Skip to comments.LA SINK HOLE: 3 MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS
Posted on 11/30/2012 8:29:22 PM PST by Blogger
I lasted a little over a minute. What a waste of time.
The Silver Surfer?
Looking at the other two stories in the video. Not so much the blood work.
OK I’m willing to be interested, but I am somewhat skeptical at the moment.
Nevertheless, I shall keep an open mind. Maybe there’s an interesting story here.
I’m looking at the sinkhole that grew substantially this week, is full of oil & toxic gases and very near a butane well which seems to be collapsing. Said well has over a million barrels of butane in it . There are two other wells very near that making for a potentially explosive situation in LA.
I found out that LA means Louisiana ...disappointing.
Interesting daily updates on Bayou Corne.
The voice in the vid was talking about chemicals from the gulf oil spill getting into blood, by ingestion, with no comment about sinkholes.
Agreed, waste of time.
“I found out that LA means Louisiana ...disappointing.”
LOL. Me too.
If this happened in CA, CARB would fine the sinkhole.
That was the first of 3 stories he discussed. There was one about seismic activity around the butane well and one about another toxic chemical being found.
Thanks, machogirl. This video by dutchsinse is very interesting too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UIhpohCVnpg#!
Scary stuff. I wouldn’t want to be around that gas. When this started in August, I didn’t know where in LA Bayou Corne was. Did a google search for Bayou Corne, and wouldn’t you know, the map search popped up with maps of Lawyer’s offices.
Today they reported it grew deeper by something like 30 - 145 feet in the month of November. And, the video mentions chloride is migrating from the sinkhole to the Mississippi river and the aquifer.
LOL. Me too.
The thought of all those socal liberals in Hollywood being sucked down into a giant sinkhole is why I clicked on this.
No, they wouldn't. Professional courtesy.
Do you honestly believe environmental group studies and what they are reporting????
A butane well???????????????
What the hell is that?
I know there are natural gas wells but I didn’t know that there were butane refineries buried deep underground.
Wow! Slap me silly!
I believe that the Bayou Corne sinkhole has enough worrisome stuff surrounding it that it needs to be watched.
Gas storage cavern in a salt dome to be specific.
They're trying to draw it down, said it would take months.
Lots of ill informed reports and flat out enviro lies floating around on what's really going on.
I live approx 20-25 miles away as the crow flies and worked in the oil industry 30 years and I'm not really sure on what's going on except there's a salt dome collapsing next to one that is used for liquefied gas storage.
There also appears to be naturally formed shallow gas pockets around the area *perking* to the surface due to the dome collapsing, some of which contain H2S.
I’ve always believed that storing anything in a salt dome was insane.
>> “Slap me silly! <<
Fracking doesn’t sound all that great either.
Not sure the enviros are far off base on this one. Sounds like there is a lot of high pressure gas creating a really bad situation down there. Appears that Texas Brine is getting fined by the state. Interesting info in document.
Part of that doc:
It is further declared that Texas Brine Company LLC (1149) is specifically directed and is hereby ordered to undertake the necessary actions to address the potential danger to human life associated with the gas pressures...
That's a lot of Bic lighters!
There are two reasons for such an opinion.
a. Radical environmentalism
a sink hole? we’re sunk
The well that contains the butane had some unusual seismic activity around the 28th, as if something was falling.
Hopefully that is not indicative of any sort of a faillure. But I agree, they need to pump the butane out of that well.
c. By virtue of destabilization of the earth around it along with the release of more than just the gas it is going after - it doesn’t sound that great.
I live in the middle of the Barnett shale -- the place where horizontal drilling in concert with fracking was first conducted on a large scale.
There has been no adverse impact on the environment whatsoever.
All the fearmongering conducted by the enviro-whackos is just that -- fear-mongering. It has no basis in actual fact.
Logic dictates that fracturing the earth in a gazillion spots would be destabilizing. On the other hand it could release tension. Also, one piece of anecdotal evidence from one location doesn’t a case make.
Here’s an old story about a sinkhole disaster in LA:
Lake Peigneur sinkhole disaster
Very much worth the 10m to watch.
Thanks for a sane answer to what’s going on down there. I figured salt was involved somewhere.
Also, the impact is not zero. That is misleading. http://energy.utexas.edu/index.php?Itemid=160&id=151&option=com_content&view=article
Researchers found no evidence of aquifer contamination from hydraulic fracturing chemicals in the subsurface by fracturing operations, and observed no leakage from hydraulic fracturing at depth.
Many reports of groundwater contamination occur in conventional oil and gas operations (e.g., failure of well-bore casing and cementing) and are not unique to hydraulic fracturing.
Methane found in water wells within some shale gas areas (e.g., Marcellus) can most likely be traced to natural sources, and likely was present before the onset of shale gas operations.
Surface spills of fracturing fluids appear to pose greater risks to groundwater sources than from hydraulic fracturing itself.
Blowouts uncontrolled fluid releases during construction or operation are a rare occurrence, but subsurface blowouts appear to be under-reported.
Also, horizontal fracking has drawn some concern from non enviro whackos.
“Hydraulic fracturing has been around for decades, but with horizontal drilling now coming into play, people are increasingly questioning and scrutinizing the risks involved,” said Andrew Maynard, professor of environmental health sciences and director of U-M’s Risk Science Center. “Areas of concern include perceived lack of transparency, potential chemical contamination, water availability, waste water disposal, and impacts on ecosystems, human health and surrounding areas.”
Nonsense. I’ve been working horizontal wells in the Bakken since 2000. In over 6000 wells in North Dakota, not one instance of fracking causing any leakage or damage to near surface aquifers (above 2,000 ft.).
From a professor of environmental health sciences, we get the talking points presented as a "concern troll" might present them. Methinks the professor is fishing for grant money.
Note that surface spills (trucks overturning) present the greatest hazard, yet the list of hazardous materials shipped around the country is long, indeed. Maybe the push should be for safer truck drivers/trucks.
Back to the research findings: "Researchers found no evidence of aquifer contamination from hydraulic fracturing chemicals in the subsurface by fracturing operations, and observed no leakage from hydraulic fracturing at depth"
which doesn't quite flange up with...
"Blowouts uncontrolled fluid releases during construction or operation are a rare occurrence, but subsurface blowouts appear to be under-reported."
None have been found (no leakage at depth), but subsurface blowouts appear to have been under reported?
If there aren't any, it's tough to under report that.
Keep in mind the oil and gas industry has a tendency to scrutinize its failures.
Simply put, failures are d@mned expensive, and that scrutiny helps avoid another one.
Keep in mind, also, that horizontal drilling has been around for decades, too, I worked my first horizontal well 22 years ago, and knew of others onshore nearly a decade before that.
Me too but it seems like they work really well,,until they don’t.
There are fifty years of experience with fracking in multiple locations with no negative environmental consequences. The "new idea" here is NOT "fracking", it is "horizontal drilling". "Evil fracking" is totally a fabrication of the green lefties to try to keep ANY source of fossil fuel from being developed. The majority of "anecdotal evidence" mostly comes from those same "green weenies", and it is done in opposition to fracking.
It IS effectively zero.
The only negatives so far are "concerns" expressed by academics and environmentalists -- who have their own axe to grind.
Practically speaking, there are spills, yes, and occasional faulty containment, yes. But they have a geographically-limited and generally minnor impact -- like any other kind of industrial activity would have.
Rational objections to "fracking" are borne more of environmental hysteria than factual evidence.
What about the stability of the earth itself? Asking the question because I don’t know. If you have a ton of fracking sites all fracturing the earth, would it not cause a potential seismic problem or would it have the opposite effect by relieving stress and creating more “room to wiggle”?
There are more than 60 million gallons of liquid butane in the dome near the sinkhole. Expanded a atmospheric pressure, that would be about 30 cubic miles of combustible mix.
What would happen if it blew? Would there be a big fireball followed by a long lasting localized fire or would it be more significant than that?