New PA Study: No Link Between Fracking & Water Contamination

 

 

Article 

Transcripts

Views: 1385

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gasman on October 24, 2011 at 4:41am
Just in case others had trouble finding this......click on the article link above.  Great article and news proving what most of us already knew! 
0jw0dsu4txfuvPermalink Reply by 0jw0dsu4txfuv on October 31, 2011 at 10:19am
What we have been trying to tell you people since we started. The Bromide levels did not come from drilling or fracking. We use no BROMIDE.
Permalink Reply by paleface on October 31, 2011 at 10:34am
Homer, I think there is a few people that had bad wells for years,maybe there isn't deep enough casings or the casings are broken or rotted and surface contamination seeps into the wells especially in a farm situation and these people are lookin at the gas companys as a source to pay to fix it,deep pockets.
0jw0dsu4txfuvPermalink Reply by 0jw0dsu4txfuv on October 31, 2011 at 10:41am
I can imagine. What I have learned from coal mining which is very limited is they contaminated a bunch of water also. When we frac the wells the intial flowback water is very heavy iron ladeen so that makes me think that a lot of these undesireable chemicals are naturally occuring.
2s72s0k9mm8gdPermalink Reply by 2s72s0k9mm8gd on October 31, 2011 at 10:57am
I have to totally agree. Coal mining in these parts started back in the 1850's. My Granparents as kids (1900-1910) grew up playing in the "Sulphur Run" as they called it that seeped out of the spoil piles near their home. 160 years since they started mining coal around here and that "sulphur run" is still flowing! Most all the water wells in these parts are hard. I have a softener hooked up and my well is 175 ft. deep and went through 3 veins of coal. But a couple generations of my family made a living in those mines and you never heard a complaint.
Permalink Reply by grayhairedgrandpa on November 3, 2011 at 3:22pm

"... elevated bromide concentrations can, under certain circumstances, cause the formation of disinfection by-products that do have a health based drinking water standard. So, elevated bromide levels can create an indirect health issue as it may combine with other elements in water to cause carcinogenic compounds ..."

Since calcium bromide (and other bromide salts) are used in drilling muds, the finger should be initially pointed at the gas companies. However, chloro-bromo compounds (which could be carcinogenic) are only formed when drinking water supplies are chlorinated. I can't think of any instances where elemental chlorine is used in treating rural well water. This normally only occurs with city water supplies and municipal swimming pools.

Permalink Reply by buggs on November 1, 2011 at 1:22am

check out this site if you want to know what is in the frac fluid - I have posted this elsewhere but will share here just to prove a point.

 

FracFocus

Permalink Reply by DP on November 3, 2011 at 2:28pm

As a environmental professional who has investigated numerous oil and gas pollution incidents  it is true that the actual fracing process has a very miminal chance to cause groundwater contamination due to the very deep depth of the formatioin being treated. This is a misaleading statement since contamination is still taking place. Most incidents occur during the transfer and storage of frac fluids at the surface during and after fracing. The impoundments are prone to leak especially if built as non centralized ponds where no monitoring or leachate collection is required (bad DEP reg loophole). Other spills do and will occuur during transport. These surface  spills  are locailzed and manageable  in most cases, and the environmantal impact is negligible, because the volume is usually small  and limited to the site and local groundwater.  The more critical environmental impact that appears to be evident but not in the spot light are sites in production where poor design standards have been employed to handle the natural gas by-products such as distilates and brine water that are produced during production. The oil and has inductry needs to design well sites with leak detection, spill prevention, and corrosion resistent material. I have seen simple bare steel or  painted steel plumbing on relatively new well sites that may be intended to be operated for 20 years or more. It is unlikely a bare steel pipe will not corrode in a few years and leak significant voumes of brine. The natural gas transmission lines that is sold are built with corrosion restistence, why  not the waste tranfer and storage vessels?  There are tens of thousands of exisitng vertical oil and gas wells in Pa that are currently operating with this type of  substandard design and undetected leaks are occurring right now. This is why increased trends in bromides and chlorides already exist in watersheds with oil and gas productoins versus watersheds without.

Permalink Reply by George Brown on November 3, 2011 at 2:37pm

DP, you sound like a reasonable person and your ideas seem like good ones.  Like you, I've seen many old gas and oil wells built using carbon steel.  No question we should strenghten environmental laws to make them use stainless or some other more durable material.

I'm all for drilling and fracking but here's a good example of were we can do better, help minimize risks, and not kill the industry.

Permalink Reply by DP on November 3, 2011 at 2:46pm
That is correct.  We are dependent on this natural resource ane need it. Pollution prevention should be the focus no prohibition.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service