We are going to “pierce, baby, drill and export the energy of the United States to the world.” The new White House tenant Donald Trump has never hidden his energy intentions and has not taken a few days to take measures to enhance the production of fossil fuels. Chris Wright, CEO of Liberty Energy, a company dedicated to the fracking technique, already appears as the leader of the Department of Energy and in a few hours, the president, declared the climate emergency to prioritize oil and gas. This translates into new pipelines such as Keystone XL and Dakota Access; It also opens the door to perforations in the Arctic (Alaska), and, of course, Leave fracking free, the controversial technique that has led the country to import energy to become one of the main gas and oil producers in the world –In 2024 it became the first country of origin of the gas that matters Spain.
The technique began to experience in 1940. «It was common in conventional deposits, when a well deteriorated. Oil and gas flowing from rock formation drag solids, clays, sand, etc. There are times when the well wall gets stuck, such as when you take a strainer and there comes a time that does not strain, the solids stuck to the wall remain and no longer produce. At that time you have to fracture them. Fracking is the ABC of the oil industry. What is the fundamental difference between what is done now and what has been done historically? Before, conventional deposits were fractured, in them the oil and the gas that we exploited was stored at a lot of pressure. However, these fossils are not formed where they are stored, but in deeper mothers rocks. What has been achieved is to directly exploit the mother rock, where there is a lot of gas and oil that, it is said, has not migrated. Today you reach those rocks that are 2,000 or 3,000 meters deep, several wells are made horizontally, the oil is fractured and extracted, ”explains José Antonio Sáenz de Santamaría, a geologist and mining disseminator.
The truth is that the history of fracking in the US is something irregular since projects massively began to appear last decade. Behind these fluctuations is the price of crude oil or international geopolitical decisions. At the beginning of the pandemic, at the beginning of 2020, the value of oil collapsed and with it, the number of platforms dedicated to fracking. Some companies threw the closure and many analysts wondered if the golden age of fracking had not been left behind. However, the Ukraine War and the EU’s decision to become independent of Russian gas reactivated the activity. In 2023, the US exported an average of 4.1 million barrels per day, that is, 13 percent more than the previous record established in 2022. «Right now, With the barrel of crude between 70 and 80 dollars, Fracking is profitable. Even if it goes down, up to at least 50 would remain profitable. The technology is being developed and the production expenses are lower, ”says Ramón Rodríguez Pons-Esparver, deputy director of the ETS of Mining and Energy Engineers of the Polytechnic University of Madrid.
But what happens if the price of crude oil? A little before the elections, Bloomberg analyzed precisely the possibility that “Trump’s promises meet a world excess of crude that, finally, it would end up moderating record production of shale. The analysts surveyed by the advice already foresee that the US would finally only add a few thousand barrels, «the slowest rhythm since the fall through the pandemic. There are few tools that Trump can use to change this situation. Opening new federal lands to exploration would take time, and some of its other proposals – such as a commercial war with China – are seen as bassists for oil, ”says the medium.
The International Energy Agency has also ruled on the same line recently, warning of a world surplus of supply of one million barrels a day with the new barrels of Guyana, Brazil and Canada, at least in the first quarter and waiting for new OPEC decisions. It seems that it is not so clear that this activity grows as much as Trump wants.
Environmental problems
This technique is accused of contaminating ground and superficial waters, of possible gas escapes or of increasing earthquakes. Complaints and studies against fracking come long. A 2014 study of the American Geological Service linked an increase in the number of earthquakes in the states of Colorado and New Mexico with the hydraulic fracture. The New York Times newspaper denounces in a report of 2024 that companies in addition to drilling to get natural gas, They are drilling to extract more and more water more depth: «Fracking has consumed about 5,679 million liters of water since 2011. That is the amount of tap water that uses the entire state of Texas in a year ». “No one would think that in the United States people would bring water to the houses only to be able to shower,” you can read, in turn, on the France24 website; An inhabitant of Dimoc recounts the situation that the residents of this town of Pennsylvania, one of the great centers of republican vote (where Trump’s candidacy for Trump’s candidacy for the promises of cheap gasoline). “The surface and underground waters that are used to supply homes have contaminated both the chemicals used during the hydraulic fracturing process that residents have lost access to clean water,” says the medium.
Even at the work level the advantages also do not seem such according to several American publications that suggest that while companies are extracting more than ever, They generate 25% less employment that a decade ago.
Hungry for energy
“Without hydrocarbons there would be no way to produce the huge amounts of steel and cement that support our world,” said the Liberty Energy CEO to highlight that even wind turbines, solar panels and batteries are made of materials for its manufacture that They require huge amounts of thermal energy derived from hydrocarbons ». These statements serve to remember, as the experts consulted point, that the consumption of energy and fossil fuels continue to grow. The Energy Institute report (Professional Organization of Engineers and other professionals in the energy sector) published last June states that The world consumption of primary energy reached a new record in 2023, with a 2% increase compared to the previous year. «Despite a year of extraordinary growth of renewable energy, the consumption of fossil fuels and emissions reached new maximums. The world consumed more than 100 million barrels per day for the first time. Although in Europe consumption fell and was below 70% for the first time from the industrial revolution and in the United States also decreased slightly (80% of primary energy), in other economies it grows. It accelerates in India and many African countries, overcoming the growth of renewable energy. For the first time, the consumption of coal in India surpassed that of North America and Europe together … the proportion of fossil fuels in the combination of China’s primary energy has been decreasing since 2011, although absolute consumption is still high, ”he says The text.
For Santamaría it is clear that «humanity will be unable to leave gas, oil or coal. I do not want to say with this that you do not have to put wind and solar and all these things, which is very good, but the problem we have is not of energy transition, but of energy addition. Any type of energy that we are able to put on the table will be consumed. When India, Brazil, South Africa and other emerging countries come to have our standard of living will consume the same as us, they will not change some energies for others, all the energy that may occur will be used, come from where it comes from. In the EU, with all how green we are, we consume 400 million tons of crude oil last year, ”he says. A large part of the EU countries, such as Spain prohibits fracking, but we import large amounts of US gas from fracking, as they have often denounced environmental movements.
For its part, Pons-Esparver speaks of the need for a diversified mix that ensures contained energy prices: «Energy cannot be eternally super face, because the industry goes where it is cheaper. The transition is not a step, because the important thing is the background context. Demand grows and you have to satisfy it at a reasonable price. That is why each country, depending on what they can take advantage of and the energy dependence that you want to have in third countries, will have a mix with more participation of some energies or others, fossils or renewable. We have transmitted the transition as if it were a step, a change but we must not take to deceive. Spain despite the participation of renewables in the Mix, continues to consume a million barrels per day, ”concludes Pons.
An environmental deregulation agenda
The president’s agenda in environmental matters has soliviant to civil movements such as Earthjustice, legal arm of the environmental movement, as they define themselves, affirm that of the 900 pages of the 2025 project presented before the elections, 150 are dedicated to dismantling the regulations that They protect the environment. Dismantle the law of endangered species implies the elimination of protections for gray wolves and Yellowstone brown bears; Weakening the clean air law involves eliminating part of the law that requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish health quality standards based on health. In addition, Trump wants to end the investments in clean energy that collected the inflation reduction law, which affects the electric cars produced by President Elon Musk’s friend (which promises to “compensate” with more investments for his mission To Mars.