Santorum wants more fracking!!!

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle


Nothing works if there is no enforcement. Regulating industry to not exist is like shooting yourself in the head.

There is a sensible middle path. Occassionally, its worth actually implementing it.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

Nothing works if there is no enforcement. Regulating industry to not exist is like shooting yourself in the head.

There is a sensible middle path. Occassionally, its worth actually implementing it.

sorry to tell you but that boat sailed looong ago. they haven't regulated a damn thing when it comes to big corps, no one is jailed nor fined when they the big guys screw up, just gets brushed under the rug until the next one.

Originally posted by crazyray
Did he mention anything about this subject when you heard him speak?

No, he didn't mention fracking last night here in Dallas. I'm sure if he would have been speaking over in Fort Worth it might have come up but we didn't hear a peep about the subject from him here.

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

Nothing works if there is no enforcement. Regulating industry to not exist is like shooting yourself in the head.

There is a sensible middle path. Occassionally, its worth actually implementing it.

sorry to tell you but that boat sailed looong ago. they haven't regulated a damn thing when it comes to big corps, no one is jailed nor fined when they the big guys screw up, just gets brushed under the rug until the next one.

Okay. Fix it.

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

Nothing works if there is no enforcement. Regulating industry to not exist is like shooting yourself in the head.

There is a sensible middle path. Occassionally, its worth actually implementing it.

sorry to tell you but that boat sailed looong ago. they haven't regulated a damn thing when it comes to big corps, no one is jailed nor fined when they the big guys screw up, just gets brushed under the rug until the next one.

Okay. Fix it.

lets do it together, but fixing global corruption is a large task at hand. i started years ago by doing business the old fashioned way, by not ripping people off and stealing their money.

reply to post by Chrisfishenstein


and did you ever hear of parts per million?

you cant eat a whole dump truck full of aspartame. but if you put a little bit of aspartame in your coffee everyday for life, you can develop cancer. (and dont dodge the point im making by saying it could be your morning cigarette yada yada yada) Just cause the chemicals are diluted doesnt mean YOU STILL AREN'T INGESTING THE CHEMICALS. lol

and where did you address the wastewater and treatment issue? diversionary tactic? So the water gets pumped in ....and not a single drop o' fracking goo gets out... where does all the wastewater go? Hmmmm?

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

Nothing works if there is no enforcement. Regulating industry to not exist is like shooting yourself in the head.

There is a sensible middle path. Occassionally, its worth actually implementing it.

sorry to tell you but that boat sailed looong ago. they haven't regulated a damn thing when it comes to big corps, no one is jailed nor fined when they the big guys screw up, just gets brushed under the rug until the next one.

Okay. Fix it.

Agree... now how? No hostile. Suggestions for where to start? We all have to start somewhere. Backs against the wall not usually the best spot to start. lol Do you think activism? Protests? writing your Congressmen? Education? Penalties? What would you suggest is the single most important place to start?

If I could talk to Rick Santorum personally I would say, What the frack man?! are you fracking serious?...Maybe those wins gave him an ego boost, and he doesn't know what the frack he's talking about!

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by crazyray

 

Actually you attacked Santorum for his beliefs (which I don't like Santorum anyways) but nonetheless, you talk about chemicals, which might be a factor if there isn't testing done in every site's public water supply at the end of each job and has to be formally tested in a lab for results!

Yes I have tons of backround in Fracking, and I live in PA which just happens to be where the Marcellus boom is so I myself am very enlightened on the topic at hand.

I did not say a federal case is warranted from a spill of fresh water, but an incident report must be filed and submitted to records and EPA for record keeping......Yes if you spill your Aquafina water on the ground, this must be done 100% of the time!!

As for trolling, come on.....That is the typical defense for someone who sees facts that someone writes in a post, and doesn't know what to say in return....He must be a troll...Burn him at the cross....COME ON!!

The cement casing does keep the chemicals from entering the ground, now having said that....Do you know how much fresh water is combined with these chemicals to make the right mixture?? NOPE!!

There are millions of gallons of water per stage of each well combined with the chemicals to produce the exact reaction needed.....Example....Go to a lake (let's imagine this lake is fresh water with nothing in it at all) put one of your so called "harmful" chemicals in this lake and go to the middle of that lake and drink it.....There will be no damage to you at all, it would be just like drinking fresh water.....There is a dilution process involved in the lake as well as out on frac jobs.

I just think there are multiple issues going on in this country that merit more attention than something that has not been proven to harm anyone at all.....Being that there have been around 30 wells very close to my house all using these "deadly" chemicals, and my water has been tested....Nothing at all....Go figure!!

End of rant.....

Admitted background or vested interest in the industry? CHECK.

Denies existence of said post from New York Times that stated:
"Other documents and interviews show that many E.P.A. scientists are alarmed, warning that the drilling waste is a threat to drinking water in Pennsylvania. Their concern is based partly on a 2009 study, never made public, written by an E.P.A. consultant who concluded that some sewage treatment plants were incapable of removing certain drilling waste contaminants and were probably violating the law."

OR

"The level of radioactivity in the wastewater has sometimes been hundreds or even thousands of times the maximum allowed by the federal standard for drinking water. While people clearly do not drink drilling wastewater, the reason to use the drinking-water standard for comparison is that there is no comprehensive federal standard for what constitutes safe levels of radioactivity in drilling wastewater. "

OR

"Among The Times’s findings:

¶More than 1.3 billion gallons of wastewater was produced by Pennsylvania wells over the past three years, far more than has been previously disclosed. Most of this water — enough to cover Manhattan in three inches — was sent to treatment plants not equipped to remove many of the toxic materials in drilling waste.

¶At least 12 sewage treatment plants in three states accepted gas industry wastewater and discharged waste that was only partly treated into rivers, lakes and streams.

¶Of more than 179 wells producing wastewater with high levels of radiation, at least 116 reported levels of radium or other radioactive materials 100 times as high as the levels set by federal drinking-water standards. At least 15 wells produced wastewater carrying more than 1,000 times the amount of radioactive elements considered acceptable.

Results came from field surveys conducted by state and federal regulators, year-end reports filed by drilling companies and state-ordered tests of some public treatment plants. Most of the tests measured drilling wastewater for radium or for “gross alpha” radiation, which typically comes from radium, uranium and other elements. " CHECK

Soooo your reports don't mean frak (see what i did there). And I'm just talking chemicals, not even getting into radiation. How is hydrochloric acid not a 'harmful' chemical? You're digging your hole deeper bro.

Keep drinking that Kool Aid, brah. read the article. Hell, everyone reading this post, read the article. Google it. Read a chemistry book. Look up wastewater treatment plant operations? EVER BEEN IN ONE??? I HAVE. Then come tell me everything is copacetic.

More a of serious note, being on the west coast is lovely. You can drink the tap water, and everything is natural by elevation and flow of the water. As long as we stay pure I think we will be fine, but I do feel bad for the people that have to go through this on the East Coast. Fracking should be out of the question why? because it pollutes the water people drink moron...I wonder if he will win those states where fracking occurs a lot.

Originally posted by crazyray


Well, aside from being a loon...this guy comes out and comes off as??? MORE OF A LOON. Can we expect an explosion of hydrofracking if he wins??? Wonder how long til the New Madrid goes then? LOL. God, this is nuts.

He even dismisses the chemicals and whatnot used in the process. DOES HE EVEN KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT?!?!? Prob not. It's like he's reading the talking points verbatim. Who writes his stuff?



www.cbsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Given the other GOP candidates, you shouldn't bandy about the word "loon."
I didn't see where Santorum said he wanted more fracking. He seemed to say that it was not the evil that it is being made out to be. Marcellus shale is about 8,000 feet down and Utica is below that. There is no groundwater at those depths and the problem with groundwater contamination mainly seems to be the settling ponds although bad cement and bore liners could also be responsible for a small part. It is not so much the fracking process but the fracking slurry and produced brines leaking out of ponds.

It is interesting to note that not long ago natural gas was the environmentalists' choice as a solution to clean energy production.Then, as soon as an abundance of natural gas was discovered, gas went on the "evil energy source list" along with everything but solar and wind. Over a 90 day period, the Sierra Clubbers reversed their position. It seems that things can be a solution when there isn't enough to solve anything and when there is enough they become bad.

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by crazyray


Well, aside from being a loon...this guy comes out and comes off as??? MORE OF A LOON. Can we expect an explosion of hydrofracking if he wins??? Wonder how long til the New Madrid goes then? LOL. God, this is nuts.

He even dismisses the chemicals and whatnot used in the process. DOES HE EVEN KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT?!?!? Prob not. It's like he's reading the talking points verbatim. Who writes his stuff?



www.cbsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Given the other GOP candidates, you shouldn't bandy about the word "loon."
I didn't see where Santorum said he wanted more fracking. He seemed to say that it was not the evil that it is being made out to be. Marcellus shale is about 8,000 feet down and Utica is below that. There is no groundwater at those depths and the problem with groundwater contamination mainly seems to be the settling ponds although bad cement and bore liners could also be responsible for a small part. It is not so much the fracking process but the fracking slurry and produced brines leaking out of ponds.

It is interesting to note that not long ago natural gas was the environmentalists' choice as a solution to clean energy production.Then, as soon as an abundance of natural gas was discovered, gas went on the "evil energy source list" along with everything but solar and wind. Over a 90 day period, the Sierra Clubbers reversed their position. It seems that things can be a solution when there isn't enough to solve anything and when there is enough they become bad.

LOL. Man, did I choose the wrong word with 'loon'! =P

The issue of toxicity is two-fold:

1. BS cement liners not working, cracking, etc. and then leaking out into aquifers.

2. The wastewater not being treated properly to be safe for human consumption... which is a fact.

Your second paragraph... agreed. Completely. Sierra Club, Super Adventure Club, potatoe, potato. People need to edumacate themselves to better think for themselves. Funny how something that was once GREAT is now EVIL... just remember we are all at war with Eurasia now...well according to the Ministry of Information.

Originally posted by crazyray

LOL. Man, did I choose the wrong word with 'loon'! =P

The issue of toxicity is two-fold:

1. BS cement liners not working, cracking, etc. and then leaking out into aquifers.

2. The wastewater not being treated properly to be safe for human consumption... which is a fact.

Your second paragraph... agreed. Completely. Sierra Club, Super Adventure Club, potatoe, potato. People need to edumacate themselves to better think for themselves. Funny how something that was once GREAT is now EVIL... just remember we are all at war with Eurasia now...well according to the Ministry of Information.

Cement liners are always a problem. Cements are tailored specifically for the geochemistry of each well and this is more art than most know. Settling ponds are often constructed with "impervious clay liners" an oxymoron at best. Even lining with EPDM they leak. Poorly built ponds can collapse or overflow during rains [e.g., Big Sandy spill.] Most of the chemicals you listed are reasonably innocuous. HCl is readily neutralized, most of the organics are biodegradable, and the antimicrobials are those found in kitchen hand soaps. Once the source is contained, it is a matter of time before they are below drinking water limits. The actual problem is the produced water that was contained in the shale. It contains radionuclides which are long-lived. This was dumped into the rivers and diluted below the limits. Not the best way to do things. There are now special water treatment facilities specifically for fracking solution. The solution is treated and recycled back to the fracking company. As this is about money, the DER only has to worry about the wastes from the treatment plant because the drillers are not going to throw away valuable drilling mud. I have not yet determined what becomes of the treatment plant brine wastes, but I understand that the PA DER is working on it. Whether they are doing the right thing is not yet known by me.

For someone who claims he's religious, he believes in assassinations and has a thirst for war with Iran. This guy scares me. People of faith who are voting for this guy need to examine their own religious teachings. It amazes me how people of faith are so gung-ho for war.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
For someone who claims he's religious, he believes in assassinations and has a thirst for war with Iran. This guy scares me. People of faith who are voting for this guy need to examine their own religious teachings. It amazes me how people of faith are so gung-ho for war.

Note that these characteristics fit G W Bush better than most. We lived through eight years of that cowboy and the GOP mobsters who benefitted from his reign.
As to Santorum "wanting more fracking," that is speculation on the part of the author. Santorum certainly has less dirty laundry than Mitt and everybody has less dirty laundry than Newt. Ron is still unknown. He seems to be more of a common man than the rest. I don't think he will be nominated because he does not espouse the cronyism and unbridled greed associated with the GOP, but I am willing to listen to him if he somehow does become a GOP candidate. The GOP really needs a good housecleaning and more moderation. Eric Cantor is a prime example of who needs to be swept out because of his tactics in the house.
Remember that no president is free to implement all of the campaign promises without congress and that presidents inherit the leavings of their predecessors. Obama inherited two paralyzing wars and their associated debt from an administration that cared only for themselves and their cronies.

Rick was our senator here in PA so I an intimately aware of him and his ability to pander. There isn't a cork or a bean bag that he wouldn't suck on if it meant he'd get paid or elected by performing that suction.

As far as his intelligence... his youngest daughter has more brains than he has in him.

Derek

PA Fracking Pollution

''In Pittsburgh, about 200 miles from the city where the purple squirrel was found, high trihalomethane levels are already a problem.

"Suffice it to say, [trihalomethanes] cause cancer and (can cause genetic mutation)," Conrad Volz, director of the Center for Health, Environments, and Community at the University of Pittsburgh, told the New Jersey Times. "We have a problem here in Pittsburgh already that the trihalomethane level in finished drinking water is now about ready to go ... higher than the drinking water standards. That's been happening in many areas of western Pennsylvania."

www.huffingtonpost.com...

This is excerpted from the Purple Squirrel Article....Bromides are going to be an issue, and the trihalomethane was what I alluded to in my prior post. When it mixed in the water treatment plants from water intakes on the Mon river here some seriously nasty stuff was coming out of Penn-American's water lines to their surburban customers.

There weren't a lot of plans made by the DEP for the millions of gallons of brine resulting from fracking, and it's being covered up. The State/DEP were mandated to fast track fracking by our polititians...it's been a clustercluck.

Originally posted by Caver78
PA Fracking Pollution

''In Pittsburgh, about 200 miles from the city where the purple squirrel was found, high trihalomethane levels are already a problem.

"Suffice it to say, [trihalomethanes] cause cancer and (can cause genetic mutation)," Conrad Volz, director of the Center for Health, Environments, and Community at the University of Pittsburgh, told the New Jersey Times. "We have a problem here in Pittsburgh already that the trihalomethane level in finished drinking water is now about ready to go ... higher than the drinking water standards. That's been happening in many areas of western Pennsylvania."

www.huffingtonpost.com...

This is excerpted from the Purple Squirrel Article....Bromides are going to be an issue, and the trihalomethane was what I alluded to in my prior post. When it mixed in the water treatment plants from water intakes on the Mon river here some seriously nasty stuff was coming out of Penn-American's water lines to their surburban customers.

There weren't a lot of plans made by the DEP for the millions of gallons of brine resulting from fracking, and it's being covered up. The State/DEP were mandated to fast track fracking by our polititians...it's been a clustercluck.

As much as I dont care for HuffPo...gotta say, sweet job brah.

reply to post by Viesczy


and how is that different from any other politicians???

reply to post by Caver78

Formation of chloroform during disinfection of drinking water has been known for a long time and is correlated to the total organic loading of the water. This means we are making the Chloroform [CHCl3] when we treat the water with chlorine. No amount of control on CHCl3 emissions will change the problem as long as we use chlorine to treat water.
This detail confounded the EPA lawyers for years and still may. The organics that make CHCl3 on chlorination need only have a methyl ketone moiety present. These are common in nature but can be from any source, natural or anthropogenic. All will produce chloroform on chlorination. The reaction is well known to basic organic chemistry students and is called the "haloform reaction" as it works with bromine also.

I backtracked an old reference should anyone want to read it. The first page is available for viewing without charge at pubs.acs.org... but your local college library should have the complete paper in their stacks.
Environ. Sci. Technol., 1977, 11 (5), pp 478–482