If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   Another study shows that the link between fracking and ground water contamination is a myth. Thankfully the Party of Science(tm) has conceded to reality and will stop opposing it, right?   (hotair.com) divider line 125
    More: Unlikely, groundwater, drilling fluids, Western Pennsylvania, shocker, eco, methane, aquifers  
•       •       •

2505 clicks; posted to Geek » on 20 Jul 2013 at 2:55 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



125 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-20 11:31:58 AM
http://hotair.com/about/

Oh yeah. Definitely sounds like a reputable group of people who most assuredly have their heads firmly in reality.
 
2013-07-20 11:34:52 AM
If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?  And why are they exempt from the Clean Water act?

One has to assume the worst.
 
2013-07-20 11:42:56 AM
So, how do you explain Pavilion, WY? Still going to go with "EPA contaminated the site" bullshiat? What caused the contamination if it wasn't fracking?

If the chemical coctails used by the drilling industry aren't all that bad, why do they fight tooth and nail to keep them secret?
 
2013-07-20 11:47:33 AM

Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?


Because "trade secret."

Marcus Aurelius: And why are they exempt from the Clean Water act?


Because $$$$$$$ HOLLAAAAAAAAAAA!
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-07-20 11:52:20 AM
Yes, Hot Air is reality and your flammable well water is just a hallucination.

That's some real trolling there.
 
2013-07-20 12:01:37 PM

vpb: Yes, Hot Air is reality and your flammable well water is just a hallucination.

That's some real trolling there.


Well, the point was that it was happening before the fracking. Though to me all that says is that it can be quite delicate, so fracking will likely cause more cases of it happening.
 
2013-07-20 12:03:55 PM

dr_blasto: So, how do you explain Pavilion, WY?


What's to explain?
 
2013-07-20 12:07:51 PM
images.persephonemagazine.com

IT'S IN THE FRACKING WATER!

 
2013-07-20 12:08:03 PM
Too many people and groups want energy independence. Fracking will continue and we'll just see what that leads to 10-20 years from now.

Personally, I'm not a fan. But, I highly doubt the process will be stopped successfully with the number of jobs and the royalties/taxes and local spending they promise communities and states.
 
2013-07-20 12:09:31 PM
Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?
 
2013-07-20 12:10:36 PM

Slaxl: Well, the point was that it was happening before the fracking


That's not relevant.
 
2013-07-20 12:16:18 PM

AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?


A few in colorado too.  Not at all disconcerting to have a toxic, flammable gas come up through your plumbing.
 
2013-07-20 12:18:33 PM
Man whoever wrote that thing sounds like a massive douchebag.
 
2013-07-20 12:32:27 PM

NewportBarGuy: Too many people and groups want energy independence. Fracking will continue and we'll just see what that leads to 10-20 years from now.

Personally, I'm not a fan. But, I highly doubt the process will be stopped successfully with the number of jobs and the royalties/taxes and local spending they promise communities and states.


the thing is... Domestic oil extraction won't lead to energy independence unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.
 
2013-07-20 12:33:36 PM
From the lab that did the report:


NETL Statement on Reported Fracking Study
July 19,2013, 12:15 p.m.

NETL has been conducting a study to monitor for any signs of groundwater contamination as a result of hydraulic fracturing operations at a site on the Marcellus Shale formation in Pennsylvania. We are still in the early stages of collecting, analyzing, andvalidating data from this site. While nothing of concern has been found thus far, the results are far too preliminary to make any firm claims. We expect a final report on the results by the end of the calendar year.

Contact:Shelley Martin, DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory, 304-285-0228,newsinf­o­[nospam-﹫-backwards]lten­*doe*gov

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/press/2013/StudyStatement.pdf

But, yeah, let's make firm conclusions without the benefit of the full report.
 
2013-07-20 12:38:02 PM

Target Builder: the thing is... Domestic oil extraction won't lead to energy independence unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.


I think there's a direct connection to the fracking done in Canada and the US which is leading to reduced "foreign" (Middle East) purchases. It's pretty obvious we fought two major wars to secure a stable supply of oil from that sh*thole region.

It won't lead to energy independence, but it will reduce our reliance on oil that costs more in blood and treasure.

Like I said, not a fan of the process, but the economic and geopolitical results are too popular to fight against.

I'm assuming that in 20 years we'll be lamenting why we did this, but that's not important right now. Drill baby drill!
 
2013-07-20 12:43:40 PM
Also, helps cause earthquakes.

www.sciencemag.org%2Fcontent%2F341%2F6142%2F164.full&h=zAQFuiMiO&s=1
 
2013-07-20 12:52:59 PM

Target Builder: unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.


Thank Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms, and Isadora Duncan.

Blues_X: Also, helps cause earthquakes.


Lockjaw and night vision too!
 
2013-07-20 12:55:22 PM
You'll notice, though, our surface lakes do not burn.  Unless they're tailings ponds created by the drilling industry with post-processing water, which are not used for drinking water, have scarecrows and air cannons to keep wildlife away from them, and are used only to recycle back into oil processing.  The Athabascan oil sands are not like Texas oil reserves - the oil is in the sand between the water table and the surface.  If you try to dig a well, the water will have to come through the oil sands layer, and then it's contaminated.  Which is why we get water from rivers and natural lakes here.

Kreist, people are so goddamn ready to knee-jerk over whatever someone sciencey tells them.
 
2013-07-20 12:56:10 PM

AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?


Above comment was in response to this, by the way.
 
2013-07-20 01:03:51 PM

AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?


That's just Canada. Things are weird up there. They even put gravy on their French fires.
 
2013-07-20 01:24:22 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: Target Builder: unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.

Thank Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms, and Isadora Duncan.

Blues_X: Also, helps cause earthquakes.

Lockjaw and night vision too!



wat.
 
2013-07-20 01:24:32 PM

Ambivalence: AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?

A few in colorado too.  Not at all disconcerting to have a toxic, flammable gas come up through your plumbing.


It always happens after a night of drinking and a trip to Taco bell.
 
2013-07-20 01:25:14 PM
 
2013-07-20 01:27:34 PM
Does our energy needs satisfy the risks of fracking?


/Its HotAir so I know its full of shiat.
 
2013-07-20 01:34:51 PM
 
2013-07-20 01:36:49 PM
But even the zealous and well-funded bureaucrats at Environmental Protection Agency have so far failed to find that much-desired connection.

Ok, that sentence pushed the article well into joke territory.
 
2013-07-20 01:39:22 PM
Well, at least this derp blog has an honest name, unlike "American Thinker" or "NewsBusters".
 
2013-07-20 01:42:45 PM

Blues_X: wat.


AND as I understand babies are being born naked in the Eagle Ford region! NAKED BABIES! This is an outrage!
 
2013-07-20 01:45:16 PM

jake_lex: Well, at least this derp blog has an honest name, unlike "American Thinker" or "NewsBusters".


It's the most honest name for a site the internet has ever seen.  They're farts in text form.
 
2013-07-20 02:01:19 PM
It's a shame that science has been infected by politics on both sides of the aisle.  I have no opinion on this particular issue because I quite frankly haven't researched it enough.
 
2013-07-20 02:10:07 PM

Ambivalence: AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?

A few in colorado too.  Not at all disconcerting to have a toxic, flammable gas come up through your plumbing.


Free gas?  Sounds like a win-win to me.
 
2013-07-20 02:13:05 PM

NeedlesslyCanadian: http://hotair.com/about/

Oh yeah. Definitely sounds like a reputable group of people who most assuredly have their heads firmly in reality.


Is it your belief that Hot Air did the scientific study? Perhaps you ought to read a bit more.
 
2013-07-20 02:22:06 PM

rumpelstiltskin: AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?

That's just Canada. Things are weird up there. They even put gravy on their French fires.


And they like ketchup flavored potato chips and coffee flavored Kit Kat bars. It's like it's a whole different country up there!
 
2013-07-20 03:08:20 PM
Lotta myths be getting dispelled today, yo
 
2013-07-20 03:11:01 PM
I haven't made up my mind on this issue.  Can someone point me towards websites that cite empirical, scientifically-valid evidence without the leftist irrational fear-mongering and the greedy corporatist denialism?  My Google-fu keeps leading me to political hyperbole bullshiat.

Thanks!
 
2013-07-20 03:11:49 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: dr_blasto: So, how do you explain Pavilion, WY?

What's to explain?


Where did all the benzine in their wells come from? It certainly couldn't be bad behavior from Encanta illegally disposing waste or from the fracking chemicals pumped into the ground. When the Uranium mine in Wind River was opened, the tailings weren't a hazard to the people of the area, they certainly wouldn't cause any increased risk of cancer would it? The fine people at Susquehana-Western would never just let shiat sit out and contaminate drinking water.

Of course, we needed Uranium back then, it was the cold war. We needed the yellow cake to arm our nation against the commies, right?

Snark aside, we've made lots of short-sighted decisions in this country regarding the extraction industry. We still allow unknown chemical compounds to be pumped into the ground, albeit lower than the wells, but without the legitimate efforts to protect the property of the people sitting on top of that shiat. So long as someone gets their CNG, it's all good, right? Damn the potential disasters, it is more important to allow markets to resolve it. Look at the penalties and efforts Susquehanna-Western endured for the uranium tailings - oh, wait, our tax dollars are cleaning up that mess.
 
2013-07-20 03:19:04 PM

Mrbogey: NeedlesslyCanadian: http://hotair.com/about/

Oh yeah. Definitely sounds like a reputable group of people who most assuredly have their heads firmly in reality.

Is it your belief that Hot Air did the scientific study? Perhaps you ought to read a bit more.


Which is why they simply linked to the study, without any interpretation or waterheaded blogspeak. Right?

Oh wait. They took a study that's still not finished and extrapolated it to mean that fracking is 100% safe, because surely monitoring efforts will know how to detect the presence of proprietary, unknown chemical compounds. Also if something hasn't leached out into surrounding aquifers in a year, then it's staying there forever, no matter what.

They also assumed that "the fracking fluid stays right here forever" in one particular place, at one particular depth, holds true across all hydrogeology and fracking depths. And they also ignored entirely the operations where they don't leave the fluid in the ground, and instead pump it back up and discharge it to a creek or some shiat.

So yes, you're right. Hot Air is totally factual, and we should take what they're saying at face value. I'm happy you took the oil industry dick out of your mouth long enough to inform us of that.
 
2013-07-20 03:21:20 PM
Good idea. Lets rape the environment to extend the age of the combustion engine for another few decades. Under no circumstances should we wait and see what the long term consequences of fracking are.
 
2013-07-20 03:22:08 PM

Blues_X: Dancin_In_Anson: Target Builder: unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.

Thank Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms, and Isadora Duncan.

Blues_X: Also, helps cause earthquakes.

Lockjaw and night vision too!


wat.


static.comicvine.com
Yeah ,his name is Black Bolt, not Night Vision.
 
2013-07-20 03:28:43 PM
Wait.  People are treating Hot Air as a legitimate source of information?!?

Wow.
 
2013-07-20 03:30:50 PM

Shostie: Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?

Because "trade secret."

Marcus Aurelius: And why are they exempt from the Clean Water act?

Because $$$$$$$ HOLLAAAAAAAAAAA!


And my work here is done.

Azlefty: Fracking does not affect ground water just ask  the folks on the  wind River Reservation

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/article/wyoming-groundwate r- again-tests-positive-for-fracking-related-chemicals-on-wind-river-rese rvation-136259


ACTUALLY
This is really the point. The study talked about tracking tracer chemical(s) that were added.
Did the study track the fraking chemicals? ALL of them? And if not, the study is close to worthless.
 
2013-07-20 03:32:10 PM
Definitively claiming fracking is harmless when the study is in the beginning stages of data collection is equivalent to watching a lit match sit on top of a pile of dry wood/paper for one second and determining there is no fire risk.

Also, I am continually amazed at the people who valiantly push for increased drilling, fracking, pipelines as though the oil companies are going to happily keep the oil here. These seem to be the same pro-business people crying about government intervention.
 
2013-07-20 03:32:46 PM
vpb
(favorite: Blamed "right wing conspiracy " for Family Research Council shooting after shooter was id'd as left wing gay activist)


Yes, Hot Air is reality and your flammable well water is just a hallucination.

That's some real trolling there.

Oh look, you lying about the facts again.

So why was it happening before fracking? Did Bush go into the past ?
 
2013-07-20 03:33:00 PM

IntertubeUser: I haven't made up my mind on this issue.  Can someone point me towards websites that cite empirical, scientifically-valid evidence without the leftist irrational fear-mongering and the greedy corporatist denialism?  My Google-fu keeps leading me to political hyperbole bullshiat.

Thanks!


That's all that there is.
Unless you know what is being pumped into the ground during fraking, how would you know what might be leaking out?
Unless you have extensive ground and air testing before, during drilling, and after during the extraction phase; how can you compare before and after data?

Farking Cheney Loophole.
 
2013-07-20 03:35:38 PM

dr_blasto: So, how do you explain Pavilion, WY?


isolated incident.  overzealous staffer.
 
2013-07-20 03:36:17 PM

IntertubeUser: I haven't made up my mind on this issue.  Can someone point me towards websites that cite empirical, scientifically-valid evidence without the leftist irrational fear-mongering and the greedy corporatist denialism?  My Google-fu keeps leading me to political hyperbole bullshiat.

Thanks!


What the EPA/WDEQ intend to study (PDF warning) in the Pavillion, WY (Encanta field). They ran a study earlier, but it was assaulted by FUD. EPA, in their all their liberal, uber-powerful, business-destroying power, decided that they would take the complaints about methodology and re-test to maintain fairness.

What's known: the process of "fracking" or hydraulic fracturing to release deeper, harder to access gas uses many chemicals which are pumped into the gas field under high pressure to break up the supporting rock. These chemicals are claimed to be trade secrets by the extraction industry and, even though a person may have a well on their property directly over a gas field, they typically do not have or own the mineral rights. Extractors can come in and drill under their land and are not obligated to compensate property owners. They also refuse to indicate the chemical compounds used.

Some studies have indicated that areas with a lot of this activity tend to see an increase, sometimes significant, in toxic chemicals in their well water.

What's unknown: due to limited testing, lack of regulation for pre-drilling testing, the exact increase in chemicals. What chemicals are used and whether wells consistently maintain hydraulic isolation during the extraction process. Also unknown is if different types of geology lend themselves better to safe fracking vs other formations where pumping to the surface, through wells or to surface water is more likely.

They are unknown as testing, sampling, requiring compound reporting are all heavily resisted by the extraction industry and they have a much more powerful lobby in the state and federal government than you or I do. In some areas, they've found methods to force people to allow drilling.
 
2013-07-20 03:36:39 PM

dr_blasto: Where did all the benzine in their wells come from?


Where did the EPA go?
 
2013-07-20 03:40:53 PM
Also, note that study after study produced by the industry indicates there's zero harm that could come from their practices. Those studies clearly show that self-regulation works and, in fact, that the process of fracking actually makes puppies happier and kittens cuter.
 
2013-07-20 03:42:58 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: dr_blasto: Where did all the benzine in their wells come from?

Where did the EPA go?


They simply met a ton of resistance from the Encanta corp-the company said the EPA contaminated the test wells when they did the tests, so the EPA backed off and declared a do-over. The do-over is in public commenting stage, will be managed by WDEQ (state) and assisted by EPA.
 
2013-07-20 03:48:12 PM

slayer199: It's a shame that science has been infected by politics on both sides of the aisle.  I have no opinion on this particular issue because I quite frankly haven't researched it enough.


I like you. Good frame of thought to have.
 
2013-07-20 03:49:03 PM
They've been running a couple of test sites (very) near me in the UK. Had to stop after 2 earthquakes to get a report saying it's OK to carry on. Whoopee!

Would think the densely populated UK is the last place to risk fracking, but the Gov£rnm£nt is k££n to off£r tax inc£ntives.
 
2013-07-20 03:52:45 PM

dr_blasto: Some studies have indicated that areas with a lot of this activity tend to see an increase, sometimes significant, in toxic chemicals in their well water.


Some stuff posted in this thread is bull.

There's a reason why the Sautner's in Dimock aren't getting the press like they used to.
 
2013-07-20 03:54:01 PM
Have the science deniers started burning books yet?
 
2013-07-20 03:55:31 PM

dr_blasto: the EPA backed off and declared a do-over.


A do over? They farking turned tail and ran.
 
2013-07-20 03:56:25 PM

dr_blasto: In some areas, they've found methods to force people to allow drilling.


While anecdotal stories about people's water wells becoming contaminated with methane after fraking starts are not proof, they certainly are interesting correlated accounts, which beg for more study.

WHAT is the likelyhood that so many reported wells had methane problems before fraking and were not reported? My guess is pretty low. People biatch about stuff constantly.
 
2013-07-20 04:02:03 PM

Mrbogey: dr_blasto: Some studies have indicated that areas with a lot of this activity tend to see an increase, sometimes significant, in toxic chemicals in their well water.

Some stuff posted in this thread is bull.

There's a reason why the Sautner's in Dimock aren't getting the press like they used to.


Hmm. Sure, lots of crap floating about for sure. Have a read. Regardless of the potential consequences, the process continues with little resistance. Again, I'd point out that fracking and extraction is seriously jacking up individual property rights. Since when did property rights become less important to the people on the right-of-center?
 
2013-07-20 04:04:44 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: dr_blasto: the EPA backed off and declared a do-over.

A do over? They farking turned tail and ran.


Yup. The jackbooted thugs bravely ran away. Dumped it off on the state. Maybe we can see the report in 2016, but WY isn't known for following through with just about anything.
 
2013-07-20 04:08:24 PM

namatad: dr_blasto: In some areas, they've found methods to force people to allow drilling.

While anecdotal stories about people's water wells becoming contaminated with methane after fraking starts are not proof, they certainly are interesting correlated accounts, which beg for more study.

WHAT is the likelyhood that so many reported wells had methane problems before fraking and were not reported? My guess is pretty low. People biatch about stuff constantly.


We still don't require tests of well integrity and quality prior to opening gas fields. It will always be easy for anyone to claim "it was like that before" without giving any thought. Personally, I think corporations should pay the EPA to do pre-drilling well inspections and tests. They should also have to pay for intermittent tests during extraction to evaluate risks and damage to the citizens of that area.
 
2013-07-20 04:12:41 PM
It would be trivial to add a chemical tracer to fracking fluid that doesn't ever occur in nature. It's inexpensive and doesn't at all effect the performance of the fracking fluid. It would also make it extremely easy to determine if the fracking fluid is causing groundwater contamination or not.

I can't imagine why the fracking industry is so opposed to this.
 
2013-07-20 04:13:42 PM
Oh, look. They do this in the preliminary study. I should try reading sometimes
 
2013-07-20 04:16:49 PM

1000 Ways to Dye: It would be trivial to add a chemical tracer to fracking fluid that doesn't ever occur in nature. It's inexpensive and doesn't at all effect the performance of the fracking fluid. It would also make it extremely easy to determine if the fracking fluid is causing groundwater contamination or not.

I can't imagine why the fracking industry is so opposed to this.


Also, why not just dump the contaminated waste water into our river systems? Wouldn't it be nice if we gave a fark about that too?
 
2013-07-20 04:18:06 PM
Article written by an Erika Johnsen.

She also works for Townhall.com

so....  I'm calling BS.
 
2013-07-20 04:32:35 PM
Penn State did a study about water quality in general in PA. They found that over 1/2 of the wells had some type of problem including natural gas. They also found that people were only getting their wells tested at about a 50% rate. So that leave 1/4 of all wells in PA have problems and have never been tested! So when fracking is being done and people get their wells tested, guess what? 1/4 of them find problems and blame the fracking. Water quality can also change from season to season. Get your damn well-water tested on a regular basis and don't wait til after there's fracking nearby.
Also methane in your well-water is dealt with rather easily by installing a vent system. And guess what? These vent systems have been around for a long time because methane in well-water has been a problem for a long time.
 
2013-07-20 04:38:46 PM
FDA has plenty of reports saying that there's no difference between brand and generic drugs too, but there are a hell of a lot more generic drug recalls than there are brand recalls. Some companies in recent years have had to recall almost everything they made, yet they are still in business and my employer is still buying from them. I'm looking at you Actavis
 
2013-07-20 04:54:00 PM

Pharmdawg: FDA has plenty of reports saying that there's no difference between brand and generic drugs too, but there are a hell of a lot more generic drug recalls than there are brand recalls. Some companies in recent years have had to recall almost everything they made, yet they are still in business and my employer is still buying from them. I'm looking at you Actavis


I take Propranolol  and the Pharmacy has changed manufacturers on me twice in the last year. First it was from Mylan, then Wyeth, and now Breckenridge. Should I be concerned?
 
2013-07-20 05:00:35 PM
Gee one would think that if it were sooooo completely harmless then the drilling industry wouldn't be so eager to exempt themselves from liability in the whole process.  WTF is wrong with these people?  People who think fracking is so completely safe should put their money where their mouth is an get their drinking water from the wells close to these fracking sites. I wonder if they would think it was so farking safe when it's their health on the line.
 
2013-07-20 05:04:18 PM

RexTalionis: From the lab that did the report:


NETL Statement on Reported Fracking Study
July 19,2013, 12:15 p.m.

NETL has been conducting a study to monitor for any signs of groundwater contamination as a result of hydraulic fracturing operations at a site on the Marcellus Shale formation in Pennsylvania. We are still in the early stages of collecting, analyzing, andvalidating data from this site. While nothing of concern has been found thus far, the results are far too preliminary to make any firm claims. We expect a final report on the results by the end of the calendar year.

Contact:Shelley Martin, DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory, 304-285-0228,newsinfo[[nospam-﹫-backwards] image 7x13]lten[* image 7x13]doe[* image 7x13]gov

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/press/2013/StudyStatement.pdf

But, yeah, let's make firm conclusions without the benefit of the full report.


"Big Science" will likely have already contacted and contaminated the researches by the end of the calendar year. Only now, before the study is complete, can accurate, unskewed conclusions be derived.
 
2013-07-20 05:11:03 PM

Barfmaker: Man whoever wrote that thing sounds like a massive douchebag.


The opening line did not fill me with confidence in his objectivity :

"Despite extreme environmentalists' hysterical pursuit of evidence to conclusively link up ..."

Excuse me, I have to go be hysterical now.
 
2013-07-20 05:16:20 PM

Dimensio: "Big Science" will likely have already contacted and contaminated the researches by the end of the calendar year. Only now, before the study is complete, can accurate, unskewed conclusions be derived.


I'd call you a half-wit but that's about half too much.
 
2013-07-20 05:19:15 PM
You know who I'd like to see doing some fracking...

db2.stb.s-msn.com
 
2013-07-20 05:19:20 PM

Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?


They do.

http://fracfocus.org/
 
2013-07-20 05:33:10 PM

ZeroCorpse: You know who I'd like to see doing some fracking...

[db2.stb.s-msn.com image 598x465]




Everyone had their favorite. Grace Park was mine.
i41.tinypic.com
 
2013-07-20 05:39:42 PM
You would think that if this was true,you would be able to find a real article in a real publication that said this,
It always seems to be ranting editorials like this, though. This asshole doesn't even have a legitimate scientific position - he's just yelling.
 
2013-07-20 05:46:37 PM
When issues like this are politicized, you can't trust either 'side'.

As an independent thinker, it's common sense that fracking causes environmental damage in one form or another.

There is much evidence whether 'scientifically' proving it or not.
 
2013-07-20 05:48:25 PM

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?

They do.

http://fracfocus.org/


Oh, well, problem solved then. Let's just see what a random well from Kern County, California is up to.

Ingredients/Chemical Abstract Service Number/Max Ing. Concentration by Additive/Max Ing. Concentration in HF Fluid

Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium 55566-30-8 0.01300% 0.00281%
sulfate
Non-crystalline silica 7631-86-9 0.01300% 0.00281%
Dioctyl sulfosuccinate sodium salt Proprietary 0.02349% 0.00508%
Alkylalcohol ethoxylated Proprietary 0.02349% 0.00508%
Oxyalkylated Alcohol (1) Proprietary 0.02349% 0.00508%

Methanol 67-56-1 0.03229% 0.00699%
Aliphatic co-polymer Proprietary 0.06242% 0.01350%
Zirconium dichloride oxide 7699-43-6 0.10073% 0.02180%
Polyethylene glycol monohexyl ether 31726-34-8 0.11696% 0.02531%
Potassium hydroxide 1310-58-3 0.15029% 0.03252%
2,2`,2"-nitrilotriethanol 102-71-6 0.25645% 0.05549%
Diammonium peroxidisulphate 7727-54-0 0.26953% 0.05832%
Aliphatic polyol Proprietary 0.34757% 0.07520%
Oxyalkylated Alcohol (2) Proprietary 0.37241% 0.08058%

Propan-2-ol 67-63-0 0.51334% 0.11107%
Carbohydrate polymer Proprietary 0.80058% 0.17322%
Phenolic resin 9003-35-4 2.34114% 0.50655%
Crystalline silica 14808-60-7 97.60714% 21.11905%

I'm sure all of the proprietary stuff is just fine.
 
2013-07-20 05:50:00 PM
All of this loose talk about ad water, feh.
If these people out in the boondocks would get their water from city and town supplies, none of this would be a problem now, wouldn't it?

/I keed. The frackers are thumping the ground in which my very ancestors are buried in Pennsylvania and it isn't pretty. Tank trucks everywhere. Oil field trash lurking. One generation of jobs exchanged for multiple generations of poisoned water. Totally worth it, right? So a bunch of oil field trash can make some money and then go home to Texas or Oklahoma and die of cancer.
//Real grafitti in the restroom of a quickie mart in Towanda, Pa.: "Fark, fight, and lay pipe."
///Also, "Rebel trash go home."
 
2013-07-20 06:14:16 PM
No, it's a total myth... we should totally let the oil companies keep pumping secret chemicals that they don't need to disclose into the ground... and the water has always been able to catch fire... sure, subby.
 
2013-07-20 06:23:30 PM

rumpelstiltskin: AgentKGB: Is that why a number of communities in Alberta have ground water you can burn?

That's just Canada. Things are weird up there. They even put gravy on their French fires.


They have burning water on the western slope of Colorado too... there's benzene in the water now... there didn't used to be... but the frackers say it's totally unrelated to all the benzene they pumped into the ground.
 
2013-07-20 06:24:52 PM
Oddly, it's science saying "fracking is harmful" and business saying "fracking is beneficial." Guess which way the politicians went?

Yeah, the same way they went on other environmental issues - they're on the side that pays them the most. Remember, this is pretty much how the arguments on climate change went, too, until the results were too obvious to ignore or deny.
 
2013-07-20 06:32:10 PM

firefly212: They have burning water on the western slope of Colorado too... there's benzene in the water now... there didn't used to be... but the frackers say it's totally unrelated to all the benzene they pumped into the ground.


Ooo let me try. The state of North Pennsylvania was completely destroyed in 1996 by fracking. The industry then paid off everyone to shut up about it.

I love this "Make up facts" game you started.
 
2013-07-20 06:34:56 PM

MarkEC: Pharmdawg: FDA has plenty of reports saying that there's no difference between brand and generic drugs too, but there are a hell of a lot more generic drug recalls than there are brand recalls. Some companies in recent years have had to recall almost everything they made, yet they are still in business and my employer is still buying from them. I'm looking at you Actavis

I take Propranolol  and the Pharmacy has changed manufacturers on me twice in the last year. First it was from Mylan, then Wyeth, and now Breckenridge. Should I be concerned?


I switched to brand name Thyroid replacement. The different generics are absorbed differently (different fillers) and the dosage varies too much for proper titration.

Like everything in the universe, your mileage may vary.
 
2013-07-20 06:40:36 PM

Mrbogey: firefly212: They have burning water on the western slope of Colorado too... there's benzene in the water now... there didn't used to be... but the frackers say it's totally unrelated to all the benzene they pumped into the ground.

Ooo let me try. The state of North Pennsylvania was completely destroyed in 1996 by fracking. The industry then paid off everyone to shut up about it.

I love this "Make up facts" game you started.


Yes it is perfectly safe. Colorado has had no problems with fracking. Do you work for the oil/gas industry? You sure seem to hate people talking about the problems it has.
 
2013-07-20 06:49:12 PM

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?

They do.

http://fracfocus.org/


http://fracfocus.org/hydraulic-fracturing-how-it-works/drilling-risk s- safeguards 

You know, the more I read about this crap, the more I think that the pollution is all on the surface.
Sure, there is a chance that the well itself leaks, but it is much more likely that they are spilling waste water on the surface which is seeping into the ground water.

(yes, I know, that would not account for the methane in the water ...)
 
2013-07-20 06:51:30 PM

Carth: Yes it is perfectly safe. Colorado has had no problems with fracking. Do you work for the oil/gas industry? You sure seem to hate people talking about the problems it has.


Easy enough to fix right?
Billion dollars per company, put into escrow and controlled by the STATE EPA.
Used to properly clean up accidents.
Refilled to a billion whenever it falls to 500 million.

TADA
clean up problem solved.

/wait, that would cut into corporate profits? and require only large and well funded fraking? nevermind
 
2013-07-20 07:23:06 PM

namatad: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?

They do.

http://fracfocus.org/

http://fracfocus.org/hydraulic-fracturing-how-it-works/drilling-risk s- safeguards 

You know, the more I read about this crap, the more I think that the pollution is all on the surface.
Sure, there is a chance that the well itself leaks, but it is much more likely that they are spilling waste water on the surface which is seeping into the ground water.

(yes, I know, that would not account for the methane in the water ...)


As I pointed out upthread, people aren't getting their water tested on a regular basis as they should. The level of methane can vary greatly depending on aquifer replenishment due to weather. Less rain, lower aquifers, more methane seeping in, completely independent of fracking or mining in the area. A guy I met from Range Resources told me they are offering people free well testing before and after the fracking in PA so people know their water quality is the same.
 
2013-07-20 07:25:56 PM

namatad: Carth: Yes it is perfectly safe. Colorado has had no problems with fracking. Do you work for the oil/gas industry? You sure seem to hate people talking about the problems it has.

Easy enough to fix right?
Billion dollars per company, put into escrow and controlled by the STATE EPA.
Used to properly clean up accidents.
Refilled to a billion whenever it falls to 500 million.

TADA
clean up problem solved.

/wait, that would cut into corporate profits? and require only large and well funded fraking? nevermind


SOSHUHLIZM!
 
2013-07-20 08:13:09 PM
Engineer designing drilling equipment to rape your lands, getting a kick, etc

/thinking about taking a field position for a couple years to pay off my student loans, buy house, new car, then come back to the office
//$$$
 
2013-07-20 08:14:30 PM

Target Builder: NewportBarGuy: Too many people and groups want energy independence. Fracking will continue and we'll just see what that leads to 10-20 years from now.

Personally, I'm not a fan. But, I highly doubt the process will be stopped successfully with the number of jobs and the royalties/taxes and local spending they promise communities and states.

the thing is... Domestic oil extraction won't lead to energy independence unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.


You think the federal government would do a better job at extraction than the present public corporations?
 
2013-07-20 08:16:44 PM
Remember when scientific analyses used to account for things?  Those were the days.
 
2013-07-20 08:33:34 PM

gameshowhost: Remember when scientific analyses used to account for things?  Those were the days.


Like when studies were inconclusive for proof between smoking and cancer? Yep, those were the days...
 
2013-07-20 09:07:08 PM

Lord Jubjub: Target Builder: NewportBarGuy: Too many people and groups want energy independence. Fracking will continue and we'll just see what that leads to 10-20 years from now.

Personally, I'm not a fan. But, I highly doubt the process will be stopped successfully with the number of jobs and the royalties/taxes and local spending they promise communities and states.

the thing is... Domestic oil extraction won't lead to energy independence unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.

You think the federal government would do a better job at extraction than the present public corporations?


Better? No output would be way down. But since the government wouldn't be profit seeking, wouldn't have to pay taxes and couldn't sell the oil on the global market it would likely be cheaper for the US.
 
2013-07-20 09:11:06 PM
What's really awesome is that some of those areas have had conventional drilling for something like 100 years, most of those years unregulated. Shockingly enough, those areas are still fairly polluted.
 
2013-07-20 09:14:01 PM

starsrift: gameshowhost: Remember when scientific analyses used to account for things?  Those were the days.

Like when studies were inconclusive for proof between smoking and cancer? Yep, those were the days...


I'M WIF U THER, BRO
 
2013-07-20 09:14:48 PM

Mrbogey: NeedlesslyCanadian: http://hotair.com/about/

Oh yeah. Definitely sounds like a reputable group of people who most assuredly have their heads firmly in reality.

Is it your belief that Hot Air did the scientific study? Perhaps you ought to read a bit more.


Well the study in question is not completed and has not made a conclusion, so perhaps you should read more yourself...beyond the aforementioned moron website. You dumbass.
 
2013-07-20 09:20:29 PM
Where is a whistleblower when you need one? I can't believe someone hasn't gotten their hands on whatever they use during fracking to be able to test it.
 
2013-07-20 09:29:17 PM

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Marcus Aurelius: If fracking is so harmless, then why are they not required to disclose what they're pumping down there?

They do.

http://fracfocus.org/


From the website you listed:

"  Although there are dozens to hundreds of chemicals which could be used as additives, there are a limited number which are routinely used in hydraulic fracturing.  The following is a list of the chemicals used most often "

Also known as "Here's a handpicked list of chemicals we can claim are reasonable and low-risk.  The rest are 'rarely' used and 'proprietary'".

If you won't disclose the exact mix you use, with exact ratios, then don't bother saying you are giving out data, as it's lying by omission.
 
2013-07-20 09:34:07 PM

Carth: Mrbogey: firefly212: They have burning water on the western slope of Colorado too... there's benzene in the water now... there didn't used to be... but the frackers say it's totally unrelated to all the benzene they pumped into the ground.

Ooo let me try. The state of North Pennsylvania was completely destroyed in 1996 by fracking. The industry then paid off everyone to shut up about it.

I love this "Make up facts" game you started.

Yes it is perfectly safe. Colorado has had no problems with fracking. Do you work for the oil/gas industry? You sure seem to hate people talking about the problems it has.


Right, you dishonestly state the case and think you're right. There was a spill into a river that was completely separate from fracking. That's like saying tsunami's cause radioactive fallout in Japan or flights out of Boston are responsible for the WTC building collapsing.

I hate it when morons spout off with passionate abandon things that are completely wrong. Ideally, if you stopped saying things that were wrong I wouldn't have a reason to post about fracking.
 
2013-07-20 09:42:29 PM

Mrbogey: Carth: Mrbogey: firefly212: They have burning water on the western slope of Colorado too... there's benzene in the water now... there didn't used to be... but the frackers say it's totally unrelated to all the benzene they pumped into the ground.

Ooo let me try. The state of North Pennsylvania was completely destroyed in 1996 by fracking. The industry then paid off everyone to shut up about it.

I love this "Make up facts" game you started.

Yes it is perfectly safe. Colorado has had no problems with fracking. Do you work for the oil/gas industry? You sure seem to hate people talking about the problems it has.

Right, you dishonestly state the case and think you're right. There was a spill into a river that was completely separate from fracking. That's like saying tsunami's cause radioactive fallout in Japan or flights out of Boston are responsible for the WTC building collapsing.

I hate it when morons spout off with passionate abandon things that are completely wrong. Ideally, if you stopped saying things that were wrong I wouldn't have a reason to post about fracking.


When coal plants accidentally dump tons and tons of coal ash, laden with heavy metals, that has nothing to do with the process of power generation, but it is a significant risk of coal power generation. Let's not do anything about anything and use the "overzealous staffer" type arguments though. What could go wrong?
 
2013-07-20 09:43:14 PM

Mrbogey: Carth: Mrbogey: firefly212: They have burning water on the western slope of Colorado too... there's benzene in the water now... there didn't used to be... but the frackers say it's totally unrelated to all the benzene they pumped into the ground.

Ooo let me try. The state of North Pennsylvania was completely destroyed in 1996 by fracking. The industry then paid off everyone to shut up about it.

I love this "Make up facts" game you started.

Yes it is perfectly safe. Colorado has had no problems with fracking. Do you work for the oil/gas industry? You sure seem to hate people talking about the problems it has.

Right, you dishonestly state the case and think you're right. There was a spill into a river that was completely separate from fracking. That's like saying tsunami's cause radioactive fallout in Japan or flights out of Boston are responsible for the WTC building collapsing.

I hate it when morons spout off with passionate abandon things that are completely wrong. Ideally, if you stopped saying things that were wrong I wouldn't have a reason to post about fracking.


So you're saying the spill would have occurred if there was no fracking in the state of CO?

I guess the spill relating to fracking in PA is just another vicious lie?

Yup, nothing can go wrong when fracking, I mean it is perfectly safe right?

But by all means lets rush and frack as quickly as possible before we have time to study what will happen 10-15 years.
 
2013-07-20 09:56:51 PM
"Drilling fluids tagged with unique markers were injected more than 8,000 feet below the surface, but were not detected in a monitoring zone 3,000 feet higher. "

After how long?  Gee, how was that info omitted from TFA?
 
2013-07-20 10:26:51 PM
I bet if its done correctly, and drilling is done using best practices and the best materials for containment, its pretty safe. At least in the short term, before the cement used to seal the well starts to breakdown. But what about companies that cut corners or don't have the most experience or know how? In those cases id bet theres gonna be problems. So if we regulate it, and inspect it and there are real consequences for f ups.. then frack away. But that doesn't seem to be the direction we are going. We are regulating less, inspecting less, not acknowledging the real risks, and absolving giant multi national energy company of any responsibility for their actions. I'm not convinced either way.
 
2013-07-20 11:04:25 PM
Start the fracking around Kennebunkport, and Cape Cod, and Naples, and La Jolla, and other places where the wealthy, super wealthy, and absurdly wealthy build and re-build their cavernous playhouses.  And especially wherever Dick Cheney has his supervillain lair out in Wyoming.  Do it there first.  Let them sign off on the "it's totally safe" thing.  Then let 'em work for five or six years.  Let 'em pump those secret chemicals into the ground long enough for us to know for sure whether this stuff is safe or not.  Let's watch the super wealthy and see if their hair falls out, and they get convulsions, and their tap water ignites.

Then I might start to put a tiny amount of credence in some farking right wing blog citing a "study" that says that fracking is safe.

Not holding my breath.
 
2013-07-20 11:23:10 PM
Republicans just can't stand the idea that safety concerns are getting in the way of profits.

When will America give corporations a break?
 
2013-07-21 01:59:54 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-07-21 04:11:47 AM

Kibbler: Start the fracking around Kennebunkport, and Cape Cod, and Naples, and La Jolla, and other places where the wealthy, super wealthy, and absurdly wealthy build and re-build their cavernous playhouses.  And especially wherever Dick Cheney has his supervillain lair out in Wyoming.  Do it there first.  Let them sign off on the "it's totally safe" thing.  Then let 'em work for five or six years.  Let 'em pump those secret chemicals into the ground long enough for us to know for sure whether this stuff is safe or not.  Let's watch the super wealthy and see if their hair falls out, and they get convulsions, and their tap water ignites.

Then I might start to put a tiny amount of credence in some farking right wing blog citing a "study" that says that fracking is safe.

Not holding my breath.



What I've been saying all along.  If fracking and coal is so safe then put it in your own goddamn neighborhood.
 
2013-07-21 09:16:33 AM
If fracking were a real danger, people would not allow it.  The masses would gather at the sites, at the corporate headquarters, no work would get done.  Congress would have a DDOS of snail mail complains preventing old timer communications.  The frackers would run and hide and deny they ever had anything to do with it.
 
2013-07-21 09:53:15 AM
How can people not know about this issue? Gasland and Gasland 2 exist. If you haven't seen them, please do so. Then reexamine comments such as, "If fracking were a real danger, people would not allow it."

They have been trying to stop it, for years. Entire towns have been trying to stop it. Regardless of your political affiliation just take four hours and watch them both.
 
2013-07-21 09:59:38 AM

slightlyfarked: How can people not know about this issue? Gasland and Gasland 2 exist. If you haven't seen them, please do so. Then reexamine comments such as, "If fracking were a real danger, people would not allow it."

They have been trying to stop it, for years. Entire towns have been trying to stop it. Regardless of your political affiliation just take four hours and watch them both.


Apparently, a fiery kitchen faucet is not a sufficient catalyst of the "do whatever it takes to stop it" attitude which is required to overcome the big money + big politics rape of the people and their lands.
 
2013-07-21 11:06:46 AM

woolvy: Engineer designing drilling equipment to rape your lands, getting a kick, etc

/thinking about taking a field position for a couple years to pay off my student loans, buy house, new car, then come back to the office
//$$$


Meh. A geologist friend of mine worked in Alberta for a while, thinking the same thing. She came back to the Puget Sound area with some rather nasty stories.
 
2013-07-21 11:14:58 AM

Target Builder: NewportBarGuy: Too many people and groups want energy independence. Fracking will continue and we'll just see what that leads to 10-20 years from now.

Personally, I'm not a fan. But, I highly doubt the process will be stopped successfully with the number of jobs and the royalties/taxes and local spending they promise communities and states.

the thing is... Domestic oil extraction won't lead to energy independence unless the oil industry is nationalized, which will never happen.


Yeah. The US produces and sales plenty of oil and gas on the open market. We also buy from the open market. If "independence" were the real aim, we'd stop international purchases and buy only from some kind of American Oil and Gas consortium setup by New World govs(like Iran does with its production), but of course it isn't the aim. The aim is profit and the destruction of local sovereignty for the sake of corporate impunity.
 
2013-07-21 11:16:43 AM

FormlessOne: woolvy: Engineer designing drilling equipment to rape your lands, getting a kick, etc

/thinking about taking a field position for a couple years to pay off my student loans, buy house, new car, then come back to the office
//$$$

Meh. A geologist friend of mine worked in Alberta for a while, thinking the same thing. She came back to the Puget Sound area with some rather nasty stories.


From what I've heard, the Alberta fields are pretty dreary places.
 
2013-07-21 11:21:11 AM

NutWrench: But even the zealous and well-funded bureaucrats at Environmental Protection Agency have so far failed to find that much-desired connection.

Ok, that sentence pushed the article well into joke territory.


Particularly when the Oil and Gas industry just killed an EPA report finding such a connection not a month ago.
 
2013-07-21 11:47:58 AM

Shakin_Haitian: When coal plants accidentally dump tons and tons of coal ash, laden with heavy metals, that has nothing to do with the process of power generation, but it is a significant risk of coal power generation. Let's not do anything about anything and use the "overzealous staffer" type arguments though. What could go wrong?


Is your argument really going to be that benzene is only used for fracking?

Carth: So you're saying the spill would have occurred if there was no fracking in the state of CO?

I guess the spill relating to fracking in PA is just another vicious lie?

Yup, nothing can go wrong when fracking, I mean it is perfectly safe right?

But by all means lets rush and frack as quickly as possible before we have time to study what will happen 10-15 years.


Yup, you went with the moronic argument. Not surprised. Go on and keep asserting that fracking is the only way a chemical spill can occur.

Lionel Mandrake: Republicans just can't stand the idea that safety concerns are getting in the way of profits.

When will America give corporations a break?


Your concern trolling for safety is duly noted.

slightlyfarked: How can people not know about this issue? Gasland and Gasland 2 exist. If you haven't seen them, please do so. Then reexamine comments such as, "If fracking were a real danger, people would not allow it."

They have been trying to stop it, for years. Entire towns have been trying to stop it. Regardless of your political affiliation just take four hours and watch them both.


There's another film called Fracknation that debunks the films. Josh Fox is lying. He omitted information and accepts stories or fracking damage with no proof. The Sautners were a trip with how their lying was so obvious when even a modicum of criticism was used. Even Fox's story of how he found out about fracking was exposed as a lie.
 
2013-07-21 12:16:35 PM
"Pumping all sorts of toxic crap into the ground close to where people live and where underground reservoirs are will have absolutely no affect on anything at all. Why do you people keep insisting on worrying about your health and safety and the environment? Do you not want oil and gas and electricity?"
 
2013-07-21 12:25:33 PM

Mrbogey: Shakin_Haitian: When coal plants accidentally dump tons and tons of coal ash, laden with heavy metals, that has nothing to do with the process of power generation, but it is a significant risk of coal power generation. Let's not do anything about anything and use the "overzealous staffer" type arguments though. What could go wrong?

Is your argument really going to be that benzene is only used for fracking?

Carth: So you're saying the spill would have occurred if there was no fracking in the state of CO?

I guess the spill relating to fracking in PA is just another vicious lie?

Yup, nothing can go wrong when fracking, I mean it is perfectly safe right?

But by all means lets rush and frack as quickly as possible before we have time to study what will happen 10-15 years.

Yup, you went with the moronic argument. Not surprised. Go on and keep asserting that fracking is the only way a chemical spill can occur.

Lionel Mandrake: Republicans just can't stand the idea that safety concerns are getting in the way of profits.

When will America give corporations a break?

Your concern trolling for safety is duly noted.

slightlyfarked: How can people not know about this issue? Gasland and Gasland 2 exist. If you haven't seen them, please do so. Then reexamine comments such as, "If fracking were a real danger, people would not allow it."

They have been trying to stop it, for years. Entire towns have been trying to stop it. Regardless of your political affiliation just take four hours and watch them both.

There's another film called Fracknation that debunks the films. Josh Fox is lying. He omitted information and accepts stories or fracking damage with no proof. The Sautners were a trip with how their lying was so obvious when even a modicum of criticism was used. Even Fox's story of how he found out about fracking was exposed as a lie.


Maybe you should have actually read my post.
 
2013-07-21 12:26:35 PM
 
2013-07-21 01:09:18 PM

MrBallou: Barfmaker: Man whoever wrote that thing sounds like a massive douchebag.
The opening line did not fill me with confidence in his objectivity :
"Despite extreme environmentalists' hysterical pursuit of evidence to conclusively link up ..."
Excuse me, I have to go be hysterical now.


You have to admit, though, that 'hysterical pursuit of evidence' is pretty catchy. I need to start using that.
 
2013-07-21 01:58:21 PM

Mrbogey: Shakin_Haitian: When coal plants accidentally dump tons and tons of coal ash, laden with heavy metals, that has nothing to do with the process of power generation, but it is a significant risk of coal power generation. Let's not do anything about anything and use the "overzealous staffer" type arguments though. What could go wrong?

Is your argument really going to be that benzene is only used for fracking?

Carth: So you're saying the spill would have occurred if there was no fracking in the state of CO?

I guess the spill relating to fracking in PA is just another vicious lie?

Yup, nothing can go wrong when fracking, I mean it is perfectly safe right?

But by all means lets rush and frack as quickly as possible before we have time to study what will happen 10-15 years.

Yup, you went with the moronic argument. Not surprised. Go on and keep asserting that fracking is the only way a chemical spill can occur.

Lionel Mandrake: Republicans just can't stand the idea that safety concerns are getting in the way of profits.

When will America give corporations a break?

Your concern trolling for safety is duly noted.

slightlyfarked: How can people not know about this issue? Gasland and Gasland 2 exist. If you haven't seen them, please do so. Then reexamine comments such as, "If fracking were a real danger, people would not allow it."

They have been trying to stop it, for years. Entire towns have been trying to stop it. Regardless of your political affiliation just take four hours and watch them both.

There's another film called Fracknation that debunks the films. Josh Fox is lying. He omitted information and accepts stories or fracking damage with no proof. The Sautners were a trip with how their lying was so obvious when even a modicum of criticism was used. Even Fox's story of how he found out about fracking was exposed as a lie.


Not the only way, but a preventable one. Thank you for agreeing that fracking causes preventable environmental damage.
 
2013-07-21 03:47:11 PM
With natural gas acting as the leading cause of the United States' think they'd want to take "yes" for an answer, wouldn't you?

Nope... not suprised.  The environmental zealots will continue to oppose anything that might delay their perfect renewable future energy source, even things that make the current situation better.  So you see, Natural gas is really just the evil man keeping the greenies down...
 
2013-07-21 03:47:59 PM
preview is my friend.
preview is my friend.
preview is my friend.
preview is my friend.
preview is my friend...
 
2013-07-21 04:42:58 PM
Another right-wing wacko trolling headline.
Fark is really starting to suck.
 
2013-07-21 05:05:46 PM

Shadyman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8

I'll just leave this here.


Do you know how much methane is in the auquifers in PA that has nothing to do with fracking, drilling, or mining? This kind of publicity stunt is dishonest at best, an outright scam at worst. 1/4 of PA's water wells tested have methane in them whether they are near fracking or not. Your video shows a tap on fire that has supposedly been contaminated for over a year. Methane in water is not hard to correct. Why would you put yourself in danger and keep using the water for a year without getting a damn vent installed? If you have low concentrations of methane in your water, don't assume that the level is going to stay low. The level can vary through natural means such as the changing seasons and varying amounts of rainfall. Get your well tested on a regular basis and don't just assume it's good since the last test over a year ago was good.
 
2013-07-21 07:01:51 PM

MarkEC: Shadyman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8

I'll just leave this here.

Do you know how much methane is in the auquifers in PA that has nothing to do with fracking, drilling, or mining? This kind of publicity stunt is dishonest at best, an outright scam at worst.


^ Yep. Hence why I posted and ran. Credible sources? Who needs those? I dropped the link and ran for an attempt to incite maximum whargarbl.

1/4 of PA's water wells tested have methane in them whether they are near fracking or not. Your video shows a tap on fire that has supposedly been contaminated for over a year. Methane in water is not hard to correct. Why would you put yourself in danger and keep using the water for a year without getting a damn vent installed?

Perhaps trying to get the fracking company to pay for a vent?

If you have low concentrations of methane in your water, don't assume that the level is going to stay low. The level can vary through natural means such as the changing seasons and varying amounts of rainfall.

Interesting.

Get your well tested on a regular basis and don't just assume it's good since the last test over a year ago was good.

Good advice for any well owner.
 
2013-07-21 07:12:06 PM

Shadyman: MarkEC: Shadyman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8

I'll just leave this here.

Do you know how much methane is in the auquifers in PA that has nothing to do with fracking, drilling, or mining? This kind of publicity stunt is dishonest at best, an outright scam at worst.

^ Yep. Hence why I posted and ran. Credible sources? Who needs those? I dropped the link and ran for an attempt to incite maximum whargarbl.

1/4 of PA's water wells tested have methane in them whether they are near fracking or not. Your video shows a tap on fire that has supposedly been contaminated for over a year. Methane in water is not hard to correct. Why would you put yourself in danger and keep using the water for a year without getting a damn vent installed?

Perhaps trying to get the fracking company to pay for a vent?

If you have low concentrations of methane in your water, don't assume that the level is going to stay low. The level can vary through natural means such as the changing seasons and varying amounts of rainfall.

Interesting.

Get your well tested on a regular basis and don't just assume it's good since the last test over a year ago was good.

Good advice for any well owner.


Penn State has a good website to read for anyone concerned about well water.

1/2 of wells in PA have quality issues, yet only half of the 1 million wells have ever been tested. That means that 250,000 wells in PA have quality issues that people are drinking from with no idea of what they're drinking!
 
Displayed 125 of 125 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report