Posted on 08/03/2010 9:14:32 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
Shale Gas has the potential to bring manifold benefits to Americans: cheap and plentiful, relatively green and clean burning, located in vast swaths underneath our feet (and not offshore or in foreign lands filled with people happy to take our money but who also hate us and who can who can turn the spigot off at will).
All good reasons in Majority Leader Harry Reid's mind to sabotage our tapping of this vast reserve of energy:
The fight over the Senate offshore drilling "spill bill" shifted Wednesday from the Gulf of Mexico to the mountains of western Pennsylvania, as Republicans slammed the last-minute inclusion of language to regulate a controversial technique to extract onshore natural gas.Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) added the language last night requiring natural gas drillers to disclose the chemicals they pump into the ground as part of the hydraulic fracturing, or hydro-fracking, process.
Republicans are wary of the addition, which comes on page 404 of the 409-page spill response bill Reid wants the Senate to take up before the recess. GOP objections to any portion of the larger bill could stall its progress, since it appears likely that Reid will not allow any amendments to be offered.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the new requirements could effectively end onshore natural gas production. He noted that some states already have hydro-fracking safety and disclosure regulations, but that taking the requirements national would freeze the industry.
Why does Reid have to pull these un-democratic stunts? Because he can? Because powerful Democratic donors (including the Democratic party Sugar Daddy George Soros) wants to kill off carbon and spend tens of billions of dollars on green schemes that reward their "clean" energy ventures . These ventures only "work" (i.e., become profitable for their investors) when carbon energy becomes very expensive (hence cap and tax); or when billions in taxpayer dollar subsidies are funneled to them; or when government-ordered mandates require utilities, companies and consumers to buy "renewable" energy. And when powerful Democrats pull fast ones behind closed doors to sabotage the tapping of a treasure our nation has been blessed to have in abundance.
A primer on the benefits of shale gas appeared in the Washington Post ("Shale Gas: Hope for our energy future").
A quote from the column:
Until recently, scarce U.S. natural gas reserves suggested increasing dependence on expensive foreign supplies of liquefied natural gas. No more. Also, natural gas emits about 50 percent less carbon dioxide -- the major greenhouse gas -- than coal. Substituting gas for coal in electricity plants could temper emissions. Finally, shale gas in Europe and Asia has huge geopolitical implications. It could reduce dependence on Russian natural gas and frustrate any gas cartel mimicking OPEC.
How much shale gas exists is unknown, but estimates are huge. The Potential Gas Committee is a group of geologists who regularly estimate future U.S. gas supplies. In 2000, the group's estimate equaled about 54 years of present annual consumption; by 2008, it was almost 90 years. "This isn't the end," says Colorado School of Mines geologist John Curtis. Globally, one study estimated the recoverable supply at 16,200 trillion cubic feet, more than 150 times today's annual world gas use).
I have written about the Democratic blueprint to derail the tapping of these reserves and here .
Fact: Creeks, streams and water supplies are being sucked dry for use in the fracking.
Fact: Water supplies are being contaminated from run-off and water table seapage.
Fact: Local roads are being destroyed because they weren't built to handle the heavy trucks that are now constantly on the road.
Fact livestock are being condemed because they "might" have consumed run-off from fracking operations. Fact: The gas boom has had a huge effect on the region, most of it very good but the downside cannot be ignored and must be dealt with.
They claim full disclosure of fracking chemicals will discourage innovation.
And in Pennsylvania, water supplies re-generate quickly.
Fact: Water supplies are being contaminated from run-off and water table seapage.
Please provide documentation other than anti-fracking propaganda.
Fact: Local roads are being destroyed because they weren't built to handle the heavy trucks that are now constantly on the road.
A nice problem to have in a down economy. Those wells will provide far more tax revenues than the road damage caused to drill them.
Fact livestock are being condemed because they "might" have consumed run-off from fracking operations.
There's that 'might' again.
Fact: The gas boom has had a huge effect on the region, most of it very good but the downside cannot be ignored and must be dealt with.
Yeah, but succumbing to left-wing anti-fracking agitprop is not the way to deal with it.
Forgot to add this. Here is a link from a local paper in the region. Most stories are positive but you will note there are issues.
http://extras.sungazette.com/naturalgas/
Like you said, many local communities appear to have not fully understood the effects on water supply and infrastructure wear and tear.
From post 14:
Every hydro-fracturing operation has MSDS sheets of all the chemicals used. Just because the list of ingredients are not run in the local paper doesn't mean they are top secret.
If disclosure were a real concern, fracking companies would not want the lists posted at all, I can just drive up to the wellsite and view the list as it stands now.
The companies are trying to avoid stupid, pointless and burdensome federal regulations - you know, the kind of stuff Freepers normally fight.
This is a state issue.
That's ironic coming from you, you said on that thread that restrictions on East Coast NG development would help drive up prices and activity out your way. Which calls into serious question your sincerity on this subject.
Here's long-term - there are no documented incidents of groundwater contamination by fracking.
You keep putting up this strawman.
thackney said:
Every hydro-fracturing operation has MSDS sheets of all the chemicals used. Just because the list of ingredients are not run in the local paper doesn’t mean they are top secret.
After decades of this processes being used, it has never been proved to contaminate water supplies in the actual operation.
Yes, there has been surface spills, just like we get spills of gasoline, pesticides, fertilizers and even milk. Do we stop using all those as well?
Jumperbones said:
Operative words; NEVER BEEN PROVED
That doesn’t mean it’s not a problem and won’t be proven.
This from Penna.
Water Problems in Susquehanna County
Posted: Jan 21, 2009 04:41 PM MST
by Kurt Aaron
Excerpted from the article:
“Some people in Susquehanna County claim all the drilling for natural gas has contaminated their water supply and in some cases, is making them sick.
“This used to make me sick before we had our water fixed. I would turn the water on and these awful vapors would come up,” said Jean Carter.
She and her husband, Ronald, said they had to spend thousands of dollars on a new water treatment system. They’ve lived near Dimock for 44 years and said, until recently, they’ve never had a problem with their well water. They told Cabot Oil and Gas the water problems started after the company started drilling for natural gas in the area.
“They said they absolutely wouldn’t help us with any problems with our water. They said we would have to prove it,” Carter said”
DEP zeros in on gas tainting water
Tests show source is a formation tapped for energy
Press and Sun Bulletin, Binghamton, NY
January 30, 2009
By Tom Wilber
twilber@gannett.com
Excerpted from the article:
“Natural gas invading at least nine water wells in Dimock Township has
been tracked to the Marcellus Shale or a similar formation being tapped
by drilling crews working in the area.
In an effort to fix the problem, regulators from the state Department of
Environmental Protection have asked Cabot Oil & Gas to vent its natural
gas production wells around the Carter Road area, just south of
Montrose, said Mark Carmon, a spokesman for the agency. The intention is
to give the gas seeping in the ground and collecting in water supplies a
means to escape.”
....
“Tests show gas found in water is “production gas,” Carmon said, meaning it escaped from the kind of geological formation commonly trapped for energy. The state has ruled out the possibility it was the product of organic conditions in shallow ground water that sometimes affect water wells.”
Natural gas in water wells has N.Y. officials on alert
Pennsylvania homeowners notified of dangers
By Tom Wilber • twilber@gannett.com • Staff Writer • January 25, 2009
http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20090125/NEWS01/901250335/1001
Excerpted from the article:
“Natural gas levels found in four water wells in Dimock Township, Pa., could indicate a broader, potentially dangerous problem, and homeowners in that area are being encouraged to vent their wells.
Following an explosion Jan. 1 that shattered an 8-foot cement well cover, four wells with unacceptable levels of natural gas have been taken off-line in the township.
In the past few days, letters and fact sheets were sent to about 20 homeowners south of Montrose, Pa., alerting them to the dangers of gas trapped in wells and encouraging them to vent them, said Pennsylvania Department of Environ-mental Protection spokesman Mark Carmon.
Meanwhile, DEP officials are analyzing tests from about 20 homes in the area to determine whether the gas found in the wells is from natural ground conditions or a byproduct of drilling operations by Cabot Oil & Gas. The Houston-based energy company is drilling dozens of wells more than a mile deep to tap the gas-rich Marcellus Shale formation.”
....
“Geological theories
“It’s possible, but not probable, that gas could migrate from the Marcellus Shale to the aquifer 6,000 feet above, said Terry Engelder, a Penn State University geoscientist with expertise in the Marcellus.
“The rock formations in and around the area carry a lot of fractures with them,” he said. “There is a slim possibility that if a company like Cabot came along, man-made fractures in the Marcellus could connect up with other fractures in more shallow units.”
A more likely scenario, he said, is gas from natural sources has been moving through shallow soils for some time, and residents are now just beginning to notice.”
,,,,
“Natural gas is not poisonous, so it does not present a drinking hazard, said Diane O’Hora a spokeswoman for the Broome County Department of Health. Combustion is the main concern.
Some are less worried than others.
Raymond Osterhout, a Wind-sor resident, has had gas in his water for years, he said, although there are no natural gas wells anywhere near his property.
To him, it’s more of a novelty than a problem.”
My Comment: While methane is considered non-toxic - much of hat assumption is based on respiration. But even then, methane will displace oxygen and can cause suffocation. Further, little has been studied on its effects in the blood, or as it is processed through major eliminatory organs.
Beyond that, once it is in a household water supply - and if not properly vented - it can accumulate and cause an explosion in hot water heaters, etc.
Further, benzene, toluene, and other toxics accompany methane in unprocessed natural gas.
Jumperbones said:
Chances are that it’s natural and there’s a slim probability that is could be caused by drilling, so what’s the problem with being upfront about what the process is and how it’s accomplished. That is unless the whole story isn’t being told.
Oilpatch Guy here and it’s safe for me to say that....
Harry Reid is a frac-ing idiot.
Brother Conservative, you forgot the first principle. If the liberals are for it, the smart one is against it, and if the liberals are against it the smart one is for it. Now, Harry Reid is trying to stop something, then you should know that you should be for it. Okay? Go read about fracking thousands of feet below the earth surface and report back to the Freepers. Bless you.
Many people go after those perceived with deep pockets. Hydrofacturing started in 1949. Do you really believe this has been a damaging operation all this time without ever finding cause?
It is interesting that the cases tend to surround the Northeastern areas but in area like Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and North Dakota where hydrofracturing has been used far longer, there are far few claims of problems.
Forgot to add this. Here is a link from a local paper in the region. Most stories are positive but you will note there are issues.
http://extras.sungazette.com/naturalgas/
This is nice if your one of the lucky ones to benefit from the windfall profits of leasing land. It’ll be easy to take the profits and move away. What about the thousands left behind to clean up the potential mess? Take the money and run. Positive stories from those who stand to benefit. No one thought Wall Street would collapse. We’ll just jump in and profit, with no regard to the outcome. When will we learn our lesson. Caution is not a bad thing.
Yeah, but when did details really matter?
How do you suppose these fluids (most of which is saltwater), which are injected into a strata of solid rock about 10,000 ft underground, finds its way thru two miles of impermeable rock to contaminate the water supply?
From your second link:
http://www.sungazette.com/page/content.detail/id/545449.html
“No estimate was provided on quantity, but no creeks, streams or wetlands were impacted...
There was no significant threat to the environment in terms of any surface water sources.
Then look in the freaking mirror. YOU'RE part of the problem.
If you so damned concerned about the environment, sell your house, sell your car, quit your job and move into a cave.
No electricity, no hot water, no modern conveniences.
If you get hurt, don't go the hospital because they use evil electricity.
Don't buy food at the store because they use evil electricity and all that evil diesel fuel used to bring the food to the store. Grow your own food.
If you are not prepared to do that, then STFU.
As explained by thackney in the post immediately underneath yours, there's nothing secret about these materials. They're openly available for anybody who wants to know.
So, ask yourself, if this is so, why does there need to a federal law to mandate their exposure?
The answer should be clear: In order to stigmatize the materials and rigidly regulate their usage -- eventually shutting down the industry.
This administration is waging war on fossil fuels. And they don't care whose jobs are lost...or what it costs the consumer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.