Fracknation

[hickslawns]

I am more concerned with the amount of crap the refinery dumps into the ground around here. I am related to a truck driver that used to haul 2 loads of caustic per day to our local refinery to dump into these wells. Let's just say, he wasn't the only driver making this trip daily. Why are they putting caustic in the ground? What the heck are they putting in there which requires them to put the caustic in to neutralize? That scares me much more than any fracking operation.

 

[bowhunter1023]

Well to start with you need to examine the word "caustic". If I take a tablespoon if crushed lime and drop in it 8oz of water, I just made a caustic solution. Even if we just injected water in these formations, the returns would be deemed caustic due to concentrations of "caustic" minerals/chemicals which can easily be absorbed from the rock formations the water encounters. Because we do use "chemicals" in the form of soaps, detergents, and mild acids, the produced water that returns to surface is caustic despite those chemicals being +/- 1% of the total solution.

As to why they are putting it in the ground, it would be because it is cheaper and they are able to so. If you want to place blame, place it on those who control the regulations and legislation that allows this practice to exist. If forced to do so, companies will then take those very same fluids to a recycling facility which is what we do. They are doing some "cleansing" to the disposal water before they inject it, so what is in the tank is not going directly in the ground without some filtering and solid removal.

 

[Ohiosam]

Nothing has zero impact so I'm not against honest discussions about issues involving drill/fracking. However those opposed are using scare tactics, blowing everything out of proportion ( just like the gun debates). Water use is one example, last year there was an article about the huge amount of Ohio's water that was going to be used. Billions of gallons per year sounds like a lot until you put it in perspective that the rainfall on a few (like 10-15) square miles will provide that water.

We use oil and gas, it has to come out of the ground someplace, it might as well come out of our ground.

 

[Jackalope]

I know better than to do this because you are always right, but I'll do it anyways...

If I give you a pressure washer under 5,000 psi and ask you to blast through 2 miles of rock, how long do you figure that will take you? FOREVER! And we only do that for 30 days, then get a good bit of the water back which is probably disposed of or reused. Huck is right when he says the majority of issues are caused by poor operating procedures on the surface, not from the actual fracking. The notion that water injected 2 miles below the surface, under layer upon layer of solid rock, will return to ruin your water well is pure nonsense IMO. If you beg to differ, I invite you to retest the 100+ water wells we have tested in Wetzel County, WV in the past two decades that surround the frack jobs we've done at much shallower depths than any Marcellus or Utica well. All those wells surround frack jobs that are 3K feet down and not once in the history of our drilling program have we ruined a water well from contaminants that can be linked to frack water seepage. All the instances of well water contamination were the direct result of improper operating procedures on the surface.

In regards to fracking fluids, we frack with 99.5% water and sand. We use a little bit of acid on the front end to "clean the pipes" so to speak. There is also some detergent and a clay stabilizer in there. So .5% of our solution is "chemical" in nature. Unless you consider the other 99.5% chemical sense water is a "chemical". But the notion that people are fracking entirely or mostly on caustic chemicals is a misnomer. It happens, but the vast majority of the industry is doing is the proper way and those who are not, are not properly representing the industry.

I'm not saying it is impossible for fracking to impact the water tables via seepage from those depths, but it is highly unlikely and virtually defies physics. If and when it does return to surface via natural migration through the dozens of rock formations between here and there, or some other remote possibility like "kimberlite pipes" (which are very rare and only found in areas known for volcanic activity whether it be past or present) we will all be long, long gone.

And to think at one time Asbestos was considered safe and a perfectly fine building material. Despite warnings and research of the dangers of Asbestos dating as far back as 1917 it wasn't until the late 1980's that the usage of it was banned and the full effects of it became known. The gigantic and very profitable Asbestos industry in America spent billions of dollars from as early as 1917 until the late 80's to coverup the health effects of Asbestos. They led gigantic PR campaigns, funded flawed research, made bribes and back door deals with politicians. During that time asbestos was used in virtually every way possible from brake pads to floor tiles in homes.. It wasn't regulated and the profits of the asbestos industry soared. Sound familiar? Hindsight is always 2020. Today we know that Asbestos is a very dangerous carcinogen and has very damaging health effects.. Eventually the companies could no longer deny it and no amount of money would cover it up any longer. They raided their bank accounts and disappeared seemingly overnight leaving everyone else to clean up the mess. But, even if the Asbestos industry had no idea that it was dangerous, the after effect was still the same. The end result was the same. Having no proof that it causes issues, is not evidence that it's ok, just as lack of proof that is cause issues is also not a free pass.



My usage of kimberlite pipes was just an example. An example of how we as humans proclaim that something is impossible yet time and nature prove that it isn't. Those rocks came from depths hundreds of miles below the surface of the earth. Yet today some African can pick them up off a riverbank. True that the last active kimberlites were over 20 million years ago. But just today are we understanding how geysers work. Analysis of the tridium content of geyser water shows that the water expelled from them is around 500 years old. Which is now scientifically accepted to mean that they cycle time of that water takes 500 years to make a complete circulation. from being expelled to making it's way back below the surface to be heated and then all the way back to the top again. People say that water moving upwards from a depth of 6-8,000 feet is virtually impossible. Yet diamonds have moved from hundreds of miles below the surface and water expelled from geysers have bee shown to cycle every 500 years through cracks in the earths crust. Can that happen in Ohio.. Sure. One of our epicenters for earthquakes in Ohio is centered in Ashtabula, and Geauga counties. The fault and rift zones in this area are admittedly not understood very well by the Ohio Division of geological survey. They "presume" the deeply burred faults are areas of weakness left over from continental shift. For instance, the Akron Magnetic Boundary under Summit, Portage, Lake and Ashtabula counties is speculated to be a fault in crystalline rock only about 6,000 feet below the surface. Earthquakes are nothing new to ohio and have been recorded as far back as written history can determine.. However in 2001 a 4.5 magnitude quake struck Ashtabula. Nearly 40 quakes above 2.0 were recorded between 1987 and 2001.. Prior to 1987 not a single quake had been noted in the area... The blame. Deep injection fracturing. Total building values in next door Cuyahga county is estimated at 124.7 Billion dollars.. You tell me if it's worth the risk when the risk is unknown?


The bottom line is this man. Neither side understands the full impact of fracking in Ohio. They both come up with research and data to support their agendas. But lack of proof that it causes an issue should never be used as proof that it's ok. And that's precisely the situation we have. And until the time that it can unequivocaly be show that it causes zero harm, caustic substances should not be used at all.. We were fortunate in the hindsight of asbestos that it's on the surface and we can clean it up.. Ohio's groundwater is nothing to roll the dice with.

 

[Ohiosam]

Battle of the admins.

rotflmao

 

[bowhunter1023]

HAHA. Nah man, it's all good. I said what I have to say on the matter. I've been around the industry my entire life and have worked in the patch for 6 years now. We/I don't have all the answers because some of the answers to these questions could take hundred, thousands, or millions of years to answer themselves. I trust the science of my industry because it makes sense to me and seems all TOO logical. Anything is possible, that I won't argue. However it is either be resource independent or dependent. Based on what I've seen first hand and what I've been taught, I trust we are doing the right thing to balance resource independence and environmental impact.

Hypotheticals are not enough for me to buy in to the fear...

 

[Jackalope]

HAHA. Nah man, it's all good. I said what I have to say on the matter. I've been around the industry my entire life and have worked in the patch for 6 years now. We/I don't have all the answers because some of the answers to these questions could take hundred, thousands, or millions of years to answer themselves. I trust the science of my industry because it makes sense to me and seems all TOO logical. Anything is possible, that I won't argue. However it is either be resource independent or dependent. Based on what I've seen first hand and what I've been taught, I trust we are doing the right thing to balance resource independence and environmental impact.

Hypotheticals are not enough for me to buy in to the fear...

As they are not enough for me to buy into the safety. That's the ting. Time will tell.

 

[Jackalope]

Battle of the admins.

rotflmao

Oh hush and go dump some more nitrates in the gulf.. lmao

 

[Ohiosam]

Oh hush and go dump some more nitrates in the gulf.. lmao

Since I grow round-up ready corn and beans no-tilling is so much easier. Consequently I have less erosion sending soil and nutrients to the Gulf. ickle:

 

[Jackalope]

Since I grow round-up ready corn and beans no-tilling is so much easier. Consequently I have less erosion sending soil and nutrients to the Gulf. ickle:

Yayyyyyy! GMO food for everyone. Choose your poison I guess. Heirloom with lots of pesticides. Or franken corn with less pesticides. Lol.

 

[Huckleberry Finn]

The bottom line is this man. Neither side understands the full impact of fracking in Ohio. They both come up with research and data to support their agendas. But lack of proof that it causes an issue should never be used as proof that it's ok. And that's precisely the situation we have. And until the time that it can unequivocaly be show that it causes zero harm, caustic substances should not be used at all.. We were fortunate in the hindsight of asbestos that it's on the surface and we can clean it up.. Ohio's groundwater is nothing to roll the dice with.

Ever heard of the Robert's torpedo? Dynamite used to fracture rock. Titusville, PA. Patented 1864.

Fast forward to 2012. Lisa Jackson, head of OBAMA's EPA. Aka the greeniest, dumbest president ever AND the world's worst political organization, ever. "In no case have we made a definite determination that the fracking process has caused chemicals to enter groundwater."

--

Oh, and Jesse was spot-on.

--

Finally, Joe, if you're really curious, here's some good readings for you. Anyone that believes that fracking is bad believes that Cabot Oil & Gas polluted groundwater in Dimock, PA. It's ground zero for the frackivists. All of the materials are here: http://www.cabotog.com/comm_surveys.html . Full disclosure. See also: http://fracfocus.org/, where companies disclose what is in their fluids (again, 99.5% water)

 

[Carpn]

The term caustic is thrown around a lot as a scare word. Hell, the lime farmers spread on their fields is technically caustic

 

[Jackalope]

Ever heard of the Robert's torpedo? Dynamite used to fracture rock. Titusville, PA. Patented 1864.

Fast forward to 2012. Lisa Jackson, head of OBAMA's EPA. Aka the greeniest, dumbest president ever AND the world's worst political organization, ever. "In no case have we made a definite determination that the fracking process has caused chemicals to enter groundwater."

--

Oh, and Jesse was spot-on.

--

Finally, Joe, if you're really curious, here's some good readings for you. Anyone that believes that fracking is bad believes that Cabot Oil & Gas polluted groundwater in Dimock, PA. It's ground zero for the frackivists. All of the materials are here: http://www.cabotog.com/comm_surveys.html . Full disclosure. See also: http://fracfocus.org/, where companies disclose what is in their fluids (again, 99.5% water)

Roll on asbestos man. Roll on. . The fact is if it wasn't for those activists the oil and gas industry would still be injecting diesel fuel in their frack fluids. From 2005-2009 they admittedly used MILLIONS of gallons of diesel fuel in their fracking fluids which sparked congressional investigations. Claim what you will but they'll get away with whatever they can to get what they want. Thank god someone is calling hem on it or it would be far worse. And if it's so harmless im sure one of the mud loggers can get us a jug of it after its reclaimed and I'll sit with ya while ya drink it.

 

[CJD3]

Can't help ya there Joe.
The only part of the process we are involved in is the drilling and cement/casing stages.
We log the lithology and descriptions of the rock we are drilling through, import surveys, gamma readings and Top drive data off the rig. Lastly and equally important, we monitor the gas levels as the rig drills into the gas rich deposits. Once a pad of holes is done everyone and everything but the well head moves to the next pad to do it all over again. It can be 45-75 truck loads depending on the size of the rig. Next comes the fracking stage.

These two pictures are displays Range has for tours that come out to the pad.

The amount of cement and steel protecting not only the water table depths but also the mine formations lower down.

Just thought I'd throw in my two cents worth.
Drill Baby Drill

 

[Huckleberry Finn]

Roll on asbestos man. Roll on. . The fact is if it wasn't for those activists the oil and gas industry would still be injecting diesel fuel in their frack fluids. From 2005-2009 they admittedly used MILLIONS of gallons of diesel fuel in their fracking fluids which sparked congressional investigations. Claim what you will but they'll get away with whatever they can to get what they want. Thank god someone is calling hem on it or it would be far worse. And if it's so harmless im sure one of the mud loggers can get us a jug of it after its reclaimed and I'll sit with ya while ya drink it.

It's harmless in the fact that when you frack a well, it's not going to pollute ground water just by the fracturing process.

And yes, I know what a 'slick water' frack is. Do you believe in the Barnett cancer cluster too? Good thing they used the diesel in the south and figured this shit out before coming up here! hahaha.

The interesting trends are the recycling water and the ability to fracture wells with 'green' technology.

 

[Huckleberry Finn]

Very cool, Jim

 

[Jackalope]

It's harmless in the fact that when you frack a well, it's not going to pollute ground water just by the fracturing process.

And yes, I know what a 'slick water' frack is. Do you believe in the Barnett cancer cluster too? Good thing they used the diesel in the south and figured this shit out before coming up here! hahaha.

The interesting trends are the recycling water and the ability to fracture wells with 'green' technology.

You should say you "believe" it is not going to contaminate groundwater just by the fracturing process. The truth of the matter is you nor anyone else have proof that groundwater will not be contaminated in the future due to fracturing process today. Nor do you or anyone else have the slightest idea what geoseismic impacts could be in the future.

I will say it again, lack of proof that it causes an issue does not mean they should get a free pass to do whatever they want until it's discovered it's a big problem. And if it wasn't for interest groups keeping the screws to these people God knows what they would be pumping in the fucking ground.

Also they didn't "figure it out "in the south before they moved north, they plainly and simply got exposed for injecting millions of gallons of diesel fuel underground. Something I am absolutely sure they would not have stopped if they were not forced to.

Mass of contamination of groundwater is not something that we can just say oops about and try to clean it up. If it was up to me 40% of the proceeds from each well would be placed in a bond to not only study but also counter future environmental and economic impacts.

 

[Ohiosam]

I always knew you're a closet liberal Joe.

lmao

Seriously my biggest concern is surface contamination. Spills at the pad or from truck accidents.

 

[Jackalope]

I always knew you're a closet liberal Joe.

lmao

Seriously my biggest concern is surface contamination. Spills at the pad or from truck accidents.

lmao.. I'm no liberal. Lets think about which of the following sounds like a liberal.. The group that uses logic and reason and questions what people say to formulate an educated opinion... The group that blindly follows and believes what others tell them like it's gospel incapable of researching and formulating a logical opinion themselves.

I would hope we are all conversationalists and don't swallow whatever load the profit hungry corporations tell us when they're pumping billions of gallons of "whatever works" under our drinking water.

just because I wouldn't go dump a tanker truck of diesel in the Maumee river doesn't make me a liberal.. lmao

 

[bowhunter1023]

I'm not blindly following anything here. I have FAR more first hand experience with this than you do. What you know came from searching the internet I presume. What I know comes from growing up in the industry; working in an area that has had active fracking at much shallower depths for the past 20+ years; and from being privy to the science behind fracking on a first hand basis and knowing what we use to frack our wells. If what we were doing at 10K feet was going to ruin the drinking water in short order, then the past 20+ years of injecting water at 3K should have ruined every well in Wetzel and Tyler Counties already. Hell, we have been waterflooding in those areas for the same amount of time injecting hundreds of barrels a day in the ground in our secondary recovery efforts and yet even that practice has not ruined the local water sources. If that is not going to do it, then a 30 day frack at 3 times the depth isn't going to either. At least not in the immediate or foreseeable future...