EPA Again Says Dimock Tests Show No Contamination

Here is the latest on Dimock and the EPA:

http://eidmarcellus.org/blog/further-review-of-the-data-in-dimock-s...

Views: 2120

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 4:23am

This has nothing to do with politics or the right or left; it's about sloppy oil and gas well drilling.

Jim ShoosPermalink Reply by Jim Shoos on March 19, 2012 at 7:47am

Your link reads a whole lot like the original press coming out of Dimock... shoot first and ask questions later when it comes to potential drilling transgressions.  Couldn't help but notice that none of the "suspect" CHK wells have ever been fracked, so we really can't point to fracking as being the "culprit" for this methane migration can we?  So, for the sake of argument lets just assume that drilling down through shallow gas formations causes some amount of this shallow gas to migrate through naturally occurring fractures in the rocks... simply call it a result of disturbing the shallow gas intervals.  No negligence is involved, nothing wrong with the casing or the cement job on the Marcellus well... what liability does the drilling company have, what liability (if any) should the drilling company incur?  Every landowner is entitled to have his property explored for gas development should they choose to do so, and as far as I am aware there is no theory of "strict liability" regarding drilling activity that would eliminate the need to establish proof.    As a simple matter of establishing liability, a landowner half a mile away is going to have a heck of a time establishing a causal connection between drilling and methane being present in their well.   You can't just "close your eyes and wish somebody guilty"... proof is required.

As for the gas bubbles in the Susquehanna...I don't know how long you have been a resident of that part of PA (if indeed you are one) but many of the old timers I have met in that vicinity said they used to go down to the river and light the bubbles when they were kids.

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 10:53am

read the links. In the water well problems violations were issued due to leaking nearby gas well casings. The gas in the river suddenly appeared after a nearby gas well was drilled and the gas was identified as marcellus formation gas. If you do it right you don't get gas in ground water and water wells.  In almost every water well methane problem there is a nearby casing violation. 

Permalink Reply by David Perotto on March 19, 2012 at 11:04am

Ji,

Are you aware that 20% of all water wells in Pennsylvania have methane contamination? This is a naturally occuring situation & has been known for decades? This known fact is stated by the Center for Rural Pennsylvania.

 

In these articles, it is unlikely that a vertical bore is the cause, they have not fraced anything. The water wells are thousands of feet away.  Would it not be possible that these water wells have had this problem all along?

Jim ShoosPermalink Reply by Jim Shoos on March 19, 2012 at 11:12am

I suggest you re-read the links... it does not state in either instance that the gas was identified as being from the Marcellus Formation, merely that it was alleged to have derived from nearby Marcellus Wells... HUGE DIFFERENCE. 

...and like I said, the links sound just like the press coverage of Dimock.  The DEP also said that Cabot was guilty as charged in that event as well. 

Your statement that "almost every water well methane problem is the result of a nearby casing violation" is ludicrous.  I can personally refer you to dozens of water well tests conducted prior to any gas drilling whatsoever in Wyoming County, PA which showed elevated levels of methane.  The same "locals" that said they used to go play down by the river and light bubbles also stated that they used to take Mason Jars of their tap water to school, shake them, pop the lid off and light the methane that dissolved out of the water.

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 12:01pm
Jim ShoosPermalink Reply by Jim Shoos on March 19, 2012 at 2:52pm

Wow...really JI...that's the best you got???  An article quoting Secretary Hangar...that was so one year ago.  Is there anything recent regarding the situation.  NO... allegations make front page news.  Exculpatory articles are buried in the back pages of the sports section.  Typical anti drilling tactics.

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 12:51pm
Jim ShoosPermalink Reply by Jim Shoos on March 19, 2012 at 2:54pm

...and another.... 2010 article that was also proven to be a false accusation.  You might try to get a subscription to newspapers that are published in the last 12 months.  Or is reading recycled newspaper another one of your environmentalist credo's???

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 4:54pm

This is from today times tribune... march 19,2012

http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/dep-asks-gas-driller-to-help-remed...

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 4:48pm

"The state Department of Environmental Protection suspects that bubbles of methane gas that appeared in the Susquehanna River in Bradford County last week resulted from natural gas drilling, DEP Secretary John Hanger said Tuesday."

Permalink Reply by ji on March 19, 2012 at 2:09pm

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service