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

Recycling Protesters Seek Help

May 15, 2013

WHEELING — Members of the Wheeling Water Warriors asked the Wheeling-Ohio County Board of Health on Tuesday to take a stand against GreenHunter Water’s plans to open a natural gas frack water......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(18)

WVUGEO

May-15-13 7:38 AM

We realize these folks might be in a legal bind insofar was what they are able to actually do, but, as in"the board needs scientific evidence showing the impact such a facility could have on public health in order to take a position on the issue. Right now, he said, there is no such evidence" and "we are in no position to make a scientific determination about safety", what they seem to be saying is that they can't be absolutely certain from what other people are telling them whether or not there are any bullets in the revolver, even though we know that there very well could be, so, we have no choice but to put the gun to our heads and pull the trigger in order to find out. Wheeling residents will be the lab rats in this experiment to get the "evidence" and "make a scientific determination about safety".

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 8:04 AM

Here's a thought. If you really want to find out whether or not this is safe, especially if radium - - as it well might, since it has been proven to be present in shale gas flowback from other areas - - is present in the frack waste to be treated in Warwood, your city fathers and mothers should go to a few of the really big insurance companies, Lloyds would at least listen to you, and say: "Hey, we want to put in this frack waste treatment plant. If it leaks something like radium that gets into our water system, a substance that will last a thousand years and isn't safe at any level, what would it cost us to insure that water system so that you would pay to replace the whole thing, pipes and all, if it gets contaminated by a leak from this plant that will only employ twelve people for maybe four to six years, at most? Then, go ask GreenHunter and the well drillers if they would help you pay the premiums for that insurance. Check on health insurance for the residents, too.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

May-15-13 8:24 AM

Here’s another thought. Treat this plant, which will process saltwater contaminated with TRACES of toxic elements, like all the other plants you will find UP and down the river that process toxic materials. This would be slightly less exciting than “putting a gun to our heads” or “being lab rats,” but processing waste just isn’t that exciting.

I do like your idea of contacting an insurance company to have a risk evaluation. Because insurance companies are experts at evaluating risk. Will you go along with their expert opinion? Or will you ignore that, too, and continue to scream hyperbole when they explain to you how little risk there will really be?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 8:33 AM

Seeking a quote from an insurance company, for both the water system and the consequent health of the residents, just seems like a reasonable request for the exercise of due diligence. Asking the plant operator to share in the costs of that insurance seems reasonable, as well.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikeyd

May-15-13 8:37 AM

us people in wellsburg were force fed this stuff not a mile from our water treatment plant but just feet.we all consumed this crap.nobody ever questioned why they were allowed to do this but it happened.so we are the lab rats and so far we are still alive.our water here is about nasty though.it's brown and it stinks.used to be that we were the only city around here with good water.this recycling plant needs to go below wheeling in a less populated area****mon sense tells you that.stand your ground protesters.you have the right.the trash that these gas companies generate belong to them.it's their problem to get rid of it.the cheapest way is to dump it in the river.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 8:39 AM

And, to address your question, Troll, would you still love us as much as you do if we did shut up?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SpankysLastDance

May-15-13 8:41 AM

I think the story of waiting for scientific evidence is "code" for we are going to side with the frackers. No scientific evidence declaring frack water good or bad for humans? Then take a stand against it until evidence is produced that proves frack water is healthy and will help to extend life. The Health Board should be unequivocal in their stand against anything that does not promote healthy living !

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

idliketoknow

May-15-13 8:49 AM

"And, to address your question, Troll, would you still love us as much as you do if we did shut up?"

Who is the "us" and "we"? Multiple personality disorder? Imaginary friend? Golem?

Just curious...

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 9:03 AM

In even the near-term analysis, all of this shale gas hoo-hah might not amount to a hill of beans, anyway. Natural gas and oil could soon be obsolete. Do a search for: "US Navy May 7, 2013, CO2 to Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels". It concerns "US Patent 8,436,457 - Synthesis of Hydrocarbons Via Catalytic Reduction of CO2" which was just awarded to the United States Navy on May 7. It is exactly what it sounds like, and, the Navy has developed additional technology wherein environmental energy can be harnessed to drive the process. Penn State and the City University of New York have developed photosynthetic processes that convert CO2 into Methane, i.e., substitute natural gas; and, in Iceland and Sweden they are starting to sell methanol made from industrial exhaust gas CO2 blended into gasoline at service stations.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 9:13 AM

idliketoknow: The "we" is an old WVU-educated geologist who spent many years as a professional geotech for a major local company whose name you would recognize - no, not a coal mining company though he worked, for a time, back in the 70's, as a coal miner, and, his wife, a one-time nursing assistant who woke him up out of a year-long, accident-induced coma at a nursing home some years back and helped him rehab/recover. Some of his old acquaintances in the chemical industry and in some educational institutions have been helping out with suggestions, guidance for research, explanations, etc. Friends have helped with computer issues. He's disabled enough that he's nearly housebound, and this is a great way to interact with people, we even appreciate Troll.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 9:30 AM

SpankysLastDance: We are in total agreement. Well said.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 10:08 AM

And, regarding one of our previous posts, as an example, search for: "New York City CO2 to Methane via Artificial Photosynthesis". It's a report about: "US Patent Application 20120208903 - Conversion of Carbon Dioxide to Methane Using Visible Light; 2012; City University of New York, NYC".

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

May-15-13 10:26 AM

WVUGEO, I never told you to shut up, so factless another straw man diversion from you, yawn.

I adamantly support your right to free speech. I’d just like to hear an occasional relevant fact from you. Like how much fracking fluid they’ll be dumping in the river (zero), or how many fracking fluid contaminated water wells you’ve actually found (zero), or how much radium is actually in that fracking fluid (almost zero – look up the definition of picocurie - I’ll get you started - pico means one trillionth).

Good luck on that coal to snake oil scheme. It's been tried here before lots of times, and never proven to be economically viable without big government subsidies, but maybe you'll be the one. Or maybe you'll convince some wealth-spreading politician you're the one.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 10:37 AM

Troll: Coal to Oil has been practiced on a large, industrial scale, at multiple sites, for more than half a century in South Africa. China reports themselves to be making "huge profits" converting Coal into Gasoline and Diesel. For many years, Eastman Chemical made Methanol from Coal in Tennessee. All easily confirmed by many sources via web search on any engine. You've just been lied to so long about how it doesn't work that you believe it.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 10:48 AM

In fact, Troll, even the US EPA thought, at least at one time, that converting Coal into Gasoline was a good idea. Search for: "US EPA Recommends Coal Liquefaction as a Clean Alternative". It concerns the US EPA report: "Clean Alternative Fuels: Fischer-Tropsch; United States Environmental Protection Agency; EPA420-F-00-036; March 2002; A Success Story (!) For the past 50 years, Fischer-Tropsch fuels have powered all of South Africa’s vehicles, from buses to trucks to taxicabs. Sasol’s South African facility produces more than 150,000 barrels of high quality fuel from domestic low-grade coal daily. The popular fuel is cost-competitive with crude oil-based petroleum products".

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

May-15-13 11:01 AM

Troll: Also search for:"US EPA Confirms Coal Liquids Cheaper Than Petroleum", It concerns the US EPA report: "Sasol: South Africa's Oil From Coal Story - - Background For Environmental Assessment; EPA-600/8-80-002; 1980; Contract No. 68-02-2635; Prepared for: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Research and Development; Abstract: The report describes the world's only oil-from-coal plant, known as SASOL, operated by South Africa since 1955. When almost 7 billion worth of expansion is completed in the early 1980s, three SASOL plants will produce a total of 112,000 barrels of oil per day, or about half of South Africa's needs. Production costs average $17 per barrel, well below the 1979 OPEC price of more than $20 per barrel".

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

May-15-13 2:34 PM

WVUGEO, then why aren't you making a mint from coal to gasoline now? Maybe there's some reason related to economics that nobody is doing that large scale here and now? Americans buy a LOT of gasoline. You need to jump into that market and get rich!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

May-15-13 5:25 PM

Fracturing may be new to the Ohio Valley but it was invented in 1948 and has been used on OIL wells way before shale gas.

1.2 million wells total. How much friggen evidence is required?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 18 of 18 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: