- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 37,378
- Reaction score
- 10,651
- Location
- US Southwest
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Drinking water doesnt exist at 10,000 feet and that's a fact.
And there's no way that high pressure gas can push the chemicals up the outside of the pipe?
That information isn't correct. Fracking at 10,000%+ feet uisn't going to effect a water zone at 300 feet.
Be careful what you read. Just because it!s on the internet doesn't mean it's true.
Said a guy I know from the Internet.
"Gosh darn Professors telling me that casements leak....what does he know......he is just a Professor....humph!"How many oil wells has this dude drilled? I bet he doesn't know a v-door from a rat's ass.
But, they're still just guessing, because I doubt that they have jacked the casing on a single well to test for leaks in the casing string, or voids in the cement.
That being the casr, it's just as plausible that those water wells were contaminated before the gas well was even drilled. Moreso, since the only contaminents detected were methane has; no drilling fluids, no sand and no frac chemicals. Anyone care to explain that?
Real unbiased studies indicate you are wrong.
Study confirms contamination around some "fracking" sites
NEXT DISCREDITED RIGHTWING MEME!
How many oil wells has this dude drilled? I bet he doesn't know a v-door from a rat's ass.
Dr. Ingraffea's research concentrates on computer simulation and physical testing of complex fracturing processes. He and his students performed pioneering research in the use of interactive computer graphics in computational mechanics. He has authored with his students over 200 papers in these areas. He has been a principal investigator on over $35M in R&D projects from the NSF, NASA Langley, Nichols Research, NASA Glenn, AFOSR, FAA, Kodak, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, IBM, Schlumberger, Digital Equipment Corporation, the Gas Research Institute, Sandia National Laboratories, the Association of Iron and Steel Engineers, General Dynamics, Boeing, Caterpillar Tractor, and Northrop Grumman Aerospace.
Source
Said somebody that can't post a single link that proves me wrong.
No, what you say is true, methane does contaminate some of those wells naturally, and the act of fracking does open up some new channels for that contamination. However, it is not true that only methane is found after fracking has commenced. Other contaminents are present (common components of the fracking fluids). All this is made more difficult by the fact that companies hold the formulation of their fracking fluids as trade secrets and refuse to reveal. Took congress many tries to get a list of just one company's formulation.
The following is a list of the chemicals used most often
I don't have to prove you wrong. I'm not even trying to prove you wrong.
Your opinion is one of many I've read on the topic.
Since you a.) are a simple drill monkey with no graduate level degree in geology or hydrology or anything else that would cause me to consider you an authority or subject matter expert, and b.) have a vested financial interest in seeing that this means of gas extraction continues, I don't even weigh your opinion all that very heavily.
And don't get me wrong. It is not my intention to dispariage in any way your ability to dig a hole in the ground. In fact, if I ever need a hole dug 14,000 feet into the ground you'd be the first guy I'd see.
But being good at digging a hole in the ground doesn't make you an expert or an authority on what happens within and outside of that hole once it's dug.
And understand, I'm not even necessarially saying that you're wrong.
I believe you are, given everything that I've read about how patently awful for the environment fracking is and all of the lawsuits (won, settled, and pending) against energy companies that practice fracking (especially as they relate to groundwater contamination), but I don't consider this topic closed and I maintain an open mind and accept that something may come along to sway my opinion in the opposite direction.
But whatever that "something" is, it isn't going to be the anonymous opinion given on the Internet by a guy who is the fracking equivelent of a roughneck.
So post up some scientific studies (not energy company or Tea Party think tank studies) that PROVE fracking is safe and I'll certainly consider them.
But for you to sit there and insist that this **** is safe and I need to take your word for it?
It's like a door greeter at Wal-Mart insisting that superstores and the importation of cheap junk from China have no effect on the decline of America's economy.
This drill monkey has a PhD in drilling. That's why I hold drilling licenses in two states.
This bill exempted fluids used in the natural gas extraction process of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) from protections under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and CERCLA.[19] It created a loophole that exempts companies drilling for natural gas from disclosing the chemicals involved in fracking operations that would normally be required under federal clean water laws — see exemptions for hydraulic fracturing under United States federal law. The loophole is commonly known as the "Halliburton loophole" since former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney was reportedly instrumental in its passage.[20] The proposed Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act would repeal these exemptions.
Energy Policy Act of 2005 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 111th United States Congress adjourned on January 3, 2011, without taking any significant action on the FRAC Act. The FRAC Act was re-introduced in both houses of the 112th United States Congress. In the Senate, Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) introduced S. 587 on March 15, 2011.[6] In the House, Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) introduced H.R. 1084 on March 24, 2011.[7]
As of March 2012 Congress had not yet passed either of The FRAC Act bills[8][9]
Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This drill monkey has a PhD in drilling. That's why I hold drilling licenses in two states.
We are not talking about water or oil wells, we are talking about gas wells. The Halliburton Loophole for gas well fracking still exists., "Dr. Apdst".By law, any reportable material introduced into a water well, or oil well, has to be documented. It's one of the things that has to be entered into a drillers log, that has to be submitted to the state.
"Gosh darn Professors telling me that casements leak....what does he know......he is just a Professor....humph!"
http://www.sustainablefuture.cornell.edu/news/attachments/Howarth-EtAl-2011.pdf
We are not talking about water or oil wells, we are talking about gas wells. The Halliburton Loophole for gas well fracking still exists.
That works.
Post up some papers you've written that actually prove what you're saying.
Or, if you don't write papers, post up some papers by folks in the field who do.
I maintain that your grasp of WWII history is deplorable, but if you're an expert in this field and can substantiate your claims, as I've said I'll maintain an open mind.
And I appologize for patronizing you.
Yes, he teaches gas well engineers, developed computer models for fracking....Those who can, do. Those who can!t, teach.
Again, why are you refering me to water well info, the subject I am commenting on is gas well fracking.
OMG....someone who supposedly has PhD in gas well drilling...is claiming that the FEDERAL laws covering gas fracking....ARE THE SAME FOR OIL AND WATER WELLS!OMG! It's the ssme thing!
Yes, he teaches gas well engineers, developed computer models for fracking....
What is amazing is that a leading scientist in the development of fracking tech.....is unknown to someone with a "PhD" in the same area of study.
Again, why are you refering me to water well info, the subject I am commenting on is gas well fracking.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?