Fracking

Mexico is walking on a treasure and, at the same time, on a political minefield. Under the land of states like Coahuila, Tamaulipas and Veracruz, an energy giant sleeps: the sixth world reserves of unconventional gas. Waking him up was the great taboo of López Obrador’s six-year term, a red line drawn with the promise of “no to fracking“However, reality has knocked on the door of the National Palace. In a turn that redefines the new mandate, President Claudia Sheinbaum has faced an iron dilemma: staying true to the campaign promise of not using hydraulic fracturing or pursuing “energy sovereignty”, one of the almost mythical aspirations of the Mexican left, to stop depending on US gas. The president has already made a decision: she is willing to pay the political cost. What began as a rumor has become a budgetary and contractual reality in 2026. The data is compelling and leaves no room for doubt about the change in course. Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) has increased its investment for this year in the “Gulf Tertiary Oil” program by 66%, going from 2,423 million pesos in 2025 to 4,016 million pesos in 2026, according to Treasury data obtained via transparency collected by The Universal. The machinery is already in motion. Pemex’s Strategic Plan (2025-2035) schedules the start of these operations after last year’s pilots. Pemex has awarded the first “mixed contracts” to private companies such as C5M, Geolis, CESIGSA and Petrolera Miahuapan. Although the state company retains the majority shareholding and control, it is the private parties who will provide the capital and technology, an urgent need for an oil company with a debt of more than 100 billion dollars. However, this injection of capital has raised alarm bells due to its opacity. The Mexican Alliance against Fracking denounces that in the 2026 Budget there are more than 245,000 million pesos allocated to gas projects that involve hydraulic fracturing, hidden under items that lack public breakdown and transparency, just as collected The Impartial. The semantics of dissimulation If he fracking was a “cursed word” in the previous six-year term, the new government has found a creative solution: change the dictionary. To avoid the political cost of openly announcing the use of fracking, the administration has chosen by a series of technical euphemisms. Rather frackingofficial documents speak of “reservoirs with complex geology” or “reservoir stimulation.” The general director of Pemex, Víctor Rodríguez Padilla, was blunt before the Senate: “We are not going to do frackingwe are taking advantage of technological development in evaluations of existing deposits.” But operational reality belies the rhetoric and breaks the discipline of official discourse. While euphemisms are used in the capital, on the ground urgency rules. The Undersecretary of Hydrocarbons of Tamaulipas, cited by The Countryrecently broke the taboo by declaring: “We talk it like it is here…hydraulic fracturing.” However, to understand the magnitude of the challenge, you have to look at the map. Pemex’s hopes are concentrated in three main basins: Burgos, Tampico-Misantla and Sabinas-Burro Picachos. The Burgos Basin is particularly relevant for being the natural extension towards the south of Eagle Ford in Texas, one of the deposits of shale most prolific of the American boom. If there is wealth north of the border, geology suggests there is wealth to the south as well. However, extracting this oil is not easy. The expert Miriam Grunstein illustrates the technical challenge starkly: the soil in these areas is a clayey “dump” and the crude oil has the density of “toothpaste.” This makes their exploitation extremely difficult, expensive and technologically demanding. Why go back to these complicated areas now? The answer is exhaustion. Pemex is pivoting toward the “unconventional” because its large conventional fields are drying up. It’s a portfolio decision to try to sustain the production platform in the face of the natural decline of traditional fields. If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu Behind Sheinbaum’s turn is a real geopolitical fear. Mexico imports 70% of the gas it consumes from the United States. “If the United States closes the valve, Mexico will be left in the dark,” recognized the head of Pemex himself. But the scenario is even more complex with the neighbor above led by Donald Trump and his vision of natural resources as national security. Recently, Washington has deployed the Project Vaulta strategy to secure critical minerals and counter China, which includes “geological mapping” of Mexican resources. The pressure is such that the Mexican government has had to give in to the harshest pragmatism. It was the Secretary of Economy, Marcelo Ebrard, who summarized Mexico’s position regarding the US energy integration demands with a lapidary phrase: “If you are not at the table participating, you are on the menu.” Mexico has decided to sit at the table fracking to avoid being devoured. Furthermore, the lack of liquidity forces this opening. Reactivating the identified wells requires immediate investments of more than $1 billion, money that will now come from private partners. The decision has been made, but the results will not be immediate. Although investment skyrockets in 2026, specialists warn that the launch of massive exploitation will take between three and four years to yield tangible results. The government’s optimistic projections suggest that, in their most developed phase, these fields could provide an additional 300,000 barrels per day. To achieve this, the “Mixed Contracts” model will be the norm: Pemex collect immediate bonuses for the award (almost 50 million dollars in the first round alone) and lets the private parties assume the operational and financial risk. A very high price The cost of this decision is already being paid in credibility with the bases. Organizations like Greenpeace and the Mexican Alliance against Fracking They have accused Sheinbaum of “betraying the people who elected her.” The most critical point is water. In a country hit by drought, the National Institute of Ecology and Climate Change (INECC) estimates that 5.7 million liters of water are required per well. Greenpeace raise the alert citing the … Read more