Berlin (energate) - The discussion about the extraction of natural gas from unconventional deposits has picked up speed again due to the energy crisis. Ulf Kämpfer, president of the Association of Municipal Companies (VKU - Verbandes kommunaler Unternehmen) since November 2022, explained in an interview with energate why the benefits of fracking are manageable from an energy industry perspective and why the dangers far outweigh the potential benefits.
energate: As a result of the energy crisis, the extraction of natural gas from unconventional deposits is once again being debated in Germany. In the past, the VKU always took a clear position against fracking. Has anything changed in this regard?
Kämpfer: No, for the following two reasons: Firstly, the extraction of natural gas from unconventional deposits through fracking could not make a decisive and necessary contribution to the energy supply. Secondly, we see dangers for the security of the water supply. We should not take these risks under any circumstances. Basically, we have to diversify our energy sources and also look for new gas suppliers. This is important in order to remain independent of Russian gas and to secure supplies.
It would take years before German fracking gas could make a significant contribution to the energy supply. First legislative procedures at the federal level, then testing, planning and participation procedures as well as approval procedures in mining law at the state level, finally several test drillings, not to mention the question of economic viability. That alone takes years, to be honest. The high investment costs would only be worthwhile if the extraction were also operated in the long term. But then we are in a time when we want to get away from fossil fuels.
Let me be clear: fracking would not get us through this winter or the next, nor is it a real prospect for the future at a time when we must focus all our efforts on expanding renewable energies and decarbonising society. At worst, the trend towards climate-neutral solutions and green hydrogen could falter. I also don't even see the beginnings of acceptance for fracking among the population.
energate: What are your biggest concerns about fracking?
Kämpfer: I have already mentioned that we overestimate the effect on supply security. Then there is the concern about the security of our water supply. We obtain 70 per cent of our drinking water from groundwater. Of all things, fracking for natural gas could endanger these resources. With increasing climate change, water is becoming a scarce commodity in some regions and thus even more precious. We must therefore be more careful with this resource. By using fracking technology, we would be recklessly putting our groundwater at risk. A groundwater body that would be contaminated as a result of fracking from unconventional deposits is irreparably damaged. We therefore reject fracking in catchment areas of drinking water production and also water protection areas. The rules in the Water Resources Act (Wasserhaushaltsgesetz) are still correct: no general ban on fracking, but clear priority for the safety of drinking water resources.
energate: Natural gas producers claim that extraction methods are more environmentally friendly today than they were a few years ago. How do you assess this statement?
Kämpfer: The fact that fracking from unconventional deposits is said to be more environmentally friendly today does not mean that it is risk-free. Not even the three expert reports on which the most recent report of the Fracking Expert Commission was based were able to completely dispel the concerns. A residual risk to groundwater remains. Fracking wells can in practice lead to irreversible contamination and damage to drinking water resources or drinking water supply facilities. In the case of drinking water supply, we cannot take such risks with a sighted eye. We are dependent on intact water resources in order to secure the nationwide supply of drinking water and to be able to maintain it for future generations.
energate: The expert commission you mentioned advocates that at least the legally possible research boreholes be realised. In your view, would that contribute to gaining knowledge?
Kämpfer: Indeed, there are gaps in knowledge and research, as the commission itself admits. So far, no research institution and no company interested in extraction by means of fracking technology has used the legal possibility for test wells or even announced it. This rather suggests that no potential is seen for a timely significant contribution to supply security in Germany through fracking. After all, I don't need to spend a lot of time and effort researching a technology that I don't absolutely need to secure the energy supply and that counteracts our exit from fossil energy production as quickly as possible.
energate: Do you expect fracking to become an issue again in Germany? Or do you believe in a continuation of the current fracking ban?
Kämpfer: There is no general ban on fracking. Since 2017, fracking has been banned in shale, clay or marl rock or coal seam rock, i.e. in the so-called unconventional deposits. Fracking, on the other hand, is permitted primarily in dense and impermeable sandstones and carbonates, so-called conventional deposits. The prerequisites are that these areas are outside water protection areas and catchment areas for drinking water production and that only conventional fracking, i.e. without water-polluting mixtures, is used. This is checked beforehand in an environmental impact assessment. So far, no company has wanted to get involved.
For the turn of the times, we have to ask ourselves: What makes sense? And what does not make sense? Do the benefits outweigh the harms? In the case of fracking, I believe that anything that does not decisively help the energy industry now and can then also harm the drinking water supply will not find a majority in this country. The discussions about the increased use of geothermal energy and possibly also CO2 storage under the seabed will be difficult enough, so we should not tie ourselves to the fracking controversy.
The questions were asked by Christian Seelos.
