• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report: Cancer-causing chemicals used in Kansas fracking

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
TOPEKA – An environmental group says companies engaged in an oil and gas drilling method known as fracking have used chemicals that can cause cancer in four wells in Kansas.Industry representatives on Wednesday denied the allegations in a report issued by the Environmental Integrity Project.
The Topeka Capital-Journal reports the group says the chemicals used to extract gas from the four wells included kerosene, diesel and other hydrocarbons for hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
Katie Brown, a spokeswoman for a program of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, says the industry has adequate safeguards to protect public health. She also says permits to use kerosene weren’t required when most of the wells were in use.
Click to expand...


Read @: Report: Cancer-causing chemicals used in Kansas fracking | The Kansas City Star

Yummy! Nothing nothing like kerosense, and diesel in the water. Tastes wonderful!

Read more here: Report: Cancer-causing chemicals used in Kansas fracking | The Kansas City Star[/QUO
 
joG said:
The human environment has been going to Hell since the 1850's, while average life expectancy has climbed and climbed.
Click to expand...

So there is no responsibility to try to curb the use or release of items that may cause cancer in people?

You are pro-life, right?
 
year2late said:
So there is no responsibility to try to curb the use or release of items that may cause cancer in people?

You are pro-life, right?
Click to expand...

Life is fine. But it is always good to keep your eye on the ball. You do not improve life by preventing innovation. That is what people try every time.
 
joG said:
Life is fine. But it is always good to keep your eye on the ball. You do not improve life by preventing innovation. That is what people try every time.
Click to expand...

I dont think spreading cancer is "innovation"...

But anyways more about this:

Energy companies have used thousands of gallons of diesel to frack for oil and gas without obtaining the necessary permits required under federal law, according to a new report by the Environmental Integrity Project.

The watchdog group's review of industry and federal data from 2010 to 2014, released Wednesday, found 351 wells in 12 states that used diesel in fracking.

Also known as hydraulic fracturing, the process involves high-pressure injection of millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals to crack geological formations and tap oil and gas reserves.

Because diesel contains carcinogens and neurotoxins, its use in fracking is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency and requires that companies meet a set of guidelines.

Though companies are required to get permits under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act if they use diesel to supplement water in fracking, the report found that no states had issued permits for the 351 wells.
Click to expand...

Read more @: Diesel is used in fracking without permits, report says - LA Times
 
joG said:
Life is fine. But it is always good to keep your eye on the ball. You do not improve life by preventing innovation. That is what people try every time.
Click to expand...

You can encourage innovation and have quality/safety controls as well.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Nah, that's just a lot of bull****.
Click to expand...

29gip36.jpg
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Except......
4 states confirm water pollution from drilling
Fracking Investigation Finds Evidence of Water Contamination
Click to expand...

1. A "complaint" can be something as simple as low flowing water. Fracking takes a ton of water to accomplish, so people might make a complaint that a fracking operation puts pressure on the local water table. This does not cause pollution.

2. Hydraulic fracturing normally takes place several thousand feet below the maximum depth for potable water in the water table. It is nearly impossible for drinking water to become contaminated in this manner for the area immediately outside the well and beyond.

3. Confirmed instances of pollution are far less than one tenth of one percent of new wells. Accidents do sometimes happen, but there is nothing inherently dangerous or dirty with the practice itself.

4. Of those confirmed instances of pollution, a good number of them had methane bubbling into their water source before fracking took place in the area. Makes sense for a well to go in where the gas is, doesn't it? For some, the fracking operation legitimately exacerbated the already ongoing situation.
 
Seems like hype. What is the concentration of these compounds? Where any legal safeguards violated? Many many many things may cause or contribute to the development of cancer. There are carcinogens literally everywhere and in almost everything. If they want to make this a public health issue they need to publish data regarding which specific carcinogens are there, the concentrations, any link to people developing cancer as a result of the contamination and if it goes beyond other public safety standards that would typically allow for such exposure.
 
joG said:
The human environment has been going to Hell since the 1850's, while average life expectancy has climbed and climbed.
Click to expand...

Okay.

So you are suggesting that the more harmful to humans the environment is, the longer humans live?
 
DA60 said:
Okay.

So you are suggesting that the more harmful to humans the environment is, the longer humans live?
Click to expand...

Evidently. ;)
 
DA60 said:
You are not sure?

Noted.


Good day.
Click to expand...

Oh. The correlation is there. What needs clarification is are things like leads and lags and all that boring stuff.
 
joG said:
Oh. The correlation is there. What needs clarification is are things like leads and lags and all that boring stuff.
Click to expand...

What correlation?

That the less healthy the environment, the longer people live?

That makes no sense, IMO.
 
DA60 said:
What correlation?

That the less healthy the environment, the longer people live?

That makes no sense, IMO.
Click to expand...

That since we have, according to complainers, been increasingly harming the environment in the 1850's life expectancy has continuously gone up an average.
 
joG said:
That since we have, according to complainers, been increasingly harming the environment in the 1850's life expectancy has continuously gone up an average.
Click to expand...

something something correlation something something causation.

While I seriously doubt that you believe increased pollution in the environment is what is causing humans to live longer (or that DA60 really thinks that you do), you're trying your best to make it sound as if you are making that argument. And DA60 is doing his best to argue with you over a point I hope you're not seriously trying to make.
 
Kobie said:
You're not drinking your fishing pole.
Click to expand...

Ya never know. I never thought about it before. Hmmm. Might be a good idea.

My mom told my sister not to stick a bean in her nose once. 30 minutes later we were taking her to the emergency room to have a bean pulled out of her nose. She never thought about it before. Just thought I would add some humor. True story though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom