pound the rocks to no avail. I was intrigued to learn that they even experimented with nuclear bombs(!) detonated underground, all in search of this precious minerals held fast in the rocks. Of course everything that came out after that effort was tainted with tons of radioactive material. The men (there are no women mentioned) driving this industry are an intriguing bunch, almost all grew up in areas where oil was a big industry like Texas and Oklahoma. For some it was something like following in the family business. That fracking has disrupted communities' lives is not in dispute. Russell Gold gives examples of people who signed leases only to be less than thrilled when the drilling was in their front yards, or on productive farmland. He tells of quiet idyllic rural towns suddenly over run with people. To be fair the same thing has happened even to those who didn't sign leases for exploration on their land. Some are just neighbours. Even worse, drilling has occurred where the "mineral rights" were owned by someone else other than the person who owns the house on the land. The legalities presented can be complex and sometimes bewildering. It was interesting reading about the business side of things, how companies such as Chesapeake Energy led by Aubrey McClendon employed very aggressive tactics in order to dominate the industry. Of the current oil boom in North Dakota where they are drilling into the Bakken Shale. I was surprised to learn that North Dakota produced more oil than some OPEC Nations like Qatar and Ecuador in 2013. Of pioneers such as George Mitchell who built Mitchell Energy from scratch while also espousing the ideas of sustainability by donating money to environmental causes and yet strangely enough his own company did not explore renewable sources of energy. He also built the The Woodlands in Houston, Texas where the original plans were based on environmental design principles. As far as environmental concerns go, the book offers some information discussing cases of allegations of contamination of ground water by chemicals used in fracking or methane seeping into water supplies. The companies involved are accused of either flouting the rules or being in such a rush that they don't take the time to think about what could go wrong. In some cases, local laws have proven inadequate in regulating the industry. Overall this is a good overview of fracking as it is used to extract natural gas and oil in the United States and how it has transformed the energy business and landscapes across the country. Engaging, entertaining at times and highly recommended for anyone interested in this topic.
After this introduction, what follows is a brief history/narration of how oil/gas exploration evolved to today's practices. Early efforts included using machines to pound the rocks to no avail. I was intrigued to learn that they even experimented with nuclear bombs(!) detonated underground, all in search of this precious minerals held fast in the rocks. Of course everything that came out after that effort was tainted with tons of radioactive material. The men (there are no women mentioned) driving this industry are an intriguing bunch, almost all grew up in areas where oil was a big industry like Texas and Oklahoma. For some it was something like following in the family business. That fracking has disrupted communities' lives is not in dispute. Russell Gold gives examples of people who signed leases only to be less than thrilled when the drilling was in their front yards, or on productive farmland. He tells of quiet idyllic rural towns suddenly over run with people. To be fair the same thing has happened even to those who didn't sign leases for exploration on their land. Some are just neighbours. Even worse, drilling has occurred where the "mineral rights" were owned by someone else other than the person who owns the house on the land. The legalities presented can be complex and sometimes bewildering. It was interesting reading about the business side of things, how companies such as Chesapeake Energy led by Aubrey McClendon employed very aggressive tactics in order to dominate the industry. Of the current oil boom in North Dakota where they are drilling into the Bakken Shale. I was surprised to learn that North Dakota produced more oil than some OPEC Nations like Qatar and Ecuador in 2013. Of pioneers such as George Mitchell who built Mitchell Energy from scratch while also espousing the ideas of sustainability by donating money to environmental causes and yet strangely enough his own company did not explore renewable sources of energy. He also built the The Woodlands in Houston, Texas where the original plans were based on environmental design principles. As far as environmental concerns go, the book offers some information discussing cases of allegations of contamination of ground water by chemicals used in fracking or methane seeping into water supplies. The companies involved are accused of either flouting the rules or being in such a rush that they don't take the time to think about what could go wrong. In some cases, local laws have proven inadequate in regulating the industry. Overall this is a good overview of fracking as it is used to extract natural gas and oil in the United States and how it has transformed the energy business and landscapes across the country. Engaging, entertaining at times and highly recommended for anyone interested in this topic.
August 16, 2014
I won this book as part of the Goodreads First-Read program.
In recent years the "Fracking" of gas shale and oil shale has come to the forefront of U.S. energy production. With wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and turmoil all over the Middle East the supply of oil has become unstable. It doesn't take much to threaten the supply line and prices have risen and become more volatile. So, a way to make the U.S. more energy independent has been the goal of American Energy Policy.
"The Boom" is Russell Gold's, a Wall Street Energy Writer, look at the technology that has transformed energy production in the United States.
As an aside, I found this book fascinating due to the fact that in the Summer of 1978 I was living in Farmington, New Mexico. A close friend of mine helped me to get a job in the natural gas industry with Halliburton Services. For a short time that Summer I would drive sand trucks and 18 wheel pump trucks up onto the high plateaus of Central New Mexico. It was there at the wellhead, that I would listen to the supervisor over a headset as he told the pump operators how much pressure was needed in order to "Frack" the sandstone in order to release the trapped natural gas and help it's flow to the surface. One of the most spectacular sights to see is when the stacks on the big V-12 engines are shooting flames into the air in the pitch dark of the desert night. So this book has been a way to help me understand mere clearly exactly what it was we were doing.
This book focuses on the type of Fracking that came many years after the jobs I was involved in. We drilled vertically, whereas "The Boom" looks into the history and development of horizontal fracking that allows the extraction of both oil and natural gas that is contained in the shale that resides under the land surface in much of the Country. But we also get to look at the less than scrupulous behavior of the wealthy men that have sought to remove this precious fuel. We also get a look at the leadership of the Sierra Club, America's preeminent environmental group, who becomes subverted by the donation's that are given to the group by one of these wealthy energy entrepreneur's.
One of the disturbing things I found in "The Book" was the callous disregard of the people whose lives had been disrupted all in the name of greed. Men like George Mitchell and Aubrey McClendon would have us believe they drilled for gas for humanitarian reasons when wealth and power was the real reason. We witness the battle between coal and oil and get a close-up look at the rise and fall of Aubrey McClendon and his control of Chesapeake Energy as he races to buy up most of the United States drillable shale. And it is mind boggling to view the billions of dollars that control the energy industry.
Also, Gold looks at the potential negative effects of "Fracking" on the environment, such as the failure of the Deepwater Horizon. The book even makes cementing a well a fascinating subject. This is an excellent look at an industry that has become mired in so much controversy. Russell Gold gives an unbiased look at all sides of this industry and its effects on the people's lives that are directly touched when the energy companies take over their day to day environment, and has done a very good job of helping the reader understand the conflicts that face all Americans in regards to the issues presented in "The Boom". I highly recommend this book.
In recent years the "Fracking" of gas shale and oil shale has come to the forefront of U.S. energy production. With wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and turmoil all over the Middle East the supply of oil has become unstable. It doesn't take much to threaten the supply line and prices have risen and become more volatile. So, a way to make the U.S. more energy independent has been the goal of American Energy Policy.
"The Boom" is Russell Gold's, a Wall Street Energy Writer, look at the technology that has transformed energy production in the United States.
As an aside, I found this book fascinating due to the fact that in the Summer of 1978 I was living in Farmington, New Mexico. A close friend of mine helped me to get a job in the natural gas industry with Halliburton Services. For a short time that Summer I would drive sand trucks and 18 wheel pump trucks up onto the high plateaus of Central New Mexico. It was there at the wellhead, that I would listen to the supervisor over a headset as he told the pump operators how much pressure was needed in order to "Frack" the sandstone in order to release the trapped natural gas and help it's flow to the surface. One of the most spectacular sights to see is when the stacks on the big V-12 engines are shooting flames into the air in the pitch dark of the desert night. So this book has been a way to help me understand mere clearly exactly what it was we were doing.
This book focuses on the type of Fracking that came many years after the jobs I was involved in. We drilled vertically, whereas "The Boom" looks into the history and development of horizontal fracking that allows the extraction of both oil and natural gas that is contained in the shale that resides under the land surface in much of the Country. But we also get to look at the less than scrupulous behavior of the wealthy men that have sought to remove this precious fuel. We also get a look at the leadership of the Sierra Club, America's preeminent environmental group, who becomes subverted by the donation's that are given to the group by one of these wealthy energy entrepreneur's.
One of the disturbing things I found in "The Book" was the callous disregard of the people whose lives had been disrupted all in the name of greed. Men like George Mitchell and Aubrey McClendon would have us believe they drilled for gas for humanitarian reasons when wealth and power was the real reason. We witness the battle between coal and oil and get a close-up look at the rise and fall of Aubrey McClendon and his control of Chesapeake Energy as he races to buy up most of the United States drillable shale. And it is mind boggling to view the billions of dollars that control the energy industry.
Also, Gold looks at the potential negative effects of "Fracking" on the environment, such as the failure of the Deepwater Horizon. The book even makes cementing a well a fascinating subject. This is an excellent look at an industry that has become mired in so much controversy. Russell Gold gives an unbiased look at all sides of this industry and its effects on the people's lives that are directly touched when the energy companies take over their day to day environment, and has done a very good job of helping the reader understand the conflicts that face all Americans in regards to the issues presented in "The Boom". I highly recommend this book.
December 30, 2014
A rather good, ground-level examination of the shale boom from its beginnings in the early '00s to roughly 2012. A couple of takeaways - first, the revolution came about due to incremental tinkering by a few companies with a known technology. The trick was hitting upon the right combination of fluid/pressure/chemical mixture to pump down a well in order crack shale and, most importantly, keep the resulting system of fractures open. In hindsight, that the innovation would come about sooner or later now seems inevitable, but that should nonetheless not takeaway just how big an achievement it was from those who actually made it. As with most discoveries, it's not obvious until it is.
Another takeaway is that the combination of easy finance and the near complete lack of intellectual property rights in 'fracking' has meant the technique has spread like wildfire wherever relatively organic rich and flat, thick shale (like that in Texas, North Dakota, Pennsylvania and Ohio) can be found. Water availability is a major concern, as is having a relatively loose interpretation of subsurface mineral rights that heavily favors the oil/gas industry over surface owners.
A third is that the real issue with fracking in terms of possible environmental contamination (aside from the global warming concerns) is not so much that the shale itself is fractured so much that well cementing is, at best, spotty and slapdash. Companies have no real interest in really determining if their wells are or are not leaking, nor do they at present have much in the way of an incentive to fix or capture those leaks unless they are forced to. If government is going to intervene, ensuing action is taken to properly cement and seal wells seems a no-brainer.
Fourth, as one might expect the players in the shale revolution are a fascinating, motley bunch of corporate types, wildcatters, petroleum engineers, and host of other sundry players that make up the oil industry. People may criticize them, as I do frequently, but these are not dumb people. The technical expertise it takes to do what these folks have done in such a short amount of time is a remarkable story in and of itself. Kudos to them - pay the Devil its due.
Fifth, the weakest part of the book is its discussion of how fracking will influence climate change. Will it speed it up? Hinder it because we are transitioning to a less carbon-heavy fuel? Hard to say, but coal is certainly hurting. Environmentalists might be advised to fight one enemy at a time - after all, after we fought the Nazis (coal) we then turned on the Soviets (oil/gas). The same logic should apply - use one enemy to fight another.
Sixth, there is very little discussion of what the global implications are. Left largely unsaid is the notion that fracking shale will quickly spread to other countries. Although this is starting to happen, especially in Argentina, the global roll out of the technology has so far been proven rather bumpy and disappointing. So far the US and, to a lesser extent, Canada have been shown to have the right combination of geology, institutions, and incentives for the shale boom to have really taken off. We'll see how well it fares elsewhere in the future.
Overall, the book is highly recommended if you are interested in a basic history of the shale boom that has taken place in the last few years.
Another takeaway is that the combination of easy finance and the near complete lack of intellectual property rights in 'fracking' has meant the technique has spread like wildfire wherever relatively organic rich and flat, thick shale (like that in Texas, North Dakota, Pennsylvania and Ohio) can be found. Water availability is a major concern, as is having a relatively loose interpretation of subsurface mineral rights that heavily favors the oil/gas industry over surface owners.
A third is that the real issue with fracking in terms of possible environmental contamination (aside from the global warming concerns) is not so much that the shale itself is fractured so much that well cementing is, at best, spotty and slapdash. Companies have no real interest in really determining if their wells are or are not leaking, nor do they at present have much in the way of an incentive to fix or capture those leaks unless they are forced to. If government is going to intervene, ensuing action is taken to properly cement and seal wells seems a no-brainer.
Fourth, as one might expect the players in the shale revolution are a fascinating, motley bunch of corporate types, wildcatters, petroleum engineers, and host of other sundry players that make up the oil industry. People may criticize them, as I do frequently, but these are not dumb people. The technical expertise it takes to do what these folks have done in such a short amount of time is a remarkable story in and of itself. Kudos to them - pay the Devil its due.
Fifth, the weakest part of the book is its discussion of how fracking will influence climate change. Will it speed it up? Hinder it because we are transitioning to a less carbon-heavy fuel? Hard to say, but coal is certainly hurting. Environmentalists might be advised to fight one enemy at a time - after all, after we fought the Nazis (coal) we then turned on the Soviets (oil/gas). The same logic should apply - use one enemy to fight another.
Sixth, there is very little discussion of what the global implications are. Left largely unsaid is the notion that fracking shale will quickly spread to other countries. Although this is starting to happen, especially in Argentina, the global roll out of the technology has so far been proven rather bumpy and disappointing. So far the US and, to a lesser extent, Canada have been shown to have the right combination of geology, institutions, and incentives for the shale boom to have really taken off. We'll see how well it fares elsewhere in the future.
Overall, the book is highly recommended if you are interested in a basic history of the shale boom that has taken place in the last few years.
July 22, 2018
Page 18 - "Source rock is where plankton turned into hydrocarbons. There is no further back. This is it."
That right there is what made me want to continue reading the book [I usually give books the first 2 chapters to really pull me in]. It's not ominous, it's not written with flourish. It's just a fact.
I just want to preface anything that follows with, I love this sort of unbiased delivery of information. It's historically accurate and chronicles how hydraulic fracturing [fracking] was discovered and how countries [though our primary focus lies in America] are using it to increase their energy output. Gold doesn't just start at fracking, he puts a lot of effort into the research and accurate delivery of how the oil and gas ended up in shale rocks, the issues that pushed researchers to search for other ways of getting oil out of the ground, the process of fracking, the people behind the boom itself and all those that came after, even those that suffered from the boom.
Gold doesn't try to persuade us into being proud of this country's fracking progress, he's not trying to build America up to be some high and mighty oil tycoon, he's not sugar coating the things companies did to get their oil. Nor is he trying to actively demonize the CEO's and companies, he's not advocating for the immediate cease to fracking and for the entire country to switch over to renewable energy over night. Gold is simply stating the truth; here's how oil is made, here's how it got into shale rocks, here's who figured out how to get the oil out of it, here's how the boom started and spread, and here are the advancements that came of it as well as the consequences [because so few acts are without consequence].
I also appreciate that the writing isn't very heavy [f that makes sense], sure Gold utilizes the jargon of the trade but it's never overwhelming or difficult to read. I personally didn't think it was a dry read, but I can see how if someone isn't a big nonfiction reader, or isn't too interested in the oil and energy industry might find it difficult to get through this book, trust me it's incredibly informative, and I feel you'll definitely gain from this knowledge. And if you're worried about the length of the book, don't be, the actual information about fracking is only 310 pages long, the rest is the thank you ad acknowledgments, sources, and citations [which are also full of a ton of awesome information if you want to read more].
And while I respect it for trying to remain an unbiased work, there is something that sticks painfully to me; this is a form of fuel that not only [through use] is damaging the planet, it it is also not renewable, and thus not sustainable. To this day fracking makes up a large of the amount of fuel America consumes [not just on our own continent but on others]. If not for the sake of people's health and safety, then we should at least be more concerned with finding a better, hopefully renewable, energy source. Because one day, maybe someday soon, those money pits are gunna dry up, and then what the hell are we gunna do?
That right there is what made me want to continue reading the book [I usually give books the first 2 chapters to really pull me in]. It's not ominous, it's not written with flourish. It's just a fact.
I just want to preface anything that follows with, I love this sort of unbiased delivery of information. It's historically accurate and chronicles how hydraulic fracturing [fracking] was discovered and how countries [though our primary focus lies in America] are using it to increase their energy output. Gold doesn't just start at fracking, he puts a lot of effort into the research and accurate delivery of how the oil and gas ended up in shale rocks, the issues that pushed researchers to search for other ways of getting oil out of the ground, the process of fracking, the people behind the boom itself and all those that came after, even those that suffered from the boom.
Gold doesn't try to persuade us into being proud of this country's fracking progress, he's not trying to build America up to be some high and mighty oil tycoon, he's not sugar coating the things companies did to get their oil. Nor is he trying to actively demonize the CEO's and companies, he's not advocating for the immediate cease to fracking and for the entire country to switch over to renewable energy over night. Gold is simply stating the truth; here's how oil is made, here's how it got into shale rocks, here's who figured out how to get the oil out of it, here's how the boom started and spread, and here are the advancements that came of it as well as the consequences [because so few acts are without consequence].
I also appreciate that the writing isn't very heavy [f that makes sense], sure Gold utilizes the jargon of the trade but it's never overwhelming or difficult to read. I personally didn't think it was a dry read, but I can see how if someone isn't a big nonfiction reader, or isn't too interested in the oil and energy industry might find it difficult to get through this book, trust me it's incredibly informative, and I feel you'll definitely gain from this knowledge. And if you're worried about the length of the book, don't be, the actual information about fracking is only 310 pages long, the rest is the thank you ad acknowledgments, sources, and citations [which are also full of a ton of awesome information if you want to read more].
And while I respect it for trying to remain an unbiased work, there is something that sticks painfully to me; this is a form of fuel that not only [through use] is damaging the planet, it it is also not renewable, and thus not sustainable. To this day fracking makes up a large of the amount of fuel America consumes [not just on our own continent but on others]. If not for the sake of people's health and safety, then we should at least be more concerned with finding a better, hopefully renewable, energy source. Because one day, maybe someday soon, those money pits are gunna dry up, and then what the hell are we gunna do?
July 3, 2015
Another Audible book cheat, but hey knowledge is knowledge
"The Boom" and Greg Zuckerman's "The Frackers" are the best two books on the shale revolution that I have read. Both are by well regarded journalists and Zuckerman had done a great job telling the tale of John Paulson's great mortgage short bet.
I would say that Russell Gold, energy beat reporter for the WSJ has the better of the two books in "The Boom". Gold pursues 3 narrative threads to explain the shale boom. The 1st is what really cements this conclusion is Gold's telling the micro-story of how Mitchell Energy was able to develop the fracking tech that enabled them to get more and more gas out of the Barnett shale and how that revolutionary process spread and adopted by an initially highly skeptical energy industry. 15-20 years ago nat gas development on the plains outside of Fort Worth was considered a marginal biz, but Mitchell's engineers pieced together a new method to use the long running oil field practice of fracking. At first the industry thought Mitchell was cooking the numbers on its production, but once the truth dawned on them a mad scramble for shale assets ensued.
The 2nd thread centers around the rise and fall of Aubrey McClendon who took a small Oklahoma energy company, Chesapeake Energy and by going "all in" on shale was able to create a multi-billion $$ enterprise. This was done through a combination of deploying a veritable army of landmen to secure drilling rights in just about every major shale play in the lower 48 of the US and borrow fantastic amounts of $$ to finance it all. McClendon was also was one of the first to recognize that in order to keep demand for nat gas ahead of supply from the shale boom, coal would have to be displaced as a key source of utility power generation. As early as 2006 McClendon under wrote an "astro-turf" campaign to paint nat gas as the green/enviro friendly alternative to coal. He made large donations to the Sierra Club tied to their advocacy of nat gas over coal and backed campaigns across the US to fight building new coal powered plants. Eventually McClendon's methods flew too close to the sun and investors began to question his leadership...he was deposed in 2012.
The last thread tackles the litany of environmental concerns regarding fracking. Gold's own parents owned a farm in rural PA that sat atop the Marcellus shale and had any number of gas companies bidding for the drilling rights. His parents and a number of their neighbors were highly skeptical and became even more put off when the development of the Marcellus picked up. Gold documents a number of incidents where accidents and bad practices created deaths and fouled water supplies.
"The Boom" and Greg Zuckerman's "The Frackers" are the best two books on the shale revolution that I have read. Both are by well regarded journalists and Zuckerman had done a great job telling the tale of John Paulson's great mortgage short bet.
I would say that Russell Gold, energy beat reporter for the WSJ has the better of the two books in "The Boom". Gold pursues 3 narrative threads to explain the shale boom. The 1st is what really cements this conclusion is Gold's telling the micro-story of how Mitchell Energy was able to develop the fracking tech that enabled them to get more and more gas out of the Barnett shale and how that revolutionary process spread and adopted by an initially highly skeptical energy industry. 15-20 years ago nat gas development on the plains outside of Fort Worth was considered a marginal biz, but Mitchell's engineers pieced together a new method to use the long running oil field practice of fracking. At first the industry thought Mitchell was cooking the numbers on its production, but once the truth dawned on them a mad scramble for shale assets ensued.
The 2nd thread centers around the rise and fall of Aubrey McClendon who took a small Oklahoma energy company, Chesapeake Energy and by going "all in" on shale was able to create a multi-billion $$ enterprise. This was done through a combination of deploying a veritable army of landmen to secure drilling rights in just about every major shale play in the lower 48 of the US and borrow fantastic amounts of $$ to finance it all. McClendon was also was one of the first to recognize that in order to keep demand for nat gas ahead of supply from the shale boom, coal would have to be displaced as a key source of utility power generation. As early as 2006 McClendon under wrote an "astro-turf" campaign to paint nat gas as the green/enviro friendly alternative to coal. He made large donations to the Sierra Club tied to their advocacy of nat gas over coal and backed campaigns across the US to fight building new coal powered plants. Eventually McClendon's methods flew too close to the sun and investors began to question his leadership...he was deposed in 2012.
The last thread tackles the litany of environmental concerns regarding fracking. Gold's own parents owned a farm in rural PA that sat atop the Marcellus shale and had any number of gas companies bidding for the drilling rights. His parents and a number of their neighbors were highly skeptical and became even more put off when the development of the Marcellus picked up. Gold documents a number of incidents where accidents and bad practices created deaths and fouled water supplies.
June 9, 2014
"Civilization has been heading toward source rock for a few thousand years; toward the geological kitchen where heat and pressure turned organic material into hydrocarbons. Now, with fracking, there's a lot more oil and gas to be extracted. But once we've reach source rock, we've gone as far back as possible. You can't devise technology to dig deeper and reach even further back in geologic time. Source rock is where plankton turned into hydrocarbons. There is no further back. This is it." (18)
"In 1967, drillers discovered Alaska's enormous Prudhoe Bay oil field a couple hundred miles north of the Arctic Circle. Years later, floating drilling platforms tapped into massive oil and gas deposits in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, a long helicopter flight from shorefront homes. The shale boom is different. Wells spread out across entire counties. As of 2013, more than fifteen million Americans lived within a mile of a well that had been fracked in the past few years. This new proximity between wells and homes is one of the defining features of the new energy landscape." (19)
"Before the S.H. Griffin #4, the industry had been fracking its wells for nearly five decades. It had used hydrochloric acid, nitroglycerin, napalm, thick gels, and even nuclear bombs [Project Plowshare]. [Nick] Steinsberger showed that there was a simpler way: water, lots and lots of water." (129)
"Back in January 2007 ... US energy consumption released 543 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in a single month. ... Five years later, in January 2012, the United States sent 479 million metric tons into the air. That's a 12 percent reduction. If you drill down into the data, you will discover that coal plants released 48 metric tons less, a 25 percent reduction. Better fuel efficiency from cars running on gasoline and diesel led to a 17-million-metric-ton drop, down 11 percent. Increased use of natural gas to generate electricity, run factories, and heat homes led to a 14-million-metric-ton increase, or about 11 percent." (265)
"In 1967, drillers discovered Alaska's enormous Prudhoe Bay oil field a couple hundred miles north of the Arctic Circle. Years later, floating drilling platforms tapped into massive oil and gas deposits in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, a long helicopter flight from shorefront homes. The shale boom is different. Wells spread out across entire counties. As of 2013, more than fifteen million Americans lived within a mile of a well that had been fracked in the past few years. This new proximity between wells and homes is one of the defining features of the new energy landscape." (19)
"Before the S.H. Griffin #4, the industry had been fracking its wells for nearly five decades. It had used hydrochloric acid, nitroglycerin, napalm, thick gels, and even nuclear bombs [Project Plowshare]. [Nick] Steinsberger showed that there was a simpler way: water, lots and lots of water." (129)
"Back in January 2007 ... US energy consumption released 543 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in a single month. ... Five years later, in January 2012, the United States sent 479 million metric tons into the air. That's a 12 percent reduction. If you drill down into the data, you will discover that coal plants released 48 metric tons less, a 25 percent reduction. Better fuel efficiency from cars running on gasoline and diesel led to a 17-million-metric-ton drop, down 11 percent. Increased use of natural gas to generate electricity, run factories, and heat homes led to a 14-million-metric-ton increase, or about 11 percent." (265)
August 14, 2015
very well researched and well written book about fracking and the people and processes involved in its evolution. this wasn't a book trying to win over disbelievers, nor was it giving a thumbs down to this relatively new industry. it was very concise, and included much more than fracking. particularly interesting to me were sections regarding renewable energy and how it could be used alternately with gas/oil -- to help enlighten some who think oil and gas are our only means of energy. the history of fracking is fascinating; its process is scary (information regarding chemicals used are proprietary, so therefore not pubicized); and the individuals and companies who have profited were sometimes well-meaning, but mostly unconscionable.
although so many of my questions were answered, so many new questions and concerns regarding fracking arose. although its future is certain, and in many ways necessary, i have my concerns about fracking having grown too much and too fast and without enough long-term concern. we do, after all, have our environment, ecosystem and the health of our future generations to worry about.
my takeaway from this book is that fracking is a pandora's box. that fracking is a state-mandated process/product in other countries vs. an industry of privately-owned companies here in the u.s., makes me feel that regulation is something that should be considered here too, as profits over people seems to be the order of the day for privately owned companies. the fact that new drills continue to be set up before further research is done on how to stop them from leaking and breaking apart underground, that ever more fields and forests are torn down, that ungodly amounts of toxic waste ponds are leaching chemicals into our groundwater, dissipating into our air -- worries me. i would hope that our need for ever increasing amounts of fuel and the way we obtain it soon becomes a more pressing concern for the majority.
although so many of my questions were answered, so many new questions and concerns regarding fracking arose. although its future is certain, and in many ways necessary, i have my concerns about fracking having grown too much and too fast and without enough long-term concern. we do, after all, have our environment, ecosystem and the health of our future generations to worry about.
my takeaway from this book is that fracking is a pandora's box. that fracking is a state-mandated process/product in other countries vs. an industry of privately-owned companies here in the u.s., makes me feel that regulation is something that should be considered here too, as profits over people seems to be the order of the day for privately owned companies. the fact that new drills continue to be set up before further research is done on how to stop them from leaking and breaking apart underground, that ever more fields and forests are torn down, that ungodly amounts of toxic waste ponds are leaching chemicals into our groundwater, dissipating into our air -- worries me. i would hope that our need for ever increasing amounts of fuel and the way we obtain it soon becomes a more pressing concern for the majority.
September 5, 2016
A very interesting read, even for someone like me with essentially no ties to the oil and gas industry beyond average-level consumption and, oh yeah ... sharing the same planet. Russell Gold dug up some very interesting bits of fracking history including early fracking experiments using torpedoes, jet fuel, and (not kidding) underground atomic fracking blasts (some in Farmington NM, no less!). Overall, I was surprised how much progress in the industry has come about from simple trial-and-error. ("Hmmm ... maybe this will blow up more of the things? Sure, toss it down!") The science of it all came very slowly and very late.
And there's much more here than just 'how to frack'. He captures the competing priorities and perspectives of homeowners and drillers and government oversight with both local examples and at a macro-level. His work on Big Gas's war on coal, partly through corruption of a large environmental advocacy group or two, is fascinating. And he's very convincing when explaining that the primary environmental dangers don't come from the fracking (which occurs thousands of feet below aquifers and productive ecosystems), but from poor drilling practices and regulations -- especially often weakly bonded and insufficient cement around the wells.
In the final analysis, we end up where he started: "There are no easy answers to the energy puzzle. There are unforeseen costs and necessary evils". p.4 If we can manage the US fossil fuel boom in the short term while we transition to preferred options in the longer-term, we just might make it. But current practices and oversight will have to improve or we'll have a planet that's not worth living on before we're done. In this, as in so many things, balance is the key.
And there's much more here than just 'how to frack'. He captures the competing priorities and perspectives of homeowners and drillers and government oversight with both local examples and at a macro-level. His work on Big Gas's war on coal, partly through corruption of a large environmental advocacy group or two, is fascinating. And he's very convincing when explaining that the primary environmental dangers don't come from the fracking (which occurs thousands of feet below aquifers and productive ecosystems), but from poor drilling practices and regulations -- especially often weakly bonded and insufficient cement around the wells.
In the final analysis, we end up where he started: "There are no easy answers to the energy puzzle. There are unforeseen costs and necessary evils". p.4 If we can manage the US fossil fuel boom in the short term while we transition to preferred options in the longer-term, we just might make it. But current practices and oversight will have to improve or we'll have a planet that's not worth living on before we're done. In this, as in so many things, balance is the key.
Read
April 29, 2014Either the story of the shale gas revolution is so interesting you cant mess it up; the two authors who wrote about it are both really good writers; or I'm just really interested in the story. Because I just read essentially the same book a couple months ago, and still really liked this. Same deal as "The Frackers" - this tells the geological/technological story about how the unconventional gas boom happened, and some of the key figures (theres Aubrey McClendon and George Mitchell again - can someone make a documentary about these fascinating characters??). Where "The Boom" differs is in a much more detailed recounting of the ground-level community impacts of shale gas production - both environmental impacts (not that different from conventional oil/gas production - i.e. well integrity matters A LOT - so unclear why fracking has generated so much outrage), to the much more intrusive "nuisance" impacts (truck traffic, noise, etc) because of the extreme drilling intensity (i.e. rigs per area) that unconventionals require. Russell Gold's own hippie leftist parents sold their mineral rights for shale drilling, so he is particularly interested in talking to homeowners about what the surge in drilling has done to their lives. One thing I had not known anything about that made for interesting reading was an alliance between Chesapeake (Aubrey McClendon's company) and the Sierra Club - McClendon gave the Sierra Club millions of dollars to fund an anti-coal campaign (guess who benefits when coal is demonized? natural gas, and therefore Chesapeake), and when this was found out, it divided the Sierra Club so bitterly that the longtime head of SC was forced to resign.
April 27, 2014
The Boom is two parts: Part I is a brief history of the oil and energy industry. While important to understand where we were, it is less interesting than the second half: where we are now and what impact it may be having on our global environment.
If you have seen Josh Fox's film Gasland, you may have been as appalled at fracking as I was. I'm may still be, even after learning more about it after reading The Boom. I'm still not 100% convinced that this is the right way to go. As Russell Gold points out in the second half, natural gas is presenting itself as an intermediate step towards renewable energy technologies. He also points out that our new-found cheaper, "lower cost" fuel in the form of gas, could be allowing two things to occur.
Gas could be a great intermediate step away from dirty coal and obnoxious governments controlling the worlds main sources of oil while allowing us to further develop clean and renewable energy sources in wind and solar. On the other hand, it could slow down developments in wind and solar because it is less expensive. We may be lulled into a false sense of security by the greater supply. We need to remember, however, that it is still a fossil fuel and continues to contribute methane, a greenhouse gas, to the atmosphere. The side effects are the possible pollution of aquifers and ground contamination, the excessive use of water needed to sustain population centers, diesel fuel used to power trucks bringing equipment to sites adding pollution and destruction of natural resources by drilling.
If you have seen Josh Fox's film Gasland, you may have been as appalled at fracking as I was. I'm may still be, even after learning more about it after reading The Boom. I'm still not 100% convinced that this is the right way to go. As Russell Gold points out in the second half, natural gas is presenting itself as an intermediate step towards renewable energy technologies. He also points out that our new-found cheaper, "lower cost" fuel in the form of gas, could be allowing two things to occur.
Gas could be a great intermediate step away from dirty coal and obnoxious governments controlling the worlds main sources of oil while allowing us to further develop clean and renewable energy sources in wind and solar. On the other hand, it could slow down developments in wind and solar because it is less expensive. We may be lulled into a false sense of security by the greater supply. We need to remember, however, that it is still a fossil fuel and continues to contribute methane, a greenhouse gas, to the atmosphere. The side effects are the possible pollution of aquifers and ground contamination, the excessive use of water needed to sustain population centers, diesel fuel used to power trucks bringing equipment to sites adding pollution and destruction of natural resources by drilling.
May 28, 2015
I received this book from Goodreads' First Reads program.
Russell Gold is an energy journalist, and his book is a book of the kind of journalism that we all say we want: balanced, even-handed, presenting the facts from both sides of the debate, and letting us, the readers, make up our own minds.
He tracks the origins of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," as it's more commonly known, up to the modern-day boom in the United States. He examines the in-the-dirt science of what happens when a natural gas well is fracked, but he also spends a lot of time looking at the people, the personalities, that have led to this massive boom in U.S. natural-gas drilling. Gold doesn't hesitate to criticize gas companies who let profits get in the way of safety, and he encourages everybody involved to ask hard questions about the safety of these wells. But he doesn't ignore the good things that the gas boom has done, such as partially freeing Americans from reliance on foreign fuel and even reducing carbon emissions (because gas burns cleaner than coal).
Gold's book is a great way to learn the basics of the fracking without receiving an indoctrination.
Russell Gold is an energy journalist, and his book is a book of the kind of journalism that we all say we want: balanced, even-handed, presenting the facts from both sides of the debate, and letting us, the readers, make up our own minds.
He tracks the origins of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," as it's more commonly known, up to the modern-day boom in the United States. He examines the in-the-dirt science of what happens when a natural gas well is fracked, but he also spends a lot of time looking at the people, the personalities, that have led to this massive boom in U.S. natural-gas drilling. Gold doesn't hesitate to criticize gas companies who let profits get in the way of safety, and he encourages everybody involved to ask hard questions about the safety of these wells. But he doesn't ignore the good things that the gas boom has done, such as partially freeing Americans from reliance on foreign fuel and even reducing carbon emissions (because gas burns cleaner than coal).
Gold's book is a great way to learn the basics of the fracking without receiving an indoctrination.
November 19, 2015
I received this book as a Goodreads First Reads Giveaway. I liked that this book elaborated on both sides of the fracking argument, even though it's pretty clear from his writing that the author is more "pro" than "anti" fracking. I would have liked to have seen more written about the correlation between earthquakes suddenly popping up in areas where there are a lot of fracking wells. There was no mention at all of this in the book, but I think it's a very important aspect to investigate.
There was some mention of the contamination of water by leaked oil wells, but the author sort of swept it under the rug by basically saying, "Well, accidents happen sometimes but at least it doesn't happen to all of the wells!" But to be fair, it was obvious that the journalist who wrote the book had done a lot of research on the subject, both on the history of the industry and on the people involved in the business of oil.
I would recommend this book to anyone that is curious about the fracking/oil industry or anyone just trying to see both sides' point of view on the topic.
There was some mention of the contamination of water by leaked oil wells, but the author sort of swept it under the rug by basically saying, "Well, accidents happen sometimes but at least it doesn't happen to all of the wells!" But to be fair, it was obvious that the journalist who wrote the book had done a lot of research on the subject, both on the history of the industry and on the people involved in the business of oil.
I would recommend this book to anyone that is curious about the fracking/oil industry or anyone just trying to see both sides' point of view on the topic.
July 14, 2014
Received via Goodreads First Reads.
I first became peripherally aware of shale oil/gas and fracking on a trip to Colorado several years ago, so this book was of interest to me.
The Boom is informative, easy to understand (even by a non-technical person such as myself), and provides not only a good picture of where the industry is now, but a good overview of the industry's history and some of the people involved.
A little bit of the environmental side is also shown as well -- some of the folks, some possible impacts, etc.
What impressed me the most about the book is that Mr. Gold tries to show all sides - the benefits, the downsides, what is good, what is wrong, what could be done better. He also doesn't "sell" this as the "be all, end all" solution to the ever growing demand for energy and fuel.
Very good read.
I first became peripherally aware of shale oil/gas and fracking on a trip to Colorado several years ago, so this book was of interest to me.
The Boom is informative, easy to understand (even by a non-technical person such as myself), and provides not only a good picture of where the industry is now, but a good overview of the industry's history and some of the people involved.
A little bit of the environmental side is also shown as well -- some of the folks, some possible impacts, etc.
What impressed me the most about the book is that Mr. Gold tries to show all sides - the benefits, the downsides, what is good, what is wrong, what could be done better. He also doesn't "sell" this as the "be all, end all" solution to the ever growing demand for energy and fuel.
Very good read.
May 5, 2014
I just finished this as we were discussing the topic on Facebook. I admit I had my reservations when I saw the author wrote for the Wall St. Journal which is usually blindly pro-free market and heavily for deregulation. He proved to be very thorough and balanced in his treatment of fracking, showing the downside and the potential upside. He does reveal the disturbing practices and deception used by the fracking companies and how they use inadequate equipment, cause a lot of damage, and resist any type of oversight. Well worth the read if you wish to investigate the topic further. I did not care for all the comprehensive biographical sketches, but other than that, it moved along quite well. Readers should be advised that there is a great deal of technical talk in the narrative, but that is necessary to hone in on the major points.
June 8, 2015
I received this book for free as a through the First Reads program in exchange for an honest review. i requested it because of the politics around Fracking.
This history of the American Energy Revolution was a very interesting read. It started with the wildcatters and followed the early energy pioneers up to modern day fracking. It seems to be a very balanced recital of the history of the energy industry. The book was not a dry recitation of facts but a history and biography of the bigger than life players. Being interested in history, I really enjoyed reading this book and if gave me some interesting insights to both sides of the fracking dispute. It explained how some communities made a very disrupting form of gas and oil extraction possibly safer and less distracting and gave some possible regulations which would make frackiing more palatable..
This history of the American Energy Revolution was a very interesting read. It started with the wildcatters and followed the early energy pioneers up to modern day fracking. It seems to be a very balanced recital of the history of the energy industry. The book was not a dry recitation of facts but a history and biography of the bigger than life players. Being interested in history, I really enjoyed reading this book and if gave me some interesting insights to both sides of the fracking dispute. It explained how some communities made a very disrupting form of gas and oil extraction possibly safer and less distracting and gave some possible regulations which would make frackiing more palatable..
February 18, 2016
As my grandfather and Son in law are petroleum geologist, this book captured my interest. Mr Gold relates the stories of the entrepreneurs, geologist and engineers that lead the USA to energy independence from the Middle Eastern sheiks. They did not work for big oil which continued the search in Russia, Iraq and venezuela to not much success. Thanks to the wildcatters Mr Gold presented, many from Oklahoma, we now have high known reserves in relative unpopulated areas that can be mined to provide the benefits of low cost cleaner energy across the world. My grandfather had tried to influence me towards geology and I loved the geologist's optimism expressed in this book. These optimists provided the recent developments out in the oil and gas patches that has so changed our outlook for energy in just a few short years.. Perhaps my Grandfather should have tried harder.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 104 reviews