Aquifer/Drinking Water Contamination
This is an important finding. Although we do not understand the process by which waste water buried deep within the ground migrates into aquifers, evidence suggests that it happens. Read here.
Views: 2620
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on -
Dear Jean & Nancy,
The attempt to shield others from information (propaganda,biased opinion,inaccurate facts,etc) may be well intended, and if we were dealing with children then of course that guidance would be most appropriate. But in this case we are dealing with thinking, adult folk who are ruggedly independent and who are generally responsible & reasonable in their final determinations.
Why would anyone want to prevent them from hearing everything in order to sort the trash from the gold? I suppose it is a personal preference when you come right down to it, and I do respect your honest desire to protect, but I personally prefer to make my own decisions without censoring of information.
In general, whenever I've come across those who are "protecting me" by restricting what I am permitted to know, it has always been that there was a hidden agenda that they had, and were attempting to make sure that I came to their "correct" interpretation. Of course I'm not suggesting that you have this as a motivating factor, but it is a technique used by far too many others.
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on
-
Daniel, I have no intention or need to "HIDE" things.. I am a land owner as well in NYS, so you can imagine how frustrated we all are up here, waiting for the DEC to get up off it's rump. The reality of the matter , is that nearly every landowner up here is is for drilling, but a larger eco minded group of beings in NYC have basically crushed all possibility of drilling with delays.. and mis information tactics and MEdia manipulation , spear headded by PROpublica.. and their assosciates.. (my research traced about 90% of the stories sources to Propublica) Drilling in NYS has been delayed for almonst 3 years now and probably will not even begin for another year at the earliest, what with all the scandles in Albany.
As an example of Media Manipulation, I attended a Pro Drilling Rally in Abany a few months ago, and about 1800 of my fellow land owners were there as well. Only 50 or So Anti Driling people showed up and they were almost exclusively from Ithica University Students..
When the event was covered on the News.. the landowneres got 1 minute of air time, and the students 15 minutes Plus interviews..
So you see, AS I said earlier, do your own research, and I am only offering you my advice, based on my own research and that is to question very closely the Propublica information.. I don't say don't read it, but confirm it..with other sources.. or you will look foolish in the end..
and just as a physical barrier, how can you contaminate a water table 300 feet down, when you are drilling 6000 feet down? ( the heat alone with vaporisze the water)The real reason GAS gets into water up here is, we are drowing in NG . I can drill a hole in my back yard and with a 1 inch pipe and have all the gas I want ( many people in OHIO already do this.) In Walton NY, you can litteraly turn on your tap, fill a glass of water and light it.. no gas wells are drilled in the area at all., just water wells
the whole area is like this..
The only good news, is that I am now aware of a class action lawsuit being prepared by landowners and coalitions, to sue the state and the City of NY over "restriction of use" of our land.. I am told that process will begin in NOV if the DEC does not release teh final Regs...
So either we get paid by drilling or by the state as compensation for not drilling...
-
Permalink Reply by Nancy Famiola on
-
Jean,
That class action suit sounds great! Haha. You should all be sueing these extremists as well.
Daniel - it's funny you say that "we arent children". Listening to the extreme tactics, it is obvious we arent dealing with people who think straight. These guys are absolutely out of their minds. I think you are giving the general public way too much credit. How would they know what is the truth and what is just garbage? How you would ever support these extremists' publications is beyond me.
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Dear Nancy,
Such passion, such surety of position. I m surprised at your lack of patience and intolerance for other points of view. If they are in error, let's present them with facts. If they are misguided, let's present them with our reasoning to hopefully act as a possible example. Let's not finger point , denigrate or try to humiliate them. We all have our faults, and we all need tolerance. Am I wrong?
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Dear Jean Michel,
The information you present is very interesting, and I meant no disrespect for you're voicing of it. Perhaps we can agree on the need for clarity and unbiased facts, and trust to the reader to sort out the hype. We absolutely agree upon the need to confirm from several sources.
You raised an interesting question when you wrote:"how can you contaminate a water table 300 feet down, when you are drilling 6000 feet down?"
As I understand it from readings around this broader site and the comments of hydro geologists who have commented, there is no impermeable layer preventing upward migration, there are numerous micro-fissure cracks throughout to facilitate that upward migration and these are enhanced when the frac fluids are injected under terrific pressure. The underground explosions to further cause cracks to release bound gas just adds to the problem. We're not even talking about natural fissures that cross many layers up and down.
Your water table reference isn't very deep is it- my well is 420 feet down and I don't have the deepest well in my area. Bottom line though- we need to be very cautious about potential contamination, whatever the source.
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on
-
HI Dan,
I guess the crux of my point of vue is that, we are surrounded at every level by NG no matter how deep you drill, 100 feet or 8000 feet.. so NG contamination by drilling is a moot point. the only concern is the chemicals introduced.. and there is what we need to worry about..
A I said, earlier, you can turn on the Well water tap in most of Sullivan and Delaware counties and Gas comes out as well as water..
So to your point of natural impermiable layer is as well moot.. we are surrounded here anyway...
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Dear Jean Michel,
We agree that the chemicals introduced can/are worrisome. There is need to monitor the process better than it has been done in the past. Perhaps we ought to put our heads together to see how to best protect our health,property values and the environment.
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on
-
there are 2 proceses to review immediately
www.gasfrac.com
and
closed loop systems with on site decontamination and recycling...
both elliminate the need for extensive regulations
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Dear Jean Michel,
Both excellent references. The second (closed loop systems with on site decontamination and recycling) seems to be the standard for the nuclear industry and would probably have to be tweaked a bit to handle the Oil/Gas requirements, but definitely doable. Nicely done.
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on
-
Closed Loop It is already in production in several test areas in PA and I think will be come the standard in NYS , until the Gathering lines are established, and then the GasFrac method will be used as it requires pipelines to be there first.. as Gasfrac has proven to be twice as efficient as water/sand fracing... in test productions..
-
-
Dan,
No sane hydrogreologist would ever tell you...
" there is no impermeable layer preventing upward migration, there are numerous micro-fissure cracks throughout to facilitate that upward migration and these are enhanced when the frac fluids are injected under terrific pressure."
The upper devonian sandstones which have been the primary target for exploration in New York and Pennsylvania are usually around 2000-3000 feet deep. These are typically loaded with gas, and since they are sandstones, they are more porous and permeable and gas can migrate around in them, and upwards (into water tables naturally).
Under these shallow formations is 3000' of absolutely impermeable SHALE. Under this shale lies the Marcellus. So, from bottom up you have Marcellus, 3000' of gray shale, then the upper formations, then your water table.
In the past, exploration had targetted these shallow sand formations which only had a few hundred feet of impermeable shale above it - then the water table above. These shallow sand formations have been hydraulically fractured for the past 40 years in the appalachian basin, right under your water table (separated by only a few hundred feet of shale) - yet you did not hear of a single instance of water contamination during those years.
That was only with a few hundred feet of impermeable shale above the fractured zone which was sufficient to keep the fracture fluids seperated from the water table above.
The Marcellus shale is overlain by 3-4 THOUSAND feet of impermeable shale. Fracture treatments can grow up and out of the Marcellus, but upper limits of this growth is 1000', while the majority of the induced fractures are concentrated within the first 500' of the initiation down below. So, worst case scenario you have 2-3 thousand feet of impermeable shale which acts as a barrier to the surficial 1000' which may have your water-bearing formations.
It is absolutely impossible to fracture 6000' of rock. It is impossible to frack over 1000' in fact. Therefore, there is MORE than enough barrier to inhibit flow upwards through the rock, and into water tables.
You need to get your arguments in line with what is actually debatable. The only pathway for hydrocarbons or frack fluids to travel upwards is the borehole itself - not the formation. If you're arguing about fluids flowing upwards and outside of the casing - maybe you have a case (you dont, but it is more reasonable I suppose).
Please read the DEP 2004 study on hydraulic fracturing in coalbed methane wells - wells that were right next to, or actually within water table zones. There were ZERO cases of water contamination due to the subsurface flow of fracture fluids... and that was basically fracking at the surface.
The reason your argument is so misleaded is because this technology had been used for 40 years in upper zones which were much more dangerous than where the industry is today - 3000-7000' below the surface. Where were you then? Where were the "contaminations" when they were fracking right below your water table.
The funny thing is, is that a study had already been done on the more dangerous stuff (shallow coalbed methane hydrofracking), yet resulted in zero harm. Why would you ever think there would be a problem fracking the deeper stuff which has 30X more impermeable rock above?
I'll tell you why, it is because you environmentalists are newbies to this, and are trying to reinvent the wheel as if the INDUSTRY is new to these processes. In reality, this debate has already been had, and has been proven safe in reservoirs far more dangerous than the Marcellus shale.
Here is the study:
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/wells_coalbedmethanestudy.html
Download one of those pdfs.
The subsurface migration of fluids upwards into water tables is such a non-issue it is laughable. Surficial maintenence of flowback and containment of fluids - okay, but the actual process of hydraulically fracturing rocks in the subsurface is safe.
Your concerns are not even close to being legit.
-
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on
-
the deepest water table level will only be at about 1000 feet anyway or it becomes uneconomical.. and maintenance will be astronomic...
Top Content
Latest Activity
© 2025 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
