Bulgaria Considers Benefits & Risks of Shale Gas

The government hopes shale gas will help cut Bulgaria's dependency on Russian supplies, but environmentalists worry about the toll drilling it might take.

Bulgaria's ambitious plans to develop shale gas production, billed as a way to reduce dependency on Russian supplies, cut energy costs and even generate profit for the EU's poorest nation, has spurred heated debate about its possible environmental impacts.

At a special conference on the risks and benefits of shale gas production last month, Energy Minister Traicho Traikov announced that a contract on the exploration of possible deposits in the northeast area of Novi Pazar will be signed with US energy giant Chevron. Under the deal, Chevron would give Bulgaria 30m euros for the rights to prospect and explore the area.

The money would go directly to the state budget, Traikov said, pointing to one immediate short-term benefit. He was also eager to ease public tension and fear about the environmental impact, saying that this process is "in no way different from any other drilling" for natural gas and will be conducted under strict supervision and in line with all legal norms.

Environment Minister Nona Karadzhova noted that exploration activities would take at least a year, with actual production expected in ten to 15 years and only after detailed environmental impact assessments.

Some experts, invited by the ministry to participate in the discussion, commented that the drilling is a "trivial procedure" and risks are no higher than conventional production. They say the environmental threats involved are insignificant when compared to the expected amounts of shale gas in the region.

Traikov estimates that there are at least one trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Novi Pazar deposit that could cover local consumption over the next 300 years. Many have questioned this, but most agree the amounts are significant.

Some specialists suggest shale gas production may lower natural gas prices in the country by 8% to 30%. Speaking at another discussion days later, Hristo Kazandzhiev from the Bulgarian Energy Forum said the biggest effect would be heightened competition that would force companies to lower their prices to maintain their market share.

All these arguments, however, were countered by environmental organisations that insist no price or benefit would be sufficient to compensate for the ecological harm the possible production, and even drillings, would cause.

"The truth is that there is no comparable data [about the possible impact of shale gas production] in our region; the technology is only ten years old," Petko Kovachev, an activist with the Green Party told SETimes.

"There is no information about the specific impacts of the production process on human health, although there are people working in the areas who have reported some health problems," he added. The region, he notes, where the potential deposits are located is densely populated, unlike most other places in the world where shale gas is extracted.

Another problem he cites is the pollution of soil and water in the process -- hydraulic fracturing, or fracking -- which involves injecting large amounts of water, sand and chemicals into shale rock formations at high pressure to force out oil and natural gas.

"It is obvious that half of the water that is pumped in remains under the earth and is in fact a polluting substance," says Kovachev. This pollution affects mostly underground waters in an area that has suffered continuous water shortage issues.

The main opposition Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) has also been quite vocal in its rejection of the shale gas exploration and production project. The BSP insists on performing an environmental impact evaluation before the actual exploration work begins, rather than after that and ahead of production activities, which are the government's plans.

"Unlike prospecting and exploration of conventional natural gas, shale gas exploration represents a single technological production attempt, which means that drilling for shale gas production is in no way different from the drilling made in the prospecting and exploration phase," BSP lawmaker and member of parliament's environment commission Georgi Bozhinov told SETimes.

"The same chemicals and abrasives are used in the experimental phase as the ones used in the production phase," he added. "This experiment is made using a huge amount of water solution... We should be sure that in case some of this water solution leaks out, it won't harm the environment... That's why we want an environmental impact assessment for the prospecting and exploration phase."

"And after we have the results of the seismological research, the structure of the earth layers, and all those guarantees that this information will provide, after the experts give their opinion and the people are convinced, then these experiments could go ahead," he explained.

"We suggest holding a serious scientific discussion about the method, the particular conditions in Bulgaria, prevention we should secure, and ways to minimise the risk. And after this discussion, carry out an environmental impact assessment for the drillings. And if everything is alright, then they could go ahead with the project," Bozhinov said.

Asked to comment on its plans in Bulgaria, Chevron told SETimes in an e-mail statement that officials "look forward to working with the Bulgarian authorities and bringing our experience in exploration and environmental protection to progress this opportunity".

Source:  Southeast European Times

Related Reading:  Shale Gas to be Issue in Bulgarian Presidential Election