FracFocus disclosures published between May 4, 2026 and June 8, 2026
Tag Archives: Colorado
Bayswater Exploration – 460600: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
This article analyzes chemical disclosures from the Bayswater Exploration well pad “Dehaan South,” highlighting discrepancies between FracFocus and the ECMC database.
Bonanza Creek – 471040: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
This post analyzes chemical disclosure data for Bonanza Creek Energy’s well pad, comparing the FracFocus system with Colorado’s ECMC database. It reveals both systems report the same fracking events, but ECMC lacks some required disclosures, including five missing chemicals. This highlights compliance gaps in accordance with Colorado’s law.
Extraction 451214: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
We compare chemical disclosures from FracFocus with Colorado’s ECMC database for a hydraulic fracturing job operated by Extraction Oil & Gas in Weld County. The study finds an unexpected anomaly: 5 chemicals appear only in the FracFocus disclosure.
Extraction – 483031: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
This analysis highlights differences between Colorado’s new ECMC database and FracFocus for an Extraction Oil and Gas well pad.
Laramie – 391336: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The well pad in this comparison is anomalous with only two products and no proppant. Even then, the ECMC and FracFocus disclosures are different.
Comparing Product Lists in FracFocus and ECMC disclosures
Comparing the product lists from one source to two separate disclosures instruments uncovers inconsistencies that undermine both instruments.
Laramie Energy – 455725: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The post compares Colorado’s new ECMC database to FracFocus, revealing significant data gaps in chemical disclosures for fracking.
Bison VI – 466299: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The comparison of two fracking chemical databases reveals that FracFocus is incomplete, missing 15 chemicals.
Verdad Resources – 474767: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The analysis reveals unexpected gaps in chemical disclosures between FracFocus and Colorado’s ECMC database, contradicting expectations of increased transparency.
Verdad Resources – 468727: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The comparison of two fracking chemical databases reveals that FracFocus is incomplete, missing 15 chemicals.
Crestone Peak – 487289: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The analysis compares fracking disclosures for Crestone’s “Invicta Pad 3-65 28,” revealing FracFocus data gaps and ECMC’s more comprehensive chemical reporting.
Noble Energy – 459220: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The analysis reveals discrepancies in chemical disclosures between FracFocus and ECMC’s database, identifying previously unlisted chemicals.
Noble Energy – Galeton: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
We examine the chemical disclosures of the site of the Galeton catastrophic blowout. The ECMC disclosures appear to be incomplete.
Kerr McGee – 481939: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The post analyzes chemical disclosures from the Kerr McGee “Paul Nelson 25-29HZ” well pad, highlighting significant gaps in FracFocus data compared to Colorado’s ECMC database.
Kerr McGee – 485208: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The comparison of two fracking chemical databases reveals that FracFocus is incomplete, missing 17 chemicals, including hazardous ones that ECMC disclosed.
PDC Energy – 461939: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The analysis reveals unexpected gaps in chemical disclosures between FracFocus and Colorado’s ECMC database, contradicting expectations of increased transparency.
PDC Energy – 460107: FracFocus to ECMC comparison
The comparison reveals ECMC’s transparency over FracFocus, disclosing 42 additional chemicals and highlighting compliance gaps in chemical reporting.
An update about Colorado’s chemical disclosure site
New: Visit this page to view up-to-date status on Colorado disclosures and more information. On May 20, 2025, PSR Colorado, the Sierra Club and the FracTracker Alliance released a report on the status of Colorado’s chemical disclosure program that was created by a 2022 law. The Guardian published an article about the report and theContinueContinue reading “An update about Colorado’s chemical disclosure site”
FracFocus Trade Secrets in Colorado
Open-FF found 13,166 Colorado wells with trade secret records. Broad patterns and examples are illustrated.
Drilling chemicals are missing from Colorado’s disclosure system
Summary: When it comes to understanding industry’s use of chemicals, Colorado’s 2022 disclosure law is a welcome step towards transparency. The law clearly stipulates that all chemicals used “downhole” – including drilling and fracking materials – must be reported. However, our analysis of the current data reported through the ECMC’s website finds no evidence thatContinueContinue reading “Drilling chemicals are missing from Colorado’s disclosure system”
Colorado: chemical quantity omissions
Open-FF found 1,602 Colorado wells with records that do not report quantity data.
Noble Energy: Omissions of quantity data
Noble Energy, Inc. omitted quantity data in 381 FracFocus disclosures. We summarize the omissions in this post.
PDC Energy: Omissions of quantity data
PDC Energy omitted quantity data in 176 FracFocus disclosures. We summarize the omissions in this post.
BP America: Omissions of quantity data
BP America Production Company omitted quantity data in 348 FracFocus disclosures. We summarize the omissions in this post.