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

http://holisticremediesnews.com/2144/le-roy-mystery-disease-update-...

The symptoms the children at LeRoy High School in LeRoy New York are suffering from are very similar to the neurological symptoms shown in the movie "Split Estate".   The movie documents what citizens in Rocky Mountain States have been living with for years, primarily in the towns of Dish Texas and Denton Texas.

Views: 11723

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ragnars Repo on February 12, 2012 at 2:50am
No
Permalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 4:07pm

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.

Permalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 15, 2012 at 10:35am

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

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

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.   

015334grltd9mPermalink Reply by 015334grltd9m on February 12, 2012 at 1:07pm

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!"

Permalink Reply by Howard Markert on February 12, 2012 at 3:13pm

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.

Permalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 3:56pm

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.

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on February 12, 2012 at 4:40pm

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!

Permalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 4:07pm

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.

Permalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 3:24am

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

Permalink Reply by Frankie Jo on February 12, 2012 at 7:08am

Mark - A solid and real analogy.

A marine deck machinery I once worked for many years back built a special mooring winch. Large steel cables, huge loads. Special circumstances, that had gone unforeseen by the engineering department, occured and an individual lost his life. A family lost a father. Co-workers lost a good friend... etc. That marine deck machinery company had insurance. Monetary restitution was made to all parties involved. Letters of condolenses were written. It was a VERY sad time for all involved.

The special circumstances were examined and solutions were tested and then implemented, retro-fitted to all machinery with the same flaw.

Did the world choose to stop making all mooring winches. Did our company shut its doors, putting a hundred or more people out of work? NO - solutions were devised and the best was made of a bad situation.

If the problem is real, examine it. Provide a solution. The "evidence" provided by the shock videos is heresay. CNN is as sensationalistic news organization that must draw ratings to get paid for commercial air time. I am NOT saying that watching the news coming from any broadcast service is pure propaganda. Everyone with an intelligent mental nugget must discern fact from the heresay.

Political propaganda is the root of all this crap. The politicos are right in recognizing this boon, the O&G shale production, will dampen the left's sandbox (The renewable energy factions). They are rightfully afraid the economics to continue to drive solar, wind and geothermal will not make any sense and further development in that industry will come to a standstill. SOLYNDRA!!!! The Obamastration will continue to invent new carbon use taxes. He needs to go and the left needs to come back to the reality that all this HOPE led to NO CHANGE!!!

Permalink Reply by Howard Markert on February 12, 2012 at 1:14pm

I actually agree with most of what you say, the problem we are facing is that the industry and the regulators who oversee them (hoping for a higher paying job after retiring with a public service pension) is that both the industry and the government are saying that the only way to do this is full steam ahead and possible water contamination and the people who depend on it be damned.   Bob Hagan's moratorium bill is just the kind of temporary halt that would allow for cooler heads to prevail and allow time for modification of the regulations and technology to progress thus lessening the risks and winning over the hearts and minds of more of the public.   Unfortunately many of the members of this forum have commenced flame wars against him, since they apparently have chosen not to argue against his proposed bill using logic.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service