Compressed Natural Gas for vehicles

Does anyone know if these gas companies and subcontractors use any compressed natural gas vehicles or do they just fill up with foreign diesel fuel?  US has Boon Pickens and corporations asking for governmental support and funding for CNG, one has to ask where the leadership is on this topic.

Views: 13070

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

2s72s0k9mm8gdPermalink Reply by 2s72s0k9mm8gd on May 13, 2012 at 3:59am

You must be really distraught over the household chemicals being flushed into your neighbors' septic systems then , huh. Surely you don't use any of these nasties , do you?

Permalink Reply by Bill F. on May 13, 2012 at 4:10am

No comparison ....maybe a few gallons compare to 25000 gallons of chemical for each frac job X 6 (or more equals ) 150000 gallons of chemical per square mile .Mile after mile in the area .Pretty big septic tank right ......!before you comment do some research !

Permalink Reply by familyman on May 13, 2012 at 5:02am

Dag gone it, that is bullpucky. I don't even want to talk to you anymore, but your statements areso foolish you bait me into talking. In chemistry we call it titration. However, you can think of it as dilution. I used your numbers in one of my responses, and i should have known better, the numbers were wrong, but even if the numbers are right, they would be so diluted. Household chemicals seriously affect the quality of water, and even the medicines people take and then release from their bodies go into a sewage treatment plant and have made significant changes in life on this earth. Specifically, as much as 80% of the male bass in the Potomac river develop eggs as if they are female, a result believed to be from the use of birth control pills from women in the DC area. The amount of Prozac that people take and dispose from their bodies are attributing to changes in marine life. They are "happy fish". Now i don't normally advocate Prozac, well I won't go there. If i use your high numbers of gallons of water use, then the gallons of chemicals used, it is exactly what XTO states, .49% of chemicals. Now if they would share the molality/molarity with me, i could perform titration numbers and we could see the real significance of it, otherwise your numbers are absolutely meaningless. I do have concerns about the disposal or the possible infiltration into water tables, but oddly enough thats not what you state. I have seen the process to protect the water tables, and my license in that area of expertise gives me alot of confidence in the required procedures. I still advocate testing water before and after drilling is conducted. In the meanwhile, stop arguing for the sake of arguing. Everyone else on this site seems to want to learn, so that problems can be avoided, and when not avoided mitigated, but you want to fight with us, and can't even provide documentation, but silly Facebook stories. Then you clearly tell us you are too busy fighting the drilling companies to share your documentation. I don't believe you, but if you are fighting them please share the civil docket number, and i will look at your arguments, and see if you have merit, but i really doubt you do anything but sit on the computer wasting your life by being an angry man.

Sorry to the rest of the readers that i failed to use proper form, i just get so riled up by this silly talk.

Permalink Reply by Bill F. on May 13, 2012 at 3:28pm

Reading through your extended BS above I see you don't think 25000 gallons of chemical (150000 gallons per square mile ) is significant . well I do even though it is diluted to your numbers .It's still going into the subsurface .As far as docket numbers I don't see your  connection between that and complaints to the DEP,EPA,and PUC that I have made on more then one occasion .I keep the cell # of the head inspector for North Central DEP right in my wallet (you probably don't believe this  good !The links provided were for reference only to show a point .If you don't like my comments don't answer them .It wasn't posted for you anyhow !

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on May 14, 2012 at 3:22am

Typical frac fluid composition for a Marcellus well

http://www.talismanusa.com/upload/editor/File/Typical%20fracturing%...

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on May 14, 2012 at 2:56am

Everything is "poison" if the concentrations are high enough. You can drink enough clean water to kill you if you try hard enough. The ethylene glycol ( common antifreeze for those of you from Rio Linda) in frac fluid is a friction reducer. Fracfocus.org shows a typical .088% concentration for friction reducers. This same chemical used as antifreeze in automobiles, trucks, agricultural, and construction equipment is used in a 50% concentration, nearly 570 times more concentrated than in frac water. Which is more likely spilled on the surface every day? Which is more likely to flow down into our drinking water aquifer?

Permalink Reply by Bill F. on May 13, 2012 at 3:21am

Here's another link for you .Got plenty of them and remember I live among this process !  http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatc...

Permalink Reply by Moe on May 13, 2012 at 3:45am

While you may "live among this process", that doesn't mean that you have any grasp of the facts involved with it.

Chip Northrup? What a joke! He could easily qualify to be the New York State idiot.

If, as you say, you spend so much time researching natural gas, you are either trying to read well beyond your ability to understand or you are very selectively looking for only fabricated information that fits your agenda.

Regarding the comments about the dust from silica sand being used as a proppant in the fracing process, perhaps you should review the MSDS data provided by major suppliers of silica sand. If you do, and if you can understand the gradation breakdown, you will find that even the finest product has no component which passes a 100 sieve - about 0.006" - or the same size as is found on 100 grit sandpaper. This is not a size that could be remotely termed 'dust'. Dust would likely fall into the 400-600 grit (sieve) range. Silica sand that is produced for industrial purposes is at least double-washed, if not triple-washed, in the quarry where it is produced to remove the fine dust particles. Further, it is very unlikely that a fracing contractor could or would tolerate any dust in the proppant, as the idea is to 'prop' open the newly-created fractures in the shale formation to promote the release of the stored natural gas, in which process fine dust particles would plug rather than open the fractures.

Permalink Reply by Bill F. on May 13, 2012 at 4:04am

First of all who are you to call anybody a joke and an idiot especially a guy that worked in the field ? I might not know all there is to know but am constantly learning everyday .I have read MSDS sheets on silica sand ! I have documented lots of frac jobs with silica sand dust  (by the way I have seen it spread for more then a mile and around the house of people living there!This sand used does create dust ...!

Permalink Reply by Bill F. on May 13, 2012 at 4:06am

Moe here's one report for you to disbelieve ....  http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=11877X696813&site=gomarcellussh...

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on May 13, 2012 at 4:31am

Regarding Silica Sand Dust, many of our children are exposed to it, particularly in the summer months. I myself was exposed to it as a child, as I spent hours playing in my sandbox. I cannot help but shiver in fear every time I walk down the far end aisle of Home Depot and see that insidious pallet of death (aka Play Sand), for I know that each 50# sack is shock full of deadly SSD (Silica Sand Dust).

Every year many of our fellow citizens (young and old alike) succumb to morbidity from submersion asphyxia, causing premature death and pain to grieving families; yet I do not hear anyone call for outlawing the use of dihydrogen monoxide. Where is the outrage, where is the justice?

JS

Permalink Reply by familyman on May 13, 2012 at 5:08am

I love it Jack, that dihydrogen monoxide is pure toxic to the human body, even if we are mostly composed of it.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service