"Did Fracking Cause a 4.0 Magnitude Earthquake...?"

Page 1 of 3 [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

18 Jan 2012, 12:17 pm

snapcap wrote:
JWC wrote:
snapcap wrote:
JWC wrote:
snapcap wrote:
Bombshell Report Links Water Contamination To Fracking For The First Time

Quote:
In a first, federal environment officials today scientifically linked underground water pollution with hydraulic fracturing, concluding that contaminants found in central Wyoming were likely caused by the gas drilling process.


Fracking is only good for the people whose pockets it lines.


And the people who don't freeze to death because they can depend on natural gas heat in their homes.


Because they wouldn't get it any other way?


Why should they have to?


Have to what?


Get it another way.



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

18 Jan 2012, 12:24 pm

JWC wrote:
snapcap wrote:
JWC wrote:
snapcap wrote:
JWC wrote:
snapcap wrote:
Bombshell Report Links Water Contamination To Fracking For The First Time

Quote:
In a first, federal environment officials today scientifically linked underground water pollution with hydraulic fracturing, concluding that contaminants found in central Wyoming were likely caused by the gas drilling process.


Fracking is only good for the people whose pockets it lines.


And the people who don't freeze to death because they can depend on natural gas heat in their homes.


Because they wouldn't get it any other way?


Why should they have to?


Have to what?


Get it another way.


Good idea! Who wants hydrocarbons in their tap water anyways?

Image

:P


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

19 Jan 2012, 11:42 am

Quote:
The first thing to understand is that water wells are shallow. The deepest private residential wells go perhaps a couple hundred meters, though most are much shallower. Fracking takes place kilometers deeper underground; and in most places, the fracked shale beds are separated from the surface watersheds by multiple rock formations of different types. There's little or no transference of anything — gas or liquid — between fracked layers and surface layers; they're simply too far apart and separated by too much rock.

However, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se.

When the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission investigated the burning water of the well owner most prominently featured in Gasland, whose tap water was gray and actually effervesced, they found that his methane was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with any natural gas drilling. His water well had been drilled directly into a shallow natural gas deposit. Nevertheless, Gasland portrayed this as a consequence of fracking, which is wrong at two levels.


http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4275



BuyerBeware
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,476
Location: PA, USA

19 Jan 2012, 2:33 pm

I didn't watch the movie. Although, while we're on the subject...

I sometimes wonder if Gasland isn't, in part, a gas company conspiracy. Might be paranoid, but it makes sense to me: While people are ranting and raving about burning tap water, other more damaging but less sensational travesties (like the COLONIAL ECONOMY) and flagrant violations of existing laws (like the stream dumping) are unnoticed.

It's called the "door-in-the-face" technique. It's a lesser-known sales pitch, the inversion of the "foot-in-the-door" technique. In essence, you confront people with a presentation that is so egregious, so unreasonable, that what you really want looks OK by comparison.

Aspies are supposed to be infuriated by injustice.

And I'm engaging in some not-so-subtle coalition-building in a probably completely inappropriate place.


_________________
"Alas, our dried voices when we whisper together are quiet and meaningless, as wind in dry grass, or rats' feet over broken glass in our dry cellar." --TS Eliot, "The Hollow Men"


JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

19 Jan 2012, 2:56 pm

BuyerBeware wrote:
I didn't watch the movie. Although, while we're on the subject...

I sometimes wonder if Gasland isn't, in part, a gas company conspiracy. Might be paranoid, but it makes sense to me: While people are ranting and raving about burning tap water, other more damaging but less sensational travesties (like the COLONIAL ECONOMY) and flagrant violations of existing laws (like the stream dumping) are unnoticed.

It's called the "door-in-the-face" technique. It's a lesser-known sales pitch, the inversion of the "foot-in-the-door" technique. In essence, you confront people with a presentation that is so egregious, so unreasonable, that what you really want looks OK by comparison.

Aspies are supposed to be infuriated by injustice.

And I'm engaging in some not-so-subtle coalition-building in a probably completely inappropriate place.


At this very moment, I am setting within 20 ft. of a so called "evil" oil and gas company executive. I can assure you these people do not have the time to plot these half-witted conspiracies that they are constantly accused of.



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

20 Jan 2012, 1:25 pm

JWC wrote:
Quote:
The first thing to understand is that water wells are shallow. The deepest private residential wells go perhaps a couple hundred meters, though most are much shallower. Fracking takes place kilometers deeper underground; and in most places, the fracked shale beds are separated from the surface watersheds by multiple rock formations of different types. There's little or no transference of anything — gas or liquid — between fracked layers and surface layers; they're simply too far apart and separated by too much rock.

However, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se.

When the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission investigated the burning water of the well owner most prominently featured in Gasland, whose tap water was gray and actually effervesced, they found that his methane was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with any natural gas drilling. His water well had been drilled directly into a shallow natural gas deposit. Nevertheless, Gasland portrayed this as a consequence of fracking, which is wrong at two levels.


http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4275


Just after he said that he also mentions that methane can leak into aquafiers due to human error. The process isn't perfect. He even says that it's true that hundreds of chemicals could be used to frack the shale. And because of an imperfect process, those chemicals can seep into the water. I've seen studies done that suggest there aren't any poisonous chemicals using in fracking that make it to well water, but I can't really take those studies seriously, because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic. I don't think they really know the complete picture of what they are doing.


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

20 Jan 2012, 1:32 pm

The idea that Fracking can cause an earthquake is sooooo romantic.

ruveyn



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

20 Jan 2012, 1:43 pm

ruveyn wrote:
The idea that Fracking can cause an earthquake is sooooo romantic.

ruveyn


The whole in and out thing is pretty erotic.

WARNING: The following is rated NWS

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DniNIvE69SE[/youtube]


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


BuyerBeware
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,476
Location: PA, USA

22 Jan 2012, 12:20 am

JWC wrote:
BuyerBeware wrote:
I didn't watch the movie. Although, while we're on the subject...

I sometimes wonder if Gasland isn't, in part, a gas company conspiracy. Might be paranoid, but it makes sense to me: While people are ranting and raving about burning tap water, other more damaging but less sensational travesties (like the COLONIAL ECONOMY) and flagrant violations of existing laws (like the stream dumping) are unnoticed.

It's called the "door-in-the-face" technique. It's a lesser-known sales pitch, the inversion of the "foot-in-the-door" technique. In essence, you confront people with a presentation that is so egregious, so unreasonable, that what you really want looks OK by comparison.

Aspies are supposed to be infuriated by injustice.

And I'm engaging in some not-so-subtle coalition-building in a probably completely inappropriate place.


At this very moment, I am setting within 20 ft. of a so called "evil" oil and gas company executive. I can assure you these people do not have the time to plot these half-witted conspiracies that they are constantly accused of.


Nah. Execs hire people to deal with that crap. I think they're called marketing majors.

Evil?? That's a matter of perspective I suppose...

We have GOT to get that upside-down smiley.


_________________
"Alas, our dried voices when we whisper together are quiet and meaningless, as wind in dry grass, or rats' feet over broken glass in our dry cellar." --TS Eliot, "The Hollow Men"


JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

23 Jan 2012, 2:53 pm

snapcap wrote:
JWC wrote:
Quote:
The first thing to understand is that water wells are shallow. The deepest private residential wells go perhaps a couple hundred meters, though most are much shallower. Fracking takes place kilometers deeper underground; and in most places, the fracked shale beds are separated from the surface watersheds by multiple rock formations of different types. There's little or no transference of anything — gas or liquid — between fracked layers and surface layers; they're simply too far apart and separated by too much rock.

However, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se.

When the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission investigated the burning water of the well owner most prominently featured in Gasland, whose tap water was gray and actually effervesced, they found that his methane was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with any natural gas drilling. His water well had been drilled directly into a shallow natural gas deposit. Nevertheless, Gasland portrayed this as a consequence of fracking, which is wrong at two levels.


http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4275


Just after he said that he also mentions that methane can leak into aquafiers due to human error. The process isn't perfect. He even says that it's true that hundreds of chemicals could be used to frack the shale. And because of an imperfect process, those chemicals can seep into the water. I've seen studies done that suggest there aren't any poisonous chemicals using in fracking that make it to well water, but I can't really take those studies seriously, because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic. I don't think they really know the complete picture of what they are doing.


Do you?



HerrGrimm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 987
Location: United States

23 Jan 2012, 7:31 pm

I like how "we're going to investigate the situation" always turns into "SEE!! THEY'RE HIDING SOMETHING!! !!"

I suggest everyone reads the Skeptoid piece before posting further. It blatantly says LET THE SCIENTISTS DECIDE IT. Not some media report with spin. Not some sensationalist piece demonizing it.

snapcap wrote:
I've seen studies done that suggest there aren't any poisonous chemicals using in fracking that make it to well water, but I can't really take those studies seriously, because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic. I don't think they really know the complete picture of what they are doing.


I don't think methane has lead or arsenic in it. I think you confused your terms, you are pretty worked up over this issue.



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

24 Jan 2012, 12:00 am

HerrGrimm wrote:
you are pretty worked up over this issue.


No you


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


JWC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 740
Location: Macondo Wellhead

24 Jan 2012, 9:57 am

snapcap wrote:
HerrGrimm wrote:
you are pretty worked up over this issue.


No you


Damn, your intelligent and compelling argument has suddenly opened my eyes! I can see the light. Thank you.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

24 Jan 2012, 10:37 am

HerrGrimm wrote:

I don't think methane has lead or arsenic in it. I think you confused your terms, you are pretty worked up over this issue.


Methane is CH4. No metals.

ruveyn



snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

24 Jan 2012, 12:55 pm

HerrGrimm wrote:
I like how "we're going to investigate the situation" always turns into "SEE!! THEY'RE HIDING SOMETHING!! !!"

I suggest everyone reads the Skeptoid piece before posting further. It blatantly says LET THE SCIENTISTS DECIDE IT. Not some media report with spin. Not some sensationalist piece demonizing it.

snapcap wrote:
I've seen studies done that suggest there aren't any poisonous chemicals using in fracking that make it to well water, but I can't really take those studies seriously, because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic. I don't think they really know the complete picture of what they are doing.


I don't think methane has lead or arsenic in it. I think you confused your terms, you are pretty worked up over this issue.


I should have stated

Quote:
because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic.


as "methane could cause harmful contaminates to seep into well water", not including the amount that occurs naturally. And I only say could because there hasn't been a test to set the expected amount before fracking, as far as I know. But I'll just say that there is, simply because people are getting sick using the water near these facilities. Yes, I know methane doesn't constitute partially of arsenic, just like water doesn't constitute partially of fluoride.

Here's some more studies

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5263/pdf/sir2006-5263.pdf

http://www.epaosc.org/sites/7555/files/Dimock%20Action%20Memo%2001-19-12.PDF

Maybe you should come back when you calm down :wink:

Same goes for you JWC.


_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*

some atheist to stick: "You're like me!"


snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

28 Mar 2012, 9:47 am

For Pennsylvania's Doctors, a Gag Order on Fracking Chemicals

Quote:
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.


$$$$$>you