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

DOE: Fracking Not Fouling Pa. Aquifer

July 20, 2013

PITTSBURGH — A landmark federal study on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, shows no evidence that chemicals from the natural gas drilling process moved up to contaminate drinking water aquifers at ......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(24)

daWraith

Jul-20-13 4:08 AM

Gravity wins again!

As I have said here for 3 years, the problem is NOT the fracking fluid mix going INTO the ground, it is waste coming back UP.

Too tempting for Billy Bob Waste Water Disposal to dump in a creek in the dead of night!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 7:28 AM

Wraith, below, makes a good point; and, from our perspective, based on some stories from PA and OH you're not being privileged to read, just about everyone involved in the frack waste treatment biz just might be a creek-dumping Billy Bob; and, the problems are far, far worse than you might imagine. But, consider: Isn't this the first time the subject of fracking possibly contaminating aquifers has even been raised in this paper? What regular reader who relies on this venue as their primary source of news even knew that there might be such a problem? Why is that? And, it's interesting, if you do a search, to discover that this same article, by the ubiquitous Kevin Begos, is being headlined in newspapers as far away from the Appalachian shale gas fields as Seattle, WA, where most likely have never even heard of Shale Gas. Seriously. Whose pushing these "feel good" gas stories so hard? And, why?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 7:51 AM

Concerning the author of this strangely popular article that for some reason, somehow, spread nationwide overnight, Kevin Begos, he is a frequent contributor of stories about the shale gas industry, almost all of them positive. And, he has been criticized for that. We can't enclose a link, but, you will find stuff about him like the following "out there": "The New York State Breast Cancer Network understands personally the danger of incomplete, shortcut reporting that can influence decisions about a serious public health issue. In his article "Some Fracking Critics Use Bad Science", Kevin Begos misrepresents existing facts and completely ignores the many still-unanswered questions about the safety of hydrofracking. He makes a common and, yes, emotional error by putting the burden of proof on the victims of industry ... .”

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcellus

Jul-20-13 8:28 AM

DaWraith & WVUGEO are both right, it is what goes down AND flows back. And while 1800-foot fractures further point to neighbor's gas reserves being stolen (right of capture?), it is failed well casings that are the bigger ground level issue at present. Industry numbers indicate 1 in 20 casings fail immediately and 50% or more fail within 30 years. Moonlight dumping is an additional concern as well as repeated spills from well pads and pits, and burial of slush pit radioactivity at too many pads. Finally, yes, AP's Kevin Begos could easily be writing for the Marcellus Shale Coalition since he is such an industry shill.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 8:39 AM

Marcellus is right about the faulty well casings - they are causing problems. But, we have taken any focus on that issue as a tactic of "deflection" on the part of the industry itself, who are, in essence, saying that the concept of fracking is itself okay, but, that there might be a few technical problems that with better attention to detail can be overcome. And, the fact that fractures can extend more than a quarter mile away from the well, as he suggests, is being proven in the courts - by mineral rights owners claiming subsurface trespass and unlawful taking, theft, of the gas beneath them by wells drilled on another mineral estate.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 9:05 AM

Well what do you know. After “a landmark federal study,” WVUGEO and Marcellus STILL don’t have a SINGLE example of a fracking fluid contaminated water well. Maybe you’ll have better luck with the next independent, unbiased scientific study.

So for now you’ll just have to work harder at spreading disinformation about fracking fluid contaminated rivers. Since you don’t have a single documented example of damage from that, either, I’ll continue to LOL at your prolific but non-specific babble. LOL

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 9:13 AM

Who exactly was it who labeled this study a "landmark", Troll? Kevin Begos? Or another industry shill? We're glad it makes you dittoheads happy. Good to see a little joy in the world.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 9:15 AM

Oh, and nice series of ad-hominem non-arguments, GEO and Marcellus. If you can't refute the facts, smearing the source will have to do. LOL

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 9:19 AM

Troll: Fruit of the poisonous tree.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 9:27 AM

Poisonous tree? LOL I suppose you checked it for toxin levels? Naaaaa... No need for actual scientific testing when you have powerful arguments like “stories from PA and OH you're not being privileged to read,” “just might be a creek-dumping Billy Bob,” and “We can't enclose a link, but...”

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 9:33 AM

Troll: You know this anal-retentive site won't allow us to post reference links. You're also bright enough to do web searches of your own and to know that we're right. You just like to hector like a blackbird perching on the electric line.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 9:38 AM

w ww.theintelligencer.n et

Well what do you know. Wrong about that, too. LOL

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 9:38 AM

Troll, PS: Though not germaine to this article, we just posted a comment over at "Coal’s Friends Are Increasing" you'll probably like, as well.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 9:42 AM

And if pointing out the FACT that your posts are nothing but undocumented, unsourced, anti-gas propaganda is "hectoring," well, at least that's better than your factless hectoring of the gas industry with babble about "cancer" and "radiation" and "contamination" you have NEVER been able to prove with a SINGLE example ANYWHERE in the Ohio Valley.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 9:43 AM

"Not germain." Another worthless comment. yawn...

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 10:17 AM

Troll: By the way, we did tell you, didn't we, that the genuinely objective and fact-based report, "The Economic Value of Shale Natural Gas in Ohio", by The Ohio State University's Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Developmental Economics, demonstrates that all the baloney sandwiches you've obviously swallowed with great gusto, about how shale gas is going to usher in an era of economic prosperity for our area, is all a part of the Big Lie? OSU says that job creation will be minimal. Actually, it's worse than that. Unemployment, according to the WV Department of Commerce, has actually gone up in some of the counties, like Wetzel, where most of the drilling has gone on.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 10:22 AM

The gas industry is just getting warmed up in the Ohio Valley. if it's already in decline, why all your fuss?

And your arguments that there's no employment and business growth from gas, along side of your arguments that gas industry workers are inundating restaurants, stores, hotels and their rapidly growing construction and transportation activities are stirring up dust, noise, and traffic are obviously, amusingly contradictory.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jul-20-13 10:37 AM

We, Troll, are not the ones making the claims. Astute scientists and researchers are. And, most of your dust, noise and traffic are being caused by transient oil/gas workers, not WV residents/WV job seekers. When the drilling and pipe-laying are done, they, and the "jobs" they seem to represent, will be gone.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jul-20-13 11:43 AM

Since you claim they'll be gone soon, and since a federal study didn't find any damage and you can't cite any, either, why all the fuss?

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Wheeldog

Jul-20-13 6:45 PM

Fracking is a highly complex method of accessing so-called tight oil and natural gas. Because of differences in geology, depths drilled, lateral expanse of side drilling, chemicals used, etc. no two wells will be exactly alike. Some wells will be "clean" and others will be problems. That is the nature of the beast.

The concern for groundwater contamination and other negative impacts are legitimate, but the real issue is why? Why are companies using this expensive technology to tap into tight rock reserves? The return on investment is small when compared to conventional wells accessing conventional oil and gas. Fracking well production declines rapidly quickly becoming marginally profitable. A field under full development has two or three years of being profitable. This undoubtedly affects mitigation decisions by developing companies.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jul-20-13 7:14 PM

Yo WEEEEEEEnerdawg, tell us about that 1955 peak oil theory again!!!

11/12/2012 Forbes:

"U.S. oil output is surging so fast that the U.S. could soon overtake Saudi Arabia as the world’s biggest producer. Driven by high prices and new drilling methods, U.S. production of crude and other liquid hydrocarbons is on track to rise 7 percent this year to an average of 10.9 million barrels per day. This will be the fourth straight year of crude increases and the biggest single-year gain since 1951.

The boom has surprised even the experts.

“Five years ago, if I or anyone had predicted today’s production growth, people would have thought we were crazy,” says Jim Burkhard, head of oil markets research at IHS CERA, an energy consulting firm.”"

BBBBWHAHAHAHAHAAH!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jul-20-13 7:15 PM

So DAWG, energy companies are spending MILLIONS on gas exploration in the OV because they like losing money for their stockholders?

BBBWhAHAHAHAHAAH!

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Wheeldog

Jul-20-13 11:38 PM

Dah, for someone who claims to be a businessman, you are amazingly dense. What is it about EROI (energy return on investment) that confuses you? It is simply "net income" vs. "gross income". Any high school math student knows the difference.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcellus

Jul-21-13 8:02 AM

Trollslayer, aka cyber bully, clings to the same past myths as the gas industry he probably works for or profits from. Tell us oh mighty one, is that true? The topic of water well contamination from shale drilling is a clearly proven fact, the Scranton Times-Tribune recently found 161 cases of that while studying Pa DEP files during a RTK request. Less posting and more research would help your pitiful case Trollslayer since the old adage holds especially true for you: You never learn anything when YOU are talking! If you think you can bully and intimidate others on this message board you are sadly mistaken, it only reveals your pitiful insecurity as a person with low self esteem.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 24 of 24 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: