If you mean cleaning the grout lines on the floor with your nails then yes, because this is the super power you've just unlocked.
FRACKING
- Thread starter Treestman
- Start date
iFlip
Active member
Are you going to trust uneducated frack crewmen suckling the golden teat of Big Oil, or scientific studies done by reputable universities and scientific organizations? If you've ever purchased a house, or participated in the purchasing of one, you have no doubt had a radon test done in the basement before going forward with the closing. That is because great amounts of Radon exist below Earth's surface, even just below the surface in some areas. These frack sites release large amounts of Radon, along with the countless chemicals used in fracking. These chemicals are a "secret," known only to the industry, just like the Coca-Cola recipe. Unfortunately these chemicals can cause enormous harms to the environment, to our health, to the health of livestock, crops, and wildlife.
Treestman
Active member
Is this the grarbage being fed to you petroleum engineers at CSM. You know damn well that several toxic and carcinogenic substances are used in the process and the industry doenst have to tell owners of land being fracked. It's a damn shame. If it were just soap, why did it take so long to frack horizontally? the indutstry wouldve been doing this (horizontal high volume) 50 years ago!
i have better htigns to do than pointless argument on ns. im going to contine real activisim and educaition, to win in New York and prohibit this criminal activity.
i have better htigns to do than pointless argument on ns. im going to contine real activisim and educaition, to win in New York and prohibit this criminal activity.
cubber
Active member
it's hard to sort through the arguments against fracing though, cause there's SO many wackjobs spouting random statistics that they pulled from each others' asses.
In north dakota, where my only experience is from, the only thing coming out of the ground other than oil is H2S gas, which is burned off in flares or flash pits, there's nothing about Radon there.
and to c-burg, that is what they must have been talking about then. somebody teach me multi-quote, quick, i'm horny.
In north dakota, where my only experience is from, the only thing coming out of the ground other than oil is H2S gas, which is burned off in flares or flash pits, there's nothing about Radon there.
and to c-burg, that is what they must have been talking about then. somebody teach me multi-quote, quick, i'm horny.
C-Burg
Active member
the carcinogen you are talking about is benzene. Benzene was used in non-emulsifiers but was phased out a long time ago (a lot of people don't know that fracing has been going on since the 1940's), the service companies that do the fracturing have spent millions of dollars developing new chemicals to be used in fracing, up stream, mid stream, and down stream processes that meet regulations and standards. The radioactive claim depends on what formation is being stimulated. If it is formation that has natural radiation, then yes you are going to have radiation, however oil, gas, or condensate from formations with radiation are not a valuable and are not generally sought after.
iFlip
Active member
To answer two questions at once...
It is not simply what comes OUT of the ground directly. So much of what is used in fracking goes directly into the aquifer, into the groundwater. This comes out slowly, not all at once, and it comes out in our drinking water, in the water we use for irrigation, and in the water that feeds our streams and rivers.
Benzene IS still used in fracking. Other harmful agents used in fracking include Methanol, Silica, Diesel, Lead, Formaldehyde, Sulfuric Acid, Mercury and Toluene.
Coming back up along with much of the water mixed with a whole host of volatile chemicals is Radon, Radium, Uranium, and Arsenic. This is not all at once, not all in one place, and is most certainly not all collected.
Those who defend fracking really amaze me. It is like a horse wearing blinders. Fracking is so bad, so evil, that to defend it requires an amazing amount of selective-vision, selective-listening, and plain outright denial.
It is not simply what comes OUT of the ground directly. So much of what is used in fracking goes directly into the aquifer, into the groundwater. This comes out slowly, not all at once, and it comes out in our drinking water, in the water we use for irrigation, and in the water that feeds our streams and rivers.
Benzene IS still used in fracking. Other harmful agents used in fracking include Methanol, Silica, Diesel, Lead, Formaldehyde, Sulfuric Acid, Mercury and Toluene.
Coming back up along with much of the water mixed with a whole host of volatile chemicals is Radon, Radium, Uranium, and Arsenic. This is not all at once, not all in one place, and is most certainly not all collected.
Those who defend fracking really amaze me. It is like a horse wearing blinders. Fracking is so bad, so evil, that to defend it requires an amazing amount of selective-vision, selective-listening, and plain outright denial.
cubber
Active member
the biggest issues this summer were 'birds getting entangled in the bird nets and dying' and 'bird nests on pumps'. true story. Marathon stopped a pump for 5 (or so?) months until the bird hatched its eggs and bailed. that's over the top in my book, but whatever, my book is thin
iFlip
Active member
Where are you getting (making up your "facts") from? This was most certainly not the biggest issue! How about the large legal fights, the constant lobbying, campaigns, fundraisers, public awareness events, protests and rallies? I would rate all of these far above your "biggest issue" of a bird nest.
cubber
Active member
I've honestly never encountered these problems or even discussions in ND, maybe it's just a regional thing and somehow ND has little of this.. I can see how you might expect things to leak into the groundwater, but again, the casing prevents that.
The way I understand fracing is much different from what people keep yelling about. and continuing with the honesty, a lot of what you are saying is exactly what the wackjobs say.
I feel like most of the arguments against fracing only use the methods from 80 years ago, and disregard any environmentally-friendly changes.
The way I understand fracing is much different from what people keep yelling about. and continuing with the honesty, a lot of what you are saying is exactly what the wackjobs say.
I feel like most of the arguments against fracing only use the methods from 80 years ago, and disregard any environmentally-friendly changes.
iFlip
Active member
I assure you, my arguments are rooted in the latest, most up-to-date information, facts, and studies. If there were no issues, there would be no anti-fracking movement. If nothing "leaked" into the groundwater, then why did PA have its residents drink bottled water for several weeks? Why was tap water able to be lit on fire near a frack site, when there was absolutely no prior history of this, ever? These "whack jobs," as you call them, may just be on to something. Maybe you should listen a little closer, check your "facts" a bit more, and be open to the idea that fracking is one of the most disruptive and environmentally damning practices of our modern-day world.
Dr.Dickless
Active member
and thats all i know about fracking
cubber
Active member
i'm not doubting that you've done research, but i guess i'm questioning the legitimacy of all these claims. tap water on fire? that seems far fetched to me, but i won't close my eyes and pretend it's not happening if i saw it.
i've heard of misshapen PA deer that look like something from a 3rd grade photoshop project being found in the woods, their deformities caused by frac water, and all kinds of horror stories... no idea how much of it is true.
i definitely believe there are spills all the time, and operators are dangerously cutting corners in frac operations periodically, but SO FAR i don't think that every single frac kills the planet.
i read all your posts, so don't think i'm not listening. I just don't see the damage that you say is happening.
i've heard of misshapen PA deer that look like something from a 3rd grade photoshop project being found in the woods, their deformities caused by frac water, and all kinds of horror stories... no idea how much of it is true.
i definitely believe there are spills all the time, and operators are dangerously cutting corners in frac operations periodically, but SO FAR i don't think that every single frac kills the planet.
i read all your posts, so don't think i'm not listening. I just don't see the damage that you say is happening.
Treestman
Active member
wow. just wow, this is just an incredible statement, You have no idea whats going in some other state swith fracking, possibly even your own. Iflip has put it just right, you have to be in serious denial to not see any problems with it or have noticed big grasroots action agianst this injustice.
Wallisch_pl
Active member
I don't all the facts but whenever I hear someone bitching about fracking I think "you think you're more important than iraq" again I have no clue but it's not like fracking is done here
Jane6
Active member
Before I saw that movie I didnt even know there was such a thing called fracking, and it really opened my eyes. Couldnt believe this huge environmental destruction is happening right infront of me, yet there is nothing about it in the public debate over here mentioning it. Seriously, everyone should see that movie, it made me sick.
2_fadez
Active member
This.
And just so you know, many of the locations featured in GasLand have surface gas in their water that already gets built up in the faucet, which is why it is able to light on fire. I'm not saying fracking has no part in flammable water, but in many places it was like that to begin with, before the drilling companies came through.
And people need to start being thankful for their gas prices of $4. Most places in Europe charge around $7-13 a gallon.
And just so you know, many of the locations featured in GasLand have surface gas in their water that already gets built up in the faucet, which is why it is able to light on fire. I'm not saying fracking has no part in flammable water, but in many places it was like that to begin with, before the drilling companies came through.
And people need to start being thankful for their gas prices of $4. Most places in Europe charge around $7-13 a gallon.
uosdwiSrjewoH
Active member
for the first fifteen or so posts i was convinced this was a group troll and fracking was just some fake thing everyone was playing along with to show how people will make an issue out of anything during election time...
AT-AT
Active member
It can be done right, but this would be more expensive, so instead of spending a little more money to do it environmentally friendly, the fracking companies lobby congress and post nice little ads and air commercials, to bullshit the people. I find it appalling that money rules everything in such a manner. I only hope that one day people will be able to see past wealth, and realize no matter how rich you are you still share this planet with everyone else.
iFlip
Active member
Natural gas and fracking need to be broken up into two entirely different topics. There are pros and cons for both, with significantly more cons than pros for fracking. Natural gas brings issues such as drilling ANWAR, offshore rigs, dependence on foreign oil, etc etc into play. Fracking is a much more at-home issue, right here in our backyards, with immediate (and long term) consequences.
North Dakota has certainly not been the booming success that the guy upthread portrayed it to be. The air quality has suffered tremendously, it has hurt the local economy severely by driving away any tourists, lowering housing prices significantly, etc. Yes, workers come in, the hotels and local restaurants flourish...but then the frack ends and these towns turn into ghost towns.
The crime rate around frack sites is another area of significant contention that has just barely been touched upon in this thread (only in my longer post). Crime rates near frack sites are appalling. Rates of rape, murder, drug use, and crime skyrocket. Those who work on frack sites tend to not exactly be the most savory, upstanding citizens.
The solution to our energy crisis does not lie at the bottom of a frack well. It does not lie in drilling ANWAR, or in a resurgence of coal. It lies (in my opinion) in a national increase in interest concerning alternative and progressive energies. We have a great deal of the technology already, but lack the initiative to put it into widespread use. We need government subsidies and incentives to kickstart the private sector in the right direction.
So please, keep natural gas and fracking as two different, individual topics. If someone wishes, start a thread on natural gas. Keep in mind, while the word "natural" sounds so nice, the means of procuring this "natural" gas are anything but natural. As a nation we are all about "green" and "natural" sounds "green," but it is often anything but.
North Dakota has certainly not been the booming success that the guy upthread portrayed it to be. The air quality has suffered tremendously, it has hurt the local economy severely by driving away any tourists, lowering housing prices significantly, etc. Yes, workers come in, the hotels and local restaurants flourish...but then the frack ends and these towns turn into ghost towns.
The crime rate around frack sites is another area of significant contention that has just barely been touched upon in this thread (only in my longer post). Crime rates near frack sites are appalling. Rates of rape, murder, drug use, and crime skyrocket. Those who work on frack sites tend to not exactly be the most savory, upstanding citizens.
The solution to our energy crisis does not lie at the bottom of a frack well. It does not lie in drilling ANWAR, or in a resurgence of coal. It lies (in my opinion) in a national increase in interest concerning alternative and progressive energies. We have a great deal of the technology already, but lack the initiative to put it into widespread use. We need government subsidies and incentives to kickstart the private sector in the right direction.
So please, keep natural gas and fracking as two different, individual topics. If someone wishes, start a thread on natural gas. Keep in mind, while the word "natural" sounds so nice, the means of procuring this "natural" gas are anything but natural. As a nation we are all about "green" and "natural" sounds "green," but it is often anything but.
cubber
Active member
I don't have a lot to argue with you on^ except that I hadn't heard anything about nd air quality decreasing, but the housing prices are skyrocketing, my brother couldn't find a 2 or 3br house for under 180k close to town, but you are definitely right about the crime rate. Oilfields attract the worst people, there is a TON of drugs, rape, and theft/ vandalism. But now that thats out of the way, you can get back to environmental aspects about it and ill back away
last_tango
Active member
Maine domestic heat reporting in
iFlip
Active member
I'll throw in just a few more points, as I am so passionate about this subject.
As far as air quality, every frack site generates 7,000 round trips by tractor trailers. The wells themselves release a host of different toxins into the air. 7,000 round trips may not seem to be a huge deal...but here in NY they want to put in 40,000 to 100,000 frack sites. Do the math. That is a LOT of tractor trailer traffic, in addition to all the pollutants from the wells themselves.
The gas industry itself admits that 6% of well casings (what protects against all the chemicals and other hazardous materials in theory) fail either immediately or within the first year. With the massive amounts of chemicals in each and every well, does 6% sound like an acceptable number?
The wastewater from wells here in NY comes out with 3,000 times more radiation than the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) says is safe for wastewater.
If these frack sites really are as safe as the gas industry purports, then why over the past 10 years has the gas industry spent 747 million dollars lobbying at the federal level for exemptions from the Clean Drinking Water Act, the Clean Water Act, the Superfund Act, and the Clean Air Act? Similar amounts of money have been spent lobbying for exemptions at the state level. Why this outpouring of such massive amounts of money to fight something as good as the Clean Drinking Water Act or the Clean Water Act for something that is theoretically "safe"? The gas companies continue to pour more and more money into these lobbying efforts.
As far as air quality, every frack site generates 7,000 round trips by tractor trailers. The wells themselves release a host of different toxins into the air. 7,000 round trips may not seem to be a huge deal...but here in NY they want to put in 40,000 to 100,000 frack sites. Do the math. That is a LOT of tractor trailer traffic, in addition to all the pollutants from the wells themselves.
The gas industry itself admits that 6% of well casings (what protects against all the chemicals and other hazardous materials in theory) fail either immediately or within the first year. With the massive amounts of chemicals in each and every well, does 6% sound like an acceptable number?
The wastewater from wells here in NY comes out with 3,000 times more radiation than the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) says is safe for wastewater.
If these frack sites really are as safe as the gas industry purports, then why over the past 10 years has the gas industry spent 747 million dollars lobbying at the federal level for exemptions from the Clean Drinking Water Act, the Clean Water Act, the Superfund Act, and the Clean Air Act? Similar amounts of money have been spent lobbying for exemptions at the state level. Why this outpouring of such massive amounts of money to fight something as good as the Clean Drinking Water Act or the Clean Water Act for something that is theoretically "safe"? The gas companies continue to pour more and more money into these lobbying efforts.
C-Burg
Active member
I have been on hundreds of frac sites and none of them have taken 7,000 tractor trailer trips. About half the pads I have been on there were 10-15 pieces of equipment driven to and from location once, there were probably 3-4 trips a day for vaccum trucks, trucks with more supplies, or something else. The water was pumped from a manifold system from a storage facility that held flowback water that has been reused hundreds of times.
iFlip
Active member
...so where is the water to frack the wells coming from? How does the gas get transported? The chemicals used in the fracking process? The 7,000 number is not my own. That is from the gas industry, done in conjunction with a study to put together an Environmental Impact Statement. Often some of the best arguments come right from the mouth of the opposition, as in this case and the case of 6% immediate or short term failure.
C-Burg
Active member
the initial water comes from the manifold system that is set up (all ready said that in my original post) to either have the water gravity fed to location or have a c-pump pump it to location. After that, each well was flowed back over night and the water was reused for the next job. Like my post also said, there was probably a flat bed load every other day. The gas gets transport via pipe lines and compressor stations that are either on sight or close. also the pipeline that is used is nothing like the oil pipe lines you see, they are similar in size to the ones that go to your house. That 7,000 number might be for the life of the well because transporting oil from a oil producing well is not part of the fracing process. But each frac job is unique to the formation and area that you are in.
californiagrown
Active member
gettem!!!! hahahahaha
