Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EPA Finds Compound Used in Fracking in Wyoming Aquifer
http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/earthquake-natural-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-fracking/11/10/2011/id/37872?camp=syndication&medium=portals&from=yahoo ^

Posted on 11/11/2011 8:12:03 AM PST by chessplayer

As the country awaits results from a nationwide safety study on the natural gas drilling process of fracking, a separate government investigation into contamination in a place where residents have long complained that drilling fouled their water has turned up alarming levels of underground pollution.

A pair of environmental monitoring wells drilled deep into an aquifer in Pavillion, Wyo., contain high levels of cancer-causing compounds and at least one chemical commonly used in hydraulic fracturing,

(Excerpt) Read more at minyanville.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fracking; sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-147 next last
To: Ruy Dias de Bivar; chessplayer
....he had polluted his own well in an attempt to get the city to run a rural water line to his place.

...can we say "fast and furious" here.....the same kind of people who populate the Justice dept. also populate the EPA...

..the "finding" may be a damnable ruse just like F&F...or a damnable lie like "global warming".

....just be cautious before making judgements, esp where any government agency is involved.

51 posted on 11/11/2011 8:39:37 AM PST by B.O. Plenty (Elections have consequences....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Ok...I must confess. In the late 80’s and early 90’s I was employed byHalliburton as a “Blender Tender” Which means I was responsible for mixing and maintaining frac fluids and for mixing the sand into the fluid.

To be honest, 99.9% of the fluids used by the frack process are combletely harmless. Essentialy they are using the same formula as jello. There are a couple of additives that can be ugly...but they are the same things used by water departments to keep bacteria out of water.

The other part of this equation is the fact that frac activity has a remarkable safety record in terms of cross contamination. The whole arguement in my opinion is baseless.

This is little more than our enemies trying to remove the ability of the United States to have a viable long term energy source.

When I see this arguement ( Kills minorities and women and kids). I quickly mark the person spouting it as either a useful idiot or a domestic/International enemy.

Any burning questions you want to know about the process?


52 posted on 11/11/2011 8:39:49 AM PST by Explodo (Pessimism is simply pattern recognition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer
A similar situation occurred about a decade ago to our company. Trial lawyers swoop in and stir all the locals up. File frivolous lawsuits. We spent millions providing for an alternative water source other than the “tainted” water wells. Turns out, it was all naturally-occurring. All they had to do was ask the old timers who would have told them that the water stunk and was full of nasties since the area was first settled. The lawyers all made out like bandits with suits and countersuits and appeals.
53 posted on 11/11/2011 8:39:59 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

Thank you for the perspective. Looks like it is WIDELY used and the source actually can’t be pinpointed exclusively to fracking use.

But will we hear that from the lamestream? (Do I really need to ask?)


54 posted on 11/11/2011 8:40:20 AM PST by SueRae (I can see November 2012 from my HOUSE!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Name, or leave in shame.


55 posted on 11/11/2011 8:40:20 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector
Great Lakes Directional Drilling Ban Should Be Lifted

State geologists estimate that approximately 30 wells could be directionally drilled under the Great Lakes. Directional drilling, sometimes referred to as slant drilling, is performed at an angle, allowing placement of the well head onshore rather than on a drilling platform in the lake. While director of the Department of Environmental Quality in 1996, I was approached by companies interested in exploring for oil and gas under the Great Lakes. I asked the Michigan Environmental Science Board (a group of scientists, mostly from universities, with environmental and natural resource expertise) to study whether directional drilling under the Great Lakes posed any threat to natural resources.

The Board concluded: "[T]here is little to no risk of contamination to the Great Lakes bottom or waters through releases directly above the bottom hole portion of directionally drilled wells." The Board went on to say: "There is, however, a small risk of contamination at the well head." The board made recommendations on steps that could be taken to mitigate any impact to the Great Lakes from the well head, including locating the wells at least 1,000 feet from the shoreline and implementing proper waste disposal measures. Before the ban, eight wells had been directionally drilled under the Great Lakes without environmental harm.


Remember kids, we need your help to lift this idiotic ban so be sure to contact your congressman and tell them to lift the Great Lakes Directional drilling ban.
56 posted on 11/11/2011 8:40:30 AM PST by cripplecreek (A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

“The EPA’s research in Wyoming is separate from the agency’s ongoing national study of hydraulic fracturing’s effect on water supplies, and is being funded through the Superfund cleanup program.

The EPA says it will release a lengthy draft of the Pavillion findings, including a detailed interpretation of them, later this month.”

Who controls the Superfund program?


57 posted on 11/11/2011 8:41:27 AM PST by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Bunk!


58 posted on 11/11/2011 8:41:51 AM PST by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector
a primary ingredient include some whiteboard cleaners and soaps
So if I drink it I can pressue wash my toilet right?
59 posted on 11/11/2011 8:43:26 AM PST by dblshot (Insanity: electing the same people over and over and expecting different results.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

People would freak out over the possibility of oil getting into the Great Lakes like it did the Gulf, but natural gas seems virtually harmless.


60 posted on 11/11/2011 8:43:55 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: stormer
Michigan Oil and Natural Gas Exploration Before 1925

In 1911 Michigan's first commercial natural gas well began production. The tabulation of "Reported Discoveries of Gas in Michigan" in the Geological Survey Bulletins is longer than the oil well list and included 116 wells. These were mostly located in ­southeastern Michigan, including Macomb, Oakland, St. Clair and Wayne counties as well as in Manistee County in western Michigan. Many of the early natural gas discoveries were most likely made not as a result of a search for oil or natural gas but were instead test wells drilled for salt or for fresh water. Strong flows of gas from water wells are not unusual in southeastern Michigan and sometimes the shallower rims of the basin can still provide a surprise. In the mid 1980s holes drilled to provide footings for a highway overpass in St. Clair County "blew out" with natural gas. The flow of gas from these early wells was usually quite small. The largest volume of natural gas was in St. Clair County were wells supplied "several families" in one case, "pumps, drills and two houses" in another case and "one house" in a number of instances.
61 posted on 11/11/2011 8:43:58 AM PST by cripplecreek (A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dblshot

And kill bugs in the urinal


62 posted on 11/11/2011 8:44:12 AM PST by Explodo (Pessimism is simply pattern recognition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

The only way is if you have a bad cement job around your surface casing, which is the protective pipe cemented in to protect the ground water. It is a rarity.


63 posted on 11/11/2011 8:44:20 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

The EPA has not bothered to trace back where the compounds came from. No instead they immediately blame industry. Truth be told, when there is natural gas and petrolieum underground, many of these products show up withput human interference


64 posted on 11/11/2011 8:45:14 AM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Name what?


65 posted on 11/11/2011 8:46:09 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: huldah1776

Mission creep on Superfund, which was originally only intended to clean up toxic spills. It sounds laudable to “prevent” allegedly possible toxic spills, but this shouldn’t be a Superfund task.


66 posted on 11/11/2011 8:46:13 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: stormer

The fact you have to ask the question sounds shady.


67 posted on 11/11/2011 8:46:34 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Most of the early discoveries of oil in Texas around the 1900’s where from communities looking for fresh water. Instead, they found that nasty petroleum that had little use because cars hadn't been invented yet. I might add that the first oil well in the US was at Titusville, Pennsylvania from an unheard of depth of 69’. Don't tell me that oil and fresh water aquifers don't coexist.
68 posted on 11/11/2011 8:49:31 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
People would freak out over the possibility of oil getting into the Great Lakes like it did the Gulf, but natural gas seems virtually harmless.

What do you think they used to get the ban in place?

They used photos of offshore oil rigs (like in the gulf of mexico), oil soaked sea birds and beaches. They just kind of skipped over the parts about the fact that the rigs would be a thousand or more feet inland and that they wouldn't be drilling for oil.
69 posted on 11/11/2011 8:51:16 AM PST by cripplecreek (A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: McGruff
Do you know how many chillin’s drown in buckets of water every year?

Deadly stuff.

We need to ban it entirely.

70 posted on 11/11/2011 8:51:56 AM PST by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

I’m from the government (the EPA) and I’m here to check your RADON.

(remember that one?)


71 posted on 11/11/2011 8:52:58 AM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Explodo
I'll defer to the expertise of one with a user name of Explodo on this subject.
72 posted on 11/11/2011 8:53:28 AM PST by dblshot (Insanity: electing the same people over and over and expecting different results.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

Only if you clean your home. My kids obviously want me to live forever.


73 posted on 11/11/2011 8:53:43 AM PST by Vermont Lt (I just don't like anything about the President. And I don't think he's a nice guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector
Anecdotes are not evidence. All I am saying is that in this situation the source of the contamination should be identified. If it is shown to be from a failure of technology then the use of that technology should be reassessed. The EPA has already concluded that fracking does not pose a threat to groundwater, and fracking is excluded from the Safe Water Drinking Act. If those assumptions are based on inadequate information, then they need to be reviewed.
74 posted on 11/11/2011 8:54:29 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

I was at an eatery in Kentucky where the water tasted like kerosene... rather authentic I’d say.

Clearly we want to try to avoid situations where extraction activities cause significant amounts of stuff to get into aquifers that otherwise wouldn’t get into them. No sense in making aquifers unusable. But the idea that Mother Nature can’t cause pollution quite handily her own self... that’s nonsense.


75 posted on 11/11/2011 8:55:32 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
[”People would freak out over the possibility of oil getting into the Great Lakes like it did the Gulf, but natural gas seems virtually harmless.”]

I happen to be a Directional Drilling Engineer working in the Marcellus Shale Region. Any drilling under the Great Lakes will be done from land with no possibility of a disaster like the one in the Gulf. On top of that, there is no way in hell that fracking can fracture the upper strata levels and cause gas or oil to migrate to the surface. It all occurres at 9 to 10 thousand feed deep, is highly contained and the fractures are less than 50 feet around the Well bore, with hundreds of non permeable formation layers above it, to protect the upper levels.

There are also strict safety standard in place that are closely monitored by State and Federal agencies to insure that these safeguards are in place, documented and tested.

The ignorance and stupidity I am reading from some of these morons who make these ridiculously uneducated claims, makes me furious. Even more so, they are the ones the public believes the most!

76 posted on 11/11/2011 8:56:31 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
And I wonder if that chemical is called dihydrogen monoxide

You should be thinking of deadly chemical OXIDANE, the substance so deadly because it can harm people in a variety of different ways!

Should liquid oxidane enter into the lungs it blocks the entry of oxygen into the blood, which can cause death in minutes. Even if the oxidane is removed before death occurs, severe brain damage can result. Recreational users are at high risk! In the US every year Thousands of people are killed by Oxidane ingestion!

In gaseous form oxidane causes severe, sometimes fatal, burns by contact with the skin! Liquid and Gaseous Oxidane is a major highway safety hazard and many fatalities occur each year due to Oxidane on the roads or in the air over the roads!

Oxidane is highly susceptible to microbial contamination, such contamination has killed millions of people!

Oxidane is also a major component of Acid Rain, and accumulates in rivers, lakes, and the ocean! When Oxidane is released into the atmosphere it may also evaporate into a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide!

77 posted on 11/11/2011 8:56:33 AM PST by no-s (B.L.O.A.T. and every day...because some day soon they won't be making any more...for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: stormer

“Anecdotes are not evidence”

Which is why you are being asked to name trouble spots and the firms and people concerned. Don’t broad brush with unsupported generalities.


78 posted on 11/11/2011 8:56:37 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

I don’t know WTF you’re talking about. Perhaps you could be more clear.


79 posted on 11/11/2011 8:56:44 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

liberals should not be on this forum.


80 posted on 11/11/2011 8:57:17 AM PST by ken21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Are you a consultant for one of these frivolous lawsuit mills?


81 posted on 11/11/2011 9:00:08 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Of all of the quadrillions of barrels of oil that the earth has produced, and is still producing I might add, only a small fraction of it is trapped into what we call fields. The rest, Heaven forbid, makes it to the surface due to buoyancy and is a naturally-occuring substance. Ever seen a satellite photo of the Gulf of Mexico on a calm day and seen all of the oil slicks? They ain't from BP.


82 posted on 11/11/2011 9:01:41 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: no-s

Oxidane!

Well, that isn’t exactly the DRYEST humor.


83 posted on 11/11/2011 9:01:54 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Let’s get independent verification as the EPA has an agenda and the current regime a proven track record of falsifying data to fit their agenda.


84 posted on 11/11/2011 9:02:54 AM PST by Ingtar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Trouble spots, firms, and people? How about Pavilion, Wyoming area, the EnCana Corporation, and the EPA?
85 posted on 11/11/2011 9:02:56 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: no-s

Wow! It’s just as bad as Dihydrogen Monoxide!

There is so much bad stuff out there!


86 posted on 11/11/2011 9:03:42 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]




Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Gary Has Friends in High Places, Thank Goodness!

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!


Abolish FReepathons -- Go Monthly
If you sign up, a sponsor will donate $10

87 posted on 11/11/2011 9:03:45 AM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

88 posted on 11/11/2011 9:04:26 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Read # 52 and 76 “genius”. You might actually learn something about the subject, while you are so rapidly making a fool of yourself.

And by all means, ask us a few questions, we would love to debat you on our level. Just remember, you had better be able to back it up.


89 posted on 11/11/2011 9:04:48 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

While I’m not familiar with the pictures, it was well known that prior to the Gulf spill, much natural oil leaked into the water. Over possibly millions of years, that’s how nature learned how to cope with it. Busting the oil up with detergent and solvent like they did in the Gulf spill hopefully hastened this process, but the natural resources to digest it were already there. By the way what has been going on with the Gulf and the spilled oil, whatever’s left of it?


90 posted on 11/11/2011 9:05:42 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Associate together into specific incidents?


91 posted on 11/11/2011 9:06:26 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Explodo
Any burning questions you want to know about the process?

Yeah Dr. Fracenstein, why is Dick Cheney trying to kill all the children and minorities? ;)

92 posted on 11/11/2011 9:08:15 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
Nice to meet someone who thinks that technology is infallible. Those who say that something is "impossible" are invariably the ones who end up with egg on their faces...
93 posted on 11/11/2011 9:08:21 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: dblshot

You can bet yer Bippy on that one ;-)

Spent most of my youtuh in the Oklahoma Oil fields. My pops even had a acidizing company until of course the Windfall profits tax sucked the money out of the oil patch back in the late 70’s early 80’s.


94 posted on 11/11/2011 9:08:26 AM PST by Explodo (Pessimism is simply pattern recognition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

Bwahahahahahaah


95 posted on 11/11/2011 9:10:13 AM PST by Explodo (Pessimism is simply pattern recognition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Nice to meet someone who wants to smear and only under pressure will begin to even approach stating specific events that can then be debated about. It’s hard to debate Judgments from On High, after all, which is Handy for You.


96 posted on 11/11/2011 9:10:32 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Did you happen to read the article? Your stream-of-consciousness posts are causing me to wonder...


97 posted on 11/11/2011 9:11:51 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Because of that millions of years of seepage, a whole biological system has evolved to consume it. It takes care of itself as quickly as it happens.

The remains of the BP spill were consumed the same way, and much faster than originally estimated. Much like Prince William Sound. The spill cleaned itself up in less than a year.

The damage the cleanup effort did by steaming the rocks and soaping the beaches, etc, did far more damage to the environment than the spill ever thought of doing. I was there on that one also.

98 posted on 11/11/2011 9:13:28 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Did you find any independent authority backing up the EPAllegations?

And wonder all you want, we do not care about your wondering. It has no weight here.


99 posted on 11/11/2011 9:13:39 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (ya don't tug on Superman's cape/ya don't spit into the wind--and ya don't speak well of Mitt to Jim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: McGruff; bamahead; Nervous Tick; SteamShovel; Tunehead54; golux; tubebender; Fractal Trader; ...
Nice graphic.
Based on the prevailing track record of the EPA, I distrust them and can not take any of their claims seriously. I can not think of an exception where any of their claims did not support the far leftist agenda at the expense of the American people. And it is getting worse. And I'll say this. They lie. The EPA lies like Obama, like Holder, like Clinton, Carter, Pelosi, Reid, etc. It's what progressives do.

 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

100 posted on 11/11/2011 9:15:28 AM PST by steelyourfaith (If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-147 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson