Fracking in U.S. is going electric, but critics say that’s far too little
fracking — as oxymoronic as it sounds — is gaining traction across the United States. But since it still extracts the very oil and gas that fossil-fuel critics want the world to stop consuming, not everyone’s convinced.
The process of fracturing shale rock formations under high pressure by blasting water, sand and chemicals deep underground is an inherently dirty business. Once a typical shale well is drilled, a frack fleet descends on the site, hooking up a series of giant diesel pumps that can run uninterrupted overnight. At any one time, there can be upward of 220 such fleets working across the U.S.
In response to the attention of environmentalists and investors scrutinizing its ESG — or environmental, social and governance — credentials, the industry is increasingly touting electric or low-diesel machines that are replacing conventional diesel fleets. The number of U.S. frack fleets running on electricity or a mixture of diesel and natural gas skyrocketed to more than 100 in September, making up about 45 percent of the country’s working fleets. That’s more than three times the 30 or so in use before COVID-19, according to Joseph Triepke, partner at energy researcher Lium. He estimates efracking or dual fracking fleets will make up about 55 percent of active fleets next year.
The new systems, which started to gain traction in 2019, not only offer lower emissions but also potential fuel-cost savings for operators. But critics say whatever emissions are being eliminated during the fracking process are still dwarfed by those created when the oil and gas that’s extracted ends up being
burned. Plus, there’s the inconvenient truth that fracking is still fracking. The loud and messy process has been accused of contaminating water supplies and causing earth tremors, though advocates argue the fuel it extracts can help the U.S. move away from dirtier coal.
Switching to electricpowered frack fleets “doesn’t really matter in the overall scheme of things, if you look at the emissions associated with the life cycle of natural gas,” said Arvind Ravikumar, a research associate professor in the petroleum and geosystems engineering department at the University of Texas at Austin. “This would be like buying a plane ticket to go from New York to Tokyo but then wringing your hands over whether you should take the stairs at the airport or the escalators. It really doesn’t make a difference.”
The debate over the issue — which the industry has dubbed “Esg-friendly” fracking — is just one example of how fossil fuel companies are trying to cut emissions while maintaining production. That poslow-carbon
ture may be increasingly difficult to maintain as more investors push energy companies to lower their footprints, including those hard-to-quantify “Scope 3” emissions, or those released by a company’s supply chain and customers. The push for more action is gaining speed: This year, Royal Dutch Shell was ordered to reduce carbon emissions by 45 percent by 2030 by a Dutch court, while Esg-minded investor Engine No. 1 won a boardroom battle with Exxon Mobil Corp.
Still, advocates of e-frack technology say every little bit counts, especially as talk of the energy transition moves quickly in the industry. E-fracking lets companies cut some emissions without trimming actual output. Customers like it, too, for the promised cost savings and how green it sounds.
For those frackers not making the switch, it’s often because they still have a glut of diesel-powered machinery to use.
At Halliburton Co., the world’s biggest provider of fracking services, “probably 40 percent or 50 percent”
of fleets are already “capable of natural gas burning in some fashion,” said Michael Segura, the company’s vice president of production enhancement. That gives it the country’s largest Esgfriendly frack fleet, he said, noting that the company may consider converting more if customers want it.
Halliburton recently deployed an all-electric fracking fleet in the Marcellus shale that it says reduced emissions for Chesapeake Energy by 32 percent — though that’s a fraction of total emissions once Scope 3 from the fossil fuels’ enduse consumption is taken into account. That helps explain why true net-zero, the ultimate goal of some sustainable investors, is such a monumental task and why critics say e-fracking is only tinkering around the edges of the challenge.
“Typically, they use electric motors anyway. It’s just a question of where do they draw the power from,” said Ed Hirs, energy fellow who teaches energy economics courses at the University of Houston. When it comes to e-fracking, “it’s just a new name.”