BajaNomad - .... th'FRACKing nutzanony thread ........

.... th'FRACKing nutzanony thread ........

Pages: 1 2

micah202 - 10-13-2014 at 12:16 PM

...edit....ah,well,,,,too bad.......bye-bye ozone

.after some previous discussion about the concerns of fracking in a relatively unregulated Mexico,,,it seems like there's a -real- issue -much- closer to home for many.......or does the EPA not hold any creds with the good'ole boys here either!?

Frackers are dumping toxic waste into California’s groundwater

By Madeleine Thomas
10 Oct 2014 7:18 PM n
California can officially add one more disaster to its rapidly growing list of water woes: The EPA just found that at least nine fracking sites throughout the state have been dumping billions of gallons of contaminated wastewater into its protected aquifers.

Not only do many of these aquifers supply drinking water to residents throughout the Central Valley, they’re also reaching dangerously low levels due to overuse, as many farmers rely on aquifers for irrigation and have been overpumping groundwater supplies as the drought carries on.

According to a letter sent to the EPA by the California State Water Resources Board, roughly 3 billion gallons of wastewater were illegally injected into aquifers throughout central California. The EPA ordered the report following contamination concerns after 11 fracking wastewater injection wells were shut down in July by state officials, DeSmogBlog reports:

The letter, a copy of which was obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity, reveals … that half of the water samples collected at the 8 water supply wells tested near the injection sites have high levels of dangerous chemicals such as arsenic, a known carcinogen that can also weaken the human immune system, and thallium, a toxin used in rat poison.

Timothy Krantz, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Redlands, says these chemicals could pose a serious risk to public health: “The fact that high concentrations are showing up in multiple water wells close to wastewater injection sites raises major concerns about the health and safety of nearby residents.”

The full scope of the contamination still remains to be seen — as many as 19 other injection wells could be sources of contamination as well, according to the report. Historic drought, top water officials who don’t follow their own water restrictions, and now widespread contamination of what little water in the state is left? The Golden State just can’t catch a break.

[Edited on 10-20-2014 by micah202]

[Edited on 10-21-2014 by micah202]

bajabuddha - 10-13-2014 at 12:21 PM

OMA, here comes the deluge.....

Udo - 10-13-2014 at 01:13 PM

That will be the next big thing for Pemex.

Bajaboy - 10-13-2014 at 01:20 PM

Some might consider this progress

rts551 - 10-13-2014 at 02:02 PM

The effects of Fracking have a direct impact on Mexico. Mexico might (or not) be able to learn from mistakes in other countries. This article ties it to Mexico

http://www.forbes.com/sites/doliaestevez/2014/06/11/fracking...

David K - 10-13-2014 at 02:27 PM

Thank you!

Now, for some facts (or at least the other side of the story)... (the following is just part of an article found here: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4275 )

The first thing to understand is that water wells are shallow. The deepest private residential wells go perhaps a couple hundred meters, though most are much shallower. Fracking takes place kilometers deeper underground; and in most places, the fracked shale beds are separated from the surface watersheds by multiple rock formations of different types. There's little or no transference of anything — gas or liquid — between fracked layers and surface layers; they're simply too far apart and separated by too much rock.

However, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se.

When the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission investigated the burning water of the well owner most prominently featured in Gasland, whose tap water was gray and actually effervesced, they found that his methane was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with any natural gas drilling. His water well had been drilled directly into a shallow natural gas deposit. Nevertheless, Gasland portrayed this as a consequence of fracking, which is wrong at two levels.

bajabuddha - 10-13-2014 at 02:30 PM

:lol:

how'd I know....

micah202 - 10-13-2014 at 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Udo
That will be the next big thing for Pemex.

....next big 'thing' indeed......I am highly concerned about the idea of mexico 'opening up' to fracking in a big way--especially since backroom deals and non-supervision ,non-enforcement of non-laws aren't likely to draw out best practices are they!?

...last time this discussion was on the table,,,'someone' was in denial about any problems in California,,,so I posted it when I saw it

micah202 - 10-13-2014 at 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se...............

...ohh,,nice edit/addition.......REALLY!?....there's -many- reports of people having ZERO problems with comtaminated drinking water before fracking hit their area.....this bafflegab is somehow meant to appease my concerns!!?-- -your quote is actually describing how fracking DOES CAUSE CONTAMINATION!!! :wow:

...is it that you think printing a few hundred words of bafflegab is going to put my concerns to rest!?put :lol:

micah202 - 10-13-2014 at 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Will you stay in love with Pemex no matter what it does, because it is a socialized industry... controlled by government bureaucrats ??? You have better odds with publicly owned American energy companies who respond to the free market and shareholders demands. You can choose to not buy one brand of gasoline to show your dislike for what they are doing. Not so when the government run company has no competition. Same is true in any industry the governmemt takes over.

....you seem to be confusing your unconditional love for the american energy complex with my great concern over fracking!....you're actually trying to convince me that shareholders in these corporations have -any- concern beyond profit....in Mexico!?!?

....I have great respect for other things you do here on Nomads,,,but oil industry fanman ain't one of them. :biggrin:

....can you please tell me how it's a good idea to disrupt the deepsub-surface of earthquake prone areas in the ways fracking does??

rts551 - 10-13-2014 at 04:36 PM

Septoid.com.....consider the source. Right up there with Blaze

Ateo - 10-13-2014 at 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Thank you!

Now, for some facts (or at least the other side of the story)... (the following is just part of an article found here: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4275 )

Glad to see you following Brian Dunning's work via Skeptoid. I used to subscribe to his weekly podcast and listened frequently. Be careful though, as it may turn you into a freethinking skeptical atheist! Just kidding.

Have you seen what he writes about Global Warming/Climate Change? He says it's real! I'd have to side with him and the scientists on that one. I'm gonna read the post on fracking (well stimulation) right now. I think this Skeptoid episode is 3 years old and there have been some new things learned of late.

Oh and Brian is heading to prison for 16 months. Just sentenced..............pled guilty to wire fraud that had allowed him to collect more than $5 million. Bummer because he seemed like such a nice guy when I met him at the Orange County Freethought Alliance convention a few years ago. Just goes to show you that you never know what's up in people personal lives.

I'm rambling here. Don't feel you need to take any time here to respond.

[Edited on 10-14-2014 by Ateo]

woody with a view - 10-13-2014 at 05:57 PM

why don't they go after the companies responsible for the "injected" waste water? why aren't they named? is this PC run amok?

vandenberg - 10-13-2014 at 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ateo
Oh and Brian is heading to prison for 16 months. Just sentenced..............pled guilty to wire fraud that had allowed him to collect more than $5 million.

Not a bad take since he likely will be out within a year. :biggrin:

Bajaboy - 10-13-2014 at 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by vandenberg

Quote:

Originally posted by Ateo
Oh and Brian is heading to prison for 16 months. Just sentenced..............pled guilty to wire fraud that had allowed him to collect more than $5 million.

Not a bad take since he likely will be out within a year. :biggrin:

Hope he enjoys his morning woody

Ateo - 10-13-2014 at 06:24 PM

Yeah, I think he was able to pay off his house with the money, but having said that there is probably a fine or he'll have to repay someone???!!!???

Ateo - 10-13-2014 at 06:29 PM

I found this podcast to be a fact based, current analysis of Fracking:

https://soundcloud.com/inquiringminds/47-anthony-ingraffea-t...

From the episode notes:

On the political right, it's pretty popular these days to claim that the left exaggerates scientific worries about hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." In a recent National Review article, for instance, a Hoover Institution researcher complains that 53 percent of Democrats in California support a fracking ban "despite the existence of little if any credible scientific evidence of fracking's feared harms and overwhelming scientific evidence of its environmental benefits, including substantial reductions in both local and global pollutants."

Three or four years ago, a statement like that may have seemed defensible. The chief environmental concern about fracking at that time involved the contamination of drinking water through the fracking process—blasting water, sand, and chemicals underground in vast quantities and at extreme pressures to force open shale layers deep beneath the Earth, and release natural gas. But the science was still pretty ambiguous, and a great deal turned on how "fracking" was defined. The entire mega-process of "unconventional" gas drilling had clearly caused instances of groundwater contamination, due to spills and leaks from improperly cased wells. But technically, "fracking" only refers to the water and chemical blast, not the drilling, the disposal of waste, or the huge industrial operations that accompany it all.

How things have changed. On the show this week we talked to Cornell University engineering professor Anthony Ingraffea about the science behind fracking—and had him explain why, nowadays, the scientific argument against fracking is more extensive. It involves not simply groundwater contamination, but also earthquake generation and the accidental emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

dtbushpilot - 10-13-2014 at 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by woody with a view
why don't they go after the companies responsible for the "injected" waste water? why aren't they named? is this PC run amok?

No Woody, it's because it's a BS article written by someone nobody has heard of. If it had merit the players would have been identified, the fact that they weren't makes it bologna. If they accused someone of it they would be sued and lose in court and they know it. Maybe I'll post something on the internet about how climate change is BS and people will include a link to it to support their beliefs, after all, it's on the net, it must be true....

dtbushpilot - 10-13-2014 at 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Thank you!

Now, for some facts (or at least the other side of the story)... (the following is just part of an article found here: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4275 )

The first thing to understand is that water wells are shallow. The deepest private residential wells go perhaps a couple hundred meters, though most are much shallower. Fracking takes place kilometers deeper underground; and in most places, the fracked shale beds are separated from the surface watersheds by multiple rock formations of different types. There's little or no transference of anything — gas or liquid — between fracked layers and surface layers; they're simply too far apart and separated by too much rock.

However, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se.

When the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission investigated the burning water of the well owner most prominently featured in Gasland, whose tap water was gray and actually effervesced, they found that his methane was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with any natural gas drilling. His water well had been drilled directly into a shallow natural gas deposit. Nevertheless, Gasland portrayed this as a consequence of fracking, which is wrong at two levels.

Walk away David, it's not worth it....

micah202 - 10-13-2014 at 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtbushpilot

Quote:

Originally posted by woody with a view
why don't they go after the companies responsible for the "injected" waste water? why aren't they named? is this PC run amok?

...Bollocks DT...it's actually breaking news ,,,with 9 of these waste injection sites shut down just in JULY ....good way to lose credibility to your whitewash if you can't even read the article you're writing off......can you not read??? :?:

micah202 - 10-13-2014 at 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtbushpilot

Walk away David, it's not worth it....

....'IT' being the planet??

....perhaps you're constipated enough that you don't care to do anything but belittle this concern,,,,but it sure would be interesting to hear what good news you have in regards to deep drilling and blasting into the depths of earthquake-prone earth

...take your time...this should be interesting

woody with a view - 10-14-2014 at 02:53 AM

micah, where are you getting this from? I don't see a link in any of your posts that why I asked my original question. then you state that these sites were shutdown? it sure would be nice to have all of the info so we could have an informed discussion instead of dodging your bombs from the great white north.

when you post a link in YOUR thread so others can read the story maybe then you can act so above us all.

[Edited on 10-14-2014 by woody with a view]

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by woody with a view
micah, where are you getting this from? I don't see a link in any of your posts that why I asked my original question. then you state that these sites were shutdown? it sure would be nice to have all of the info so we could have an informed discussion instead of dodging your bombs from the great white north.

when you post a link in YOUR thread so others can read the story maybe then you can act so above us all.

sorry,,,here's the source.... although you did not ask in your earlier post...''why don't they go after the companies responsible for the "injected" waste water? why aren't they named? is this PC run amok?''
.... http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/central-california-aqui...

.......not acting 'above' y'all,,,and didn't state that any sites were 'shut down as you're saying,,,not throwing 'bombs' either,,,,but looking forward to the rational discussion you talk of....let's get past the whitewash on this..'not worth it,,,indeed!' ......someone just needs to say why fracking is such a good idea for mexico!?

[Edited on 10-14-2014 by micah202]

Seriously? whatever....

woody with a view - 10-14-2014 at 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by micah202

Quote:

Originally posted by woody with a view
why don't they go after the companies responsible for the "injected" waste water? why aren't they named? is this PC run amok?

Quote:

Originally posted by micah202
...Bollocks DT...it's actually breaking news ,,,with 9 of these waste injection sites shut down just in JULY ....good way to lose credibility to your whitewash if you can't even read the article you're writing off......can you not read??? :?:

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 05:17 AM

...wow Woody...wtf!?
...you say you asked for the link in your 1st post but did -not-!

...I pointed out that 9 of the waste injection sites were shut down--not websites!....a pretty clear example that the concerns are -serious-.

...you seem to be much more interested in discrediting than discussing a serious situation for the environment.....

................'whatever' ,,indeed :yawn:

[Edited on 10-14-2014 by micah202]

Mexitron - 10-14-2014 at 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ateo
.

How things have changed. On the show this week we talked to Cornell University engineering professor Anthony Ingraffea about the science behind fracking—and had him explain why, nowadays, the scientific argument against fracking is more extensive. It involves not simply groundwater contamination, but also earthquake generation and the accidental emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

I can verify the increased earthquakes after having lived in Texas for a few years ( in Fort Worth which is surrounded by an armada of fracking rigs)---there's lots of them now, in a place that is seismically unactive. They are, however, generally small magnitude.

woody with a view - 10-14-2014 at 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by micah202
...wow Woody...wtf!?
...you say you asked for the link in your 1st post but did -not-!

...I pointed out that 9 of the waste injection sites were shut down--not websites!....a pretty clear example that the concerns are -serious-.

...you seem to be much more interested in discrediting than discussing a serious situation for the environment.....

................'whatever' ,,indeed :yawn:

[Edited on 10-14-2014 by micah202]

which sites were shutdown? FRACKING SITES! you used the word "sites" yourself. :?:

all I was trying to say was insert a link with your thread so everyone can start from the same place and have a discussion.

Sweetwater - 10-14-2014 at 08:56 AM

A significant lack of knowledge is being displayed again and that is due to ignorance. A little due diligence clarifies the issue. Waste water from hydraulic fracking is a known source of pollutants, several of which are highly toxic. If that water is not treated and disposed of properly, it will create an environmental hazard. Those are irrefutable facts stated clearly. And this reported circumstance is an example of that type of irresponsible and illegal activity. Those companies and those wells have earned the penalty of being shut down. I'm sure that further legal actions will follow.
There is no ideology debate here, these are proven toxic hazards that can not be injected into public waters, just like the fact that you can not empty your bilgewater from your boat or RV onto the street.

Quote:

Documents Reveal Billions of Gallons of Oil Industry Wastewater Illegally Injected Into Central California Aquifers Tests Find Elevated Arsenic, Thallium Levels in Nearby Water Wells SAN FRANCISCO— Almost 3 billion gallons of oil industry wastewater have been illegally dumped into central California aquifers that supply drinking water and farming irrigation, according to state documents obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity. The wastewater entered the aquifers through at least nine injection disposal wells used by the oil industry to dispose of waste contaminated with fracking fluids and other pollutants. The documents also reveal that Central Valley Water Board testing found high levels of arsenic, thallium and nitrates — contaminants sometimes found in oil industry wastewater — in water-supply wells near these waste-disposal operations. “Clean water is one of California’s most crucial resources, and these documents make it clear that state regulators have utterly failed to protect our water from oil industry pollution,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a Center attorney. “Much more testing is needed to gauge the full extent of water pollution and the threat to public health. But Governor Brown should move quickly to halt fracking to ward off a surge in oil industry wastewater that California simply isn’t prepared to dispose of safely.” The state’s Water Board confirmed beyond doubt that at least nine wastewater disposal wells have been injecting waste into aquifers that contain high-quality water that is supposed to be protected under federal and state law.

woody with a view - 10-14-2014 at 09:05 AM

^^^YES!^^^

David K - 10-14-2014 at 11:50 AM

Nobody here wants polluted ground water, or oil companies to violate the law or rules.

Oil can be obtained safely and must be obtained to meet the needs of the people and to improve economic and social conditions.

If a country has its own oil, and enough to take it to when solar, fusion, or some other energy source can replace it, then it would seem to be the most fair for that country to use its supply instead of another country's.

Every time we create a way to become energy independent and raise the standard of living, some far out group wants to stop it, put America down, and will make up horror stories to sway public opinion.

Let's have the facts and use logic, not emotional rants to obtain opinions on what is good for our country... and for the world.

If new fracking technology does pollute ground water, the land, the air, then I don't want any part of it. On the other hand, if it is a safe way to fulfill our energy needs and creates good, high paying, full time employment (as it has so far where it is done), then we all should be for it.

You want to go to Baja, after all... well, your car/ truck/ plane needs fuel to get you there (and to work to pay for your vacation)!

bajabuddha - 10-14-2014 at 11:58 AM

Great campaign speech, DK. Now get on the ballot.

rts551 - 10-14-2014 at 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Nobody here wants polluted ground water, or oil companies to violate the law or rules.

Oil can be obtained safely and must be obtained to meet the needs of the people and to improve economic and social conditions.

If a country has its own oil, and enough to take it to when solar, fusion, or some other energy source can replace it, then it would seem to be the most fair for that country to use its supply instead of another country's.

Every time we create a way to become energy independent and raise the standard of living, some far out group wants to stop it, put America down, and will make up horror stories to sway public opinion.

Let's have the facts and use logic, not emotional rants to obtain opinions on what is good for our country... and for the world.

If new fracking technology does pollute ground water, the land, the air, then I don't want any part of it. On the other hand, if it is a safe way to fulfill our energy needs and creates good, high paying, full time employment (as it has so far where it is done), then we all should be for it.

You want to go to Baja, after all... well, your car/ truck/ plane needs fuel to get you there (and to work to pay for your vacation)!

don't you think there is enough out there to start questioning the safety of fracking? Or do we continue with out question and then find out at a later date that irreparable damage has been done?

woody with a view - 10-14-2014 at 12:38 PM

isn't that what's going on with ebola? there are 2 cases now, when it gets over 100 (let's hope not!) just remember what ol Barry said on Sept 16:

"First and foremost, I want the American people to know that our experts, here at the CDC and across our government, agree that the chances of an Ebola outbreak here in the United States are extremely low. We’ve been taking the necessary precautions, including working with countries in West Africa to increase screening at airports so that someone with the virus doesn’t get on a plane for the United States. In the unlikely event that someone with Ebola does reach our shores, we’ve taken new measures so that we’re prepared here at home. We’re working to help flight crews identify people who are sick, and more labs across our country now have the capacity to quickly test for the virus. We’re working with hospitals to make sure that they are prepared, and to ensure that our doctors, our nurses and our medical staff are trained, are ready, and are able to deal with a possible case safely."

well that didn't take long! does anyone think an airport worker or flight crew can diagnose someone who isn't showing any symptoms as they pass thru an airport? how did a trained nurse contract the virus from the ONLY patient in America to have ebola?

when HIV first popped up it killed 100% of those infected. so this ebola is only 1/2 bad I guess?

Bajaboy - 10-14-2014 at 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K

Every time we create a way to become energy independent and raise the standard of living, some far out group wants to stop it, put America down, and will make up horror stories to sway public opinion.

So I'm wondering which far out group is against clean energy?

Oh yeah, Big Oil!

bajabuddha - 10-14-2014 at 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by woody with a view
how did a trained nurse contract the virus from the ONLY patient in America to have ebola?

...she forgot to gargle.... :lol:

Mexitron - 10-14-2014 at 02:40 PM

Quote:

With all the fracking going in Central Texas there have been relatively few cases of contamination. Of course nothing will ever be perfect and I'm sure a few of those gassy faucets are from fracking. I would though, rather see the US head towards other energy sources with equal enthusiasm. Fork over another 10 billion to get fusion off the ground! Then we have a 400 year supply of energy (as Lithium is needed in the reaction and that's the supply we have on Earth). But, in 400 years we'll be boldly plundering other worlds for dilithium crystals, eh Kirk?

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by woody with a view

all I was trying to say was insert a link with your thread so everyone can start from the same place and have a discussion.

...err,,it's in the post you quoted above..4:01am....shouldn't be too hard to find if you're not soooo busy trying to discredit,,,deflect or change the subject.......it seems -anything- is better than actually addressing the issue? .....here its the link again.... http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/central-california-aqui...

dtbushpilot - 10-14-2014 at 02:58 PM

Well, we finally made it home to Baja, it's been a lon few days but we're glad to be home.

I guess I owe micah a reply to his question about my reply to woody's question. I find it interesting that no one other than me offered up an answer to the original question. I was also disappointed that you (micah) felt the need to respond with insults and name calling but there is a certain group that I expect that kind of thing from on Nomads so no worries, as you were.

When someone asks me for information I usually like to try to give it based on my personal experience rather than quoting someone else's research, I'll try to do that when I have the opportunity to gather my thoughts. There is a big pile of bags and boxes in the middle of the floor and my sweetheart is giving me that "get off the computer and get to work" look so I'd better get moving.

In the interim and going against what I said above I'd like to add some information gathered by others that apply to some of the conversation in this post.

For some information on who owns oil companies look here:
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ir_11.htm

For something about oil companies investment in alternative energy look here:
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/bp-worldwide/...

For some general information about the role of oil companies and what fracking etc. is about you can find some interesting stuff here:
http://www.energytomorrow.org/

And for some general straight talk about what a company (including oil companies) is in business to do there is something here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorensteffy/2013/06/28/alternati...

I feel that I need to give fair warning: Those who think that big oil is owned by fat cats on wall street, that taxing big oil hurts those fat cats, that oil companies are afraid of and hate alternative energy sources, that big oil doesn't care about the environment just the bottom line and many other liberal talking points probably won't read any of this stuff and if you do you will either be better informed or you will claw your eyes out half way through it.

David K - 10-14-2014 at 03:07 PM

Thank you (DT) David!

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sweetwater
A significant lack of knowledge is being displayed again and that is due to ignorance. A little due diligence clarifies the issue. Waste water from hydraulic fracking is a known source of pollutants, several of which are highly toxic. If that water is not treated and disposed of properly, it will create an environmental hazard. Those are irrefutable facts stated clearly. And this reported circumstance is an example of that type of irresponsible and illegal activity. Those companies and those wells have earned the penalty of being shut down. I'm sure that further legal actions will follow.
There is no ideology debate here, these are proven toxic hazards that can not be injected into public waters, just like the fact that you can not empty your bilgewater from your boat or RV onto the street.

...thanks for actually reading the article and making thoughtful comments.

....my concern overall is how fracking has quickly become the new goldrush,,but unlike golddigging,,the quest for natural gas blasts relatively deep into the earths surface.
.....governments all over the world are quickly embracing this technology not for any reason that makes long-term sense,,,but for the financial benefit that comes by way of taxes that will somehow make it look like they are running their governments well....this seems to be a rather short term gain for possibly long-term damage.
....I do not trust big oil to tell me how good this all is,,...every indication I get is that perhaps in some places they are not polluting groundwater,,causing seismic damage,etc but they totally lose credit when they undertake clearly dangerous, illegal ,and highly immoral practices such as quoted in the OP.

...Economically fracking is a boondoggle as well....there's many regions and countries that most of the natural gas is destined for foreign markets...up here in BC the intention is to make va$t amount$ of $ from importing to china,,,,but -already- the price is being driven down and contracts with other countries being signed,,that will for a largepart shut-out our production once it's online

....it doesn't take a crystal ball to look down the road even a few short years to see that the results of the fracking debacle will be a glut of lowcost natural gas,,,damages to the environment well beyond what's already apparent,,,and quite possibly some seismic issues we can't seem to imagine yet!

...there are many other ways to address the fuel issue but of course it would take imagination,,investment and discipline that's contrary to goldrush mentality

....edit...DT...I just noticed your post above,,,,I too have a few things going on,,will check-out your links later on sometime.....and I apologize for my language-it reflects the emotions that get triggered by my concerns --it really would be good for me to work hard to learn all sides of this issue in a calm and thorough manner ...I'll do my best to take care

[Edited on 10-14-2014 by micah202]

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 05:21 PM

Quote:

Every time we create a way to become energy independent and raise the standard of living, some far out group wants to stop it, put America down, and will make up horror stories to sway public opinion.

Let's have the facts and use logic, not emotional rants to obtain opinions on what is good for our country... and for the world.

If new fracking technology does pollute ground water, the land, the air, then I don't want any part of it. On the other hand, if it is a safe way to fulfill our energy needs and creates good, high paying, full time employment (as it has so far where it is done), then we all should be for it.

You want to go to Baja, after all... well, your car/ truck/ plane needs fuel to get you there (and to work to pay for your vacation)!

....well,,I'm certainly not part of any 'far out group',,,really just a nomad and sailor,,highly concerned with the fracking procedure as it's been being applied,,as are others. The very believable reports of water contamination -before- these recent reports of pumping toxic waste into the watertable,,,,and as a nomad am very concerned when I hear that these practices are going to be applied to mexico by yet more foreign interests.

....I have no interest to 'put america down',,,but wonder where the need for a 'better standard of living' stops in this magna carta approach to other countries and the earth's resources?...and who's 'better standard' would that be anyways...there's enough history to show that big oil and it's shareholders really just give a big F about anything but their bottom line growing.
...unfortunately,,it's only big oil that can afford to produce 'just the facts'-few others have the resource or inclination to prove otherwise....again history is proving it hard to trust those who are issueing the 'facts' in this issue.....hopefully some of DT's material will prove me wrong ,and I can rest assured that the population of mexico is indeed in good hands in terms of resource extraction......otherwise the source you quoted earlier only confirms my concern that extraction of natural gas by fracking can and does cause previously pristine wells to become fowled.....

....you say...''If new fracking technology does pollute ground water, the land, the air, then I don't want any part of it.''...but the article you quote is pretty clear.....'' we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata.''........how can you wish to support such practices as they've been proven,,,,and how can you trust the oil companies to properly self-monitor their behaviors and practices in mexico when they've shown such a track record?

...another question I have of fracking in mexico is in regards to the huge amount of water that's consumed in the process....last I heard,,water is not all that plentiful in mexico,,,or am I wrong again?

....I'll be a likely reply will be that all the problems are based on 'old fracking technology',,,and everything's all good now...there's hopefully some truth to this,,but I really am concerned that it's still not 'all good',,and there's no upcoming seismic concerns or contamination or water consumption,,or economic concerns for me and others to worry about.

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by micah202]

Bajaboy - 10-14-2014 at 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Read the links provided by DT, just above...
If you think there is 0 negative affect to somebody or some thing from any mining, then you are being unrealistic. Mining must be done, and you can bet it is FAR cleaner and safer than it was 50-100 years ago or more!

Gas exists and earthquakes or fault movement and landslides can release it. Blobs of oil wash on the beach that come from petroleum seeping into to ocean from underground, naturally.

I want to have a strong and rich America again, like the one I grew up in, for my kids and grand kids, and not the mess we have here today. A strong and growing economy with energy independence can return America to the top again... and that is where we can do more good for the world.

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by David K]

Why not renewable energy? Why should big oil get government handouts?

If you look at the list of largest companies by revenue, the top three are in oil and gas along with 6 of the top 10. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_re...

Big Oil owns our government regardless of which team you bat for....wake up and smell the tar balls :light:

rts551 - 10-14-2014 at 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rts551

Quote:

don't you think there is enough out there to start questioning the safety of fracking? Or do we continue with out question and then find out at a later date that irreparable damage has been done?

Can you answer this David? In your own words?

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 09:14 PM

Quote:

....I've looked through DT's links,but didn't find -anything- that isn't directly sponsored by the petro-industry....it's pretty hard finding neutral reporting on this,,,but I'll keep trying ,DT's info was a bit too much like reading a glossy brochure for a timeshare :spingrin:

....I guess I'm one of those 'extremists' that considers the 'strong and rich America of the past' and those who believe that's a current aspiration to be a large part of the problem,,, such a condition can only be achieved by subjugating a large part of the planet-probably a topic best for 'off-topic'

.....I'll put together some material and links from some hopefully more neutral sources I'm reading,,not an easy find considering the economic leverage involved --but pretty 'interesting' reading so far

....I really do appreciate you folks who've encouraged me to go from a concerned emotional citizen to a more well informed one .

.

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by micah202]

motoged - 10-14-2014 at 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
..... Blobs of oil wash on the beach that come from petroleum seeping into to ocean from underground, naturally......

I want to have a strong and rich America again, like the one I grew up in
[Edited on 10-15-2014 by David K]

David,
If you really believe that oil pollution in the oceans is due to natural seepage....I guess I can see how you think the good ol' days will return...

Just click those heels....see if you get back to "Kansas". :rolleyes:

David K - 10-14-2014 at 10:04 PM

Yes Ged, I don't make up stuff. I either am posting established facts, personal experience, or at least my opinion based on 57 years of living.

I lived on the beach in Del Mar for 7 years, and getting tar off of our feet was a normal activity. There are no offshore oil rigs in San Diego County waters.

Some links:

http://www.whoi.edu/oil/natural-oil-seeps

http://oils.gpa.unep.org/facts/natural-sources.htm

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/07/local/la-me-oil-bird...

motoged - 10-14-2014 at 11:09 PM

David,
Keep the blinders on....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_spills

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html

It's just a start of the first few links on Google....type in "List of ocean oil spills"....see what info is easily available.

The concern being discussed is the risks of relying on petroleum products and the cost to the planet....your lost america is a result of such thinking...

micah202 - 10-14-2014 at 11:32 PM

.
I'm still hoping to hear how it's a good idea to disrupt the deepsub-surface of earthquake prone areas in the ways fracking does??

...another question might be.... Fracking currently enjoys exemptions from parts of at least seven major national statutes, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act. If fracking is so safe, why can't the industry be held to the same standards as everyone else?

and here's an answer to your suggestion that fracking is a 'clean' alternative .....
........''It is a common assertion that replacing coal with shale gas lowers greenhouse-gas emissions. Unfortunately, this assumption can no longer be trusted. The process of fracking itself, plus the alarming methane leakage rates found in America's extensive natural-gas transmission and distribution network, combine to make gas a far greater threat to climate stability than its proponents will admit. The Environmental Protection Agency's current Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks predicts leakage rates of only around 2.4%, and natural gas reaches parity with coal (depending on your assumptions about boiler efficiency) at around 3.2%. However, a range of studies in recent years have called into question the conventional wisdom about methane leakage. One of the most recent, from a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research group, measured methane leakage rates from a Utah gas field at an astonishing 9%, and this didn't even include leakage from distribution and transmission.''http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/934#con_statement_anchor

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by micah202]

micah202 - 10-15-2014 at 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
So, your solution is to go back to horse and buggy for transport and burning trees for heat and cooking?

....well,,I realize you haven't yet given an inch on climate change,,,rather living in denial,,,,but all those prosperity years,,and that 'great standard of living'?--unfortunately it seems to be --payback time-- on that one...better go kiss the grandkids,,tell them how you saved a nice inheritance for them to rise above the crowd

....I did a lot of reading last night...Dave I think you'll actually be happy with some of my conclusions :wow:

micah202 - 10-15-2014 at 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Okay... some may have given up on America, but I haven't. I don't believe ex-politicians or movie actors or anybody who calls themselves a scientist who says evidence is conclusive. Science is the continued gathering of data and is not conclusive on future events that have not happened. As for energy production, we will continue to improve it and find new sources of it.

I do hope you had some good reading and I want to be happy for your conclusions, however.
Have a great day Micah!

...head-in-sand club,,,,indeed.
......I'll get on with a summary-it'll be a 'while' forsure...haven't figured just how many words I need to ......EAT
...in the meantime.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEJo7x9y3D4

wessongroup - 10-15-2014 at 09:26 AM

"Science is the continued gathering of data and is not conclusive on future events that have not happened."

Say, would this apply to Ebola ... just asking :biggrin:

As for science on this "topic" ...

http://www.pnas.org/search?fulltext=Fracking&submit=yes&...

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by wessongroup]

Bajaboy - 10-15-2014 at 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Science is the continued gathering of data and is not conclusive on future events that have not happened.
Have a great day Micah!

Are you really saying that science cannot be conclusive? Will the sun rise tomorrow? I suppose there is some uncertainty here but most would conclude that it will. Well of course Galileo proved that the Earth rotates around the Sun.

David, you are no different than the Catholics that called Galileo a heretic. While NOAA and other climatologists might not be able to prove man made climate change is occurring with 100 percent certainty, the general consensus is clear.

I'm sure you're still going to argue that the Earth is stationary...right :light:

rts551 - 10-15-2014 at 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajaboy

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Science is the continued gathering of data and is not conclusive on future events that have not happened.
Have a great day Micah!

or flat? the center of the universe?

dtbushpilot - 10-15-2014 at 10:56 AM

I fully intended to weigh in on this topic but I see that I'm too late. I don't have anything to offer those who already know everything there is to know about big oil and fracking. Please carry on without me....

bajabuddha - 10-15-2014 at 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Science is the continued gathering of data and is not conclusive on future events that have not happened. As for energy production, we will continue to improve it and find new sources of it.

Gotta be a quote off Ms. Palin's new $9.95 website. I guess oil was first discovered with a dousing switch, and initial refining and fracking techniques were divine dliverances from prayer. That quote has to go down in history. I still say, get on the ballot; you'll make a stellar politician (Earl Grey or plain Lipton's?). Maybe when California splits into new States you can be a Governor.... The Twerpinator! :no:

micah202 - 10-15-2014 at 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtbushpilot
I fully intended to weigh in on this topic but I see that I'm too late. I don't have anything to offer those who already know everything there is to know about big oil and fracking. Please carry on without me....

...okay,,,I wanted to be more thorough ,,but here's my 'nutshell' before I head out......

.....fracking in general has been around for -decades-,,,with some pretty early boondoggles....technology has improved -immensely-....seismic issues were mostly from blasting..but 'we don't need to do that no more'...and 'as long as there's no core ruptures' they figure they can stop contaminating peoples wells............and I buy that,,,in a perfect world there's no human error and no malicious intent,,,
,,,,,I can understand the desire to get out from reliance on Russian oil,,but why the huge need to go -russian- into such a huge scale so fast--any economist would suggest that's a big folly.
.....my larger concern is that of trust--a BIG hurdle to get over...how do I trust the same companies who are deliberately pumping contaminants into california's groundwater to go into mexico and have -any- concern other than bottom line $$$....the track record,,provable 'science' is not.very.good :barf:

......your thoughts???

dtbushpilot - 10-15-2014 at 11:45 AM

Well crap, I wrote several paragraphs in reply to the original article that started this whole thing and lost it somewhere in cyberspace. Maybe that was God's way of saying "don't waste your time grasshopper".

Lots of things are easy to get wrong in the oil industry if you aren't paying attention, don't care, aren't properly trained or supervised, paid to look the other way etc. I'm certain that the oil industry in Mexico is a mess and if it is left to Pemex the fracking projects will follow suit.

New Power

bajaguy - 10-15-2014 at 12:05 PM

And maybe soon we won't need (much) oil.........

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/15/us-lockheed-fusion...

wessongroup - 10-15-2014 at 12:18 PM

Hope so on the "new power"

"This summer, driven partially by North Dakota's boom, the United States surpassed Saudi Arabia in total oil and gas production, making the nation not only the number one consumer of fossil fuels but also the number one producer. (China is currently leading when it comes to annual carbon emissions, although this country still has higher emissions per capita.) Around the same time, the Pentagon issued a warning that climate change, caused by unchecked fossil-fuel extraction, "will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions—conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence." A subsequent report issued by the CNA Corporation Military Advisory Board, a government-funded military research organization, went even further, stating that the effects of climate change—food insecurity and massive forced displacement, just to name two—"will serve as catalysts for instability and conflict."

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/10/inside-north-...

That the Pentagon has weighted in on this one, on the side of Global Warming and/or "Climate Change" as a National Security Risk .... it is NOT a joke nor something to be taken lightly, it would appear, at this time

But, then ... military intelligence being what it is ... I'm sure there will be those who may think they® don't know what they are doing ... :lol:

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by wessongroup]

Sweetwater - 10-15-2014 at 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by motoged
David,
Keep the blinders on....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_spills

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html

It's just a start of the first few links on Google....type in "List of ocean oil spills"....see what info is easily available.

The concern being discussed is the risks of relying on petroleum products and the cost to the planet....your lost america is a result of such thinking...

Ged, blinders is one way of stating that quite a few folks insist on practicing willful ignorance. In the face of facts and reality, they dodge and insist on repeating their same stances and opinions rather than examine the truth. It threatens them at a level that requires fierce determination to center themselves with what they want, not what is real. This forum has a group that fits that model as well as any I've ever encountered. They are self serving, self centered and mutually reinforcing. I don't expect that to change but it is good to see others who continue to evolve.....just sayin'......

wessongroup - 10-15-2014 at 02:40 PM

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by wessongroup]

bajabuddha - 10-15-2014 at 02:43 PM

I think this about sums up your stance, sweetwater. Pick your own favorite bullet-points.

From Dictionary.com:

LIBERAL (adjective)

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.

4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: "a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers."

6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: "a liberal attitude toward foreigners."

CONSERVATIVE (adjective):

1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: "a conservative estimate."

3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: "conservative suit."

4. (often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

5. (initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism.

6. having the power or tendency to conserve or preserve.

In my eyes, ISIS (ISIL, IS, etc.) is radical conservatism. Who and what really is the terrorist threat here? Ain't Ebola. With safe drinking water as the most important single item on earth for survival, and the current lack thereof and depletion/drought conditions, extra measures must be put in place to insure without any doubt there is not going to be any 'compromise'. Period.

micah202 - 10-15-2014 at 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtbushpilot
Well crap, I wrote several paragraphs in reply to the original article that started this whole thing and lost it somewhere in cyberspace. Maybe that was God's way of saying "don't waste your time grasshopper".

Lots of things are easy to get wrong in the oil industry if you aren't paying attention, don't care, aren't properly trained or supervised, paid to look the other way etc. I'm certain that the oil industry in Mexico is a mess and if it is left to Pemex the fracking projects will follow suit.

...darn...sorry to hear that good fellow...I was hoping you'd help allay my concerns.

....I remember a couple of further issues I read about that raise some further concern......as DaveK brought up in his first comment,quote in the thread....the companies have seen that some cross-pressuring is 'inevitable' at the best of times...it makes me wonder if -you- would be willing to have fracking in -your- watertable...or is this just a good idea for -other- watertables??

...or maybe it's that you don't use a watertable in mexico so ''it don't matter''?

...but ...but the BIGGEST KICKER as I see it is the issue of direct methane damage to the OZONE...generally it's considered to be 2-3%,,but in some counts it's been -measured- at 9%!! .....cowfarts indeed. :barf:

......but I guess that's not a problem if 'big science hasn't proved' there's a problem :wow:

..so overall,,yes I see that fracking technology has improved since it's early times,,,but for what we know,,,it's actually still a very -lethal- technology...by no means the 'clean alternative' I'd like to think it would be.

....I've kept a file of any references I've quoted,,can look up more details if you need

.

[Edited on 10-15-2014 by micah202]

wessongroup - 10-15-2014 at 05:27 PM

Dittos on the water .. big time

Even Ebola needs it ... at this time

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by wessongroup]

BajaRat - 10-15-2014 at 05:39 PM

This is Bat country damnit

motoged - 10-15-2014 at 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bajabuddha
I think this about sums up your stance, sweetwater. Pick your own favorite bullet-points. ...

Guys,

I didn't take SW's comment as a disagreement as much as a more eloquent way of expressing my thought.....

...and am not being politically as partisan here as I tend to be at times with the "Lib VS Cons" rap.

I am not beating the political horse to death this time....just the ecological horse :biggrin:

I see humans as a virus on this blue planet....and have stated that before....with some distinctions being made re: symbiotic VS parasitic relationships.

Too bad this species of animals hasn't evolved as much as we are hoping it can....

Baja is my reprieve.....fish tacos and dusty trails with some good folks.... :saint:

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by motoged]

woody with a view - 10-15-2014 at 05:55 PM

hey Ged, i'll pave the way for you next week! surf will be pumping, water is unusually warm so i'll do my best to leave a bunch of fish for you!

motoged - 10-15-2014 at 06:01 PM

Way cool, Woody :light:

The shipping place sent an e-mail saying the T-shirts arrived....will pick them up on Saturday.

I will be in Baja from Dec 14 - Jan 10th ....give or take....will be hanging in Asuncion and BoLA in that time....would be good to have a visit if you are in the barrios.

Hope you have a SWELL time.....after the morning sesenta y nueve reading

dtbushpilot - 10-15-2014 at 08:12 PM

Well frack ged, it looks like we will be here when you are in the neighborhood. Looking forward to throwing some fracking roost and swilling some suds. Keep me posted on your eta in the east cape....

motoged - 10-15-2014 at 09:58 PM

DT,
my guys are rearranging the trip and i may not make it south of Insurgentes....will know in a week and will let you know.

The driver has pulled the frackin plug and I am a passenger. He is a very good friend who is employed as a contractor "non-destructive metallurgical tester" in the oilfields of Manitoba and Saskatchewan...and the work Enbridge has been doing over the past handful of years was testing pipeline welds on older pipelines. Their work has diminished recently due to Enbridge has apparently met the testing expectations (basic minimum???) and he has been laid off. My friend said there has been a 50% failure rate on pipeline welds (40-50 year old pipelines).

So he is feeling fracked up with the downturn in demand for his type of services.....which he prefers to climbing around in boilers in mills, etc.

So, I might frackin miss the south cape ....and THAT is fracked up, eh?!

I hope he decides to make the trip....

It's all just more factual evidence that the dependency on the petroleum industry fracks things up with its policy decisions affecting the well-being of Nomads and the general population. Fewer Baja travellers ripping up the desert, frequenting local taco stands, renting rooms, buying gas, and diminishing the cerveza and tequila supplies has got to be bad for the Baja economy...

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by motoged]

micah202 - 10-15-2014 at 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by motoged
....... Enbridge has apparently met the testing expectations (basic minimum???) and he has been laid off. My friend said there has been a 50% failure rate on pipeline welds (40-50 year old pipelines).

....ohh,,mannnnn...you're not 'appeasing' my trust issues!

dtbushpilot - 10-16-2014 at 06:11 AM

Jeez ged, those big oil companies screw up everything, I say it's time we put them in their place! NO MORE PETROLEIUM PRODUCTS! We can do it if we stick together, turn off the heater, unplug the TV, park the car, turn off the lights, unplug grandma's respirator, gather firewood....scratch that, burning wood causes global wa....climate change. We can do it if we stick together, let's put a stop to those greedy bastards once and for all!

Keep me posted on your plans ged, maybe I'll come up north and catch a ride with you. Let's keep the fact that I'm a conservative capitalist a secret from your friends, I wouldn't want them to question your true colours. (that's Canadian for colors).

Edit: I just realized that if we do as I suggested above we would have to push our motorcycles....please disregard everything I said. :lol:

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by dtbushpilot]

Mexitron - 10-16-2014 at 06:56 AM

David---I remember cleaning the tar on our feet after the beach too! Always had a can of turpentine by the back door. There is of course natural seepage---anyone who lived in Santa Barbara knows that as blobs of oil were floating around before any offshore rigs. For the tar on SoCal beaches though, as I understand it the oil tankers would flush their tanks offshore of SoCal and that was the source of our black feet. Someone put a stop to it evidently as I haven't seen hardly any for eons.

Just flew into Fort Worth last night, an Australian chap sitting next to me was blown away at seeing the number of fracking rigs over Central Texas as we flew in. He'd heard about it but had no idea of the scale of the operation. There really has been few problems, as of yet, with contamination of groundwater for such a large operation.

David K - 10-16-2014 at 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mexitron
David---I remember cleaning the tar on our feet after the beach too! Always had a can of turpentine by the back door. There is of course natural seepage---anyone who lived in Santa Barbara knows that as blobs of oil were floating around before any offshore rigs. For the tar on SoCal beaches though, as I understand it the oil tankers would flush their tanks offshore of SoCal and that was the source of our black feet. Someone put a stop to it evidently as I haven't seen hardly any for eons.

Just flew into Fort Worth last night, an Australian chap sitting next to me was blown away at seeing the number of fracking rigs over Central Texas as we flew in. He'd heard about it but had no idea of the scale of the operation. There really has been few problems, as of yet, with contamination of groundwater for such a large operation.

Sounds great Steve! Viva Fracking and Energy Independence!

David K - 10-16-2014 at 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtbushpilot
Jeez ged, those big oil companies screw up everything, I say it's time we put them in their place! NO MORE PETROLEIUM PRODUCTS! We can do it if we stick together, turn off the heater, unplug the TV, park the car, turn off the lights, unplug grandma's respirator, gather firewood....scratch that, burning wood causes global wa....climate change. We can do it if we stick together, let's put a stop to those greedy bastards once and for all!

Keep me posted on your plans ged, maybe I'll come up north and catch a ride with you. Let's keep the fact that I'm a conservative capitalist a secret from your friends, I wouldn't want them to question your true colours. (that's Canadian for colors).

Edit: I just realized that if we do as I suggested above we would have to push our motorcycles....please disregard everything I said. :lol:

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by dtbushpilot]

Good one David...' bye bye grandma!' How about your motorbikes powered by wind or solar? :lol:

Mexitron - 10-16-2014 at 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K

Quote:

Sounds great Steve! Viva Fracking and Energy Independence!

Its a good thing for us to be producing our own oil but I do wish we would parley the benefits (ie-profits) into alternate sources of energy as the fracking boom won't last forever and we don't need more foreign hostilities over oil. Its really a travesty with all the sun hitting the western US that every roof doesn't have a solar panel----look at Germany, with a not very sunny climate, now deriving immense amounts of their power from the sun.

David K - 10-16-2014 at 08:39 AM

Of course... it will be a source for us until we have mastered other energy sources... Covering the desert with windmills or solar panels is not doing enough or efficient. We will invent or discover a new or better way to create energy. Until then, we have new reserves of petroleum under our feet, thanks to modern fracking methods.

motoged - 10-16-2014 at 09:38 AM

DAvid,
Finally, you get it !! :lol:

I like the benefits of petroleum in my life....and it's downside could be managed better.

I know my friends would enjoy your company (maybe the six of us could bunk at your new palapa on the beach for 10 days or so ????).

I have some conservative capitalist values as well....maybe that's why we can get along for the occasional moto ride ....or it's just because you are a good guy, politics aside.

The whole mid-east dung heap situation is the crusades being revived, with oil as a side-show/complication.

I am sure someone would suggest the solution is to frack the area and turn it into a parking lot...

Until then, I just hope there is enough gas for the bikes until I am too old to ride....to hell with the future generations....

Hey , have you seen the KTM electric bikes?

Quote:

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by dtbushpilot]

Mexitron - 10-16-2014 at 11:16 AM

Turning the swords back into plowshares:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/15/us-lockheed-fusion...

"(Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp said on Wednesday it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade.

Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said he and a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed's secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were now going public to find potential partners in industry and government for their work.

Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters.

In a statement, the company, the Pentagon's largest supplier, said it would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year, and build a prototype in five years.

In recent years, Lockheed has gotten increasingly involved in a variety of alternate energy projects, including several ocean energy projects, as it looks to offset a decline in U.S. and European military spending............"

It's not just about fracking...

motoged - 10-16-2014 at 12:32 PM

Articles from Globe and Mail:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/loonie-oil-prices-could-fall-much-further-don-pittis-1.2799880

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/natural-gas-switch-won-t-slow-climate-change-study-suggests-1.2800549

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by motoged]

MMc - 10-16-2014 at 02:21 PM

I think this might also work well in Baja. the US Navy is interested in both.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070913-burni...

Sweetwater - 10-16-2014 at 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by micah202

Quote:

....ohh,,mannnnn...you're not 'appeasing' my trust issues!

I know several communities in Wyoming and Colorado that are dealing with fracking issues just like this one....trust is not on the agenda.....hold them to their contracts and verify.....

Quote:

More fracking produces more open waste pits

by David Martin Davies Tuesday, October 14, 2014 - 14:40
The United States is on the verge of becoming the world’s top producer of oil, according to the International Energy Agency. But the oil boom is also leading to a boom in toxic oil field waste that can end up in open pit disposal sites. There are increasing concerns over the dangers these disposal sites pose for air quality. All energy producing states have to deal with an ever-escalating amount of waste. In Wyoming, there are 35 commercial waste pits and permits pending on six more. North Dakota shipped 1.75 million tons of oil and gas waste to landfills in 2013. And, while Colorado - like North Dakota - has been tightening regulations on the waste water resulting from drilling operations, the state's solid waste pits are still left uncovered. None of these states have conducted studies to determine if the air coming off pits is safe. A recent investigation in Texas by InsideClimate News and the Center for Public Integrity uncovered a troublesome gap in oversight by state and federal regulators over these giant pools of oil field muck. That problem is clear in the situation facing the residents of Nordheim, Texas, a town of 300 people about 75 miles southeast of San Antonio. Farmers and ranchers gathered recently at the old dance hall there to organize against what they see as an environmental threat to their town.

There have been multiple spills here in Utah into the city(Red Butte) and into adjacent wilderness areas.....but then folks who've never been to wilderness areas don't seem to mind either.....all good if you live in a concrete jungle anyway.....but that does mean you are downstream.....especially those in drought starved Cali.......

Quote:

It is unknown how much of the oil entered the river, which is the largest tributary to the Colorado River, the main source of drinking water for about 35 million people. It is also the habitat of four endangered fish species.

Willful ignorance remains willful and ignorant.....

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by Sweetwater]

bajabuddha - 10-16-2014 at 04:01 PM

I'm surprised "Gasland" documentary hasn't been mentioned yet. Won an Academy Award in 2011 for best documentary. I suggest finding it, and watching it. I have a CD copy I watch at least a couple of times a season, and loaned it to a friend who at the time was in Canadian politics battling the Big Guys and fracking in Alberta. Great film.

David K - 10-16-2014 at 04:05 PM

It was mentioned in one of the links... full of false stories.

EDIT to add link, one article... plenty more if you search.

From a link off a site DT posted: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/09/10/frackin...

Here is what's in there if you won't open it:

A colleague asked me the other day why I refer to Gasland filmmaker Josh Fox as a “modern day carnival barker”. I quickly realized the reason for the question: This fellow is only about 30 and doesn’t know what a carnival barker is, or better put, used to be. I sometimes forget how old I’ve gotten to be, so I suppose an explanation is in order.

Those of us of advanced enough years remember back in the days when the traveling carnival would periodically come to town. In the little town where I grew up, they’d set up their tents and rides on the old rodeo grounds on the West side of town, with a midway bisecting the affair. In the midway there would always be a guy with a booming voice shouting things like “Step right up, folks! Come see the Bearded Lady! Come marvel at the Wildman of Borneo!” and so on, and so forth.

So you’d pay your quarter to get into the House of Oddities – more rudely known as the freak show – and it would quickly become obvious that the “Bearded Lady” was actually some big, burly guy wearing eye liner and a cheap dress, and the “Wild Man of Borneo” was actually some guy they’d paid ten bucks to put on a grass skirt, wave a club around and shriek unintelligible gibberish. In other words, upon closer inspection it became clear that the images you were seeing were sort of real, but actually not what they were claimed to be by the Carnival CCL +0.81% Barker, i.e., they were fake.

This is what Josh Fox does for a living – he is in the process of becoming wealthy by making films that contain images that are sort of real, but actually not what he represents them to be. In other words, he’s a modern day Carnival Barker.

Take the first Gasland film as a prime example. The main visual from that film used in almost all promotional ads about it and re-aired endlessly by a very compliant national news media is of a man in Colorado lighting his kitchen water faucet on fire. In the film’s narrative, our erstwhile Carnival Barker links this to hydraulic fracturing operations that had recently begun in the general area. But just as in the House of Oddities, the truth about the image is significantly different than the Barker had led his audience to believe.

The truth is that folks in that area of Colorado have been able to light their water faucets on fire since human beings first began settling in the area and drilling water wells into the shallow aquifer beneath the ground, which happens to sit directly above a coal seam, and thus is filled with substantial amounts of naturally occurring methane gas that migrates up from the coal along with the water. Colorado regulators investigated and certified that this compelling image presented by Gasland had literally nothing at all to do with hydraulic fracturing or any other oil and gas development activities in that area.

The recently-released sequel, Gasland II, presents a similar, seemingly compelling image of a man in Parker County, Texas who has the amazing ability to light the spout of his garden hose on fire. Again, our modern day Carnival Barker leads the viewer to believe that this frightful scenario was made possible by “fracking” operations in he area. And again, the truth is something else entirely.

You see, this image was demonstrated in a Texas District Court proceeding not long ago to have been a fraud, with the evidence showing the garden hose had actually been attached to the home’s gas supply outlet rather than a water faucet. State regulators similarly affirmed that is was not due to nearby gas drilling. Just another House of Oddities-like illusion designed to take advantage of the gullible and ignorant among us.

Phelim McAleer, maker of the film FrackNation, recently exposed the fact that even Fox’s claimed reason for wanting to make his anti-Fracking film in the first place was a fraud. Fox’s narrative in the opening seconds of Gasland goes as follows:

One day I got a letter in the mail. It was from a natural gas company. The letter told me that my land was on top of a formation that was called the Marcellus Shale which stretched across Pennsylvania…New York…Ohio…and West Virginia and that the Marcellus shale was the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.

I could lease my land to this company and I would receive a signing bonus of $4,750 an acre. Having 19.5 acres that was nearly $100,000…right there in my hand. Could it be that easy?

Well, yeah, for folks who actually got such a letter in the mail, it potentially could be that easy. The trouble is, as McAleer clearly exposes in FrackNation, our favorite Carnival Barker never received the letter he claims in the film to have gotten in the mail. When confronted about this one of many falsehoods in a recent radio interview in Aspen, Colorado, the Barker refused to answer on the air. Subsequent investigations revealed that Fox’s gas lease story was likely manufactured entirely.

The other main trait of the Carnival Barker is that, even though he knows what he is doing is at best misleading and at worse patently dishonest, he has no sense of shame or remorse, and keeps going to town after town, repeating the same cynical process all over again for the next audience of gullible schlubs. True to his Barker heritage, Mr. Fox also bears this unfortunate trait, as he continues to present these false narratives to audience after audience, reporter after reporter, witless C-list celebrity after witless C-list celebrity, potential funder (like HBO and the Park Foundation) after potential funder, even though he is fully aware of the deceit.

One supposes that everyone has a right to make a living in the manner in which they choose, even if it amounts to shaking down the unsuspecting segments of our society. But that doesn’t mean anyone is required to admire it, and it doesn’t mean that any of us should mince words about the true nature of the undertaking.

He’s a Carnival Barker, and nothing more. What he peddles in his films is as dishonest as the illusions in the House of Oddities.

[Edited on 10-16-2014 by David K]

bajabuddha - 10-16-2014 at 04:21 PM

... so did they take his Academy Award away??

bajabuddha - 10-16-2014 at 04:34 PM

And, speaking of CARNIVAL BARKERS, got your name in the hat yet? Left. Benghazi. Oh, brudder.

bajabuddha - 10-16-2014 at 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K[/I]
The countdown to moving this thread off General Baja Discussion is on, 10, 9, 8, 6, ...

Your first post on 10-13. STEP RIGHT UP AND GET A CUPIE DOLL!!! ... How many posts and paragraphs have been added since? and here (by your own admission) I thought you were second-in-command of this site.

Left, indeed. Just ask Nixon, John Mitchell (and the whole Cabinet), James Watt, Jolly Ollie North, and of course, Dubya Junior, Papa Cheney... THE RIGHT IS RIGHT!

Right?

5,4,3.... :no:

willardguy - 10-16-2014 at 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
No, truth is in no way an obstacle to praise or reward for the left.

The guy who said if you like your health care plan you can keep it... and the average family will pay $2,500 less... and the Benghazi attack was the result of a You Tube video... and the chance of ebola coming to America is slim... and if it does, we have in place everything needed to contain it STILL HAS HIS JOB!

bajabuddha - 10-16-2014 at 05:00 PM

:lol:

^ ^ ^ ^ ^

awwww.... he went offline.....

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by bajabuddha]

micah202 - 10-16-2014 at 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sweetwater

Quote:

Originally posted by micah202

Quote:

....ohh,,mannnnn...you're not 'appeasing' my trust issues!

I know several communities in Wyoming and Colorado that are dealing with fracking issues just like this one....trust is not on the agenda.....hold them to their contracts and verify.....

There have been multiple spills here in Utah into the city(Red Butte) and into adjacent wilderness areas.....but then folks who've never been to wilderness areas don't seem to mind either.....all good if you live in a concrete jungle anyway.....but that does mean you are downstream.....especially those in drought starved Cali.......

Willful ignorance remains willful and ignorant.....

...so sad,,so true......it makes one wonder how long these dinosaurs will plod the earth,,,,,and what will be left from their trying to keep the standard of living like the good'oledays :barf:

Sweetwater - 10-16-2014 at 05:36 PM

Micah,
You'll notice the attempt at deflection....it's a common tactic of the willfully ignorant to attempt to muddle the discussion by deflecting it onto another venue. The fact that fracking is the topic is not on their agenda. So, with bold bullying tactics they attempt to shout down the reality that they need to deny......and then stomp out of the room with indignation....

So classic and so ignorant.....it's like the chicken and the egg.....which came first, the lack of intellect or the decision to be willfully ignorant.....one leads to the other and vice versa....

micah202 - 10-16-2014 at 06:07 PM

.
....^^....yeh,,,kinda saw that ~ page 2.

...it's amazing how tenacious they are......I can only imagine their reaction if the frackers knocked on their door...in america they'd happily take a royalty and gleefully celebrate their new standard of living....in Mexic,,not so much . :wow:

dtbushpilot - 10-16-2014 at 07:53 PM

Thanks for posting that DK, I thought about giving first hand testimony about lots of issues covered in this thread but decided not to subject myself to the piling on of those who know everything there is to know about all of the settled science. My advice to you is not to waste your time, you could claim that the sky is blue and they will call you names for it. You and I and most folks that have done any research know that the Gas Land videos were total BS but if they fit your agenda they must be struck on stone tablets somewhere. I don't know anything about an academy award buddha but just because you get an award for something doesn't mean you deserve one. Heck, I heard about a guy who won a Nobel Peace Prize once that.........

People who have their mind made up about a topic (on every side) will gravitate toward news sources that support their agenda. The post that started this stupid thread was "BREAKING NEWS" according to micah straight from the "desmog blog".....really? the "desmog blog"? Is that where you look for your fair and balanced "breaking news" micah? What a bunch of fracking sheep.....

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by dtbushpilot]

bajabuddha - 10-16-2014 at 09:08 PM

DT, my mind's not 'made up' on the subject, but seems yours is. My mind says there's more to be learned, and more to be watched, and watched out for. Yours is the mind that is made up that all's well, fracking's all ok, and the industry that does it is the true impermeable layer. After what BP and their ilk have done, tres contrare. West Africa and the BP refineries of south Texas shores with countless spills, explosions, fines, penalties, and environmental destruction shows me who needs watching, and who's really telling 'the truth' and who's really the carnival barkers.

I trust your logic, you worked in the field; your credentials are sound. That doesn't mean THEIRS IS. You by your admission are a field worker, and that's great. I trust in your word and your feelings, made a very good living for you, and a good retirement (I take it). I had a good friend for many years that was pro-union, until he became fire chief of a major refinery (first Amoco, now BP). His opinion of first, the unions, and later the Corporate bosses radically changed, due to seeing 'beyond the bubble'.

Who's minds are truly those that are fully 'made up' and unchangeable? Who's looking for answers, and who thinks they really have them all?

Ateo - 10-16-2014 at 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mexitron

Its a good thing for us to be producing our own oil but I do wish we would parley the benefits (ie-profits) into alternate sources of energy as the fracking boom won't last forever and we don't need more foreign hostilities over oil. Its really a travesty with all the sun hitting the western US that every roof doesn't have a solar panel----look at Germany, with a not very sunny climate, now deriving immense amounts of their power from the sun.

Exactamente!

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by Ateo]

Skipjack Joe - 10-16-2014 at 10:51 PM

Quote:

quote]Originally posted by David K
No, truth is in no way an obstacle to praise or reward for the left.

The guy who said if you like your health care plan you can keep it... and the average family will pay $2,500 less... and the Benghazi attack was the result of a You Tube video... and the chance of ebola coming to America is slim... and if it does, we have in place everything needed to contain it STILL HAS HIS JOB!

What? You're going to blame Obama for the ebola virus epidemic as well?

You're incredible DK. Just when I think you can't be any more ridiculous you go one better.

micah202 - 10-16-2014 at 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtbushpilot
Thanks for posting that DK, I thought about giving first hand testimony about lots of issues covered in this thread but decided not to subject myself to the piling on of those who know everything there is to know about all of the settled science. My advice to you is not to waste your time, you could claim that the sky is blue and they will call you names for it. You and I and most folks that have done any research know that the Gas Land videos were total BS but if they fit your agenda they must be struck on stone tablets somewhere. I don't know anything about an academy award buddha but just because you get an award for something doesn't mean you deserve one. Heck, I heard about a guy who won a Nobel Peace Prize once that.........

People who have their mind made up about a topic (on every side) will gravitate toward news sources that support their agenda. The post that started this stupid thread was "BREAKING NEWS" according to micah straight from the "desmog blog".....really? the "desmog blog"? Is that where you look for your fair and balanced "breaking news" micah? What a bunch of fracking sheep.....

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by dtbushpilot]

....enough whitewash DT....I actually totally agree that movie lost a lot of credit when the producer or whoever wanted to ignore the fact that there's been occurrences of natural gas in water systems long before fracking was around,,,,but enough already,,,,I spent a fair number of hours doing serious research to get an objective view and saw clearly that the industry is willing to put up with 'inevitable' collateral damage in the way of 'cross-pressuring' into water sources,,where testing shows the actual fracking chemicals showing up--not just natural gas..... and of course the 2 to 3 to 9% of total product that escapes into the atmosphere

.....why you want to -try- and discredit the information is totally astounding.....'lost your papers',,indeed :lol:

....I guess some people just can't open their minds until it's just. too. late. :wow:

...how are the stocks doing?...and how can you even -look- at your granchildren?? :no:

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by micah202]

dtbushpilot - 10-17-2014 at 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bajabuddha
DT, my mind's not 'made up' on the subject, but seems yours is. My mind says there's more to be learned, and more to be watched, and watched out for. Yours is the mind that is made up that all's well, fracking's all ok, and the industry that does it is the true impermeable layer. After what BP and their ilk have done, tres contrare. West Africa and the BP refineries of south Texas shores with countless spills, explosions, fines, penalties, and environmental destruction shows me who needs watching, and who's really telling 'the truth' and who's really the carnival barkers.

I trust your logic, you worked in the field; your credentials are sound. That doesn't mean THEIRS IS. You by your admission are a field worker, and that's great. I trust in your word and your feelings, made a very good living for you, and a good retirement (I take it). I had a good friend for many years that was pro-union, until he became fire chief of a major refinery (first Amoco, now BP). His opinion of first, the unions, and later the Corporate bosses radically changed, due to seeing 'beyond the bubble'.

Who's minds are truly those that are fully 'made up' and unchangeable? Who's looking for answers, and who thinks they really have them all?

You don't quite have me figured out buddha. I see things from a different perspective than you, that doesn't mean that I believe that fracking or disposal of fracking fluid is totally safe and good to go in all circumstances. There is still a lot to learn, some of it will be learned the hard way unfortunately. It is up to all of us as Americans and residents of this planet to try to do our best to protect our environment and resources.

The US is an energy hungry nation, the world is energy hungry, we need it to survive. Energy producers and providers are doing their best to provide us with the energy that we demand. For the most part that energy (be it oil, coal, nat.gas, solar, wind, nuclear etc.) is delivered to our doorstep and at our fingertips without problems or issues, the vast majority of wells that are hydraulically fracked and the disposal of the fracking fluid is done without issues but there are always some exceptions.

Geologists in the US are some pretty knowledgeable folks, the oil industry employs the best of them. Do they get it right 100% of the time? No. The same goes for every other aspect of the energy industry, while they get it right 99.9% of the time there is always a possibility of failure due to any number of factors. We still have a lot to learn and we (all of us with our minds open) are learning more each day. We only hear about the bad things that happen especially as it pertains to the oil and gas industry. The energy industry has made some monumental screw-ups over the years and the media has gone above and beyond to be sure we are informed. The other 99.9% of what they do you won't be hearing about, no news there, it is what they do day in and day out to provide for our needs in a safe and clean manner.

The energy industry doesn't and shouldn't get a free pass when it comes to safety and environmental concerns. We should and do demand that they get it right 100% of the time. Is that possible? No, of course not. The products that they extract, refine and deliver are dangerous and toxic, there will be problems from time to time. The last thing that the energy providers in the US want is a leak, spill, fire, injury etc. They go to lengths that people that haven't been exposed to their procedures wouldn't understand. The media won't be telling you about that stuff, it doesn't fit their "big oil is bad" agenda. I can tell you from first hand experience that the oil producers take extreme measures to do their job safely. The bigger the company the more stringent their safety procedures.

I have witnessed lots of environmental messes during my career. I have also been part of the movement towards increased safety and environmental awareness. The oil industry is improving every day, they have a tough, dangerous job to do and they do a damn good job of it. Unfortunately, as long as we demand inexpensive energy their products will be necessary and in demand. I for one am glad that they are doing what they do, you should be too.

The science isn't settled on fracking, not by a long shot. There is still a lot to learn and we are learning more every day. We should continue to hold the energy providers to the highest standard of safety, it's in everybody's best interest. The science on climate change isn't settled either, we still have a lot to learn there too but that's a different (but related) topic.

BTW Buddha, while field work was some of the more satisfying work that I did, I was fortunate to work in other areas of the energy industry as well.

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by dtbushpilot]

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by dtbushpilot]

dtbushpilot - 10-17-2014 at 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by micah202

Quote:

....I guess some people just can't open their minds until it's just. too. late. :wow:

...how are the stocks doing?...and how can you even -look- at your granchildren?? :no:

[Edited on 10-17-2014 by micah202]

I'm not sure what you mean about "whitewashing" micah, I never said that stuff didn't exist. There is more than one side to the story, it isn't as simple as "fracking is bad, let's put a stop to it". The energy industry's job is to provide us with inexpensive, clean energy in a safe, responsible manner while making a profit for their shareholders (me and everybody else with a 401K or pension). They typically accomplish that. They are getting better all the time, partly because of government regulations. (not all government intervention is bad).

Interesting that you should mention the product that escapes into the atmosphere. Vapor recovery requirements have been implemented throughout the industry. I'm sure you must know this as you have done the research. Our company has been designing and building vapor recovery units (VRU's) for a number of years now. They are basically the same compressors that you would use to move natural gas but quite a bit more complicated as they have to be able to separate oxygen from the vapor before it can be compressed and pushed into the pipeline. When new rules are implemented sometimes it is done in phases with the requirements getting stricter as time passes. This gives the industry time to design the required equipment and get it delivered to the site.

Another thing to consider is that the rules are not the same everywhere. One example that comes to mind is Indian reservations, they are sovereign nations and make their own rules. Most big oil companies follow the same stringent guidelines for safety and environmental concerns regardless of the requirements on the ground but that isn't necessarily the case with smaller producers. It wouldn't be difficult to find a mess being made somewhere by someone and report it as "business as usual" in the energy industry if that is your agenda (as the contributors to "desmogblog" might do).

David K - 10-17-2014 at 08:39 AM

The really sad part is (I think) that we all want the same thing, ie. to be happy and healthy. How we achieve that is where we split ways.

For some here it is to demigod corporations and American business. To put their trust in government bureaucrats who are often thousands of miles removed from where they want to micro manage. To punish success and reward failure. To redistribute wealth with the result of making us all poor, and somehow that is the only way to be fair.

For the rest it is to have a choice and pick the best available things for our needs. To use our money to support business (which hires and pays workers and makes a profit which is returned to investors and pays taxes). To have money to help others, and improve our lives. To want everyone to have success. Instead of lowering people to be fair, let's raise people through employment and opportunity. Corporations must do what the people want since it is their dollars that keep a corporation alive. They must compete for your business by making the best product at the best price. The people choose with their dollars.

My advice, don't trust government... be wary of anything they do. We hope they do right or that they can't do too much damage while in power. Sometimes government does do good and only those things the Constitution outlines as its duties. Other times the government ignores the Constitution and uses presidential powers in dictatorial actions that are claimed to be for the good of the people but instead are for job security for the bureaucrats.

Power belongs to the people and government is supposed to serve the people to do only those things the people cannot do on their own: to protect people from force or fraud.

Pages: 1 2