Defending fracking has become heresy. Those who dare to point out the benefits it would bring to the country risk being labeled as enemies of the environment in the media and digital bonfire. The mere word causes rejection or apprehension, and positions on the topic are often taken with precarious or biased information. What should be a technical and informed discussion has turned emotional and even politicized.
Oil and gas were not generated where they are usually found (geological traps). It occurred deeper in what is known as “source rock” or “generative rock” and, over millions of years, ascended accumulating in conventional reservoirs. But not all hydrocarbons migrated; only those trapped in porous rocks did. The rest, which remain in the source rock, are called Unconventional Reservoirs.
One example is the La Luna formation, located in the Magdalena Medio and Venezuela. In the neighboring country, the rock was porous and the hydrocarbon ascended in large volumes; in Colombia, it did not. Venezuela has 300 billion barrels of reserves, we have 1.782M; they have enough for 230 years, we have enough for 5.6 years. Since it is the same formation, it is likely that there is oil and gas trapped on the Colombian side.
And the way to verify its existence is to explore using fracking, a stimulation technology similar to that used in many conventional reservoirs in Colombia. With this, one descends to the generative rock and drills horizontally. Then, with pressurized water, sand, and additives, microfractures are created in the rock to facilitate the controlled release of the trapped hydrocarbon to the surface.
Having this technique clear, its discussion mainly has three dimensions: environmental, economic, and energy security. Regarding the first, there are concerns mainly about its impact on water resources. For example, there is worry about whether it could contaminate aquifers, and if given the volume of water required to fracture the rock, it could leave other activities without water.
Although fracking requires a significant volume of water at the beginning, it is necessary to put it in perspective. To fracture a well, for example, it requires the equivalent of watering a golf course per month; and that water, once the rock is fractured, is extracted and reused in the drilling of the next wells. And in the order of priority for access to water resources, the hydrocarbon industry is one of the last in the use of this resource.
Something similar happens with other concerns, many of them valid, given the little knowledge that exists on the subject and, it must be said, the deliberate misinformation that some lead. Thus, the risk of contaminating an aquifer – due to breakage or fractures in the pipe – is very low and, except for specific cases, due to nearby geological failures – the process does not pose a seismic risk. The other dimension is economic and energy security. The fiscal framework is based on a premise that is not guaranteed: a sustained production of 860,000 barrels/day, which with current reserves and declining mature fields, is impossible. The only way is to double the reserves to have something to produce from, unless we find an equivalent to what Cusiana was, by developing unconventional reservoirs. The above, if the country wishes to remain self-sufficient in hydrocarbons and have surpluses for export.
The other option is that the industry declines in production, ending up importing oil and gas – surely at higher prices – passing on to Colombians via taxes what the sector contributes to public finances or significantly reducing public investment, as it is not easy to replace oil revenue.
The good news is that there is no need to choose between fracking or water, as the Minister of Mines and Energy says, it is feasible to use this technique responsibly and safely. The risks, inherent to all human activity, are clearly identified and can be prevented.
Hence the need to have an informed discussion on the subject. Unfortunately, many have been led to believe that they must choose between water and oil and that fracking is a destroyer of water sources, which is not true. And given the sensitivity it arouses, the environmental issue – which should concern us all – has become a political battleground, accentuated by misinformation in some media.
Colombia has been trying for nearly ten years to initiate exploratory drilling to validate whether or not there is oil and gas trapped in the generating rocks, with one of the strictest regulations in the world. Isn't it time to conduct a serious, informed, and technical analysis on the subject, when self-sufficiency in oil and gas, fiscal sustainability, and the opportunity to generate more economic and social development for all Colombians are at stake?
Francisco José Lloreda Mera
President of the Colombian Petroleum Association
Colombian Association of Oil and Gas