I would also point out that it wasn't written by anyone at the DoE
I would also point out that it wasn't written by anyone at the DoE
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Actually I believe there is evidence that fracking does cause increased geological activity if it's done in the region of an active fault. The fluid/water can act as a lubricant between plates on a fault line. If the fault is under stress increased geological activity has been observed. This holds true though for all forms of deep well drilling.
What bothers me is the knee jerk reaction of many people to ban a viable technology that isn't fully mature rather than determine what the problems associated with the technology are and implement the necessary controls to mitigate them.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Those are good questions. Here's another one. If fracking can cause of small earthquake could it cause a large one with concurent liquifaction and it's destructive potential?
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Agreed.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That's not a comprehensive list of chemicals used in fracking. Mineral acids are often used including the very hazardous hydrofluoric acid. Also fracking liquid return water is often contaminated with petroleum contaminates that do include hazardous aromatics and aliphatics. Which, as we've discussed before, can and should be managed properly.I just don't understand why people are so implacably opposed to fracking, it just seems to go well beyond any rationality. As Mott said, as long as it is well regulated then there are few problems, it seems that you would prefer to pay European prices for natural gas. If fracking is so dangerous then you ought to be able to show chapter and verse of all the harm that its caused. What is bizarre is all the scientifically illiterate coming on here and pontificating about the subject. One such canard is on the composition of the fracking water, well here is a diagram from the Dept. of Energy website. Can you see any aromatic hydrocarbons like benzene, toluene or phenol listed there? Of course, som ebright spark like Rune will say that it is all lies and he knows better as they are all shills and controlled by Big Oil and Big Gas.
Last edited:
cancel2 2022
Canceled
I frankly cannot see a mechanism to cause liquifaction to occur, you would need earthquakes of at least magnitude 7 and above for that to happen. I wouldn't advocate injecting shitloads of water into the San Andreas fault but then I assume that nobody is stupid enough to even try. One thing I would say though is that a lot of the regulatory powers are at state level, I think they should all be brought under federal control as that is the only way to ensure best practice throughout the USA.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I'm sorry but I can't agree with you. The majority of the problems with fracking are related to the hazardous materials used and produced by the process. They can be managed safely. Fracking isn't the problem. The lack of the appropriate level of regulation and enforcement of said regulations is the heart of the problem here. In this respect, fracking is no different than any other industrial process. In my humble opinion of over 20 years of hazardous materials management fracking is far less risky than say, primary steel manufacturing. Don't believe me? Visit a mill when they do a pour. Same goes with primary aluminum manufacturing. The volumes of hazardrous materials and waste generated by primary aluminum manufacturing and the associated public safety risk are far greater than those associated with fracking. We seem to be able to manage both of these mature technologies (steel and aluminum) adequately.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I agree but is that adequate reason to close down the majority of operations who do operate responsibly and provide a hugely valuable product or should we increase the level or regulation, eliminate existing exemptions from many environmental laws and regulations and increase the level of enforcement to insure compliance and responsible operation of these processes?
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Horizontal drilling and multi-stage fracking (which extend fractures across several kilometers) were introduced around 2004 and are now used across North America.
As conventional natural gas dwindles, the industry is drilling for "unconventional" sources like shale gas, which depend on these new production methods.
The toxic flowback wastewater from fracking (as much as 3 million gallons per well) is usually re-injected into deep disposal wells.
While much of the concern about fracking relates to its impact on potable water supplies, other impacts include air pollution, wastewater disposal, industrialization of farm land, increased carbon dioxide emissions, and destruction of wildlife habitat from multi-pad fracking sites that can be as large as five square acres.
But there's another impact that is less well known.
Official written comments submitted to the EPA by the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council asked that the EPA also "look at the potential for fracking to cause earthquakes."
In 2009, the Wall Street Journal (June 12) called earthquakes "the natural gas industry's big fracking problem."
http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/does-gas-fracking-cause-earthquakes
As conventional natural gas dwindles, the industry is drilling for "unconventional" sources like shale gas, which depend on these new production methods.
The toxic flowback wastewater from fracking (as much as 3 million gallons per well) is usually re-injected into deep disposal wells.
While much of the concern about fracking relates to its impact on potable water supplies, other impacts include air pollution, wastewater disposal, industrialization of farm land, increased carbon dioxide emissions, and destruction of wildlife habitat from multi-pad fracking sites that can be as large as five square acres.
But there's another impact that is less well known.
Official written comments submitted to the EPA by the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council asked that the EPA also "look at the potential for fracking to cause earthquakes."
In 2009, the Wall Street Journal (June 12) called earthquakes "the natural gas industry's big fracking problem."
http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/does-gas-fracking-cause-earthquakes
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Explain to me how the hell you can use HF with water, that would result in a hugely exothermic reaction probably resulting in an explosion. It also baffles me why you would want to use aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene or toluene.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Good question. Cause they use a variety of mineral acids, HCl and HF are two of the most common ones used and both are nasty. Particularly HF. Both are also easily managed via neuatralization though.
yet, so far they have been in the 3 - 4 range
also, per the article, the groundwater removal was not via an artesian well, but several wells
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Totally agree apart from your spelling of aluminium!!
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Bullshit, more like 2.0-3.0 or about the same as a herd of elephants farting.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Water table contamination does occur from fracking. Mainly from faulty well casings that leak. That can easily be managed by specifying well casing construction (and that may all ready be the case) and requiring leak detection devices and inspections (again, as far as I know those could all ready be requirements). Also water table contamination has occured from storing return or produced water in open pits and other substandard methods that lead to contamination.
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
In north-central Texas, the Barnett Shale field has some 14,000 natural gas wells and at least 200 wastewater disposal injection wells.
In recent years, a series of small, but measurable and felt earthquakes have hit Cleburne, Irving and the Dallas/Fort Worth area.
The Fort Worth Business Press (June 10, 2009) stated: "It's clear the incidence of earthquakes has increased as Barnett Shale production increased during the past two decades."
Slick-water fracks were first introduced in the Barnett Shale field. Subsequently, the number of wells drilled in the area went from a yearly average of 73 in the late 1990s to 2,500 in 2007.
Dallas News (Nov. 1, 2008) interviewed John Ferguson, a geosciences professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, and reported: "Nobody knows exactly what causes a particular quake, Dr. Ferguson said. But it's possible that the recent increased drilling and extraction of natural gas from the Barnett Shale had an effect. The extraction process affects the fluid pressure deep inside the earth, which is the sort of thing that could nudge a nearby fault, he said. It's happened elsewhere."
http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/does-gas-fracking-cause-earthquakes
In recent years, a series of small, but measurable and felt earthquakes have hit Cleburne, Irving and the Dallas/Fort Worth area.
The Fort Worth Business Press (June 10, 2009) stated: "It's clear the incidence of earthquakes has increased as Barnett Shale production increased during the past two decades."
Slick-water fracks were first introduced in the Barnett Shale field. Subsequently, the number of wells drilled in the area went from a yearly average of 73 in the late 1990s to 2,500 in 2007.
Dallas News (Nov. 1, 2008) interviewed John Ferguson, a geosciences professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, and reported: "Nobody knows exactly what causes a particular quake, Dr. Ferguson said. But it's possible that the recent increased drilling and extraction of natural gas from the Barnett Shale had an effect. The extraction process affects the fluid pressure deep inside the earth, which is the sort of thing that could nudge a nearby fault, he said. It's happened elsewhere."
http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/does-gas-fracking-cause-earthquakes
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
But Grind only has a peashooter and Damo has a real gun! How can you say that?
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
But Grind only has a peashooter and Damo has a real gun! How can you say that?
It's all in how you use it baby!
cancel2 2022
Canceled
In the UK wells are all triple lined, that is best practice and it is surely easy enough to specify the same in the US. What seems to be happening is that the whole industry is being maligned because of one or two cowboys in the early days.