# Trading Water for Fuel is Frackin' Crazy



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

Respected scientist and philanthrophy David Suzuki criticizes fracking, asserting 'that we have better ways to create jobs and build the economy than holding an 'everything must go' sale on our precious resources.'

More...


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Water shortages are a myth. There is plenty of water, anywhere you want it on earth - all you have to do is pay the market rate for it.

What these folks are complaining about is the price.

If you don't like high water prices, you are free to move somewhere else. There are already too many people in too many drought areas.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

Some people never learn that greed can blind

Fracking frees up gas in deep geologic formations such as the Marcellus and Utica shales that have spawned the current drilling frenzy. Also held there are ancient marine waters and naturally occurring toxic substances that are not a problem when segregated by a mile or more from the earth's surface and fresh groundwater zones. Fracking disturbs, distributes, and carries upward with the fracked gas "produced waters" containing radioactive materials, heavy metals, hydrocarbons such as BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and toluene), bromide, highly concentrated salts, and many other organic and inorganic compounds that, when exposed to our environment, are dangerous health hazards--many are known carcinogens and toxic to biological life. The chemicals added to the injected frack fluid obviously compound the problem, but even if companies were to switch to "green," non-toxic fracking fluids, drilling and fracking in these deep formations will always deliver potentially deadly chemical hazards, even in a perfectly regulated 

A recognized problem this poses is that each fracked well produces millions of gallons of highly contaminated wastewater, yet there are no currently operating facilities that remove all of these pollutants. Less understood is that fracking is destroying our groundwater, and there is no way to prevent it. Drilled wells provide pathways for these contaminants to rise under pressure and mix with freshwater aquifers, causing these deep geology pollutants to mingle with shallow groundwater. The cement and steel casings used and the plugging methods for post-production gas wells do not isolate methane, other dangerous gases, and pressure-driven contaminated fluids from the aquifer. The zonal isolation will be breached either instantly due to poor construction; in a period of years, due to harsh downhole conditions eating away the cement and steel; or, if best available technology is employed, within 80 to 100 years--it is not a question of "if," it is a question of "when." The industry is well aware of this, as are regulators. Apparently, they have decided to sacrifice our groundwater.

Our drinking water and the springs that provide the base flow of our streams and rivers originate from these aquifers. Less than 1 percent of the earth's water is potable and, due to other (some related) influences, it is vanishing still. Once our groundwater is contaminated, it is ruined, not only for us but for uncounted future generations. What calculated benefit could possibly make this a good idea?


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Sorry, can't buy the risk factor as "high" any more than a different discussion we had on background radiation.

Every time a volcano erupts, the same sort of thing happens that you describe - only about a million times more material is ejected. Just like surface streams clean themselves of 90% of their pollutants simply by flowing about a mile, so too underground aquifers tend to separate out such materials with distance - so only wells in close proximity to the drilling are at risk. As with every sort of pollutant, the concentration varies as the inverse cube of the distance (if it is "1" at 1 foot, it is 1/8 at 2 feet; 1/27 at 3 feet, etc.).

I'm not saying the materials should not be managed - and I'm pretty confident that there are standards for filtering the waste byproducts which are expelled from the wells. What I am saying is that claims that this is "destroying our environment" are like saying that a single ant's piss will poison Lake Superior.

Another consideration is that many of the byproducts brought up in such a well which are individually toxic may have industrial uses making it economical to extract them from the slurry. Don't have enough info on that to know if it's being done, but wouldn't be surprised.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

Let's leave the science to scientists.


----------



## dragonsgate (May 19, 2012)

PhantomPholly said:


> Sorry, can't buy the risk factor as "high" any more than a different discussion we had on background radiation.
> 
> Every time a volcano erupts, the same sort of thing happens that you describe - only about a million times more material is ejected. Just like surface streams clean themselves of 90% of their pollutants simply by flowing about a mile, so too underground aquifers tend to separate out such materials with distance - so only wells in close proximity to the drilling are at risk. As with every sort of pollutant, the concentration varies as the inverse cube of the distance (if it is "1" at 1 foot, it is 1/8 at 2 feet; 1/27 at 3 feet, etc.).
> 
> ...


Now that you explained it al I will stop bothering to take my used motor oil to the recycler and just pour it in the gutter so it can get lost in the mix with the volcanos and stuff.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

You took the words right out of my mouth!
Don't you get pissed at people that want to promote false science?


----------



## dragonsgate (May 19, 2012)

sunworksco said:


> You took the words right out of my mouth!
> Don't you get pissed at people that want to promote false science?


I am not a scientist and do not have to be one to know that fraking is bad. I am not a businessman either but I am pretty sure corporate greed is the name of the game and all the people that are making billion of dollars from fraking can afford to live far away from the devastation. They can also afford to buy all the bottled water they need to bath in.


----------



## mk4gti (May 6, 2011)

dragonsgate said:


> Now that you explained it al I will stop bothering to take my used motor oil to the recycler and just pour it in the gutter so it can get lost in the mix with the volcanos and stuff.


Just make sure you do that only in Atlanta


----------



## esoneson (Sep 1, 2008)

Just one observation from a bystander that knows little about fricking fracking.

Both sides of this argument try and show "what happens when fracking occurs". I.e. theoretically. Poison......not poison......radio active........non-radio active......ruining groundwater.....not ruining groundwater.

Please someone show me the results of what HAS happened at a fracking sight that has produced one result or the other. 

There are plenty of fracking operations that have been in operation for quite a while. Which ones have produced the poison?........the radio active substance?.......Which ones are clean? 

I don't care about theory. Show me the beef.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

http://youtu.be/96AEzQYangE


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

esoneson said:


> Just one observation from a bystander that knows little about fricking fracking.
> 
> Both sides of this argument try and show "what happens when fracking occurs". I.e. theoretically. Poison......not poison......radio active........non-radio active......ruining groundwater.....not ruining groundwater.
> 
> ...


I agree with this,
Nearly anything we do CAN have disastrous consequences - but does not have to have them

The solution is a combination of sensible regulation and "Polluter Pays"


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

dragonsgate said:


> Now that you explained it al I will stop bothering to take my used motor oil to the recycler and just pour it in the gutter so it can get lost in the mix with the volcanos and stuff.


No need to be sarcastic. Every little bit helps and I recycle dutifully.

The point is, however, that fracking isn't about to run us over some imaginary tipping point that "kills the world." I get so tired of the Chicken Little hyper-inflated hyperbole. Just for scale, a million gallons is about 1 Olympic swimming pool - not even a dust speck in the world's water supply.

We should use care; have contingency plans; and monitor carefully. I believe all of these are already occurring. The histrionics we can all live better without.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

sunworksco said:


> Let's leave the science to scientists.


lol I am a scientist. A computer scientist, but a scientist nonetheless - and I also happen to have considerable training in how to deal with radiological incidents and poisoned water supplies thanks to my 9 years with Uncle Sam (they called it NBC, or "Nuclear, Biological, Chemical" training, and survival training). We got lots of training, and I found it interesting. Are you certain you want to leave it to me??? 

Not that scientists are some kind of mystical priests with secret access to the wisdom of god. They are simply fallible human beings who attempt to apply reason to a particular discipline - some with better effect than others.

You don't have to be the top of the field to a) read the summaries and b) have a little pragmatism. Screaming "Fire" because someone lit a cigarette is counterproductive to your cause (if your cause is to eliminate smoking) because it just establishes your lack of credibility and your unethical willingness to twist the facts to suit your personal aims. Taking a personal passion that one step too far is pointless. 

And, to your point about people being greedy. Is their desire for profit any greedier than your desire for people to live their lives according to your personal vision of how the universe ought to be? Or, to be fair, for my personal desire to see humanity behave in a manner I happen to believe is "more rational?" I think not, they are all identical - meaning we are all greedy and thus (as better people before me have said) "Greed is a meaningless word." 

In any event, those who seek to focus on the ills of a topic without weighing those ills against the good are worse than misguided. The truth is never popular...

Back to the original article. He did not post it as a scientist, it was posted as an opinion piece (and a re-hash at that) with carefully selected "supporting evidence." Virtually all of the objections to Fracking have been either fully refuted, or addressed to moderate the risks - either voluntarily by the industry out of fear of litigation or through regulation. The only real outstanding question is whether small tremors induced by Fracking are "harmful," or might actually be beneficial in the long run. No one has a computer big enough to answer that one yet, but Yellowstone has not gone super-volcano, either.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

esoneson said:


> Just one observation from a bystander that knows little about fricking fracking.
> 
> Both sides of this argument try and show "what happens when fracking occurs". I.e. theoretically. Poison......not poison......radio active........non-radio active......ruining groundwater.....not ruining groundwater.
> 
> ...


Thank you. The Chicken Little crowd is big on "might," short on "has."


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

sunworksco said:


> http://youtu.be/96AEzQYangE


Pretty well refuted, along with it's sequel.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Duncan said:


> I agree with this,
> Nearly anything we do CAN have disastrous consequences - but does not have to have them
> 
> The solution is a combination of sensible regulation and "Polluter Pays"


I agree with Duncan. 3 times this year, I better have a drink...


----------



## hmincr (Jan 20, 2012)

Don't know about anyone else, but, I just sat through the whole video. It's amazing how money can corrupt and get people to outright lie. 

Down here, water is wasted beyond the normal persons comprehension. I keep telling people that one day, water will be as valuable as gold. They ALL think I am the "Crazy ******". 

I truly believe there is NO WAY to stop the environmental destruction of the USA. 

I also have spent many hours and days on the Delaware river, and, am closely related to the "Delaware Nation" through my great grandfather, a Native American of said "Delaware Nation". He lies in the Cemetery of the church yard near where I was raised, in Lakewood, New Jersey.

It's truly a sad state of affairs, and, if ANYONE does not believe these videos and people, they need to get their heads out of their asses, and start paying closer attention.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

I whole-heartedly agree with you.
People still think that Andrew Jackson was an American hero, when in reality he was just a genocidal maniac.
Only greedy blindness or a troll would disagree with the scientific evidence for fracking water pollution.
When fracking shits down your well, maybe you will understand and have some kind of empathy towards their plight.
It is criminal what Chaney did as VP to the nation. He made a mockery of the safe water act.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

hmincr said:


> Don't know about anyone else, but, I just sat through the whole video. It's amazing how money can corrupt and get people to outright lie.


Yes, people lie. Why do you think the videos are true? There is money and fame and power to be gained by creating an imaginary boogey-man, and these people are after it all. Like every good lie, it builds on some selected truth. However, the truth becomes vanishingly small as the lie grows.

These topics are worth discussion, but should be based on facts not fanciful horror films.

No sane person wants poisoned water, and if you think they do you need to seek professional help. Lake Erie was declared "dead" in the 1960's, but is now cleaner than in 1850.

Here is the bottom line: If there were even one single locality they could point to and say, "This place is poisoned as a direct result of Fracking!" then we would see it every day not only on MSNBC but also on Fox News. This happened with Love Canal (you young folks won't remember this, and so imagine we've never faced these kinds of problems before).

What? There is no such community. The fears and speculation run rampant, but there is no Armageddon.

Be vigilant and demand accountability. I like what Duncan said; a balanced approach keeps dishonest people honest. But don't be the "Boy who cried Wolf."


----------



## mk4gti (May 6, 2011)

I feel better that they are handing free pizza when the fracking incidents happen.

http://www.newsweek.com/chevron-gives-residents-near-fracking-explosion-free-pizza-229491


----------



## palmer_md (Jul 22, 2011)

mk4gti said:


> I feel better that they are handing free pizza when the fracking incidents happen.
> 
> http://www.newsweek.com/chevron-gives-residents-near-fracking-explosion-free-pizza-229491


wow. just wow


----------



## hmincr (Jan 20, 2012)

Phantom, you are not conversing with "you younger guys" when you respond to my posts. I know about Love Canal, and, I know about pollution of the ground. I grew up in an area where drinking spring water directly from the flowing springs, was as safe as anyone can imagine. 

In a few years, all springs that the state could identify, were deemed POLLUTED. 

I may not be a scientist, or a chemist, and, certainly not a politician, but, when someone lives in an area for over 20 years, then, a drilling company pumps millions of gallons of chemical laced water in to the ground, and, in a matter of days or weeks, their drinking water can be lit on fire, something is happening, and, the only change has been a gas well was established. 

Anyone, as you stated, can produce a questionable video. Problem is, when the company personnel were presented with poignant questions, they refused to address them. What are they hiding ? WHY is there over 900 different chemicals in that "Produced" water ? WHY are most of them, carcinogenic, and WHY will any of those company reps, that state the water is safe and drinkable, ALL refuse to drink any of it ?

Could it be that the "produced" water, is just being dumped underground, from some OTHER clean up, that would be shut down, if the water could be analyzed, and, under strict secrecy, just added to the well, to dissolve the elements that harbor the gas, and allow the gas to be collected?

Do you even know what Shale is ? IF this chemical laced water is DISSOLVING The shale, somewhat, to actually convert some of the shale to gas, what about the eventual collapsing of the ground "Sinkholes", just like happens to old coal mines, salt mines, etc.? IF the ground is permanently damaged and unlivable around, where do the people go to live, or, do you support a type of genocide in just letting those affected, just wither away and die ?

A good example of what happens underground, is abandoned Gold mines, etc. The ore is blasted loose and carried outside the mine, t be processed. When the ground is blasted, it also is slightly loosened, and, the minute amounts of acids in the mineralized streaks , locked up inside the host rock, are released, they seep into the ground, or, reach a layer of rock, and drain to the outside of the mine, causing real problems to the area around the mine. There is NO high pressure water, laced with chemicals, used in the gold mine. It WAS used outside the mine, as Cyanide. That practice was halted many years ago. It did NOT pollute like this fracking does. It was only affecting SURFACE water supplies. Fracking is done a LONG ways, underground. There is no containment , "casing", to prevent the water and gases from percolating to the surface. 



I have many questions I would like to see HONEST answers to, regarding Fracking. I just don't believe all the Company reps. There is just too much money at stake, for things to NOT be bad.


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

Solar will never beet free pizza . Who needs water with free soda . LOL


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

Here is the bottom line: If there were even one single locality they could point to and say, "This place is poisoned as a direct result of Fracking!" then we would see it every day not only on MSNBC but also on Fox News. This happened with Love Canal (you young folks won't remember this, and so imagine we've never faced these kinds of problems before).

MSNBC and FOX are in the entertainment and disinformation business, not informative true factual news.
I'm a young 65 years of age and know that EPA SuperFund sites are never truly cleaned up.
There is absolutely zero credibility in defending dirty corporate polluters.


----------



## hmincr (Jan 20, 2012)

AMEN to that !!!


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

mk4gti said:


> I feel better that they are handing free pizza when the fracking incidents happen.
> 
> http://www.newsweek.com/chevron-gives-residents-near-fracking-explosion-free-pizza-229491





> "Then the house just sort of shook and there was a big loud bang," he told T_he Pittsburgh __Post-Gazette_. “It scared him...


In other words, no one was hurt. Like any gas well, there is a possibility of fire - and this one is only one of thousands which have occurred at wells. There was a whole movie starring John Wayne, "The Hellcats," about Red Adair and his team of oil well firemen. That was in the 60's. 

Fracking had nothing to do with the fire.

There is also a probable fatality - again, a hazard common to all wells.

The pizza was to address the community's emotional responses. That seems to be the limit of "evidence" against Fracking.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

hmincr said:


> In a few years, all springs that the state could identify, were deemed POLLUTED.


Absent any other details, it's impossible to know whether that statement has any useful meaning. Were they polluted before and it just wasn't made public? What type of "pollution"? What if any cause was attributed?



> I may not be a scientist, or a chemist, and, certainly not a politician, but, when someone lives in an area for over 20 years, then, a drilling company pumps millions of gallons of chemical laced water in to the ground, and, in a matter of days or weeks, their drinking water can be lit on fire, something is happening, and, the only change has been a gas well was established.


Yep, methane in the water table is a hazard of all drilling. Sometimes it happens without any drilling at all, for no apparent reason. However, it can be filtered out easily. Is it a downside of drilling for gas and oil? Certainly. Is it "destroying the earth?" Hardly. People are always angry when what they had for free requires some change, I get that. But that is just one side of the coin, the other being that everyone benefits from cheaper gas.



> Anyone, as you stated, can produce a questionable video. Problem is, when the company personnel were presented with poignant questions, they refused to address them. What are they hiding ?


They may not be hiding anything at all. To some questions there are no answers that can be given which do not simply lead to condemnation and more questions - no matter what answer is given. A witch hunt has no innocent so far as the hunters are concerned - the purpose is not to discover truth, but to spread fear and doubt.



> WHY is there over 900 different chemicals in that "Produced" water ?


Any time water is run underground it comes up with chemicals and minerals. It may or may not be introduced by man; caused by man; etc. If they put something in the water they pumped down that was harmful, they should be held accountable for cost of remediation - I excuse nobody for polluting, and if they did it intentionally they should be in jail or executed. 

None of that has anything to do with whether Fracking is "inherently good or bad." It has everything to do with whether individuals did bad things.



> WHY are most of them, carcinogenic, and WHY will any of those company reps, that state the water is safe and drinkable, ALL refuse to drink any of it ?


I don't drink untreated water. I have no evidence that most, a majority, or even some of the chemicals you refer to are or are not carcinogenic without a report, and the report cannot tell me where every item came from.

Again, you are conflating a particular incident with Fracking in general. That is a false comparison. That's like saying, "Frank beat his wife, so all men should go to jail." Fail Argument.



> Could it be that the "produced" water, is just being dumped underground, from some OTHER clean up, that would be shut down, if the water could be analyzed, and, under strict secrecy, just added to the well, to dissolve the elements that harbor the gas, and allow the gas to be collected?


Absolutely. That has nothing to do with Fracking, and everything to do with criminal activity.

Sorry, your post has nothing to add to the topic of whether Fracking is good or bad. I agree that people who pollute should go to jail or be executed, and that their assets should be used to clean it up. That has nothing to do with whether or not Fracking is "good or bad."


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

sunworksco said:


> Here is the bottom line: If there were even one single locality they could point to and say, "This place is poisoned as a direct result of Fracking!" then we would see it every day not only on MSNBC but also on Fox News. This happened with Love Canal (you young folks won't remember this, and so imagine we've never faced these kinds of problems before).
> 
> MSNBC and FOX are in the entertainment and disinformation business, not informative true factual news.
> I'm a young 65 years of age and know that EPA SuperFund sites are never truly cleaned up.
> *There is absolutely zero credibility in defending dirty corporate polluters.*


Bold mine. You know, your irrational accusations are truly tiresome. _ I know someone who killed a person. You are "someone," therefore you must be a murderer... _

Aside from being rude and a violation of TOS, it simply shows an utter lack of maturity and character. 

I don't condone, defend, or excuse polluting, nor does anyone do so simply by political affiliation or opinions about the relative merits of Fracking. I never have, not in this thread or anywhere else, nor has anyone I've ever met irrespective of political viewpoint. The only people who do so are mentally ill. In any event the argument is utterly irrelevant to whether or not Fracking is good or bad.

As for the news media - no matter what you or I think of the politics of any of them, to suggest that they would all conspire to cover up an actual danger to life goes beyond the pale and into full tinfoil territory. If there was a story to report, they would be blaring it 24x7.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

If I was still in the USA the water problem I would be worried about is not "Fracking"

It's "water mining" - a frightening amount of US drinking water comes from old aquifers - these are not being replenished, the water levels are slowly dropping


----------



## mk4gti (May 6, 2011)

"Fracking is great as long as it's not in my back yard". Not sure if there are other words as, wait for it, ... hypocrisy 

http://qz.com/179920/the-ceo-of-exx...long-as-it-doesnt-spoil-his-view/#/h/49046,1/


----------



## palmer_md (Jul 22, 2011)

mk4gti said:


> "Fracking is great as long as it's not in my back yard". Not sure if there are other words as, wait for it, ... hypocrisy
> 
> http://qz.com/179920/the-ceo-of-exx...long-as-it-doesnt-spoil-his-view/#/h/49046,1/


And that is just a water well, wait until they start actual fracking next to his property.


----------



## mk4gti (May 6, 2011)

In the end, there will be free pizza


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

Check out Gas land and Splitestate on Netflix .


----------



## hbthink (Dec 21, 2010)

Just the small chance that we may be polluting/destroying super precious water tables is enough in my book to step back and understand the outcome of fracking for better or worse before jumping in and trying it. Unfortunately the energy industry never waits not when profit motive is pushing them forward. The energy industry history with damaging our valuable ecosystems should be enough to give us pause. There are several superfund sites nearby left behind by energy companies that now wipe their hands over the matter and leave the cleanup to the taxpayer. I don't think fracking is any different and someday when we have destroyed several water tables it will be up to taxpayer again to try and remedy this serious disaster. 

This is all compounded by the problem that global warming has created, and we so clearly see out here in the west as we enter the 13 year of drought!!! another problem created by our energy greed and left to everyone to try and fix.

Steve


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/fracking/fracking-action-center/map/#


----------

