I was asked about starting a thread about fracking so here we go.
This should get the ball rolling.
Democracy for America
Last month we challenged T. Boone Pickens to prove his claim that fracking is safe by disclosing the chemicals he used while "personally fracking over 3,000" wells.
He still hasn't disclosed what chemicals are used, but his spokesman responded, "Boone has publicly supported the disclosure of chemicals used in fracking operations."
Well, if that's the case, why doesn't he just tell us what chemicals he uses?
Fracking is a risky process to extract oil and gas that uses hundreds of proprietary chemicals and has been reported to release radioactive elements. Thanks to Dick Cheney's Halliburton loophole, oil companies are largely unregulated and don't even have to disclose the hundreds of chemicals they use to frack.
T. Boone and the oil companies claim fracking is safe, but for the millions of Americans who rely on drinking water that could be contaminated with fracking chemicals, their claim isn't enough. We need proof.
Add your name now and tell T. Boone that he needs to back up his claim and disclose the chemicals.
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/activities/520?akid=1045.1774740.2hkPwW&rd=1&t=2
Clearly T. Boone Pickens is more concerned about his bottom line than keeping America's drinking water safe. He'll say anything to convince the public and Congress that fracking is harmless. Call T. Boone's bluff.
Thanks for everything you do.
- Kaili
Kaili Lambe, Political Campaign Manager
Democracy for America
We are lookig for pros and cons.
Doesn't seem to be anything too hazardous about fracking.
Video
Quote from: Ross on July 01, 2011, 05:51:23 AM
I'm not interested in starting a thread on fracking ??? ???
LOL...It's Ross's American right to change his mind...Go, Ross!!
The Fracking Song:
A clusterfrack of Fracking:
FYI ya'll, I asked Ross to start this thread since it seemed to me to be a good topic of discussion. We have already seen a couple of good vids, and had a lot of personal slamming for Ross. I apologise Ross, that is not what I expected to happen on this thread. I thought the forum community might share info on what they thought fracking was exactly, and what are the pros and cons. Again, I am sorry Ross, I should have known better. :( BTW folks those were a couple of interesting vids!
Quote from: sixdogsmom on July 02, 2011, 05:12:10 PM
FYI ya'll, I asked Ross to start this thread since it seemed to me to be a good topic of discussion. We have already seen a couple of good vids, and had a lot of personal slamming for Ross. I apologise Ross, that is not what I expected to happen on this thread. I thought the forum community might share info on what they thought fracking was exactly, and what are the pros and cons. Again, I am sorry Ross, I should have known better. :( BTW folks those were a couple of interesting vids!
I am very happy to have started this thread for you.
And I am not the least bit offended by the remarks.
Thanks for sticking up for me.
There is something to be learned here.
Good post Ross and Six. A little something everyone should know about "Fracking":
Fracking Up Our Water Supply
By Laurie Fendrich
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/fracking-up-our-water-supply/32719
Anybody reading this post ever seen Gasland, Josh Fox's movie about a kind of drilling called high-volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF)—frequently shortened to "fracking"? Hydraulic fracking produces what energy giants like Halliburton will tell you is the answer to all our energy problems—clean natural gas. Gasland tells a different story. Watching it requires a strong stomach.
Burning natural gas may be cleaner than burning coal, but the back-story to getting it is filthy. Consuming billions of gallons of clean water that's then mixed together with toxic chemicals, (the energy companies, citing the need to protect company secrets, won't release the full list of the chemicals they use; how do benzine and toluene sound, for starters?), hydrofracking requires drilling through deep aquifers in order to retrieve natural gas that's trapped inside the shale lying even deeper below. Right now, there are fracking drill sites all over such states as Colorado, Wyoming, and Pennsylvania, with stories of the brutal pollution of rivers, lakes, and streams only now beginning to surface. A battle is raging in upstate New York between those who see a buck to be made, and want drilling to start yesterday, and those who suspect that any bucks to be made will go to a select few and everybody else will be stuck with a mess.
A byproduct of fracking—aside from huge industrial drilling sites rising up smack in the middle of what previously were pristine rural areas, hundreds of huge trucks rumbling along country roads, maintained by county taxpayers, 24 hours a day, toxic air pollution near the drilling sites, and general air pollution caused by all those rumbling trucks—is a staggering problem that simply has no solution: Fracking produces billions of gallons of wastewater with no means of disposing of it that anyone, anywhere, can say is safe.
Even more frightening is the possibility that fracking will contaminate not merely a few luckless individual homeowners' water (this has already happened, in hundreds of cases), but of rendering whole aquifers useless. The risk isn't confined to people living in faraway places. Pittsburgh banned hydrofracking within its city limits after the water in the Monongahela River became too polluted to drink. New York City's water supply—which currently is so clean it needs no filtration—comes directly from the Catskills—an upstate mountain region that sits solidly on part of the Marcellus Shale, with its vast reserve of natural gas. One big fracking accident—no, one minor accident—and the drinking water for 9 million people will be imperiled.
It's taken a while for The New York Times to catch up with the hydrofracking controversy, but today they did. Whether today's article proves to be a game-changer on the issue, I don't know. All I know is that energy companies are on the warpath, and that they lie. Hydrofracking for natural gas imperils what will soon become the most sought-after resource in the 21st century: Water.
Note: I blogged on this issue back in November. Nothing I have read since then has changed my opinion on the matter:
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/theres-gold-in-them-thar-marcellus-shales/28905
My husband is an oil field pumper. I asked him how fracking is done. He says that there is a huge pump that is used. A huge hose is put into the hole. Then sand, a little salt, and a little bit of some kind of chemical is used to blast into the hole. At least, that's what I got out of the answer to my question. He didn't know what kind of chemical is used.
Janet, they include benzene, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde, toluene and methanol for starters.
California has introduced... "A bill forcing oil and gas companies to reveal what chemicals they use when using hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," to extract natural gas in California passed the California Senate Natural Resources Committee earlier this month and is set to go before the Environmental Quality Committee next week."
Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2011/06/fracking-hyraulic-fracturing-california-oil-natural-gas-shale-wieckowski.html
There was a piece on 60 minutes tonight.
Here is a link to the preview and I feel certain they will put up the full piece soon.
http://www.cbs.com/primetime/60_minutes/video/?pid=DZryeh5SXaMn_rI9cG6VTmHyhb9D_gVi&vs=homepage&play=true
excuse the advertisements.
APNewsBreak: EPA implicates hydraulic fracturing in groundwater pollution at Wyoming gas field
By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, December 8, 1:12 PM
CHEYENNE, Wyo. — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday for the first time that fracking — a controversial method of improving the productivity of oil and gas wells — may be to blame for causing groundwater pollution.
The draft finding could have a chilling effect in states trying to determine how to regulate the process.
The practice is called hydraulic fracturing and involves pumping pressurized water, sand and chemicals underground to open fissures and improve the flow of oil or gas to the surface.
The EPA's found that compounds likely associated with fracking chemicals had been detected in the groundwater beneath a Wyoming community where residents say their well water reeks of chemicals.
Health officials advised them not to drink their water after the EPA found hydrocarbons in their wells.
The EPA announcement has major implications for the vast increase in gas drilling in the U.S. in recent years. Fracking has played a large role in opening up many reserves.
The industry has long contended that fracking is safe, but environmentalists and some residents who live near drilling sites say it has poisoned groundwater.
The EPA said its announcement is the first step in a process of opening up its findings for review by the public and other scientists.
"EPA's highest priority remains ensuring that Pavillion residents have access to safe drinking water," said Jim Martin, EPA regional administrator in Denver. "We look forward to having these findings in the draft report informed by a transparent and public review process."
The EPA also emphasized that the findings are specific to the Pavillion area. The agency said the fracking that occurred in Pavillion differed from fracking methods used elsewhere in regions with different geological characteristics.
The fracking occurred below the level of the drinking water aquifer and close to water wells, the EPA said. Elsewhere, drilling is more remote and fracking occurs much deeper than the level of groundwater that anybody would use.
In Colorado, regulators are considering requiring oil and gas companies to publicly disclose the chemicals used in fracking
The public and industry representatives packed an 11-hour hearing on the issue on Monday. They all generally supported the proposal but the sticking point is whether trade secrets would have to be disclosed and how quickly the information would have be turned over.
Industry representatives say Colorado and Texas are the only states to have moved to consider disclosing all fracking chemicals, not just those considered hazardous by workplace regulators.
______
Associated Press writer Colleen Slevin contributed to this report from Denver.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/apnewsbreak-epa-implicates-hydraulic-fracturing-in-groundwater-pollution-at-wyoming-gas-field/2011/12/08/gIQA1iNafO_story.html
There have also been comments around the edges that fracking contributed to the recent Oklahoma earthquakes.
You know that was my thought about the earth quakes.
So it doesn't surprise me.
Here is some New info about fracking I hope interest some of you.
Headlnes of stories at the link below the headlines:
For Pennsylvania's Doctors, a Gag Order on Fracking Chemicals
Docs on PA Gag Order: No Fracking Way!
Fracking: It's All About the Water
There are also a couple of other headlines.
https://motherjones.com/search/apachesolr_search/For%20Pennsylvania%E2%80%99s%20doctors%2C%20a%20gag%20order%20on%20fracking%20chemicals
"Fracking" is the name given to the process of injecting high pressure fluids into the ground to increase the release of natural gas. The problem is that such practices often contaminate ground water and put entire communities at risk. The energy industry, of course, ignores any environmental concerns since that might cut into their profit margin. But do people really want to save a dollar on their utility bill at the cost of having no water to drink?
Okay, so what excuse will they come up with this time to justify polluting our water? Because if they keep this up, a clean water supply is going to be scarcer than oil:
For the first time, a scientific study has linked natural gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing with a pattern of drinking water contamination so severe that some faucets can be lit on fire.
The peer-reviewed study, published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, stands to shape the contentious debate over whether drilling is safe and begins to fill an information gap that has made it difficult for lawmakers and the public tounderstand the risks.
The research was conducted by four scientists at Duke University. They found that levels of flammable methane gas in drinking water wells increased to dangerous levels when those water supplies were close to natural gas wells. They also found that the type of gas detected at high levels in the water was the same type of gas that energy companies were extracting from thousands of feet underground, strongly implying that the gas may be seeping underground through natural or manmade faults and fractures, or coming from cracks in the well structure itself.
Warph, it seems more like scare tactics. They've been fracing for years. Where's the proof?
Is this another attempt to expand the Federal government? Sure looks like it.
Like Fracking? You'll Love 'Super Fracking'
About the fifth paragraph down in the Bloomberg Business article.Baker Hughes has set its sights on creating "super cracks," a method of blasting deeper into dense rock to create wider channels. The aim of the technology, branded as DirectConnect, is to better concentrate the pressure of fracking fluids to reach oil or gas farther from the well bore, which existing methods fail to do as effectively.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-01-19/like-fracking-youll-love-super-fracking
This is one long article that reads more like a horror story.
I guess I can say it was good reading but not enjoyagle reading.
http://www.hcn.org/issues/43.11/hydrofracked-one-mans-quest-for-answers-about-natural-gas-drilling/print_view
This web site shows pictures (Drawings) of oil fields some show two different depth levels drilled horizontal. This represents drilling only one mile horizontal. Today they can drill 6 to 8 miles horizontal and possibly further.
This site also shows a map of oil fields in the US, Kansas oil fields included.
http://frackingfarm.drillfrackrepeat.com/
Looks like I should go back to my Uncle Bill's place and Frack those old played out wells. I might make a fortune....not.
Quote from: redcliffsw on March 28, 2012, 06:45:07 AM
Warph, it seems more like scare tactics. They've been fracing for years. Where's the proof?
Is this another attempt to expand the Federal government? Sure looks like it.
Just a few to start with:
http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson/pnas2011.html
http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson/projects.html
http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/news/fracking-on-pnas-website
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2011/0509/Fracking-for-natural-gas-is-polluting-ground-water-study-concludes
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2011/0417/New-warning-of-poisonous-chemicals-in-natural-gas-hydrofracking
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fracking+water+fire&oq=fracking&aq=1&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_l=youtube.1.1.0l10.6204l9016l0l20375l8l8l0l1l1l0l516l922l4-1j1l2l0.
Warph, are the Duke people and their research financed by the government?
Government money has a way of achieving the results that the liberals want.
Nothing like building a bigger government and that's where the Republicans are taking us.
Does the Republican Party know they are liberals?
Quote from: redcliffsw on March 30, 2012, 05:00:13 AM
Warph, are the Duke people and their research financed by the government?
Government money has a way of achieving the results that the liberals want.
Nothing like building a bigger government and that's where the Republicans are taking us.
Red, why would the government pay out big bucks to promote anti-fracking studies when they are for fracking.
http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/obama-gives-fracturing-the-green-light/3415
If the government and the oil companies could insure that fracking would not hurt the water supply in years to come, i'd be all for it. But as it stands, fracking has caused big problems over the years with water supplies all over the U.S.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on March 30, 2012, 09:02:25 AM
Does the Republican Party know they are liberals?
Would they care?
Let's ask Norm Coleman or Richard Luger or Arlen Specter or John Warner... or maybe that Brownback fella.
Oh, that;s right, they are 'moderate' conservatives. Isn't that just another way of saying, "Lacking in conviction and without constitutional understanding, or milquetoast."?
Quote from Patriot:
Would they care?
Let's ask Norm Coleman or Richard Luger or Arlen Specter or John Warner... or maybe that Brownback fella.
Patriot,
The term us conservative Repubs have for them types is RINO---but I think you already knew that.
Republicans' history is based upon liberalism. Republicans never saved the Union, they changed it from what the Founders intended.
Quote from: redcliffsw on March 31, 2012, 06:00:02 AM
Republicans' history is based upon liberalism. Republicans never saved the Union, they changed it from what the Founders intended.
After making a reasoned review of the events and outcomes of the mid-1800s (the shifting to an all knowing all powerful central government and away from state sovereignty) it does seem that they turned the united states into something of a Hotel California... once in, you can check out, but you can never leave. So much for any future declarations of independence.
And to this day, many repubs seem hell bent to sell the same concept to other sovereigns via 'nation building'.
Isn't that just the jumbo version of the left's 'busybody, do gooder, solve society's ills' (real or imagined) mentality? Got problems or poverty? Give us the unlimited power of government & we'll fix it... either in Detroit, Mississippi, Iraq, or dare I say Elk County.
I don't know why anybody would want to be a Republican. Makes no real American sense whatsoever.
Worse yet, the modern Democrats are nothing more than glorified Republicans.
No "real" American sense? Good grief! Yer just askin' for a poke in the nose! ;D ;D ;D ;D I have a lot of military friends who are repubs and the Marines might like to question just what you mean. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Your American friends certainly ought to be questioning the matter.
Republicanism is liberalism and not many can deny that.
This is wandering off subject, but do you label everybody before you can be friends or shop in their stores? That must be awkward if you will only have contact with people who are conservative enough for you! :-\ Does everything have to be politically attached to a party somehow? Do your council members run by party? Our city councilmen do not, because we have a mayoral form of Gov't. but County Council does. Just interested.
Now back to fracking. PA next door to me is really split on the water issue. Some are really afraid the water will be permanently lost and with all the coal and pollution that already exists I can see why, but the fracking people have appealed to the people who believe they will keep the water safe and produce an almost endless supply of affordable gas. I sure don't know.
Quote from Diane:
This is wandering off subject, but do you label everybody before you can be friends or shop in their stores? That must be awkward if you will only have contact with people who are conservative enough for you! Does everything have to be politically attached to a party somehow?
Holy Moly Diane---we finally see eye to eye on something !! :)
I was first a Demo because at a young age I thought a donkey was more cool than an elephant but when Slick Willie, the draft dodger got elected, I became a Repub. I have never been a Liberal and will never be a Liberal so why Red thinks all Repubs are Libs is beyond me. I probably lean towards being a Libertarian but with people like R.Nader and that Israel hating Ron Paul being the face of that party I will never call myself a Libertarian. Now Red, I have "shown you mine--now show me yours " I have asked before if you minded telling us which political party you are registered as but if you answered it I missed it. If you don't want to tell us it is OK because I won't loose a minutes sleep over not knowing . I loose too much sleep wondering who the heck Patriot is . Do I know him ? ;D
Jarhead, you're not seeing eye to eye with Diane. It's this early hot weather that's causing you think that.
I was a Democrat all my life until 4 or 5 years ago. Gave up on the nonsense and did not sign up again for 'em.
Check out the history of the Republican party and you'll see why I want no part of that either. Or just look at Romney,
Gindrich or Santorum and that oughta tell you something too.
Don't lose any more sleep wondering who is Patriot. You gotta admire the stand that Patriot and others take in Elk County.
Wow,way to insult someone using my name! :P
Diane did someone pulll a Ross?
Quote from: jarhead on April 02, 2012, 11:42:42 AM
I loose too much sleep wondering who the heck Patriot is . Do I know him ? ;D
No, of course you don't. But at least by being awake, all the folks in your neighborhood can sleep in peace... absent your snoring. :o
Quote from Patriot:
No, of course you don't. But at least by being awake, all the folks in your neighborhood can sleep in peace... absent your snoring.
Watch it there K.W.---I know who you are and where you live !!! I bet that has you shaking in them Fly -Boy issued combat boots, huh ? ;D
Quote from: jarhead on April 02, 2012, 09:13:07 PM
I bet that has you shaking in them Fly -Boy issued combat boots, huh ? ;D
Uh huh. Like a frightened turtle..... Not. :)
The Mississippi Limestone Oil Field we are sitting on appears to be putting out sufficient oil to make the greedy oil companies very happy. Channel 3 news last night said they are now paying as much as $3000.00 an acre for oil leases in south central Kansas. So if you are happy with $25 an acre or $200 an acre go for it. I chose not to. My property and piece of mind is worth a lot more then that.
The possibility/risk's of quakes and contamination is worth a lot more then a few hundred dollars to me.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2011/12/19/oil-companies-exploring-south-central-kansas/
http://superioroilandgas.com/mississippi-limestone-emerging-as-top-flight-horizontal-liquids-play/
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=49&articleid=20110923_49_0_ihyMsi502043
Fracking and Economic Development
North Frackota
http://grist.org/news/more-vignettes-from-north-frackota-where-rents-are-sky-high-and-adultery-is-illegal/?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=update
Some good news perhaps.
Energy industry develops nontoxic fracking fluids
PITTSBURGH (AP) — The oil and gas industry is trying to ease environmental concerns by developing nontoxic fluids for the drilling process known as fracking, but it's not clear whether the new product will be widely embraced by drilling companies.
http://news.yahoo.com/energy-industry-develops-nontoxic-fracking-fluids-171713821.html