If fracking fluids are found to be the cause of the illnesses at LeRoy High School, would you change your position on fracking?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John O on February 12, 2012 at 8:50am

No

• ▶ Reply

LandownerPermalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 10:07pm

What needs to be recognized is the individuals that continue to drive the anti-fracking agenda have their own chosen path which is renewable energy. Making the shale oil / gas reserves accessible places their agenda at severe risk. No one will want to pursue the more costly / less efficient path to energy independence using wind / light / geothermal if cheap / clean natural gas is made available for the next 20 years and beyond. It is the political agenda of the left. Does not matter if it makes sense or not, if we can make a cataclysmic disaster flick out of it, the general public might get gun shy.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Drill Baby Drill on February 15, 2012 at 3:08pm

 I have to disagree that we will not want or should not want to keep pursuing wind, solar, geothermal.  But it needs to be the private sector not the Fracking Federal Government.  Solyndra debacle makes me want to vomit! 

We have geothermal heat at our house.  We have the cheapest utility bill of anyone I know.  We have four geothermal vertical wells just outside one bedroom window.  There is no evidence of them but nice to know where they are so no one digs near them.  They are drilled by water well drillers.  They have no casing so they are not expensive like a water well.  We installed one more than the required 3 for the size of our home.  We have a geothermal furnace which looks like a normal furnace but functions slightly differently.  They were very expensive when they first came out, less expensive when we got ours and now I think you can easily make up the cost with savings on fuel.  Building a new house you should definitely look at geo-thermal option ... need a new furnace you will have one additionl cost of excavating some to get the wells attached to your furnace but worth looking into for sure.

This winter we were driving out in Van Wert and Paulding counties in OH on 224 west and then on 30 north toward Chicago.  If you are ever out this way you need to make a special trip to see this - "Blue Creek Wind Farm in Van Wert and Paulding counties is the largest wind project in the state"  http://www.iberdrolarenewables.us/bluecreek/docs/primary/03-Appendi... for more info.  Google it too .. some great articles about this and the county commissioner there who got this started.  Farmers get paid rent money and royalties.  It takes up some of their property for the base.  They can farm under but no homes or building in the fall zone.  We happend to have smart phone with us and were able to read all about this project.  Farm makes enough electric for all homes in both counties plus more.  They were able to get it online thanks to extra capacity available from AEP in the area.  They are hoping everyone there will get electric cars as they have plenty of electricity for it.  This company has projects planned in other counties, Lake Erie and Ashtabula near us.

PA has several large windfarms too and we saw them driving along the turnpike in January and also saw a large solar panel farm on the south side of turnpike about halfway across PA.  Google pa turnpike, wind farms or solar panels and you can read about them.

These technologies are possible and can be cost effective.  All new technology costs more at first.  Anyone remember your first cell phone, etc.  Now the phones are free with the 2 yr agreement and it has more minutes, M2M is free, texting, smart phones and on and on.  Grew up with a black and white TV and 3 channels and you had to get up to turn the channel and now I am watching a Hi Def color with so many channels and shows that we set up our DVR to record one show while we watch another and click to watch a movie for 5 buck for two people unlike the 8 dollars apiece plus gas plus pop corn if we went to the theatre.

• ▶ Reply

LandownerPermalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 15, 2012 at 4:35pm

Never said we should not. I said no will want to.

Solar has been costing more since the middle 70's. Its all about manufacturing processes

I accept your input with regard to geothermal as it sounds like you have personal experience.

I think wind farms will become untenable if natural gas stays as low as it is right now. Also, like solar, wind does not produce consistently.

I am an R&D engineer, I fully understand the value of pressing new technologies into affordable ones. If the natural gas reserves are opened up and the market stays flooded like it is, the development monies will not be there, because the ROI will not look good. In our capitalist system, its always the bottom line.

This is the reason for the scare stories - the lefties know there seed monies will dry up and be sent over to O&G investments

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff D. on February 12, 2012 at 8:55am

It would not change my position generally.  Should such a link be established in this or any other individual case, it would be evidence of the potential for fracing to cause harm.  It would not be evidence that fracing always or even frequently causes harm.  The key would be to understand what specific practices by the operator led to the problem and ensure that regulations are in place to minimize a repeat of that problem.  

There have been incidents in which malfeasance by manufacturers have led to environmental damage and health effects in adjacent communities.  There have also been situation in which negligence by airlines have caused people to die in plane crashes.  No one responds by saying that we should end all manufacturing or commercial flights because there is environmental or health risks associated with those activities.  We try to understand specifically what went wrong and adopt practices that minimize a recurrence in the future.  Fracing should be treated no differently.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard Markert on February 12, 2012 at 6:59pm

I agree more regulation of the industry by people who are not former industry employees and are prohibited from taking jobs in the industry for 8 years after leaving public service.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ron Eiselstein on February 12, 2012 at 7:07pm

So by agreeing to more regulation, you now accept hydraulic fracking and this industry, thank you.

 

Now please tell your Occupy Youngstown buddies you are now converted, and remember SMILE, 761 people know this.

 

Oh!  and "Gas For You!"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard Markert on February 12, 2012 at 9:13pm

As I have mentioned before on this forum, I am opposed to all fracking personally, however, being a realist I understand that the energy demands of the country continue and the power of the industry is enormous.  The kinds of regulation I would propose include:

1. A moratorium until the EPA study is completed.

2. A complete reworking of the permitting process, to make sure that environmental concerns are addressed in the placement of wells (no more wells being located within a few hundred feet of a waterway, no wells in our state or local parks).

3. increased radiation monitoring of flowback and produced water and of all personnel and equipment used to transport and dispose of those fluids.

4. environmental impact fees for the transport and disposal of toxic or radioactive waste in Mahoning County.

5 A mandate calling for the use of the greener fracking fluids county or statewide.

6. A mandate calling for the recycling of brine water so that it can be used again for fracking.

7. An environmental impact fee for the destruction of the fresh water.

8. Replacing all ODNR and EPA officials that have control over natural resources by people who have never worked in the industry and can not accept a job from the industry or lobbying for the industry for 8 years after leaving public service.

If you think that means I am on your side, than please explain to your fellow forum members the logic of increased regulations on a dangerous industry that has a proven track record of taking unnecessary risks with their employees lives and the land, air, and waters where they drill.

• ▶ Reply

LandownerPermalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 9:56pm

Because some trees and grass died and a few students developed ticks and there is no evidence to the fact that a brine spill or train derailment involving neurotoxins was the cause of either issue, you feel all these demands are necessary. Where in the he!! are you going to find anyone QUALIFIED to do oversight that has not worked in the industry? A college grad? You are going to can everyone at the ODNR because they are clearly biased?

Let's review - salt will cause vegetation to die. Children developed ticks. There is no hard evidence the neurotoxin spill or the brine spill caused either of the issues(hmm... neorotoxins vs. salt water, I wonder....) and you jump to the conclusion that you are opposed to ALL fracking. You have stretched this out way too far and its just so obvious. Exactly what are you trying to accomplish here? Do you see your lack of standing or ??? You are losing this discussion BADLY -please stop while you are behind! I simply cannot respond to this drivel any longer - good night.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on February 12, 2012 at 10:40pm

8. Replacing all ODNR and EPA officials that have control over natural resources by people who have never worked in the industry and can not accept a job from the industry or lobbying for the industry for 8 years after leaving public service.

Gee Howard 1/2 of what you say has already been done under the current administration. As to lobbyist well the administration already has that covered they hired them into the government already!

• ▶ Reply

LandownerPermalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 10:07pm

What needs to be recognized is the individuals that continue to drive the anti-fracking agenda have their own chosen path which is renewable energy. Making the shale oil / gas reserves accessible places their agenda at severe risk. No one will want to pursue the more costly / less efficient path to energy independence using wind / light / geothermal if cheap / clean natural gas is made available for the next 20 years and beyond. It is the political agenda of the left. Does not matter if it makes sense or not, if we can make a cataclysmic disaster flick out of it, the general public might get gun shy.

• ▶ Reply

LandownerPermalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 9:24am

One - Let's try to be a little more vague. The information provided is on par with simply saying a chemical spill occured without any detail of what was spilled and how much and where and any secondary containment, how long between occurance and discovery / report... If you wrote a headline for the accident on the turnpike last night in a similar manner I think it might read - "People were hurt on the highway because of cars"

Two- Let's say it is linked to a spill of liquids that should have been properly disposed. It was a spill! With this logic, we should stop flying in airplanes because, ya know, they can crash and well people do die in automobile accidents, so let's stop building cars, let's see, O yeah let's pound all our guns into plowshares and live in peace. Why not simply identify the chemicals in the fracking water and ban their use?  No - I think we should throw the baby out with bathwater. (sarcasm)

Three -What needs to be recognized is the individuals that continue to drive the anti-fracking agenda have their own chosen path which is renewable energy. Making the shale oil / gas reserves accessible places their agenda at severe risk. No one will want to pursue the more costly / less efficient path to energy independence using wind / light / geothermal if cheap / clean natural gas is made available for the next 20 years and beyond. It is the political agenda of the left. Does not matter if it makes sense or not, if we can make a cataclysmic disaster flick out of it, the general public might get gun shy.

 

So to answer the question above - NO - I would prefer that those responsible for the spill recitify the mess (remidiation) pay fines, give restitution to those harmed and MAYBE, just maybe the corporation(s) that run the business that do the work will avoid future similar mistakes. Burned once, twice shy

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 30
• Next ›
• Page