Posted on 11/30/2012 8:29:22 PM PST by Blogger
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?
That would probably depend on wind conditions at the time.
Remind me to stay clear of LA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.