Eagle Ford Versus Edwards Aquifer

[Nbadan]

Royalty check for some, but Is it safe to be gas fracking so close to San Antonio's main water supply?

http://www.eaglefordshale.com/files/2010/12/Eagle-Ford-Shale-Well-Map.jpg
Permits and completed well in Eagle Ford shale oil

Edwards aquifer recharge zone..

http://www.edwardsaquifer.net/images/edwards.gif

Fracking compounds found in water samples...

Findings show fracking likely linked to groundwater pollution in U.S.


The EPA announced Thursday that it found compounds likely associated with fracking chemicals in the groundwater beneath Pavillion, a Wyoming community where residents say their well water reeks of chemicals.

Calgary-based Encana owns the Pavillion gas field. An announced $45-million US sale to Midland, Texas-based Legacy Reserves fell through last month amid what Encana said were Legacy's concerns about the EPA investigation.

Encana spokesman Doug Hock said there was much to question about the draft study. The compounds EPA said could be associated with fracking, he said, could have had other origins not related to gas development.

"Those could just have likely been brought about by contamination in their sampling process or construction of their well," Hock said.

The low levels of hydrocarbons found in local water wells likewise haven't been linked to gas development and substances such as methane are naturally occurring in the area.

"There are still a lot of questions that need to be answered. This is a probability and it is one we believe is incorrect," Hock said.

In a statement on its website, Encana says it remains committed to seeing that the investigations into determining the source of the compounds found in the Pavillion groundwater are backed by sound science that is reviewed by independent peers.

The EPA said its announcement is the first step in a process of opening up its findings for review by the public and other scientists.

"EPA's highest priority remains ensuring that Pavillion residents have access to safe drinking water," said Jim Martin, EPA regional administrator in Denver. "We look forward to having these findings in the draft report informed by a transparent and public review process."

The EPA also emphasized that the findings are specific to the Pavillion area. The agency said the fracking that occurred in Pavillion differed from fracking methods used elsewhere in regions with different geological characteristics.

The fracking occurred below the level of the drinking water aquifer and close to water wells, the EPA said. Elsewhere, drilling is more remote and fracking occurs much deeper than the level of groundwater that would normally be used.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/12/08/bc-fracking-groundwater-epa.html

This study was specific to the Pavillion area but still brings to question whether Texas has done enough study regading the spread of the dangerous chemicals that will be used in gas fracking near our own aquifer. At the very least, I encourage those in counties who are effected by this and other fracking concerns to watch the documentary gasland ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZe1AeH0Qz8 ) and be very proactive toward protecting the purity of your most precious natural resource....

[boutons_deux]

the shale doesn't seem that close to the Edwards, and it's downstream of the Edwards, anyway.

But SAWS recently made a controversial contract with some county down that way to pump out their brackish water, could be contaminated with fracking fluids.

http://www.saws.org/our_water/waterresources/projects/desal.shtml

http://www.saws.org/our_water/waterresources/projects/asr.shtml

[scott]

Agreeing with boutons (that was hard to write), the shale doesn't really threaten the Aquifer but I would be concerned about the water being imported from the south.

Full disclosure: I'm an opponent of fracking with the current methods and technology used.

[Nbadan]

Agreeing with boutons (that was hard to write), the shale doesn't really threaten the Aquifer but I would be concerned about the water being imported from the south.

Full disclosure: I'm an opponent of fracking with the current methods and technology used.

Don't forget that we also have many readers who live in the area of the Eagle Ford shale drilling...the project is leading to a mini-economic boom there and some of the sudden wealth effects are also being felt in San Antonio where lower housing inventories could lead to a temporary increase in home sales prices until the housing supply south of town catches up with the demand....many workers are living in temporary housing...the project is also bringing higher paying jobs to the area, and people who will spend that money in San Antonio..

[Nbadan]

There is also the Barnett shale project near Dallas...perhaps some of our Dallas readers can touch on the effects of that project on the region...all boom, no bust?

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/barnettshale/countyproducing.php

[TeyshaBlue]

There is also the Barnett shale project near Dallas...perhaps some of our Dallas readers can touch on the effects of that project on the region...all boom, no bust?

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/barnettshale/countyproducing.php

I would say overall...its been a boom. Drilling is pretty contentious in the Ft Worth area (now. Early on there wasnt alot of resistance.) ...not so much on the Dallas side.
I own rental properties in North Ft. Worth. The royalty payments were pretty substantial.

[boutons_deux]

The Age of Thirst in the American West

Coming to a Theater Near You: The Greatest Water Crisis in the History of Civilization


here’s the bad news in a nutshell: if you live in the Southwest or just about anywhere in the American West, you or your children and grandchildren could soon enough be facing the Age of Thirst, which may also prove to be the greatest water crisis in the history of civilization. No kidding.

If that gets you down, here’s a little cheer-up note: the end is not yet nigh.

In fact, this year the weather elsewhere rode to the rescue, and the news for the Southwest was good where it really mattered. Since January, the biggest reservoir in the United States, Lake Mead, backed up by the Hoover Dam and just 30 miles southwest of Las Vegas, has risen almost 40 feet. That lake is crucial when it comes to watering lawns or taking showers from Arizona to California. And the near 40-foot surge of extra water offered a significant upward nudge to the Southwest’s water reserves.

The Colorado River, which the reservoir impounds, supplies all or part of the water on which nearly 30 million people depend, most of them living downstream of Lake Mead in Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Tucson, Tijuana, and scores of smaller communities in the United States and Mexico.

Back in 1999, the lake was full. Patricia Mulroy, who heads the water utility serving Las Vegas, rues the optimism of those bygone days. “We had a fifty-year, reliable water supply,” she says. “By 2002, we had no water supply. We were out. We were done. I swore to myself we’d never do that again.”

In 2000, the lake began to fall -- like a boulder off a cliff, bouncing a couple of times on the way down. Its water level dropped a staggering 130 feet, stopping less than seven feet above the stage that would have triggered reductions in downstream deliveries. Then -- and here’s the good news, just in case you were wondering -- last winter, it snowed prodigiously up north in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.

The spring and summer run-off from those snowpacks brought enormous relief. It renewed what we in the Southwest like to call the Hydro-Illogic cycle: when drought comes, everybody wrings their hands and promises to institute needed reform, if only it would rain a little. Then the drought breaks or eases and we all return to business as usual, until the cycle comes around to drought again.

So don’t be fooled. One day, perhaps soon, Lake Mead will renew its downward plunge. That’s a certainty, the experts tell us. And here’s the thing: the next time, a sudden rescue by heavy snows in the northern Rockies might not come. If the snowpacks of the future are merely ordinary, let alone puny, then you’ll know that we really are entering a new age.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175475/tomgram%3A_william_debuys%2C_the_parching_of_the_w est/

There's nasty uranium and other mineral extracting out west, plus the usual oil and fracking, so plenty of opportunity to screw up dimishing surface and ground water supplies.

The Repugs want to kill the EPA and any other regulations protecting land, water, and air.

[4>0rings]

The Age of Thirst in the American West

Coming to a Theater Near You: The Greatest Water Crisis in the History of Civilization


here’s the bad news in a nutshell: if you live in the Southwest or just about anywhere in the American West, you or your children and grandchildren could soon enough be facing the Age of Thirst, which may also prove to be the greatest water crisis in the history of civilization. No kidding.

If that gets you down, here’s a little cheer-up note: the end is not yet nigh.

In fact, this year the weather elsewhere rode to the rescue, and the news for the Southwest was good where it really mattered. Since January, the biggest reservoir in the United States, Lake Mead, backed up by the Hoover Dam and just 30 miles southwest of Las Vegas, has risen almost 40 feet. That lake is crucial when it comes to watering lawns or taking showers from Arizona to California. And the near 40-foot surge of extra water offered a significant upward nudge to the Southwest’s water reserves.

The Colorado River, which the reservoir impounds, supplies all or part of the water on which nearly 30 million people depend, most of them living downstream of Lake Mead in Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Tucson, Tijuana, and scores of smaller communities in the United States and Mexico.

Back in 1999, the lake was full. Patricia Mulroy, who heads the water utility serving Las Vegas, rues the optimism of those bygone days. “We had a fifty-year, reliable water supply,” she says. “By 2002, we had no water supply. We were out. We were done. I swore to myself we’d never do that again.”

In 2000, the lake began to fall -- like a boulder off a cliff, bouncing a couple of times on the way down. Its water level dropped a staggering 130 feet, stopping less than seven feet above the stage that would have triggered reductions in downstream deliveries. Then -- and here’s the good news, just in case you were wondering -- last winter, it snowed prodigiously up north in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.

The spring and summer run-off from those snowpacks brought enormous relief. It renewed what we in the Southwest like to call the Hydro-Illogic cycle: when drought comes, everybody wrings their hands and promises to institute needed reform, if only it would rain a little. Then the drought breaks or eases and we all return to business as usual, until the cycle comes around to drought again.

So don’t be fooled. One day, perhaps soon, Lake Mead will renew its downward plunge. That’s a certainty, the experts tell us. And here’s the thing: the next time, a sudden rescue by heavy snows in the northern Rockies might not come. If the snowpacks of the future are merely ordinary, let alone puny, then you’ll know that we really are entering a new age.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175475/tomgram%3A_william_debuys%2C_the_parching_of_the_w est/

There's nasty uranium and other mineral extracting out west, plus the usual oil and fracking, so plenty of opportunity to screw up dimishing surface and ground water supplies.

The Repugs want to kill the EPA and any other regulations protecting land, water, and air.

The writing was on the wall long long ago.

Back in 07'

http://seekingalpha.com/article/24410-t-boone-pickens-invests-in-water-should-you

"Pickens’ new company, Mesa Water, has been buying up ground water rights in Roberts County, Texas - 200,000 acres in all. He says that over a 30-year period, he expects to make more than $1 billion on his investment of $75 million."

And he wasn't the only one buying up then and I'm sure he owns considerably more water rights, right now.

[boutons_deux]

The Shocking Republican Attack on the Environment and Our Drinking Water

But today there is a deep disconnect between escalating public concern and government action. Numerous bills passed this year by the Republican-led House of Representatives bash well-established scientific evidence, attempting to dismantle or delay regulations that safeguard America's water, food, air and environment.

The current war on clean water is part of a Republican deregulation agenda that screams "job killer!" at any environmental protection effort.

Both Senate and House Republicans make no secret of their ultimate goal: to end all environmental regulation and abolish the Environmental Protection Agency. "EPA is a rogue agency," Nebraska Republican Representative Lee Terry recently told the Associated Press.

Texas Governor Rick Perry opened his presidential campaign by saying the agency "won't know what hit 'em" if he is elected president.

But, as David Goldston, a Natural Resources Defense Council researcher, notes, "They're changing fundamental laws, not just blocking regulations."

The REINS Act, which passed the House of Representatives on December 7, is among the most draconian of these new initiatives.

By a vote of 241 to 184, the House approved the Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny Act, which would require an up-or-down vote in Congress on all rules with an annual economic impact of $100 million or more proposed by regulatory agencies.

Four House Democrats voted for the bill: John Barrow of Georgia, Dan Boren of Oklahoma, Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, and Colin Peterson of Minnesota.

The REINS Act has been flying under the media radar, embedded in both Senate and House plans for "job creation." It would require a Congressional vote on any regulation with an annual economic impact of $100 million or more -- that's 50 to 100 votes per year -- creating a scheduling nightmare that would make passage of any new federal regulation virtually impossible.

Under the Act, if one house rejected or failed to vote on a rule within 70 working days, it would "be dispatched to the regulatory graveyard," notes "The Washington Post." REINS would return environmental regulation to 1890s standards -- when corporations polluted with impunity.

While advertised as money savers, these attempts at deregulation are thinly-veiled corporate giveaways that will bolster industry profits at the expense of our families' health. These attacks on Clean Air and Clean Water act protections, if passed, would cause tens of thousands of premature deaths annually.

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/153401

=======

Fucking Repugs, gotta hate 'em every last fucking one of them, and any Dems that vote with them.

[cdcast]

It's not just the chemicals used in fracking, it's also the amount of water used in fracking. They're drilling deeper in the Eagle Ford meaning more water wasted. And if you have hundreds of drilling sites in the Eagle Ford, think about the water being used up.

When the communities south of S.A. start having water problems, whether by contaminated water or even lack of water, they'll be looking at their neighbors to the north for help.

With the population increasing rapidly in this area and throughout Tx now and for the next few decades, protecting the Edwards Aquifer will get tougher and tougher.

[boutons_deux]

I've read that 1M gallons of water are polluted and pumped down a single fracking hole, and what water comes back up is beyond detoxification, put into ponds where inevitably there will be leaks into subsurface water, and overflows during heavy rains and floods.

[CosmicCowboy]

I've read that 1M gallons of water are polluted and pumped down a single fracking hole, and what water comes back up is beyond detoxification, put into ponds where inevitably there will be leaks into subsurface water, and overflows during heavy rains and floods.

You've "heard" that?

As for the OP's question, no there is no chance of Edwards contamination.

Fracking has it's water use issues but the waste water can be and is handled responsibly. There's too much money at stake for the companies to risk getting shut down on water quality issues. I know there have been legitimate cross contamination issues in other parts of the country but the eagle ford is a DEEP structure...like at 12,000 feet, thousands of feet below the water tables. Chances of cross contamination from fracking are really slim to none.

[boutons_deux]

UCA, oil/gasco division, lying to fracked landowners.

Regulations say they must disclose risks, liabilities, fully to capitalists, but can lie to landowners. Another game rigged.

Landowners left out of the loop on 'fracking' risks

By Neela Banerjee, Washington Bureau
Mon Dec 12 2011 12:00 AM
Reporting from Washington-- Natural gas companies that regularly use hydraulic fracturing to drill disclose the risks to shareholders, but not to landowners, according to a report released Monday.

As a result of disclosure requirements in federal securities law, some companies that have led the push into the mid-Atlantic and Northeast to use hydraulic fracturing have described to shareholders in explicit terms the potential dangers of their work, including leaks, spills and explosions. One company, Chesapeake Energy Corp., touted in its annual report in March that its efforts to lease land from private owners was a "land grab."

At the same time, oil and gas companies and the land acquisition companies working for them did not mention to landowners the same potential safety and environmental risks, according to the report by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based organization that has been critical of the industry.

The report said a description by Cabot Oil & Gas, a major gas producer, in its 2008 form 10-K — a securities filing of the company's performance — was typical: "Our business involves a variety of operating risks, including: well-site blowouts, cratering and explosions; equipment failures … pollution and other environmental risks."

Hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as "fracking," involves shooting water infused with chemicals and sand at high pressure into shale formations to tap reservoirs of natural gas.

Craig Sautner and his wife, Julie, said they were never told of any risks when they leased about 3.5 acres of their land in Dimock, Pa., to Cabot in 2008, the report said. After Cabot began drilling in the area in 2009, state officials determined that Cabot's operations had contaminated well water used by the Sautners and 18 other Dimock families. Cabot disputed the finding.

The company did not respond to emails seeking comment on the report.

Jack Norman, chief executive of Elexco Land Services, a property acquisition company, told the report's researchers that his company did not practice the same level of disclosure as expected in securities filings because the actual risk of gas field accidents was negligible.

"We believe the risk is very, very low," he told The Times in a telephone interview from Pennsylvania. He added that companies reaped no benefit from such disclosure to landowners: "No one is going to go out there and say something like, 'At one of every 10,000 of our wells, we may have an incident.' No one will do it."

Some landowners who have long experience with the industry criticized the report for implying that landowners bear no responsibility for finding out the risks of fossil fuel development. Jerry Simmons, executive director of the National Assn. of Royalty Owners, which represents landowners with oil and gas production on their property, said he was "flabbergasted" that landowners signed leases without taking the time to understand the implications.

"It's almost offensive that people say, 'I didn't know what was going on and I signed it anyway,' " Simmons said in a telephone interview from Tulsa, Okla. "Especially if someone is pressuring you, shouldn't that raise some red flags?"

Disclosure statements that companies make to shareholders are public documents, generally available online.

The report's authors, however, said that "drilling companies clearly have a double standard" when discussing risk. "Shareholders are warned, but many landowners are not. This means that thousands of landowners may be signing legally binding contracts without understanding that their property, their health, their finances and their communities could suffer serious harm."

The increased use of fracking has unlocked large new gas deposits in small towns and rural areas along the Eastern Seaboard but also touched off a debate about risks. Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency linked contamination of well water in central Wyoming to fracking.

Typically, gas producers and their agents lease land from private owners for a small sum and pay royalties on any production that occurs. Once a lease is signed, landowners have little chance of getting out of it and most can be unilaterally prolonged by the company.


http://mobile.latimes.com/p.p?m=b&a=rp&id=1322045&postId=1322045&postUserId=7&sessionToken=&catId=5217&curAbsIndex=1&resultsUrl=DID%3D6%26DFCL%3D1000%26DSB%3Drank%2523 desc%26DBFQ%3DuserId%253A7%26DL.w%3D%26DL.d%3D10%2 6DQ%3DsectionId%253A5217%26DPS%3D0%26DPL%3D3

[CosmicCowboy]

Damn boutons...have you EVER read a prospectus? They throw in every possible or impossible risk, real or imagined in order to try to stave off shareholder lawsuits in case the stock goes down.

[cantthinkofanything]

There have been several small "earthquakes" in the Barnett Shale area. Specualtion is that it's the result of all of the horizontal oil and gas drilling and subsequent fracking in the area.

My question/concern is that if this is true, will these tremors significanlty damage the integrety in the casing that is protecting the underground water zones?

[CosmicCowboy]

There have been several small "earthquakes" in the Barnett Shale area. Specualtion is that it's the result of all of the horizontal oil and gas drilling and subsequent fracking in the area.

My question/concern is that if this is true, will these tremors significanlty damage the integrety in the casing that is protecting the underground water zones?

Earthquakes are shifts in tectonic plates deep in the earth. They shouldn't affect a drill casing.

[TDMVPDPOY]

the only way to solve this, allow drob to continue waste water on his lawn...hahahaha

[cantthinkofanything]

Earthquakes are shifts in tectonic plates deep in the earth. They shouldn't affect a drill casing.

It's why I put the word in quotes. I'll rephrase. Are horizontal drilling and fracking causing underground events that are resulting in home foundations being damaged and shallow earth being significantly shifted? If so, wouldn't this also lead to some risk of failed casing?

[boutons_deux]

Damn boutons...have you EVER read a prospectus? They throw in every possible or impossible risk, real or imagined in order to try to stave off shareholder lawsuits in case the stock goes down.

the point of the article was that all the CYA risks are hidden from landowners.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's why I put the word in quotes. I'll rephrase. Are horizontal drilling and fracking causing underground events that are resulting in home foundations being damaged and shallow earth being significantly shifted? If so, wouldn't this also lead to some risk of failed casing?

Short answer? No. As far as I know fracking in the Eagle Ford is happening around 12,000 feet and is contained within the rock structure at that depth...no way that's going to cause foundation cracks of affect the surface at all.

[cantthinkofanything]

Short answer? No. As far as I know fracking in the Eagle Ford is happening around 12,000 feet and is contained within the rock structure at that depth...no way that's going to cause foundation cracks of affect the surface at all.

I really don't know the answer. There seems to be a lot of evidence either way and I thought I might get to the bottom of it on SpursTalk.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usb0006alu.php

[boutons_deux]

"There's too much money at stake for the companies to risk getting shut down on water quality issues."

:lol holy shit CC pimping for the unregulated, unpoliced/unenforced frackers, as if they gave a shit about the EPA (but they are paying the Repugs to kill EPA), why they paid dickhead to exempt frackers from EPA regs completely and ALL testing of frackers' damages.

[CosmicCowboy]

The whole world is out to get you Boutons. Just give up and kill yourself.

[boutons_deux]

naw, bitch slapping you righties is too damn much fun.

[TeyshaBlue]

naw, bitch slapping you righties is too damn much fun.

If you ever do it, it will be the first time.

[boutons_deux]

If you ever do it, it will be the first time.

If you ever quit stalking me to post a msg with content, it'll be the first time, bitch

[TeyshaBlue]

Nice try.:lol

[TeyshaBlue]

Actual content is lost on you bot, as its usually studiously ignored while you're parroting another "progressive" blog.

[boutons_deux]

more content from TB, as always

[TeyshaBlue]

....

[TeyshaBlue]

more content from TB, as always

Remember this content, bot?:lmao
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161521

[Nbadan]

Woohhooooo earthquakes!

Ohio Mayor Buys Quake Insurance as He Seeks Answers on Fracking
Bloomberg:


The mayor of Youngstown, Ohio, says he wonders whether a well used to dispose of wastewater from oil and natural-gas drilling is making his city shake. Just to be safe, he’s bought earthquake insurance.

“You lose your whole house, that’s your life savings, and if you have no money or no insurance to replace it, then what do you do?” Mayor Charles P. Sammarone said in a telephone interview today. “Information is needed to make the homeowner and the residents feel safe.”

There have been 11 earthquakes in this northeastern Ohio city since D&L Energy Inc. began injecting drilling brine, a byproduct of hydraulic fracturing, 9,200 feet (2,804 meters) underground in December 2010. The strongest, magnitude 4.0, hit last week on New Year’s Eve.

Sammarone said he has asked the City Council to pass a resolution tonight supporting state Representative Robert F. Hagan, a city Democrat who has called for a moratorium on so- called fracking and injection-well activity “until we can conclude it’s safe.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-04/ohio-mayor-buys-quake-insurance-as-he-seeks-answers-on-fracking.html

[Nbadan]

Lack of transparency always works out well...


Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction—but they won’t be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will “gag” doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.

Pennsylvania is at the forefront in the debate over “fracking,” the process by which a high-pressure mixture of chemicals, sand, and water are blasted into rock to tap into the gas. Recent discoveries of great reserves in the Marcellus Shale region of the state prompted a rush to development, as have advancements in fracking technologies. But with those changes have come a number of concerns from citizens about potential environmental and health impacts from natural gas drilling.

There is good reason to be curious about exactly what’s in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.

Pennsylvania law states that companies must disclose the identity and amount of any chemicals used in fracking fluids to any health professional that requests that information in order to diagnosis or treat a patient that may have been exposed to a hazardous chemical. But the provision in the new bill requires those health professionals to sign a confidentiality agreement stating that they will not disclose that information to anyone else—not even the person they’re trying to treat.

http://grist.org/natural-gas/for-pennsylvanias-doctors-a-gag-order-on-fracking-chemicals/

[Halberto]

Fracking the eagle ford will never affect the edwards aquifer. There is no way the fractures will make their way through 5,000+ feet of different strata, and the casing is the most ridiculous cement you could imagine.

[Halberto]

God damn it Nbadan, you are posting the most retarded shit.

[Nbadan]

Yeah, this land could be uninhabitable by the time gas frackers are done with it...the bigger problem is that no one knows what these companies are pumping into the ground...

[Sec24Row7]

There is oil production in the edwards... and H2S... jesus... you people...

[Halberto]

Hey Nbadan, we're about to burn a 60' flare here in a little bit. Do you want me to take a snap of it with my phone for you to see?

[Nbadan]

God damn it Nbadan, you are posting the most retarded shit.

ummmm....yeah.....

New Study Predicts Frack Fluids Can Migrate to Aquifers Within Years


Scientists have theorized that impermeable layers of rock would keep the fluid, which contains benzene and other dangerous chemicals, safely locked nearly a mile below water supplies. This view of the earth's underground geology is a cornerstone of the industry's argument that fracking poses minimal threats to the environment.

But the study, using computer modeling, concluded that natural faults and fractures in the Marcellus, exacerbated by the effects of fracking itself, could allow chemicals to reach the surface in as little as "just a few years."

"Simply put, [the rock layers] are not impermeable," said the study's author, Tom Myers, an independent hydrogeologist whose clients include the federal government and environmental groups.

http://www.propublica.org/article/new-study-predicts-frack-fluids-can-migrate-to-aquifers-within-years

[Nbadan]

Damn it Mouse....I'm spoon-feeding you the story of the next decade...where is the documentary?

:lol

[greyforest]

i can only hope all the people who did this are still around to drink that shit and get cancer from it

[cantthinkofanything]

i can only hope all the people who did this are still around to drink that shit and get cancer from it

evolution will make it so that people will learn to benefit from the chemicals. in fact, the differences in propriatary frac fluids explains the forked development from humans to the greys and reptiles

[Nbadan]

nothing to see here...the oil/gas industry does a splendid job paroling itself..

New Fracking Research Disputes A Fundamental Industry Claim


A primary claim of the hydraulic fracking industry is that deeply buried rock layers will always seal and contain the dangerous chemicals that are injected thousands of feet underground.

But a new study released in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences concluded that fracking for natural gas under Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania may lead to harmful gas or liquids flowing upward and contaminating drinking-water supplies.

The study found that salty, mineral-rich fluids deep beneath Pennsylvania's natural gas fields are seeping upward thousands of feet into drinking water supplies. Although it found no evidence of fracking chemicals doing the same, the findings suggest that there are paths that would let hazardous gas or fluids flow up after drilling:

"The biggest implication is the apparent presence of connections from deep underground to the surface," Robert Jackson, a biology professor at Duke University and one of the study's authors, told ProPublica. "It's a suggestion based on good evidence that there are places that may be more at risk."

The study supplements another recent study that used computer modeling to predict how fracking fluids would move over time and found that they could migrate toward drinking water supplies far more quickly than experts have previously predicted.



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/new-research-debunks-fundamental-fracking-industry-claim-2012-7#ixzz20H4G5cjb
http://shale.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/news/archives/24680-findings-mixed-in-fracking-water-st

[Nbadan]

A new report on shale resources and hydraulic fracturing from the Government Accountability Office (GAO)—an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress—concludes that fracking poses serious risks to health and the environment. The report, which reviewed studies from state agencies overseeing fracking as well as scientific reports, found that the extent of the risks has not yet been fully quantified and that there are many unanswered questions and a lack of scientific data.

Major reports and studies were also released in Europe the past two months, all of which came to the conclusion that fracking poses serious risks to water, public health, and the environment, and that additional scientific study is necessary. Meanwhile, in NY hundreds2 of doctors, scientists, and medical organizations have renewed calls for an independent, comprehensive health impact assessment and additional scientific research.

“The big-money gas industry is at it again,” said John Armstrong of Frack Action on behalf of New Yorkers Against Fracking, a broad coalition of New Yorkers opposed to fracking. “Rather than allow a comprehensive independent health assessment that can study the dangers fracking poses to our water and health, they just want to frack as quickly as possible and take their profits back to Texas.”

Given the conclusions from the broad NY, U.S., and world-wide scientific and medical community that fracking poses serious public health and environmental risks and needs further scientific study, the gas industry and the Joint Landowners Coalition’s rush to frack is dangerously reckless and irresponsible.
...


complete piece: http://ecowatch.org/2012/fracking-is-reckless/

[boutons_deux]

The giveaway that fracking was bad for water, and that the industry knew it from the very beginning, was when the Repugs specifically exempted fracking from the Clean Water Act and blocked all fracking pollution research. Then the criminal liars and frauds said "no research has shown that fracking pollutes water". Corporate profit, public disease and death.

[Nbadan]

San Antonio considers shale drilling’s effect on ozone
By Neena Satija - Texas Tribune


As the ozone rating in San Antonio continues its slow upward march, area officials are beginning to investigate whether oil and gas drilling in the Eagle Ford Shale has anything to do with it. But their efforts are fraught with complications. And they remain far from answers in what is sure to be a high-stakes debate over the environmental impact of one of the country’s newest and fastest-growing oil and gas development regions.

<snip>

That “big stick” is held by the Environmental Protection Agency. For years, San Antonio has touted itself as the largest American city that is in compliance with federal ozone standards, and therefore not subject to extra regulation and enforcement from the EPA. That will soon change. Today, San Antonio is violating the Clean Air Act based on its ozone scores, the highest of which are far above the maximum acceptable value of 75 parts per billion.

“The San Antonio region has really become much more of an interest for ozone problems than it ever was before,” said Daniel Cohan, an associate professor of environmental engineering at Rice University who studies the formation and control of air pollution. Not only have the region’s ozone levels started to increase, but the EPA also lowered its ozone standards from 85 parts per billion to 75 parts per billion in 2008, during the final year of George W. Bush’s presidency.

San Antonio’s ozone uptick is relatively recent. The city’s ozone numbers dropped dramatically in the beginning of the last decade; in 2007, it was under the federal limit even during some of the hottest days of the summer. Starting in the late 2000s, ozone levels began to increase again — just as the first wells were being drilled in the Eagle Ford Shale, now a 400-mile swath of oil and gas production stretching from South Texas’ Mexico border all the way to East Texas, brushing the southern tip of the San Antonio metropolitan area.

That timing has not been lost on anyone. “I think that there can be and there might be impacts” of the oil and gas development, Bella said. This month, AACOG produced its first estimates of the Eagle Ford Shale’s emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX), air pollutants that are the precursor components of ozone.

The numbers are very preliminary and have not been shared publicly. But they suggest that the oil and gas extraction-related activities in the Eagle Ford Shale result in dozens of tons of emissions of VOCs and NOX every day, according to AACOG’s estimates. Such emissions would be equivalent to as much as half of what’s emitted daily by the entire San Antonio-New Braunfels metropolitan region each day. During a recent health forum in San Antonio, AACOG officials suggested that Eagle Ford activities could increase the city’s ozone score by several parts per billion within the next decade.

<snip>

Spokesmen for the Texas Oil and Gas Association and the South Texas Energy & Economic Roundtable, which was established by the 11 largest operators in the Eagle Ford Shale, did not respond to requests for comment.

<snip>

Air pollution experts at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, which will soon review AACOG’s report and help with revisions, have their own thoughts on the matter. They don’t believe that the Eagle Ford Shale is a major cause of the ozone changes in San Antonio, based on the data they are monitoring.


<snip>

[boutons_deux]

TCEQ? now there's a totally politicized TX agency that can be counted on to protect the environment.

For some extremely foresightful reason, dickhead Cheney made sure his Halliburton and other frackers would be untouchable:

"You might wonder why the EPA has not limited or regulated fracking operations, in light of the combustible water, cancer-causing chemicals, and earthquake clusters.

The EPA might well have adopted significant national policies on fracking by now, had the practice not been made exempt from the main national environmental laws in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, an offspring of Dick Cheney’s secretive energy committee.

The exemptions from the:

Clean Water Act,

the Safe Drinking Water Act,

the Clean Air Act, and

the Superfund law

drastically limit the agency’s authority to act on fracking."

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18071-frackonomics-the-science-and-economics-of-the-gas-boom

[Th'Pusher]

Purestream introduces its water-treatment technology into the Eagle Ford

http://m.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/blog/eagle-ford-shale-insight/2013/08/purestream-introduces-its.html?ana=e_du_pub&s=article_du&ed=2013-08-27&r=full

[TDMVPDPOY]

complaining about the quality of water...lol while in africa...

[boutons_deux]

SAWS is building desal plants so they can suck brackish water out of south TX aquifers. Want methane with that?

[Big Empty]

Some freinds of mine st work were talking about this recently. There are some places where fracking takes place where the river and tap water can catch fire? Idk but that sounds crazy!

[CosmicCowboy]

Some freinds of mine st work were talking about this recently. There are some places where fracking takes place where the river and tap water can catch fire? Idk but that sounds crazy!

There are also places with no fracking where the ground water contains methane. There has been NO proven causation from fracking.

[boutons_deux]

There are also places with no fracking where the ground water contains methane. There has been NO proven causation from fracking.

because BigCarbon has gotten Congress to block all approval and funding, for many years, of fracking, just like BigGun has blocked research into gun violence.

because there's methane water where there's no fracking proves nothing. People complaing about methane, etc in their water near fracking began AFTER the the fracking arrived.

[Nbadan]

Well, well, well.....

Stanford University report finds fracking CAN pollute underground drinking water
Source: Cleveland.com

Stanford University report finds fracking CAN pollute underground drinking water, conflicting with previous studies

April 01, 2016 at 1:49 PM


A newly released study of fracking in a small Wyoming town has found that common practices in the industry may have widespread impacts on drinking water – a conclusion in direct conflict to U.S. EPA and Yale University reports last year that no such evidence exists.

The latest study was conducted by scientists at Stanford University based on findings from hydraulic fracturing operations in Pavillion, Wyoming, population 231.

The findings were reached based on public records and were published in the latest edition of Environmental Science & Technology.

The Stanford study found a direct link between fracking operations near the town and underground sources of drinking water. The research cited such unsafe practices as the dumping of drilling and production fluids containing diesel fuel, high chemical concentrations in unlined pits, and a lack of adequate cement barriers to protect groundwater.

Read more: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/04/stanford_university_study_reac.html#incart_river_h om

[boutons_deux]

Well, well, well.....

Stanford University report finds fracking CAN pollute underground drinking water
Source: Cleveland.com



The science has been conclusive for a while, it will become overwhelming. BigCarbon has killed the planet, and BigOil knew about and hid AGW 40 years ago.

[CosmicCowboy]

:lmao read your own fucking article. The pollution was from surface contamination.

[boutons_deux]

:lmao read your own fucking article. The pollution was from surface contamination.

there's plenty of surface contamination from fracking, and holdind ponds.

[CosmicCowboy]

there's plenty of surface contamination from fracking, and holdind ponds.

I know in Texas they are pretty strictly registered and controlled. I have no problem with strong enforceable guidelines to avoid surface contamination.

[boutons_deux]

"registered and controlled" :lol

:lol what's the enforcement budget?

:lol how many inspectors?

:lol how many fines per year for violations?

"registered and controlled" :lol