The most common accusations against shale exploration - and yes, ANSWERS
It seems as though these days people just aren't willing to do any unbiased investigating concerning the issue of natural gas drilling before jumping on the "stop drilling - natural gas companies are evil" bandwagon. It may not seem like it from all the news articles you come across, but the overwhelming majority of people are actually pro-drilling. However, the majority of non-industry people (regular citizens) who are actually voicing their opinions are the anti-drilling groups.
If you google Marcellus drilling, you will get 100's of pages of the fears of fracking, pollution, companies raping the land like coal companies, etc.. The problem is that the industry is painted as not caring about the environment, and going by its own rules. Here are the most common accusations against natural gas drilling. Again, take my comments with a grain of salt and do some real research on your own before believing anything. And by research, I dont mean newspapers, or extreme websites... I mean peer reviewed science literature. Here we go:
Q: Why dont companies tell us what chemicals are in frack fluids?!?
A. This is a claim found everywhere and it's such a misleading question. It's posed as if these companies are hiding something. The chemicals used have never been a secret to the public. I don't understand why this keeps coming up when the info is right there. Example: Go to Chesapeake's website. They put a large link to the "frac facts" right on their homepage. Yes, their homepage. It lists every chemical in a frac fluid. You may not agree with the chemicals involved, but don't say that they're not telling you. Next question.
Q. Why don't companies release how much of each chemical is in their frac fluid?
A. Is that really the question you're looking to get an answer to? If Haliburton said they were putting .0001 ounces of biocide per 100,000 gallons instead of .0002 ounces per 100,000 gallons... Would that change your view of fracking? This question is asked (like the specific chemicals used in frac fluids question) in order to make the industry appear as if it has a dirty little secret. Let's be logical, that small difference is not going to change your opinion, but it gives you the argument they're hiding something.
The exact formulas to the T are not known, but the general amounts are known (down to a hundreth of one percent). That's pretty damn good. Like the specific chemicals involved, this question has an answer - again it's plastered on Chesapeake's home page.
Q. We need to hold companies responsible for the wastewater! We can't let them dump it wherever they want!
A. There are actually incredibly strict sets of regulations for companies to abide by when dealing with their water. If you don't abide by them, you are gone - see ya, no drilling permits are issued. When I hear these claims I say to myself "Yes, you're right, we should be holding them accountable...We do. There should be regulations... and there are". It's like a person saying "We can't let police officers wear neon green dresses to work!"... Well, I don't think anybody is arguing against that. And they don't.
The industry IS held responsible. People need to understand that companies can not drill if they don't get every permit approved by the DEP. If the DEP approves it, then why is the "blame" (used loosely) on the companies? I expect the typical "because the DEP is in the pockets of the industry".. leads me to my next false statement.
Q. The DEP is in the pocket of the industry, that's why there are no regulations!
A. Well, we've discussed the regulations already as being some of the strictest regulations in the country. Now as to the DEP being corrupt. That's a pretty bold statement to make considering nobody has any information as to why they say that (funny word I call "data"). I'm not going to say show me the data because that's a defensive statement. I can say, however, that for every dollar lobbyists bring in for natural gas drilling, 100 are brought in by coal or oil. 1000 for renewables (biomass especially). To say natural gas has a stranglehold is... well.. just wrong. Do you wonder why the US has the most natural gas in the world, yet relies on it the least for electricity and fuel (generally speaking)? Even if lobbyists do get some more support for natural gas drilling - are you against switching from gasoline to a cleaner natural gas fueled vehicle? Are you against America being able to finally use it's own energy source and stop funding foreign corrupt countries?
There are literally hundreds of questions/claims just like this that have answers. I know, it is tough to be able to tell what is factual and what is propoganda when you are new to this industry. Even this post here, don't believe a word I say until you actually do a little digging from both sides. Yes, go check out some of the problems involved with drilling, then check out how companies are addressing it. Let's see if the extremists environmentalists have that type of comment ever (e.g. "go check out Exxon's safety record and come back to me"). They won't ever say that, because they know the truth is there which refutes their argument. I am pro-natural gas, a proud American. Go Marcellus.
Views: 1571
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by drillman on
-
Who says that Dr. Theo Colborn is a "highly respected scientist?" I'll bet many people that that Bernie Madoff was a highly respected investment strategist. So much that he was able to swindle them out of about $50 billion! Theo Colborn is an environmental extremist. Here's just one link to a report on drilling and relative non-impact on ground water. Your scare tactics make it sound as if these problems are overwhelming when the facts prove they are not.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Dee Fulton on
-
In answer to "Who says that Dr. Theo Colborn is a highly respected scientist?" Dr. Colborn received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the National Council for Science and the Environment. The United Nations, The Society of Toxicology and Environmental Chemistry, the Center for Science in the Public Interest also honored her with awards.
Her 1988 research on the state of the environment of the Great Lakes revealed that persistent, man-made chemicals were being transferred from top predator females to their offspring and undermining the construction and programming of their youngsters’ organs before they were born. In light of this evidence, in 1991 she convened 21 international scientists from 15 different disciplines to share their research relevant to trans-generational health impacts. Specific participant and specialty information is provided in the Wingspread Consensus Statement at www.endocrinedisruption.com. -
-
Permalink Reply by BuckinghamGasMan on -
G:
Obviously the 16 inspectors that NY employs are more than enough since they aren't drilling Marcellus wells. The current inspectors are, I'm sure, inspecting non-Marcellus wells and that number would increase (as Pa's numbers did) when Marcellus wells are drilled. And no, NY will not freeze in the dark. Those opposing gas drilling will buy their gas from other States thereby having it both ways -- they have gas and "their State" did not allow drilling -- although they will be contributing to someone elses water pollution which was the point all along. Meanwhile poor farmers are selling their property and environmentalists will be decrying loss of habitat and Open Space.
Let's have good rules; good inspectors; caution; and yes, drilling. -
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Thomer on
-
I'm all for gas drilling but using the word "exploited" is not going to win you any points. What is the big hurry? Drilling in Pa and NY is not the same as elsewhere, because the landscape and the people involved are different. There are always different concerns no matter where you go so just respect the process, however slow it may be. Oil and gas companies have come a long way (for the better) than they have in the past, but "stuff" happens whether intentional or not and that is of concern to many. We need this transitional fuel, but we have to do it right. If people feel like they are being "exploited" it's going to make things more difficult and then nothing will get done. That would not be good for anyone. Time will tell if the "nimbys" are right or wrong, but some of their concerns are legit. You are not going to appease everyone, but if the O+G companies will hold themselves responsible, that would go along way.
-
-
The word "exploited" as defined by Webster's Dictionary: "to make productive use of." From another dictionary: "to make full use of and derive benefit from." My use of this word should not be taken out of context.
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Thomer on
-
You must have missed the rest of the definition in your dictionary. It means to use unfairly to one's advantage. Maybe you meant to say "explore" or "utilize" in your original post because I can't imagine that you would want people to be taken advantage of.
-
-
Bob: The word can be used either way. I never intended it to be used in a manner to suggest taking advantage of anyone. I suppose it was a poor choice considering that's how you took it. Now I have little doubt others took it the same way. However, I assure you, it was not meant as such.
-
-
Bob: The O&G companies are held liable for damages. There are regulations in place that protect the environment and more will surely come as the DEC adopts the most recent proposed revisions to the GEIS. Currently the state mandates a bond from a developer prior to permitting. Please people, do some research of your own and stop jumping to erroneous conclusions.
With regard to potential ground water contamination - I encourage you to review the document found at this link:
http://www.dittus.com/energy_in_depth/pdfs/gwpc_kell_testimony.pdf
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Dear Drillman,
A very interesting site, worth the effort to go through it.Bottom line, the report maintains that although there are numerous cases of contamination, it is due NOT to the drilling process of fracing, but to a host of operator errors or company policies. This then is where we need to be on guard- to be certain that we do not repeat the errors of the past. They point out the regulatory commissions that are supposed to oversee the drilling process- once again a place to focus on to ensure our continued health and water purity.
Dan
-
-
Dan: You are as transparent as any obstructionist I've ever encountered. You sir, are an anti-driller. You will NEVER be satisfied with any amount of regulation. You will NEVER believe anyone who says that drilling is safe. You are a hypocrite extraordinaire.
-
-
This report is dated June 2009. At that time Mr. Kell, a geologist employed in the Ohio Natural Resources Dept, Mineral Resource Management , felt comfortable testifying "As a result of our regulatory review and analyses, the GWPC concluded that state oil and gas regulations are adequately designed to directly protect water resources through the application of specific programmatic elements such as permitting, well construction, hydraulic fracturing, waste handling, and well plugging requirements." This was pre-Dimock. Dimock...where children were sickened, wells explode and tap water can be ignited. This was pre-NY Health Dept. disclosure of radioactive waste water. I am not sure that we can assume that Mr. Kell would endorse his June 2009 statement today.
Regarding our trust in public agencies to protect us, I will also point out that in 2009, Pennsylvania was allowing waste water to be dumped into sewage treatment facilities which did not address the TDS (Total Dissolved Solids.....a whole 'nuther subject) loads, much less the potential for pouring radioactive waste, carcinogens, EDs and other toxic materials into the rivers which are the source of public drinking water. In the fall and winter of 2008, all 17 Mon River water intakes between the WV line and Pittsburgh were drawing water with high levels of TDS. One of the consequences was that citizens were exposed to trihalomethanes, a byproduct of disinfection that causes bladder cancer. Furthermore, water drawdowns eradicated some streams and reduced the flow rates of many others. Call me a "nimby". Call me a cynic. I know a little too much about what has happened in our world and I haven't seen answers produced to address the risks of gas drilling which have been identified. Our agencies are behind the curve on regulating this industry and its going to require many studies simply to get a handle on the risks and many more tax-dollar funded employees to regulate/enforce this behemoth.
-
-
Couldn't agree more! g van Hulsteyn
Top Content
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
pig dung replied to Theresa Kolk's discussion 'What's going on in your area?? any info???' in the group Tioga County, PApig dung replied to Theresa Kolk's discussion 'What's going on in your area?? any info???' in the group Tioga County, PA
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
