Skip to comments.Fracking critics using bad science, experts say
Posted on 07/23/2012 6:23:30 AM PDT by upchuck
Critics of fracking often raise alarms about groundwater pollution, air pollution, and cancer risks, and there are still many uncertainties. But some of the claims have little or nothing to back them.
For example, reports that breast cancer rates rose in a region with heavy gas drilling are false, researchers told The Associated Press.
Fears that natural radioactivity in drilling waste could contaminate drinking water aren't being confirmed by monitoring, either.
And concerns about air pollution from the industry often don't acknowledge that natural gas is a far cleaner burning fuel than coal.
"The debate is becoming very emotional. And basically not using science" on either side, said Avner Vengosh, a Duke University professor studying groundwater contamination who has been praised and criticized by both sides.
Shale gas drilling has attracted national attention because advances in technology have unlocked billions of dollars of gas reserves, leading to a boom in production, jobs, and profits, as well as concerns about pollution and public health. Shale is a gas-rich rock formation thousands of feet underground, and the gas is freed through a process called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in which large volumes of water, plus sand and chemicals, are injected to break the rock apart.
The Marcellus Shale covers large parts of Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio and West Virginia, while the Barnett Shale is in north Texas. Many other shale deposits have been discovered.
One of the clearest examples of a misleading claim comes from north Texas, where gas drilling began in the Barnett Shale about 10 years ago.
But researchers haven't seen a spike in breast cancer rates in the area, said David Lee, a professor of medical anthropology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
(Excerpt) Read more at newyork.newsday.com ...
I been at a friends home in a fracking area and we could light up the spicket before they even knew about fracking.
The first gas well into the Barnett Shale was 1981.
A History and Overview of the Barnett Shale
10 years later in 1991, there were 100 producing gas wells in the Barnett Shale.
It’s been nearly 30 years since I worked in the oil field and studied Petroleum Engineering, and much of the technology has improved since then. However, isn’t the formations being fracked several thousand feet below water aquifers? Just more ridiculous junk science from the Flat Earth Environmentalists.
Man, talk about an egregious case of bias by this AP repoorter. He/she injected the comment 'about both sides' after the quote. Even though nothing in the article shows fracking proponents are not using science. I had to read this twice to spot that little gem.
It’s all manipulation, a means to an end, the end being grab the money
Eco-Nazis are determined to have us all living in caves.
Have the critics of the technology of any and all energy extraction industries ever used GOOD science?
The likelihood of causing either ground water contamination or of inducing earthquakes is low to nonexistent, simply because of the sheer mass of material that lies between the zone where the fracking occurs, and any surface or near-surface zone. This is not like underground nuclear testing.
Yes, silly, but those evil oil and gas companies pump the gas into the aquifer because they like dirty water more than profits. /s
For those who would like to see how fracking is done. It’s an oil company video, about 3 minutes.
Interesting video. Thanks for posting.
Whaddaya expect.....honesty?? :^) They are just doing the bidding of their Saudi owners.
With the lies of the environmental movement, can you imagine proposing to use septic tanks and leech fields today?
Can you imagine what they would be saying?
I have a well and a septic tank. Everyone around here does. It’s the way sewerage and water have been taken care of for many, many years.
I look forward to the day some environut tries to take this away from us.
A gun behind every blade of grass. Un-huh.