Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

GreenHunter Water Reveals Its Plans

Jack Confident Facility in Wheeling Will Get Done

May 12, 2013

By CASEY JUNKINS Staff Writer NEW MATAMORAS, Ohio — John Jack is confident that GreenHunter Water’s plans to store nearly 800,000 gallons of natural gas frack water in the Warwood section of Wheelin......

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




May-12-13 6:59 AM

Not clear from the article what is shipped on the barges and where.

Sounds like "solid waste", WHERE is that going to be shipped?

And where does the recycled water go? Reused in fracking or dumped into the river or ??

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 7:50 AM

Well, of course you would expect someone in his position to say that "radium ...will be minuscule in volume". It ain't necessarily so. In 2011, via "Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5135: Radium Content of Oil- and Gas-Field Produced Waters in the Northern Appalachian Basin (USA)", the US Geologic Survey revealed, as summarized on page 8, that some Marcellus flowback contains Radium in an amount, as measured by radiation activity, very nearly 100 times that allowed for industrial effluent by EPA and Nuclear Regulatory Commission limits.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 8:32 AM

it'll be dumped in the river like they did in wellsburg.the epa turns a blind eye to these people.if you go out and take a good look at the roads you'll see the real meaning of vandalism.tell us what's in this crap you bunch of vandals.harassment will be the best that you all can hope for with all lie and the government will swear to it.protesters stand your ground.these people are not to be trusted.they are out for a buck no matter what.fix the roads.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 8:47 AM

The public should ask Mr. John Jack to produce an OSHA compliant Material Data Sheet for the substances he is exposing to his workers.

That is the law.

Although the fracking industry passed a law so they could hide their hazardous fracking fluid contents from the public, Mr. Jack is exposing his workers to something more dangerous as it contains both carcinogens and radioactives.

Ask Mr. Jack how he knows what he is exposing his workers to? Did he test it? Is he going to test it? If so, he needs to share this with his workers. If he isn't going to test it, how will he know that all the different types of sludges he gets from all the different areas is safe for his workers and can be properly treated by his facility.

How many different tests will he run?

Does he have the equipment to do this?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 8:48 AM

The real problem with Radium is that it bio-accumulates, and will displace Calcium in your bones - a special hazard for growing children. If it gets into the food chain, it will build up in the organism at the top of the chain - us. Even OPEC knows that. In the Journal of Environmental Research And Development Vol. 3 No. 3, January-March 2009; in the article "Potential Environmental Effect Of Elevated Levels of Radium-226 in Produced Water", scientists from Abu Dhabi and Oman report that "produced water" from oil and gas wells, contains "abnormal" amounts of Radium 226, with "96%" of their water samples "appreciably exceeding" their own established limits for Radium content.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 8:49 AM

Was there this level of opposition to the former Seidler Oil Petroleum Company? That had to have been a more hazardous operation, same location and no problems that I remember and I don't believe that it caused any trouble for the water treatment plant either.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 8:58 AM

It won’t be dumped in the river. It will be stored in tanks and recycled for reuse or shipped out on barges. Do you think nobody will be watching this one? Duh...

And it won’t be industrial effluent, so WVUGEO your effluent comparison is irrelevant. But just for fun, suppose they mixed that fracking water with 99 parts river water. Would it meet the Radium standard for industrial effluent then?

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:04 AM

John Jack and GreenHunter, we don't want you here. Your reply to the community is unacceptable. Your numbers are false. Stand your ground City Council!


1. To treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms at intimidate. 2. A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people. 3. A hired ruffian; a thug 4. To force one's way aggressively or by intimidation

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:04 AM

And, be very, very suspicious of any reports these people produce showing that there are no hazards. University scientists in Texas and Pennsylvania have been disciplined for taking gas industry money and then producing "studies" showing, variously, small environmental impact and great economic benefit from nat gas. We've documented those cases in other article comments sections. Similar has occurred in New York State, which we'll eventually get around to documenting for you. Keep in mind that Chesapeake Gas gave $26 million to the Sierra Club for their "Beyond Coal" campaign. This industry has no problem, it seems, with "influencing" the public reportage and the public perception of the facts.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:09 AM

... said the WVUGEO who regularly posts here to influence the public perception of the facts. LOL

Still waiting on that single example of a fracking fluid contaminated water well here in the Ohio Valley, GEO. I’m sure you’ll “eventually get around to it.” LOL

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:11 AM

Troll: It doesn't matter. If any amount of Radium, at all, is discharged into the river upstream of a drinking water treatment plant intake, it is not acceptable. Radium accumulates over time in your bones. It will affect your genetic material and it's effects will manifest as disease and disability in your grandchildren.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:14 AM

GEO, I have news for you. There's already some Radium in the water. It's a naturally occurring element. You'd better stop drinking and bathing immediately.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:18 AM

Troll: Speaking of bathing, when was it, exactly, that your brain got washed by the nat gas crowd?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:21 AM

I've been wondering myself why you're such a coal booster?

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:21 AM

"In 1986, Congress enacted the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) ‡. EPCRA established requirements for federal, state and local governments, tribes, and industry regarding emergency planning and "community right-to-know" reporting on hazardous and toxic chemicals. The community right-to-know provisions of EPCRA are the most relevant part of the law for shale gas producers. These provisions help increase the public's knowledge and access to information on chemicals at individual facilities, along with their uses and potential releases into the environment. "

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:22 AM

"Under Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA, facilities manufacturing, processing, or storing designated hazardous chemicals must make Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), describing the properties and health effects of these chemicals, available to state and local officials and local fire departments. Facilities must also provide state and local officials and local fire departments with inventories of all on-site chemicals for which MSDS exist. Information about chemical inventories at facilities and MSDS must be available to the public. Facilities that store over 10,000 pounds of hazardous chemicals are subject to this requirement. Any hazardous chemicals above the threshold stored at shale gas production and processing sites must be reported in this manner."

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:24 AM

So enough with the myth about "not knowing" about what is in the mysterious Fracking Fluid.

Go to Fracfocus dot ORG, they list ALL of the chemicals commonly used.

They also have a list of all of the registered wells in your area and what they are using.

Enough with the "myths".

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:28 AM

Now the REAL issue is what comes BACK UP from the GROUND after the well is fracked, there is NO MSDS on that.

And you cannot "filter" radioactivity and some other toxic chemicals from the water.

So if it get recycled and recycled, is there some threshold at which it is not usable anymore because the unfiltered concentrations are too high??

What happens to THAT water?? Dumped into an old well? Still some logical questions to be asked.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:33 AM

From the article “After treating the frack water, GreenHunter plans to ship brine water - the vast majority of its volume, according to Jack - by truck back to well sites for re-use. Solid waste would go to a landfill outside Parkersburg, with liquid waste taken by barge for disposal at one of several deep injection wells.”

Notice the lack of any plan to dump any of it in the river.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:46 AM

So all of the toxic material that returns from the ground goes into solid waste that is dumped in a LANDFILL and contaminates the water as years of rain water flow through it??


Seems to me you folks focus too much on the chemical composition of the clean fracturing fluid going into the mix but miss the obvious about the toxic waste that comes back.

At some point in time the recycled water cannot be reused so either they mix it with enough fresh water it is usable again or stuff it down an old well.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:47 AM

Where's your economic benefit? Search for the article "Emperor Has No Gas Boom", in Martinsburg, WV's "The Journal". Therein, you'll learn that last December "Workforce West Virginia reported that since 2008" only "916 jobs have been added" statewide because of nat gas. And, despite a "rise in production, severance taxes in 2012 are no greater than they were in 2008". Further, employment in "Marshall, Wetzel, Doddridge and Harrison" counties, which "account for 87 percent of Marcellus shale gas production ... has actually declined". If you're going to accept the risk of water contamination, you should at least stand to gain some benefit, shouldn't you? Where is it?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:48 AM

Similar industrial activities have been responsibly conducted up and down this river for decades. This is a case of a community of retirees collecting pensions from companies that did industrial work along the river using trucks that travelled past their homes, who now would prefer not to listen to the next generation of employees of industries along the river using similar trucks.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:56 AM

WVUGEO, where's your economic benefit? Ask the owners of local hotels, restaurants, shops, and every other type of local business if there’s an economic benefit to the gas boom. Only 916 jobs in this industry in the entire state? LOL

You can’t claim there’s no economic benefit and at the same time complain about all the congestion at stores, restaurants, hotels...

Try again.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 9:59 AM

Dump the solid waste in landfills? You can't, at least in ones that are properly monitored and regulated. In the latest news on the topic, search for the April 23, 2013 article "Shale Truck Sets Off Alarm In South Huntingdon", Pittsburgh Tribune. "A truck loaded with Marcellus shale drill cuttings ... triggered a radiation alarm at a hazardous waste landfill ... . (A PA DEP spokesperson said the material which triggered the alarm) "was radium 226, which is what we expect from shale drill cuttings". Such triggering of landfill alarms by shale waste, and scrapped shale drilling equipment, which alarms were put in place to keep hospitals from dumping their radioactive wastes, has happened a number of times.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-12-13 10:03 AM

Troll: All of the benefits you mentioned are transient and temporary. And, the decline has already started. It was reported in PA that drilling permit applications have, to quote one source, "fallen off a cliff". Once your transient well drillers have left, there will be no lasting jobs benefit.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 89 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.

I am looking for: