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.

(Philly.com)   Pennsylvania frackers are stunned to learn they can't dump their toxic waste wherever they feel like it   (philly.com) divider line 100
    More: Hero, Pennsylvania, Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania Attorney General, gas wells, produced water, contaminated soil, waste management, XTO Energy  
•       •       •

3446 clicks; posted to Business » on 12 Sep 2013 at 1:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-12 11:06:44 AM  
TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.
 
2013-09-12 11:16:07 AM  

WTFDYW: TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.


I'm not anti-fracking, but without the fear of legal consequences the industry has no reason to make sure that the process is as environmentally neutral as possible. If you want the oil/gas profits, you have to pay, and I mean big, for the privilege.
 
2013-09-12 11:21:21 AM  

WTFDYW: TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.


So you'd be OK with that waste being dumped in your back yard, then?  And you really think that poor poor oil company shouldn't be held responsible?
 
2013-09-12 11:23:54 AM  

WTFDYW: TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.


I think I must be having difficulty with my reading comprehension this morning, do you think you could show me exactly where in the article that was stated?
 
2013-09-12 11:28:26 AM  

Frankentots: do you think you could show me exactly where in the article that was stated?


That was the local industry shill talking.  He had no evidence, he was just spouting nonsense to sway the opinions of people like you-know-who.
 
2013-09-12 12:17:23 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Frankentots: do you think you could show me exactly where in the article that was stated?

That was the local industry shill talking.  He had no evidence, he was just spouting nonsense to sway the opinions of people like you-know-who.


and it appears to have worked.
 
2013-09-12 12:18:55 PM  
Damn.  Those frackers are like the Malons of the East Coast.
 
2013-09-12 12:25:03 PM  
"This decision sends a chilling message to all businesses looking to locate in Pennsylvania that they could be held criminally liable in the event of an unintentional spill by a contractor that resulted in no injury to humans or wildlife and that had no lasting impacts on the environment," said Gene Barr, its president.

GOOD.  Maybe next time you'll work to prevent unintentional spills.
 
2013-09-12 12:37:10 PM  

Mentat: "This decision sends a chilling message to all businesses looking to locate in Pennsylvania that they could be held criminally liable in the event of an unintentional spill by a contractor that resulted in no injury to humans or wildlife and that had no lasting impacts on the environment," said Gene Barr, its president.

GOOD.  Maybe next time you'll work to prevent unintentional spills.


I was going to drill for gas in Pennsylvania where it is located, but now I will drill somewhere else.
 
2013-09-12 12:41:05 PM  
Kane's office announced charges Tuesday against XTO Energy Inc. for discharging more than 50,000 gallons of toxic wastewater from storage tanks at a gas-well site in Lycoming County.

XTO in July settled federal civil charges over the incident by agreeing to pay a $100,000 fine and deploy a plan to improve wastewater-management practices.

"Criminal charges are unwarranted and legally baseless because neither XTO nor any of its employees intentionally, recklessly, or negligently discharged produced water on the site," XTO said in a statement.


So there was a spill, but no one did it?

#@$*ing raccoons!
 
2013-09-12 01:07:57 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: Kane's office announced charges Tuesday against XTO Energy Inc. for discharging more than 50,000 gallons of toxic wastewater from storage tanks at a gas-well site in Lycoming County.

XTO in July settled federal civil charges over the incident by agreeing to pay a $100,000 fine and deploy a plan to improve wastewater-management practices.

"Criminal charges are unwarranted and legally baseless because neither XTO nor any of its employees intentionally, recklessly, or negligently discharged produced water on the site," XTO said in a statement.

So there was a spill, but no one did it?

#@$*ing raccoons!


Read the bolded part and stop pissing your pants.  There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.
 
2013-09-12 01:15:42 PM  

Ontos: Read the bolded part and stop pissing your pants.  There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.


Well, I can think of at least one way- releasing it legally to a company that handles toxic waste disposal so that they can handle it correctly and make sure that it's disposed of in a manner that's consistent with NOT PUTTING TOXIC CHEMICALS INTO THE ENVIRONMENT.
 
2013-09-12 01:17:57 PM  
With Corbett in charge of the state, nothing will happen to this company.
 
2013-09-12 01:20:58 PM  
Uh oh.  Somebody didn't get their kickback check last month.
 
2013-09-12 01:22:03 PM  

Ontos: I_Am_Weasel: Kane's office announced charges Tuesday against XTO Energy Inc. for discharging more than 50,000 gallons of toxic wastewater from storage tanks at a gas-well site in Lycoming County.

XTO in July settled federal civil charges over the incident by agreeing to pay a $100,000 fine and deploy a plan to improve wastewater-management practices.

"Criminal charges are unwarranted and legally baseless because neither XTO nor any of its employees intentionally, recklessly, or negligently discharged produced water on the site," XTO said in a statement.

So there was a spill, but no one did it?

#@$*ing raccoons!

Read the bolded part and stop pissing your pants.  There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.


They played dumb and blamed vandals. Because that makes a shiat ton of sense. Someone farked up, now they can have their day in court.
 
2013-09-12 01:23:45 PM  

Ontos: There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.



Unless there was a third party involved, like say a small plane crashed into it or a beaver knocked down a tree, I am not sure how many ways there are. Either it was intentional,  a result of improper training and oversight of personnel, or there was insufficient maintenance of the containment system.
 
2013-09-12 01:26:23 PM  

Ontos


There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.


Such as?

Oh, and from TFA:

A DEP inspector discovered wastewater leaking from an open valve on a storage tank during an unannounced visit to the Marquardt well site on Nov. 16, 2010. The wastewater spilled into a tributary of the Susquehanna River and also contaminated a spring. Pollutants were present in the stream for 65 days after the spill. The grand jury's presentment does not say who opened the valves on the tank or why. XTO officials at the time suggested vandals might be responsible. But it noted that the drilling site had no secondary containment, little security, and no alarm system for leaks.


Looks like negligence to me. Keep in mind that showing negligence involves duty, breach, causation, and damages.

XTO had a duty to ensure their operation did not contaminate the environment. They apparently breached that duty, hence the prosecution.
 
2013-09-12 01:26:47 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Ontos: I_Am_Weasel: Kane's office announced charges Tuesday against XTO Energy Inc. for discharging more than 50,000 gallons of toxic wastewater from storage tanks at a gas-well site in Lycoming County.

XTO in July settled federal civil charges over the incident by agreeing to pay a $100,000 fine and deploy a plan to improve wastewater-management practices.

"Criminal charges are unwarranted and legally baseless because neither XTO nor any of its employees intentionally, recklessly, or negligently discharged produced water on the site," XTO said in a statement.

So there was a spill, but no one did it?

#@$*ing raccoons!

Read the bolded part and stop pissing your pants.  There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.

They played dumb and blamed vandals. Because that makes a shiat ton of sense. Someone farked up, now they can have their day in court.


That would be covered by negligence, I'd suspect.  If they allowed vandals to do that, they were negligent in properly protecting the tanks.
 
2013-09-12 01:32:19 PM  
For every dollar they're fined Corbett will give them ten back in tax breaks and throw in a spotted owl burger and lubed-up fawn to bang - assuming the chicken doesn't get jealous.
 
2013-09-12 01:33:19 PM  

Ontos: Read the bolded part and stop pissing your pants. There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.


Care to point out how that could be? Negligence can cover a whole lot of scenarios.
 
2013-09-12 01:41:43 PM  

EvilEgg: I was going to drill for gas in Pennsylvania where it is located, but now I will drill somewhere else.


images3.wikia.nocookie.net
Still going to make the local tapwater catch on fire, even if you are drilling from the next county over.
 
2013-09-12 01:43:28 PM  
They usually just come dump it into Ohio, so I'm OK with them having to be liable when they fark shiat up.
 
2013-09-12 01:46:09 PM  
I'm actually pretty surprised to learn this too.
 
2013-09-12 01:50:39 PM  

Ontos: Read the bolded part and stop pissing your pants. There's several ways you can release produced water without it being intentional, reckless, or negligent.


Really?  Intentional and unintentional encompass all of the possibilities.  Within "unintentional", the possibilities I can think of are negligence, recklessness, and interference by an outside party--and in that last case someone else is responsible, and we go through the whole decision tree again with them.  Thus, it eventually works out to be intentional, reckless, or negligent on someone's part.
 
2013-09-12 01:55:49 PM  
Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.
 
2013-09-12 01:58:21 PM  

UberDave: Damn.  Those frackers are like the Malons of the East Coast.


Didn't expect a st:voy reference.

/nobody expects a st:voy reference.
 
2013-09-12 02:03:16 PM  

Kyosuke: "Oh...chemicals are scary!"


Dihydrogen monoxide? No.

Aflatoxin B1? Yes.

/I'm not saying Aflatoxins are present in "produced water"; but to make a blanket statement that, "Chemicals aren't scary," is untrue.
 
2013-09-12 02:04:33 PM  

Kyosuke: Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.


You mean the proprietary chemicals blends that we can't disclose because they are trade secrets are scary people.  But I suppose you are right, because if there is one industry with a stellar track record of never hiding the environmental damage their business is doing, its  the gas and oil production industry.
 
2013-09-12 02:07:21 PM  

Kyosuke: Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.


Maybe if they would just tell people what they're using, people wouldn't need to assume the worst. It's usually the worst with this level of secrecy and legal chicanery.
 
2013-09-12 02:11:51 PM  

wingnut396: Kyosuke: Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.

You mean the proprietary chemicals blends that we can't disclose because they are trade secrets are scary people.  But I suppose you are right, because if there is one industry with a stellar track record of never hiding the environmental damage their business is doing, its  the gas and oil production industry.


I believe the general problem isn't with the fluid they use, but with the stuff released from the earth in the process.
 
2013-09-12 02:17:02 PM  
It's not like they would pay the fine anyway.
 
2013-09-12 02:17:47 PM  

Kyosuke: Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.


Okay you drink them...

Here is a list

Start with the first one.  Ass.
 
2013-09-12 02:18:43 PM  

Kyosuke: Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.


I guess we'll mark you down as having no problem bathing your baby with said chemicals then.
 
2013-09-12 02:24:37 PM  
"Kane's office said it did not need to prove intent to prosecute the company for crimes."

Pretty sure they are going to have to prove intent or gross negligence if they want to get a conviction though.
 
2013-09-12 02:26:43 PM  

Lars The Canadian Viking: wingnut396: Kyosuke: Hah, I sitting through days of conferences on horizontal drilling and fracturing right now.

And I'm laughing at the "Oh...chemicals are scary!" people in this thread.

So there's that.

You mean the proprietary chemicals blends that we can't disclose because they are trade secrets are scary people.  But I suppose you are right, because if there is one industry with a stellar track record of never hiding the environmental damage their business is doing, its  the gas and oil production industry.

I believe the general problem isn't with the fluid they use, but with the stuff released from the earth in the process.


Why not both?
 
2013-09-12 02:28:01 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Kyosuke: "Oh...chemicals are scary!"

Dihydrogen monoxide? No.

Aflatoxin B1? Yes.

/I'm not saying Aflatoxins are present in "produced water"; but to make a blanket statement that, "Chemicals aren't scary," is untrue.


You're the first in this thread to differentiate between good and 'bad' chemicals. I haven't made that statement, by the way.
 
2013-09-12 02:31:04 PM  
FT: "The grand jury's presentment does not say who opened the valves on the tank or why. XTO officials at the time suggested vandals might be responsible. But it noted that the drilling site had no secondary containment, little security, and no alarm system for leaks."

yeah, string these farkers up. they dumped the waste to save money and they deserve anything that can be pinned on them
 
2013-09-12 02:31:55 PM  

Kyosuke: Gecko Gingrich: Kyosuke: "Oh...chemicals are scary!"

Dihydrogen monoxide? No.

Aflatoxin B1? Yes.

/I'm not saying Aflatoxins are present in "produced water"; but to make a blanket statement that, "Chemicals aren't scary," is untrue.

You're the first in this thread to differentiate between good and 'bad' chemicals. I haven't made that statement, by the way.


That's probably because it's entirely irrelevant.  If all they were pumpin into the ground was water, then there's no reason why that wouldn't have been disclosed openly from the outset.  It's the 'bad' chemicals that matter.  If you drink a liter of water with 1 gram of cyanide in it, the autopsy isn't going to say anything about water.
 
2013-09-12 02:33:07 PM  
Oh, and just to state the obvious: The fewer of us using their products means less profit and less incentive to drill these types of wells. Your choice.
 
2013-09-12 02:34:30 PM  

Frankentots: WTFDYW: TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.

I think I must be having difficulty with my reading comprehension this morning, do you think you could show me exactly where in the article that was stated?


Why don't you read TFA again yourself.
 
2013-09-12 02:34:47 PM  

Kyosuke: Oh, and just to state the obvious: The fewer of us using their products means less profit and less incentive to drill these types of wells. Your choice.


Yes.  it's juuuuust that simple.
 
2013-09-12 02:40:10 PM  

Kyosuke: Oh, and just to state the obvious: The fewer of us using their products means less profit and less incentive to drill these types of wells. Your choice.


Oh! Because only Americans use natural gas? They don't sell it outside the country at all?

Weird.
 
2013-09-12 02:42:20 PM  
FTFA:

Criminal charges are unwarranted and legally baseless because neither XTO nor any of its employees intentionally, recklessly, or negligently discharged produced water on the site," XTO said in a statement.


Ok, know how i know you are lying, cuz there was a release of this material, yes?  And XTO did oversee this discharge, yes?  So it had to be one of those things that allowed it to occur.  I mean, I guess the cause could be "magically", but is that a thing now?  It happened by magic?

WTFDYW: TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.


Other than the article not saying any such thing, you are spot on.  Can I subscribe to your newsletter?
 
2013-09-12 02:46:00 PM  

WTFDYW: Frankentots: WTFDYW: TFA states that there was no long term impact to the environment and that no people or animals were injured. Looks like the AW is AWing and looking to run for a bigger office. Fark her with a rusty rake.

I think I must be having difficulty with my reading comprehension this morning, do you think you could show me exactly where in the article that was stated?

Why don't you read TFA again yourself.


The Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry also protested. "This decision sends a chilling message to all businesses looking to locate in Pennsylvania that they could be held criminally liable in the event of an unintentional spill by a contractor that resulted in no injury to humans or wildlife and that had no lasting impacts on the environment," said Gene Barr, its president.

That sounds like, his opinion, man.  And considering that this had to happen:

The Fort Worth, Texas, drilling company, which Exxon acquired in 2010, said it had worked cooperatively with federal and state authorities to clean up the spilled waste, known as "produced water." XTO excavated and removed 3,000 tons of contaminated soil from the site.

I am going to say he is talking out of his ass, and you are still wrong.
 
2013-09-12 02:53:55 PM  

sno man: Here is a list

Start with the first one.  Ass.


Who doesn't buy the first one to treat their own swimming pool water?
Really?
 
2013-09-12 03:02:13 PM  

asmodeus224: Ok, know how i know you are lying, cuz there was a release of this material, yes?  And XTO did oversee this discharge, yes?  So it had to be one of those things that allowed it to occur.  I mean, I guess the cause could be "magically", but is that a thing now?  It happened by magic?


Intentional mischief in the oil fields is a hell of a lot more prevalent than you could possibly imagine.
 
2013-09-12 03:04:13 PM  

SVenus: sno man: Here is a list

Start with the first one.  Ass.

Who doesn't buy the first one to treat their own swimming pool water?
Really?


It's also in shampoo and toilet bowl cleaner, hell even Fabreese... I'm not sure I'd want to drink any of those either.

Fine, you can have the naphtha
 
2013-09-12 03:07:46 PM  

sno man: Fine, you can have the naphtha


In the wells I've fracked so far, all of them had naphtha in the zone I was trying to get to come OUT of the well.  The amount of that going in pales in comparison to what comes out.
 
2013-09-12 03:16:57 PM  

SVenus: sno man: Fine, you can have the naphtha

In the wells I've fracked so far, all of them had naphtha in the zone I was trying to get to come OUT of the well.  The amount of that going in pales in comparison to what comes out.


If it's coming out, than is a part of the "produced water"  (wonders how much the guy that came up with that name got paid) and it's the problem of the company pissing in the hole to contain it and deal with it properly. Period.  However many 'vandals' there may or may not be.  Secondary containment, higher fences, a big dog or two, all of the above, whatever.
 
2013-09-12 03:18:05 PM  
than = then
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report