♪ next, a special edition of kqed "newsroom." the firestorm over fracking. it's propelled a domestic energy boom around the country, but the process remains controversial. >> no fracs for us. >> in california, fracking is sparking concerns about potential effects on groundwater quality. >> regulations don't protect you. >> proponents say it's safe and ness. >> you can kill for it or drill for it. i prefer to drill for it. >> what are the risks, can we regulate them and will fracking become more common place in california?

>> good evening. welcome to kqed "newsroom." i'm thuy vu. we devote the program to examining hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking. it uses water, sand and chemicals breaking up rocks to increase oil and gas production. fracking is not yet widely used in california. but questions about the environmental impacts in other states have triggered calls to ban it here. we begin where the issue is going before the -- >> the film "vertigo."

>> today, just around the corner from the famous church, a different kind of drama is unfolding. a grass roots group called san ber nieto rising has put an initiative on the november ballot that asked the voters to ban the oil and gas technique. they say it uses large amounts of water. >> the misuse of water in a drought time is the big issue. you know? even some of the farmers and the farm workers around here are very concerned about that because that means jobs. >> even though they produce little oil and none of it through fracking it's the first county in california to qualify an anti-fracking initiative. it is leading a trend of those fighting to ban the practice. >> are you paying attention, governor brown? ban fracking and hydraulic drilling in all of california

now. >> environmental groups have called for a moratorium or ban on fracking in california. governor jerry brown's decision in 2013 to allow fracking to continue prompted the group to take action. >> working with politics sometimes is very challenging, and so that's how we decide the initiative process would be delayed. >> her message is resonating in a county where agriculture is a $3 million business. it takes as much money to frac in california as it does to grow one acre of strawberries. she is worried that it can pollute the wells. >> the river has been dry for over a year. it should have been running. >> this winter, there was only enough grass for 700 cows. not the 2,000 that usually feed on calhoun's ranch. >> it is obvious right now that water is the most precious thing

that we have. so i have personally supported the initiative with money. with funding. >> fracking in california has mainly been confined to some oil fields in kern county. the top oil producer. widespread fracking in other states has led to boons in oil and natural gas production. there it's being extracted from shale, where fuel is tightly stored. this looks like a layer in a cake, and extends for miles. so producers drill horizontally to access as much as possible from a single well. then they pump water, mixed with sand and chemicals at high pressure to fracture the rock. u.s. gee logical survey why control agists are working to get the methods out. >> they all have at their basis

a gelling agent so that it can hold the sand. when it sits in place. and then they add another compound to make the gel collapse. and when it collapses it leaves the sand behind. >> the sand is a conduit and the sand and the chemicals also flow to the surface and are captured. >> maybe they don't put it in the tanks or into the trucks. and in doing that, there are many opportunities for a mistake or a leak to occur. above somebody's fresh groundwater resource. that presents a risk. >> the hbo documentary "gas land part 2" documents the wells contaminated. a 2013 screening in santa cruz moved people to ask the director for advice. >> what he told us is that regulations don't really protect you. you have to stop it.

>> but governor jerry brown favors regulation over a ban. he signed a law in 2013 that calls for state agencies to create regulations by 2015 based on the results of a series of studies. >> i signed a bill that is requiring not one, but two scientific studies. deep studies on the effects of fracking. on water, on seismic activity, on air, on land use. >> the usgs' thomas hopes they come up with rules. >> the first line is the regulation of the well construction. if the wells are built properly, then the risks to ground water are minimized. the second thing would be regulations involving fluid handling at the surface. >> while the rules are finalized, companies must obtain a state permit and test

groundwater if neighbors request it. geologists wonder whether a boon in fracking in california is even likely. given its unique geology. >> i think any reasonable analysis would have to recognize there's a huge amount of uncertainty there. >> california has the same type of oil-rich shale rock as places like north dakota. but california's monterrey shale has been producing that all along. >> these organic shales, they have been fractured, they have been shaken by earthquakes. they have been faulted. they very effectively have generated this oil and the oil has been expelled from the source rock. migrated up into the big traps. and been produced in california for 125 years. the question is, how much if any oil remains behinds in the source rocks? it is completely reasonable to think that most of the producible, that is the recoverable oil has been expelled. and migrated away somewhere. >> california's geology is so

complex that the department of energy recently slashed by 96% its projection of how much of the state's shale oil might be recoverable. but big oil companies say they still see potential for fracking in california. >> does that look like a good location? >> yeah. >> meanwhile, some small producers have their own concerns about the anti-ballot measure. the initiative calls for a ban on two other oil extraction techniques commonly used across the state. >> the impact of this initiative on our project would be devastating. >> the company, citadel exploration, has drilled the first of up to 15 exploratory wells in southern san bonito to see how much is there. >> my project can bring significant tax revenue to the county, upwards of $3 million a year. >> the project is using a method called cyclic steam injection.

about half of oil in california is extracted with similar methods. designed to heat up oil that's too thick to flow. >> you take a single well bore, inject steam into it for two weeks. you then let that steam soak in ground and then you put that well back on the pump and start to produce it back. >> if the initiative were to pass, citadel wouldn't be able to move from exploration to production. >> it is an absolute anti-hydrocarbon initiative. it is attempting to outlaw all methods of oil extraction. not only fracking but a number of other means of just well stimulating. >> it is a threat to the oil industry. i admit it that it probably is, if you're an investor that that is a problem. but we feel that it is time to really start moving very significantly off of fossil fuel. we can have a much brighter future. alternative energy is technologically ready to be

used. i think the only barrier is political at this point. >> but most transportation is still fueled by petroleum and the state imports 60% of its crude oil from alaska and countries like iraq. >> i served in operation iraqi freedom. i say very simply and some people say crudely that you can drill for it or kill for it. but that's just the truth. so i prefer that we drill for it here. >> the 42,000 voters will get their chance to decide if they agree in november. >> that story was reported by gabrielle kuros and lauren summer. a group in santa barbara county has put a similar initiative on the november ballot and county supervisors in santa cruz bans fracking in may. scott schafer takes it from here

with a look at why it's mobilizing political and industry group. >> the california department of conservation is responsible for bringing the regulations around hydraulic fracturing and the process has been underway a year now. later i'll be joined by guests here in the studio, but first, i spoke with the chief deputy director, jason marshall. jason marshall, welcome. >> good afternoon. >> let me begin by asking you this. you're in the process of developing more permanent rules for fracking. what are some of the environmental issues, some of the concerns you have as you go about that? >> well, as we're looking at the rules for hydraulic fracturing, we are looking at a couple of key pieces. one of them is well integrity, well construction is really important to making sure that the oil and water in the ground and as the oil comes out of the ground that they don't mix. we're taking a look -- close look at the groundwater monitoring provisions. a very big change with senate bill 4 from last year. and it's to make sure that there has been no contamination of groundwater and then lastly, there's some very important

neighbor notification provisions and public notification provisions after the hydraulic fracturing or other well stimulation takes place. >> there was some concern that they did not require oil companies to release the specifics of the chemicals that they were using, saying that they were proprietary. has that been changed? >> i was real clear about the trade secrecy provisions. there's a number where they cannot disclose the information and in all cases our department will be getting that information. that is information that is disclosed to the public after the hydraulic fracturing event. but it is also what they anticipate to use is disclosed up front. >> california of course is in the middle of a historic drought and fracking requires a lot of water. should in be -- will there be regulations limiting the amount of water that these companies can use? >> well, our regulations don't deal with how much water they

use, but they do include provisions for identifying what they call a water management plan. so where did the water come from, what other uses could it have been put to. so there's a clear understanding about the volumes of water being used. >> but is it even a good idea to move forward with a process given that agriculture is starved for water? they would say, and, you know, individual users are being asked to cut back. i mean, is it the right time to move ahead with something like this? >> well, there's really two things that are going on there. one of them is that operators can increasingly use what some people would call recycled water that came out of to hydrocarbon zones. some of them already do that. but the other thing we'll discover as we go through this water management planning process is just how much water is being used. by our understanding, with the current methods of doing hydraulic fracturing, oil and gas operations use about 160,000 gallons of water per hydraulic fracturing job, but the important thing is to know how much water is being used and

where it's coming from. >> is it possible to have environmentally friendly fracking or is it inherently there's a risk involved, just as there is with other oil production? >> hydraulic fracturing it's an industrial process an there are risks associated with that. the purpose of our regulations is to identify the risks and to make sure we have appropriate protections to ensure the protection of the public health and safety. >> here we are in earthquake country. there are some studies, a recent one i believe, in cornell showing a link between the injection of waste water from fracking into the ground and earthquakes. up to 3.0 magnitude. how concerned are you about that? >> well, the disposal of waste water is something that's been going on in california for decades. 3 billion barrels of waste water is injected into california's aquifers by existing oil and gas

operations. either to water disposal wells or to enhanced oil recovery into existing oil fields to help increase production. so from the point of view of an additional amount of water being injected, into that system, not as concerned but let's be clear. our regulations and the revision we just made to them make it very clear that there's a monitoring for seismic activity that needs to make place during hydraulic fracturing operations. anything above a 2.0 we'll know about it. it will be reported. >> quickly, what's at stake here? you have to get this right, don't you? >> well, i think what's at stake is confidence in the public. public's mind that the rules are strong enough to protect them and the environment from any of the risks. what's at stake for the industry is to know that they have complied with some stringent rules. that affect this practice. >> all right, jason marshall from the california department of conservation, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. and joining me now are

lauren summer, the science reporter andqs@ scott detrow, sacramento bureau chief. and david vacar, energy reporter. welcome to all of you. david, of course the state is responsible for drafting these regulations, ultimately implementing them i guess. how is the state doing? >> well, it's interesting to watch. the state agency in particular that is in charge of all of this, the department of conservation and within that the division of oil, gas and geothermal resources, this is putting them in a role they didn't have before. they have always been in charge of making sure that oil field operations are run the right way in the state. but this whole process is giving them sort of a public prominence that they just are not used to. they're going to be conduits of information between oil companies that are doing fracking around the state and the public. and that's not really something they have much experience with in the past. >> a lot of emotion around this

as well, so the public is paying close attention. >> exactly. that said, they do appear to be moving to implement everything that the legislature asked them to do with that law last year, sb-4. and the rollout of that is not as fast as a lot of people like, but they're making progress on it. the legislature also though did not give them too much leeway in some of the major things. they basically have their marching orders to what they need to do. >> lauren summer, take us through the numbers -- not literally, but in the sense of how much fracking potential is there in california? because we have heard this is going to make california like texas. and then we think, maybe not. i have heard it's revised downward. what are the reer is -- reserves, what's the potential? >> well, we have the shale here in california. a few years ago it was a huge estimate about how much oil was there, 13 billion barrels of oil. just a month ago it was downgraded to 600 million barrels. >> that's a huge drop. >> a huge drop.

and where the change comes from is an estimate of how easy it is to get the oil out of the ground. the real number, maybe it's somewhere in between, but we're hearing from all sides. some people think we're not going to be north dakota and others say the potential is there. and the companies will figure out how to get that oil out. >> how does that change in the possibilities of fracking change the interests that companies have in investing or even, you know, going about trying it? >> i mean, the oil industry in the state is very old. it's been around for a century. the easy to get stuff has been gotten. some of the old oil fields are starting to slow down. the reason that fracking is of interest because there's a lot of the source rock where the oil comes from. that's where you'll see the investment. when some of the reserves that have been so prolific in california start to wind down. >> the fracking here would result in oil getting extracted. scott detrow, you used to report

back in pennsylvania where fracking is huge, and how is the political environments different back there? >> one big difference is in pennsylvania, you know, the drilling industry was started in pennsylvania. but then it went away for a while. and this natural gas boom was in parts of the state -- rural parts of the state that hadn't seen this before. all of a sudden, you have major industrial trucks coming in, you have these wells popping up. and it really completely changed the face of a lot of the reuschel commune -- rural communities there in pennsylvania. i think it will be different in california. it's located in parts of the state that have a legacy of oil drilling. i don't think you will see total shifts in places where you haven't seen drilling before. but when you talk about fracking, it's the dale. >> california is a highly regulated state especially when it comes to the environment. pennsylvania not so much? >> you have republican

governors, you have republican legislature who have made it clear that their goal was to work with the natural gas industry to ramp it up. to the point of texas. their goal was to become the texas of natural gas they'd like to say. but -- so, you know, they did eventually put a lot of the regulations in place that california is talking about now. in fact, if you look at all of the states that have drilling, by and large the regulations are all in the same ballpark. but the difference is that pennsylvania waited until its boom was several years in already before it did the regulations. and what california is doing well better than other states is that it's putting this in place before the boom comes. >> so is there a sense that we can learn from north dakota and pennsylvania, from either mistakes or just any aspect of this so that we don't get into trouble in places that maybe they have? >> well, i think one of the things you touched on there is what's driving this debate in california. you know? in western pennsylvania, you had an area that was mostly farm fields or woods. so absolutely beautiful place to be. i used to report there myself. and then it turned into a

semi-industrial area with oil fields operations of natural gas operations all over the place. most of the fracking, almost all of the fracking happening in california right now is in the area we have always had oil operations in the state. mostly kern county, yeah. and people outside of that area don't want to become that. they don't want their homes to turn into an oil extraction zone. they have seen what happened in pennsylvania. that's exactly what gets them so scared of what could happen here. >> to any of you, is what happened in pennsylvania scary? >> well, i mean, it depends, because yes, there's a massive industrialization. and if you like your small, quiet town, you have a problem with that. but you go to the towns and the truth is, people are making $80,000 a year to drive trucks around and they just graduated from high school. there's a lot of money that comes with this. there's a lot of second and

third and fourth and trickle down of benefits that come with the drilling boom. a lot of people say that's great, i understand there are consequences. i'm happy to make money here too. but pennsylvania has seen one minor recession when the price falls out and people stop drilling, all of a sudden those jobs dry up very, very quickly. >> and the particular problem here in california, the concern is that the new areas that people are worried about, maybe there's an expansion of oil drilling happened to be ag areas, farms. so you have people concerned about groundwater, concerned about the impact on their land. that's where we're starting to see some of the tension. >> you mentioned groundwater and agriculture relies on that. but people do for their drinking water. i think that's the scary thing for folks. one of them. without knowing it or only when it is too late will they realize that the groundwater has been contaminated. how serious a risk is that? >> well, there are a lot of studies about that in other parts of the country where we do have fracking. there's no definitive answer on

it. no definitive study you can point to. there are ones in pennsylvania and also in texas, southern texas, where people have gone in, looked at well water and found a lot of chemicals that you would not normally expect to find. like in texas, they're found fairly elevated levels of arsenic. that's not something that you want to be drinking, but they didn't find it consistently around every well. it was sort of a hit and miss kind of thing. so that's part of why people are so emotional about this issue. there isn't really a bedrock of knowledge we can all point to and say, okay, we agree. this is the situation we're facing. >> scott detrow, this is an election year and governor brown has had a split with environmentalists who are calling for a moratorium and the governor is sort of taking the same position that president obama is, all of the above. let's explore it, let's be careful, but this is sort of a transitional fuel. what kind of political pressure if any is the governor feeling? >> this is actually a real tension point at the democratic convention earlier this year, the state convention.

the governor was giving his acceptance speech for the party's nomination and he was interrupted -- the end of the speech was interrupted by anti-fraccers by allowing it to take place here. i think you're seeing this become more and more of a main issue for grass roots democratic supporters. when you look at how the bills put a tax in place or to overall ban it, they never seem to have enough votes in the legislature. so i think that's a tension point that's going to continue between party activists and party leaders. >> lauren, yeah, go ahead. >> that shift we're seeing, they're going at a local level now. there are a lot of cities in colorado and new york that have banned it on the city level. so that's what california activists are trying to do here. well, let's do a piecemeal approach. >> there's a nuclear free zone in berkeley, and it's working really well. would that pass in kern county or even santa barbara?

>> i think santa barbara is a real test. they're right next to ventura county and it's a sizable industry. that's where the push back will be. >> that's a perfect place to test how they stack up against each other, because santa barbara has oil production and an ag community and they tend to lean conservative politically. but this is their water we're talking about. >> well, they have had their own tensions with environmentalists. >> yeah. so we'll see exactly how it shakes out. i think that's the most interesting county to watch. >> in kern county there's a truce between ag and oil, because they don't want to criticize each other. could we get to a point especially with this drought where, you know, something is going to break? >> yeah. it's interesting because most of the time, groundwater is not a big topic in the state. this year because of the drought, 60% of the water supply will come from groundwater in a year like this. the tensions are really flaring because of the drought. you have two industries that want to get along.

there are a lot of jobs that come from both of them. but i think the drought will make it worse. >> scott detrow, do you have any sense of this becoming an issue in the governor's race from the republican side? >> yeah, neel kashkari is a big proponent of the oil, he's a full embracer of the fracking process. kind of a typical republican line you have heard. but one of the many areas where he'll try to draw contrasts. >> that and the bullet train. >> the crazy train as he calls it. fair to say, it will be part of the conversation. >> all right. scott detrow, i'm sorry, we should out of time. david baker, "san francisco chronicle" energy reporter. and lauren summer, science reporter. thank you all very much. thuy, back to you. thank you, scott. we'll be following the process as regulations are finalized in the coming months. for more in depth coverage in

california, please go to kqed.org/fracking. i'm thuy vu. thank you for watching and have a good night.

( clock ticking loudly) ( alarm rings) (horn honking) i just don't see why it suddenly landed in my lap. good morning! i'm on my way now, sir. move, gerry! good morning! is it? third time lucky. good morning, brian. ah, sod the lot of you! ♪ it's all right, it's okay ♪