It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Taken from The Wall Street Journal - Fracking Has Had No ‘Widespread’ Impact on Drinking Water, EPA Finds
Fracking isn’t causing widespread damage to the nation’s drinking water, the Obama administration said in a long-awaited report released Thursday.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—after a four-year study that is the U.S. government’s most comprehensive examination of the issue to date—concluded that hydraulic fracturing, as being carried out by industry and regulated by states, isn’t having “widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water.”
So even though there are countless posts here at ATS concerning this, it seems that the EPA has spoken, pockets were lined with money from the lobbyists, and the fracking community won.
My grandma has 17 gas wells on her property
Conclusions
Through this national-level assessment, we have identified potential mechanisms by which
hydraulic fracturing could affect drinking water resources. Above ground mechanisms can affect
surface and ground water resources and include water withdrawals at times or in locations of low
water availability, spills of hydraulic fracturing fluid and chemicals or produced water, and
inadequate treatment and discharge of hydraulic fracturing wastewater. Below ground mechanisms
include movement of liquids and gases via the production well into underground drinking water
resources and movement of liquids and gases from the fracture zone to these resources via
pathways in subsurface rock formations.
We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on
drinking water resources in the United States. Of the potential mechanisms identified in this report,
we found specific instances where one or more of these mechanisms led to impacts on drinking
water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells. The cases occurred during both
routine activities and accidents and have resulted in impacts to surface or ground water. Spills of
hydraulic fracturing fluid and produced water in certain cases have reached drinking water
resources, both surface and ground water. Discharge of treated hydraulic fracturing wastewater has
increased contaminant concentrations in receiving surface waters. Below ground movement of
fluids, including gas, most likely via the production well, have contaminated drinking water
resources. In some cases, hydraulic fracturing fluids have also been directly injected into drinking
water resources, as defined in this assessment, to produce oil or gas that co-exists in those
formations.
The frequency of on-site spills from hydraulic fracturing could be estimated for two states, but not for operations nationally or for other areas. Frequency estimates from data and literature ranged from one spill for every 100 wells in Colorado to between approximately 0.4 and 12.2 spills for every 100 wells in Pennsylvania. These estimates include spills of hydraulic fracturing fluids and chemicals, and produced water reported in state databases. Available data generally precluded estimates of hydraulic fracturing fluid and/or chemical spill rates separately from estimates of an overall spill frequency. It is unknown whether these spill estimates are representative of national occurrences. If the estimates are representative, the number of spills nationally could range from approximately 100 to 3,700 spills annually, assuming 25,000 to 30,000 new wells are fractured per year.
The EPA characterized volumes and causes of hydraulic fracturing-related spills identified from selected state and industry data sources. The spills occurred between January 2006 and April 2012 in 11 states and included 151 cases in which fracturing fluids or chemicals spilled on or near a well pad. Due to the methods used for the EPA’s characterization of spills, these cases were likely a subset of all fracturing fluid and chemical spills during the study’s time period.
originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
a reply to: xmaddness
So even though there are countless posts here at ATS concerning this, it seems that the EPA has spoken, pockets were lined with money from the lobbyists, and the fracking community won.
Yep, countless posts on ATS....That mean nothing but hear-say and speculation....
It has been proven MANY times that fracking has no drinking/underwater contamination factors involved...But ATS have people they talk to or read on a website about contamination and all of a sudden it is true....I stopped arguing because people just believe what people tell them, but I live in south-western PA and we have wells everywhere, EVERYWHERE, and every person in our families have well water to drink and nobody that I know has any issues with drinking water! My grandma has 17 gas wells on her property, 2 as close as a few hundred yards away and her water well is nearby also and her water has been tested many times with no issues, and tastes amazing!
I feel bad for people who have no idea on the topic and just spout nonsense because they don't know....
originally posted by: NavyDoc
Okay. I' m confused. The government is the only body that can help us so we must have governmental controlled healthcare and regulations and the government must force people to bake cakes because only the government has the ability to protect us, except when we don't like what the government says?
Is that about right?
I was on the call the EPA held back when it launched the study. The EPA representatives on that call explained that the retrospective portion of the study would provide helpful information, but that the prospective portion would be the centerpiece of the study because it would provide baseline data against which follow-up tests could be compared over the course of the study. The industry blocked the prospective part of the study, however, and it was eventually dropped.
originally posted by: mc_squared
originally posted by: NavyDoc
Okay. I' m confused. The government is the only body that can help us so we must have governmental controlled healthcare and regulations and the government must force people to bake cakes because only the government has the ability to protect us, except when we don't like what the government says?
Is that about right?
I'm a Liberal who doesn't trust the government. You know why? Because industry has their greasy paws all over the government. Here's an interesting comment from the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette article I linked above:
I was on the call the EPA held back when it launched the study. The EPA representatives on that call explained that the retrospective portion of the study would provide helpful information, but that the prospective portion would be the centerpiece of the study because it would provide baseline data against which follow-up tests could be compared over the course of the study. The industry blocked the prospective part of the study, however, and it was eventually dropped.
So what's your solution though - just hand the keys over to that same industry corrupting the government, and expect everything to be hunky dory? We need accountability, which starts with an informed electorate that actually cares and holds their representatives responsible.
originally posted by: eXia7
originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
a reply to: xmaddness
So even though there are countless posts here at ATS concerning this, it seems that the EPA has spoken, pockets were lined with money from the lobbyists, and the fracking community won.
Yep, countless posts on ATS....That mean nothing but hear-say and speculation....
It has been proven MANY times that fracking has no drinking/underwater contamination factors involved...But ATS have people they talk to or read on a website about contamination and all of a sudden it is true....I stopped arguing because people just believe what people tell them, but I live in south-western PA and we have wells everywhere, EVERYWHERE, and every person in our families have well water to drink and nobody that I know has any issues with drinking water! My grandma has 17 gas wells on her property, 2 as close as a few hundred yards away and her water well is nearby also and her water has been tested many times with no issues, and tastes amazing!
I feel bad for people who have no idea on the topic and just spout nonsense because they don't know....
So could you please post a video of you going and getting a few glasses of fracking water and could you then please drink them on camera? Only after I watch you drink a few glasses of toxic waste, will I even consider the possibility for myself.
originally posted by: eXia7
originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
a reply to: xmaddness
So even though there are countless posts here at ATS concerning this, it seems that the EPA has spoken, pockets were lined with money from the lobbyists, and the fracking community won.
Yep, countless posts on ATS....That mean nothing but hear-say and speculation....
It has been proven MANY times that fracking has no drinking/underwater contamination factors involved...But ATS have people they talk to or read on a website about contamination and all of a sudden it is true....I stopped arguing because people just believe what people tell them, but I live in south-western PA and we have wells everywhere, EVERYWHERE, and every person in our families have well water to drink and nobody that I know has any issues with drinking water! My grandma has 17 gas wells on her property, 2 as close as a few hundred yards away and her water well is nearby also and her water has been tested many times with no issues, and tastes amazing!
I feel bad for people who have no idea on the topic and just spout nonsense because they don't know....
So could you please post a video of you going and getting a few glasses of fracking water and could you then please drink them on camera? Only after I watch you drink a few glasses of toxic waste, will I even consider the possibility for myself.