Is Fracking contaminating ground water? Making it flammable?

[Cairenn]

She has used his posts in her nonsense.

In SE Louisiana, Texas Brine 'over mined ' a salt dome at Bayou Corne. The top fell in and took some of the marsh with it. It is huge problem to the folks that live there, they have been out of their homes for about a year now. No connection to oil or gas production, there is is both oil and methane seeping into from the rocks.

This happened near Shreveport, over 200 miles north of Bayou Corne

http://www.ksla.com/story/19828119/authorities-investigate-loud-boom

Leave it a fearmonger to not allow an accident to go un exploited

http://www.examiner.com/article/la-...nden-explosions-is-possibility-physicists-say

So somehow methane from the sinkhole (she blames that on BP blow out that was over 50 miles out in Gulf) 'travels' in aquafier for over 200 miles where it is 'ignited' by a meteorite (that is never found).


For anyone interested, these are from an industry site, but a nice explanation of fracking.

http://www.naturalgas.org/shale/gotshale.asp


http://www.naturalgas.org/shale/shalewells.asp

http://www.naturalgas.org/shale/waterdisposal.asp

http://www.naturalgas.org/shale/nextsteps.asp

 

[muttkat]

She has used his posts in her nonsense.

In SE Louisiana, Texas Brine 'over mined ' a salt dome at Bayou Corne. The top fell in and took some of the marsh with it. It is huge problem to the folks that live there, they have been out of their homes for about a year now. No connection to oil or gas production, there is is both oil and methane seeping into from the rocks.

This happened near Shreveport, over 200 miles north of Bayou Corne

http://www.ksla.com/story/19828119/authorities-investigate-loud-boom

Leave it a fearmonger to not allow an accident to go un exploited

http://www.examiner.com/article/la-...nden-explosions-is-possibility-physicists-say

So somehow methane from the sinkhole (she blames that on BP blow out that was over 50 miles out in Gulf) 'travels' in aquafier for over 200 miles where it is 'ignited' by a meteorite (that is never found).


For anyone interested, these are from an industry site, but a nice explanation of fracking.

http://www.naturalgas.org/shale/gotshale.asp

It might be safer to use it than extract it.

I've been reading a lot about fracking in the UK recently and have been a little worried about the environmental impacts of such an activity. Now I can see that there may well be a long term issue due to the quantity of invasive tampering which is required but recently I have come across this which appears to be a little more immediate.



The video shows people setting fire to the gas present it their water supply. To me it looks a bit of a stretch as surely the heat source would be negated by the running water but I'm by no means an expert. Wondering if anyone has any more information on this?

It might be safer to use it than extract it. There might be too much of a rush to get into it.



Seems like alot of these environmental narrators seem to have an English accent. lol

 

[Cairenn]

You do realize that the poor casing problem can also happen in ANY type of a well? even a water well.

Well Failures and Casing Leaks

Summary: Opponents of shale development often cite a statistic that 60 percent of all shale wells will fail, which will result in polluted underground aquifers and damage to the environment. The claim originates from Cornell professor (and anti-natural gas activist) Anthony Ingraffea, who claims to have "industry documents" as his source. Ingraffea's appearance in Gasland Part II was thus a foregone conclusion, and Fox spent nearly as much time running through Ingraffea's CV as he gave to Ingraffea to repeat that talking point.

Riding on Ingraffea's coattails, Josh Fox also cited the statistic in an op-ed last summer, as did Yoko Ono in a recent letter to the New York Times. Fox even made the talking point a key part of his short film "The Sky Is Pink," released last summer. The actual source is a decade-old article that examined what's known as sustained casing pressure, or SCP. There is indeed a graph on the second page detailing that, over a 30 year time span, 60 percent of wells will be affected by SCP. The graph appears in Gasland Part II, as well.

The Facts: The problem for Ingraffea – who fashions himself an objective scientist – is that the statistic he's waving around has absolutely nothing to do with shale development. How do we know that? The caption under the graph from which Ingraffea pulled the statistic (and which the camera in Gasland Part II does not provide viewers enough time to read) actually states the following:

"Wells with SCP by age. Statistics from the United States Mineral Management Service (MMS) show the percentage of wells with SCP for wells in the outer continental shelf (OCS) area of the Gulf of Mexico, grouped by age of the wells. These data do not include wells in state waters or land locations." (p. 63)

Read through that again. Notice that it is referring to activity in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Notice as well that it explicitly excludes any sort of data from onshore development. Shale wells in the United States are drilled onshore, not thousands of feet deep in the Gulf of Mexico – a fact that Ingraffea, Fox, Yoko, and all the other activists apparently hope the public never discovers.

This would be like preaching about the dangers of convertible automobiles based on statistics relating only to the performance of heavy-duty trucks. It reflects a fundamental ignorance of the very industry that these activists so desperately want to malign. It's also hilarious that Ingraffea makes this claim in Gasland Part II immediately after Fox spends several minutes describing how the professor is the world's most renowned expert on well casing and cementing. If that were the case, wouldn't he be able to recognize something as basic as the difference between an onshore and offshore well?

As for sustained casing pressure (SCP), it's actually a term that refers to the buildup of pressure between casing strings in a well. It does not necessarily refer to a leaking well, or even to a well that soon will be leaking. There are a variety of technologies and processes that can address SCP if it appears, too. Ironically, SCP reduction is the whole point of the document that Ingraffea believes is some sort of smoking gun. If you read the article in its entirety, it actually highlights what's available to the industry to prevent, minimize and even fix SCP.

Once again, Fox and his disciples have demonstrated they do not understand the basic processes they're trying to explain; and yet, they claim we should trust them anyway.

Let's take a closer look at the onshore well "failure" issue, though, and this time with data that are actually relevant. An August 2011 report from the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC) actually examined data that is relevant to shale development. GWPC reviewed more than 34,000 onshore wells drilled and completed in Ohio between 1983 and 2007. The data show only 12 incidents related to failures of (or graduate erosions to) casing or cement – a failure rate of 0.03 percent. Most of those incidents (more than 80 percent) occurred in the 1980s and 1990s, long before the current technology and updated state regulations that came online over the past decade.

The report also looked at more than 187,000 wells drilled and completed in Texas. The incident rate there: 0.01 percent.

So, far from shale wells suffering from a failure rate of 60 percent, data from hundreds of thousands of wells show that casing failures occur at a rate of no more than three one-hundredths of one percent. Of course, failure rates – however low they may be already – can always be made lower still. But can we at least agree that folks who rely on the "leaky shale wells" talking point should at least have a grasp of the basic facts – like, for instance, which data do and do not refer to shale wells?

Read More:

Ground Water Protection Council: State Oil and Gas Agency Groundwater Investigations – A Two State Review: Ohio and Texas
Associated Press: Some fracking critics use bad science
EID: For Josh Fox, the Sun Also Rises
EID: 60 percent of statistics are made up

That is the scientist your linked to ---not even related to shale gas wells.

and now to Mr Tillman

Calvin Tillman (DISH, Tex.)

Summary: Mr. Tillman, a former mayor of DISH, Texas, played a prominent role in Gasland, and regularly tours the country to recite talking points about the supposed dangers of shale. Tillman claims that natural gas development in his community created a range of health problems for local residents, and that those impacts will affect residents in other parts of the country where development is or will be occurring. Tillman decided to get active on the issue after a series of natural gas compressor stations were built near DISH, and he most frequently cites benzene concentrations as the key problem. In Gasland Part II, Tillman's story was retold as if it were new, and he is shown driving around his (former) community, pointing out houses of residents who are suing the natural gas industry.

The Facts: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) – which is responsible for regulating air emissions in the state – evaluated Tillman's claims, specifically a report from Wolf Eagle Environmental that supposedly found harmful levels of benzene concentrations in DISH. As mayor of DISH, Tillman had contracted Wolf Eagle to conduct that test.

TCEQ's investigation, however, found that the "highest potential 1-hour maximum benzene concentration is below the health effects level," although the agency did stress the need for additional research. The problem was that the Wolf Eagle team measured benzene over an incredibly short period of time, which led TCEQ to conclude that it "was not possible to determine if residents were exposed" to the concentrations that Tillman had claimed.

In other words, Tillman's consultants took a snapshot measurement and suggested it was what residents were being exposed to over a long period of time. That's just not how credible scientific air sampling and analysis works.

It's worth noting, too, that Wolf Eagle Environmental used to go by the name Wolf Eagle Environmental Engineers and Consultants, but later shortened its name after it was revealed that the company did not actually employ a single licensed professional engineer on staff. Wolf Eagle Environmental is also the firm that, through its employee Alisa Rich, helped devise a "strategy" with Parker County, Texas activists to get the EPA involved in a now-infamous water contamination case in 2010 – a strategy that involved creating a deceptive video to make regulators think a landowner's water was on fire, which they blamed on nearby shale development.

In addition to the TCEQ's findings, the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) later collected blood and urine samples from residents in and around the town of DISH to assess whether Tillman's claims were accurate. DSHS concluded:

"Although a number of VOCs [volatile organic compounds] were detected in some of the blood samples, the pattern of VOC values was not consistent with a community-wide exposure to airborne contaminants, such as those that might be associated with natural gas drilling operations."

DSHS added that the sources of exposure were likely tobacco (those who registered elevated levels of benzene were smokers), public drinking water systems, which include disinfectant byproducts, and even household products like cleaners and lubricants. Although there were limitations to DSHS's review (VOCs are only present in blood for a short period of time), the agency nonetheless stated that its findings "did not indicate that community-wide exposures from gas wells or compressor stations were occurring in the sample population."

In early 2013, Tillman's organization – ShaleTest – claimed to have found high levels of benzene in DISH once again, and cited a TCEQ report that found elevated benzene levels in Fort Worth. TCEQ, however, explained that neither reading crossed the threshold for health impacts. Tillman was once again guilty of using short-term readings to suggest a long-term exposure problem, a decision that TCEQ said was "not scientifically appropriate."

Read More:

Tex. Comm. on Env. Quality: Health Effects Review of Ambient Air Monitoring Data Collected by Wolf Eagle Environmental Engineers and Consultants
Tex. Dept. of State Health Services: Final Report: DISH, Texas Exposure Investigation (May 2010)
Fort Worth Star-Telegram: "Benzene levels at Fort Worth, Dish gas compressor stations questioned"
EID: Public Health and Hydraulic Fracturing: Get the Facts
EID: Seven Questions for the Mayor of DISH
EID: Gasland Star Sees His Shadow in Michigan; Good News for Shale?

And this


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-24/range-wins-appeal-in-suit-against-texas-landowners.html

Range Wins Appeal in Suit Against Texas Landowners
...

Range Wins Appeal in Suit Against Texas LandownersRange alleged in court papers the Lipsky couple and Rich engaged in a conspiracy to defame the company and used false and misleading evidence as "a pretext for getting the EPA and the media to wrongly label and prosecute Range as a polluter of the environment."

The Lipskys shot video of methane-fueled flames shooting from a hose hooked up to their well in Parker County, Texas, and sent it to a blogger who posted it on Google Inc.'s YouTube video-sharing site. Range also alleged that they hired Rich to test their well water and alert the EPA.

Texas's anti-SLAPP Act allows pretrial appeals only in cases where the trial court fails to make a timely ruling on a motion to dismiss, the court of appeals said in June.

Range lawyers said the law was "plain and unambiguous" when a trial judge issues a timely ruling on a motion to dismiss, as occurred in this case. They said Rich and the Lipskys shouldn't be allowed to pursue a pretrial appeal by any avenue because they had not proven the trial court committed "a clear abuse of discretion."

 

[muttkat]

Wel

Videographer hoaxed that scene.



I lived next door to a power plant that was converted from oil to gas turbine. The gas was a lot cleaner. My rates were pretty good too. Apparently the gas is supplying our markets as well.

Well thats a good thing then.

 

[muttkat]

You do realize that the poor casing problem can also happen in ANY type of a well? even a water well.

Well Failures and Casing Leaks

Summary: Opponents of shale development often cite a statistic that 60 percent of all shale wells will fail, which will result in polluted underground aquifers and damage to the environment. The claim originates from Cornell professor (and anti-natural gas activist) Anthony Ingraffea, who claims to have "industry documents" as his source. Ingraffea's appearance in Gasland Part II was thus a foregone conclusion, and Fox spent nearly as much time running through Ingraffea's CV as he gave to Ingraffea to repeat that talking point.

Riding on Ingraffea's coattails, Josh Fox also cited the statistic in an op-ed last summer, as did Yoko Ono in a recent letter to the New York Times. Fox even made the talking point a key part of his short film "The Sky Is Pink," released last summer. The actual source is a decade-old article that examined what's known as sustained casing pressure, or SCP. There is indeed a graph on the second page detailing that, over a 30 year time span, 60 percent of wells will be affected by SCP. The graph appears in Gasland Part II, as well.

The Facts: The problem for Ingraffea – who fashions himself an objective scientist – is that the statistic he's waving around has absolutely nothing to do with shale development. How do we know that? The caption under the graph from which Ingraffea pulled the statistic (and which the camera in Gasland Part II does not provide viewers enough time to read) actually states the following:

"Wells with SCP by age. Statistics from the United States Mineral Management Service (MMS) show the percentage of wells with SCP for wells in the outer continental shelf (OCS) area of the Gulf of Mexico, grouped by age of the wells. These data do not include wells in state waters or land locations." (p. 63)

Read through that again. Notice that it is referring to activity in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Notice as well that it explicitly excludes any sort of data from onshore development. Shale wells in the United States are drilled onshore, not thousands of feet deep in the Gulf of Mexico – a fact that Ingraffea, Fox, Yoko, and all the other activists apparently hope the public never discovers.

This would be like preaching about the dangers of convertible automobiles based on statistics relating only to the performance of heavy-duty trucks. It reflects a fundamental ignorance of the very industry that these activists so desperately want to malign. It's also hilarious that Ingraffea makes this claim in Gasland Part II immediately after Fox spends several minutes describing how the professor is the world's most renowned expert on well casing and cementing. If that were the case, wouldn't he be able to recognize something as basic as the difference between an onshore and offshore well?

As for sustained casing pressure (SCP), it's actually a term that refers to the buildup of pressure between casing strings in a well. It does not necessarily refer to a leaking well, or even to a well that soon will be leaking. There are a variety of technologies and processes that can address SCP if it appears, too. Ironically, SCP reduction is the whole point of the document that Ingraffea believes is some sort of smoking gun. If you read the article in its entirety, it actually highlights what's available to the industry to prevent, minimize and even fix SCP.

Once again, Fox and his disciples have demonstrated they do not understand the basic processes they're trying to explain; and yet, they claim we should trust them anyway.

Let's take a closer look at the onshore well "failure" issue, though, and this time with data that are actually relevant. An August 2011 report from the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC) actually examined data that is relevant to shale development. GWPC reviewed more than 34,000 onshore wells drilled and completed in Ohio between 1983 and 2007. The data show only 12 incidents related to failures of (or graduate erosions to) casing or cement – a failure rate of 0.03 percent. Most of those incidents (more than 80 percent) occurred in the 1980s and 1990s, long before the current technology and updated state regulations that came online over the past decade.

The report also looked at more than 187,000 wells drilled and completed in Texas. The incident rate there: 0.01 percent.

So, far from shale wells suffering from a failure rate of 60 percent, data from hundreds of thousands of wells show that casing failures occur at a rate of no more than three one-hundredths of one percent. Of course, failure rates – however low they may be already – can always be made lower still. But can we at least agree that folks who rely on the "leaky shale wells" talking point should at least have a grasp of the basic facts – like, for instance, which data do and do not refer to shale wells?

Read More:

Ground Water Protection Council: State Oil and Gas Agency Groundwater Investigations – A Two State Review: Ohio and Texas
Associated Press: Some fracking critics use bad science
EID: For Josh Fox, the Sun Also Rises
EID: 60 percent of statistics are made up

That is the scientist your linked to ---not even related to shale gas wells.

and now to Mr Tillman

Calvin Tillman (DISH, Tex.)

Summary: Mr. Tillman, a former mayor of DISH, Texas, played a prominent role in Gasland, and regularly tours the country to recite talking points about the supposed dangers of shale. Tillman claims that natural gas development in his community created a range of health problems for local residents, and that those impacts will affect residents in other parts of the country where development is or will be occurring. Tillman decided to get active on the issue after a series of natural gas compressor stations were built near DISH, and he most frequently cites benzene concentrations as the key problem. In Gasland Part II, Tillman's story was retold as if it were new, and he is shown driving around his (former) community, pointing out houses of residents who are suing the natural gas industry.

The Facts: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) – which is responsible for regulating air emissions in the state – evaluated Tillman's claims, specifically a report from Wolf Eagle Environmental that supposedly found harmful levels of benzene concentrations in DISH. As mayor of DISH, Tillman had contracted Wolf Eagle to conduct that test.

TCEQ's investigation, however, found that the "highest potential 1-hour maximum benzene concentration is below the health effects level," although the agency did stress the need for additional research. The problem was that the Wolf Eagle team measured benzene over an incredibly short period of time, which led TCEQ to conclude that it "was not possible to determine if residents were exposed" to the concentrations that Tillman had claimed.

In other words, Tillman's consultants took a snapshot measurement and suggested it was what residents were being exposed to over a long period of time. That's just not how credible scientific air sampling and analysis works.

It's worth noting, too, that Wolf Eagle Environmental used to go by the name Wolf Eagle Environmental Engineers and Consultants, but later shortened its name after it was revealed that the company did not actually employ a single licensed professional engineer on staff. Wolf Eagle Environmental is also the firm that, through its employee Alisa Rich, helped devise a "strategy" with Parker County, Texas activists to get the EPA involved in a now-infamous water contamination case in 2010 – a strategy that involved creating a deceptive video to make regulators think a landowner's water was on fire, which they blamed on nearby shale development.

In addition to the TCEQ's findings, the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) later collected blood and urine samples from residents in and around the town of DISH to assess whether Tillman's claims were accurate. DSHS concluded:

"Although a number of VOCs [volatile organic compounds] were detected in some of the blood samples, the pattern of VOC values was not consistent with a community-wide exposure to airborne contaminants, such as those that might be associated with natural gas drilling operations."

DSHS added that the sources of exposure were likely tobacco (those who registered elevated levels of benzene were smokers), public drinking water systems, which include disinfectant byproducts, and even household products like cleaners and lubricants. Although there were limitations to DSHS's review (VOCs are only present in blood for a short period of time), the agency nonetheless stated that its findings "did not indicate that community-wide exposures from gas wells or compressor stations were occurring in the sample population."

In early 2013, Tillman's organization – ShaleTest – claimed to have found high levels of benzene in DISH once again, and cited a TCEQ report that found elevated benzene levels in Fort Worth. TCEQ, however, explained that neither reading crossed the threshold for health impacts. Tillman was once again guilty of using short-term readings to suggest a long-term exposure problem, a decision that TCEQ said was "not scientifically appropriate."

Read More:

Tex. Comm. on Env. Quality: Health Effects Review of Ambient Air Monitoring Data Collected by Wolf Eagle Environmental Engineers and Consultants
Tex. Dept. of State Health Services: Final Report: DISH, Texas Exposure Investigation (May 2010)
Fort Worth Star-Telegram: "Benzene levels at Fort Worth, Dish gas compressor stations questioned"
EID: Public Health and Hydraulic Fracturing: Get the Facts
EID: Seven Questions for the Mayor of DISH
EID: Gasland Star Sees His Shadow in Michigan; Good News for Shale?

And this


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-24/range-wins-appeal-in-suit-against-texas-landowners.html

Range Wins Appeal in Suit Against Texas Landowners
...

Range Wins Appeal in Suit Against Texas LandownersRange alleged in court papers the Lipsky couple and Rich engaged in a conspiracy to defame the company and used false and misleading evidence as "a pretext for getting the EPA and the media to wrongly label and prosecute Range as a polluter of the environment."

The Lipskys shot video of methane-fueled flames shooting from a hose hooked up to their well in Parker County, Texas, and sent it to a blogger who posted it on Google Inc.'s YouTube video-sharing site. Range also alleged that they hired Rich to test their well water and alert the EPA.

Texas's anti-SLAPP Act allows pretrial appeals only in cases where the trial court fails to make a timely ruling on a motion to dismiss, the court of appeals said in June.

Range lawyers said the law was "plain and unambiguous" when a trial judge issues a timely ruling on a motion to dismiss, as occurred in this case. They said Rich and the Lipskys shouldn't be allowed to pursue a pretrial appeal by any avenue because they had not proven the trial court committed "a clear abuse of discretion."

Hmmm. OK then.

 

[Met Watch]

Iv seen enough from Dutchsinse antifracking earthquakes etc . Every time there was a earthquake he'd find a fracking well nearby and blame it on that ?

To be fair to Dutch (and I can't believe I'm saying that), there have been a few earthquakes he took note of that could be legitimately tied to fracking operations. Unfortunately, as you said, he calls so many earthquakes the result of fracking that it's impossible to take him seriously on any of them.

 

[Joe]

To be fair to Dutch (and I can't believe I'm saying that), there have been a few earthquakes he took note of that could be legitimately tied to fracking operations. Unfortunately, as you said, he calls so many earthquakes the result of fracking that it's impossible to take him seriously on any of them.

Ill agree but dont they use explosives to frack ? even the World Trade center showed up on the seismic scale from falling

 

[Cairenn]

Explosives where used at one time, but now, only fluid is used to frack the well.


http://www.halliburton.com/public/projects/pubsdata/hydraulic_fracturing/fracturing_101.html


http://www.rigzone.com/training/insight.asp?insight_id=319&c_id=4

 

[Joe]

Ill agree

Explosives where used at one time, but now, only fluid is used to frack the well.


http://www.halliburton.com/public/projects/pubsdata/hydraulic_fracturing/fracturing_101.html


http://www.rigzone.com/training/insight.asp?insight_id=319&c_id=4

maybe the explosives would be better ?

Fracking: Drilling & Injecting fluid into the ground at high pressure to fracture shale rocks and release natural gas.

From 1 to 8 million gallons of water needed for each well using hundreds of tankers. Several hundred chemicals used including carcinogens and toxins to make the fracking fluid.

. A high percentage of the toxic fracking fluid is left in the ground.

 

[M Bornong]

Unfortunately, there are those that believe if no one is watching they can get away with the abuse that will lead to ground water contamination. $60,000 seems like a slap on the wrist to me.

An oil company will pay a $60,000 penalty for discharging fracking fluid into an unlined pit in Kern County.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board said in a statement Friday that Vintage Production California discharged saline water and hydraulic fracturing liquid into an unlined pit for 12 days last year.

http://www.turnto23.com/news/local-news/shafter-oil-company-ordered-to-pay-fracking-fine

And a link with the video that led to the investigation.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...dumping-fracking-discharge-in-central-valley/

 

[Cairenn]

That is the thing that bothers me about most potentially hazardous issues. There have been major issues in some areas with poor control of Pig farming waste. Just a couple of years ago, Memphis, TN was fined for allowing untreated sewage to flow into the Mississippi River.

Fines should be increased and repeat violaters should lose their drilling or disposal rights.

 

[M Bornong]

Cairenn, after having a little time to think about, it seems to me that the cost of building a properly lined holding pond, and proper disposal of the waste would probably cost more than this company was fined, and people wonder why our government regulations have gotten so big, when I see things like this happening in my backyard, I don't think they've gotten nearly big enough, and that makes me really sad.

 

[M Bornong]

Cairenn, I was wondering if you might look at this comment, how close is the fracking process in the Bakken formation to the water table?

 

[Bill]

Cairenn, I was wondering if you might look at this comment, how close is the fracking process in the Bakken formation to the water table?

View attachment 5080

I have to wonder what they consider close. According to the North Dakota State Water Commission the water table goes down 2000 feet at the most but fracking takes place at the 8000 ft level and below.
http://www.mgwa.org/meetings/2012_fall/plenary/shaver.pdf
If I read this correctly there are no major issues with porosity,
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/p1653/p1653.pdf
and the formation is bounded top and bottom by shale.

North Dakota also seems to be looking at using treated, non potable water in the injection process to preserve the supply of drinking water.
http://www.undeerc.org/Water/pdf/BakkenWaterOppPhase2.pdf

 

[Bill]

That's what I assumed. So, it's essentially coming out of the tap along with the water? I was just wondering as it looked a bit set up to me.

I can't find the transcripts but the TV show 60 minutes did a show in the 1970's that covered this issue in parts of Pennsylvania and New York. They showed people lighting the outflow from their kitchen taps. The source was naturally occurring methane in the ground that people tapped into when they drilled their own wells. This is the same are that activist are now using for proof that fracking is releasing methane into the water without acknowledgeing the prior existence of the phenomena. The were some people that tried to blame it on oil wells at the time but they could not explain why it happened in areas where drilling was no taking place.

 

[Cairenn]

On some story about the flammable water, a comment was from someone that mentioned that when his uncle had a water well drilled in 60s, in Minn that it hit a methane pocket. Not being a fool, he had it plumbed into a tank and he used it for heating in his home and barn and outbuildings. He had been using it for around 50 years.

 

[Buildy]

Fracknation is good.

Yikes. What I thought I was watching was a smear campaign against a few loonie-toons who were looking to make a fast buck - therefore painting the entire anti-fracking movement with the same brush. I found very little evidence or science in favour of fracking to be well presented in the film.

I'm hardly against fracking, but all I took away from this film is that it was nothing more than a corporate propaganda tool.

 

[Cairenn]

Why is it propaganda when an industry presents facts and not when those against an industry use tricks and hoaxes to promote their views?

What points did it make that you objected to?

 

[Bill]

Yikes. What I thought I was watching was a smear campaign against a few loonie-toons who were looking to make a fast buck - therefore painting the entire anti-fracking movement with the same brush. I found very little evidence or science in favour of fracking to be well presented in the film.

I'm hardly against fracking, but all I took away from this film is that it was nothing more than a corporate propaganda tool.

The few loony-toons you are talking about have managed to garner national and international media attention. They are doing more harm than good by promoting erroneous information that the anti-fracking movement has absorbed, advanced, and failed to repudiate. It's not propaganda for the people/industries they are making false claims about harming to respond.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

The few loony-toons you are talking about have managed to garner national and international media attention. They are doing more harm than good by promoting erroneous information that the anti-fracking movement has absorbed, advanced, and failed to repudiate.

Lots of parallels with the chemtrails hoax. Loony toons start a hoax, others pick up on it, no self correction. It becomes a "movement" believed by thousands......

Let me guess, anyone who disagrees is considered a "shill" for the oil companies, right?

 

[betterways]

Yes, methane gets into water and always has, but it's been increasing in areas with Fracking. I have attended lectures from consultants for the Oil & Gas industry in Texas that went over the many points in which it can occur. (I'm in Houston) And the fact that they rarely get the chance to take measurements before the fracking therefore no one can tell what's changed as a result of the fracking. But mostly the lectures are all about the improvements & new technologies they are making to reduce the methane leaks & groundwater contamination. But they have no data on what's been happening & still happening in wells where those improvements weren't made.

Also, no answer to the massive amounts of fresh water taken out of our water system, although there are companies that frac with propane instead of water & then recapture & reuse it. This method results in fewer methane leaks into the atmosphere as well. (All methane should be captured where ever we possibly can, btw, at any cost.)

And discussion of the Frack sand mining ruining small towns & prime farmland all over Wisconsin. I recently saw an article about a school in the county where my mother lives having to install expensive air filtration systems in the schools because of the particulate matter. This is a part of the country where few people have air conditioning. They open windows and used to breath pretty clean air. Not anymore.

 

[betterways]

Fracknation is good.

Natural gas is cleaner and it will become a major bridge fuel until greener forms are available.

Greener energy sources are available and if we'd been working on that the last few decades, we'd already be there. Look at how much of their energy Germany gets from renewable energy. And it's neither a sunny nor windy place and they only started a short time ago. And at the same time, their economy is booming.

Also, natural gas doesn't burn as clean as we've all been made to believe. I was stunned recently when I saw a chart comparing fuels. I always thought my stove and gas heater burned pretty clean. It's more like 50% of the CO2 emissions from Coal. And not much different from oil. Not clean. Just cleaner. And remember we are only talking about pollution from burning. Not about the harm done in obtaining & refining it.

Also, there's a lot of evidence that these fracked wells will peter out much faster than we've been led to believe. It's a bubble and it will be short and all this damage will have been for nothing.

 

[Buildy]

Let me guess, anyone who disagrees is considered a "shill" for the oil companies, right?

Wrong guess.

Why is it propaganda when an industry presents facts and not when those against an industry use tricks and hoaxes to promote their views?

What points did it make that you objected to?

Mostly the lack of facts in the film. It just seemed to me that it sought to discredit a few people in the film, and not so much facts. I learned very little.


I'm on your side here people!

 

[Hot Wing Conspiracy]

I've been reading a lot about fracking in the UK recently and have been a little worried about the environmental impacts of such an activity. Now I can see that there may well be a long term issue due to the quantity of invasive tampering which is required but recently I have come across this which appears to be a little more immediate.



The video shows people setting fire to the gas present it their water supply. To me it looks a bit of a stretch as surely the heat source would be negated by the running water but I'm by no means an expert. Wondering if anyone has any more information on this?

I worked for 2 years at a company that monitored fracking for oil and gas companies. Well casing failures are not that uncommon, and they almost inevitably lead to water table contamination.

As for Fracknation, come on - I'm sorry that you can be so easily persuaded.
http://www.growthbusters.org/2013/01/do-we-want-to-live-in-fracknation/

 

[Bill]

I worked for 2 years at a company that monitored fracking for oil and gas companies. Well casing failures are not that uncommon, and they almost inevitably lead to water table contamination.

As for Fracknation, come on - I'm sorry that you can be so easily persuaded.
http://www.growthbusters.org/2013/01/do-we-want-to-live-in-fracknation/

Okay I'll ask. Where and when did these well casing failures occur? How often? Did it occur during the extraction process or was it associated with waste water injection? Which water tables were contaminated? When? Were any reports filed? Was the EPA notified? Were any studies done on the contamination? Are there any published papers or reports you can reference?