media blackout regarding the flooding at fracking sites in colorado????

reply to post by rival


all very interesting information.

the waste water is what concerns me the most.

reply to post by rival

Thank you for your reply and I recognize the value of this industry for employment for sure. What always gets me are the shortcuts these industries take to save a buck or avoid inspection. Even if they are in the minority, people stand to suffer as a result. I will/do trust the sources, but your inout is most valuable as well. I am aware of Gasland and other 'scary' docs, but I am trying to focus on the science.

a minute amount of chemicals

Sometimes it doesn't take much to do damage. I am no chemist, but some of those, or combination listed don't sound exactly safe. Antifreeze? I would like to hear from others who are familiar with the chems listed before I relax.

I drive a truck that transports
these chems and am required by OSHA to have a complete manifest of ANY
chemicals that are toxic in any way at my fingertips at all times.

So none of them are listed on your MSDS labelZ?

To be honest I wouldn't want to drink any of it, but it is not nearly as
dangerous as has been portrayed

I'll take you word on that?

If you want to know what I DO consider to be a threat, research what
happens to the waste water that comes back up after frac'ing....

How so? Is the waste water a mixture of what went in ? What would make it bad? What do they do with it?
Thanks again for your participation. Perhaps some of the operations work differently, on different scales? Maybe the procedure varies with gas quantity?

reply to post by speculativeoptimist


Welcome...

The chemicals can be site specific, but usually remain the same--soaps to
reduce friction, some chems to stop rusting, and some to stop dangerous gases
from forming. And by minute amounts I am talking about 50 gals of chemicals
to 500,000 gallons of water. But to be fair, while that amount of chems may sound
innocuous to a laymen, a 1 in 50,000 ration of lysergic acid diethylamide
in drinking water would be catastrophic.

Still, IMO, these chems I deal with everyday ARE relatively innocuous when
compared to what can be found under the normal kitchen sink. The most
dangerous I deal with is called Biocide by Dupont, either granulated or liquid.
It's used to keep fresh water from souring. We use about a gallon for every 150
barrels of fresh water when at the customers request. If you get this stuff
on you it is caustic and will burn you in its pure form, but diluted it is as harmless
as chlorine in a swimming pool.

Now....to what I see as a potential threat...the waste water disposal.
(sorry if this gets to be long)

In the frac'ing process we push approx. 100 truckloads of water down the hole.
The water comes up mixed with the sand, and chems, and the naturally occurring
minerals and salts in the shale. No big deal IMO, water goes down, water comes
up--an equilibrium is achieved.

It is what we do with the waste water that gives me pause. Waste water is taken to
a waste water disposal, which essentially is another well site. Often a waste water
disposal will be an old well site that didn't produce, though usually they are drilled
for the purpose of waste disposal.

What bothers me is the IMMENSE amount of water that is pumped down these
holes TO STAY. No equilibrium achieved--just lakes and lakes of waste water
pumped into the ground sometimes only 7 or 8 thousand feet deep 1 1/2 miles.

What do I mean by immense amount?

One typical waste water disposal will handle 100 truckloads a day for many years.
I know one that has been active at around 50 truckloads a day for over twenty years.

Imagine one hundred truckloads a day for only one year. That's 540,000 gallons
a day, or about 300 Olympic sized swimming pools a year.

To me, that is the elephant in the room no one is talking about

reply to post by rival


How dare you speak knowledge from personal experience around here! No one wants to hear that when we have links that tell us the true truth!

I personally think a bigger worry is all the washed out sewage and septic tank water. That can't be good.

reply to post by rival


i think that's what the concern is with the massive flood waters. the waste water not being contained and mixing with the flood and spreading all over the darn place. the media isn't even looking at that at all....... granted there are other priorities right now such as finding missing people and helping the ones that have lost their homes.

reply to post by pasiphae


I don't think there is a media blackout about the fracking, I think the focus is mainly on the event; the loss of life and properties, that's the main stream media for ya. Try searching local news stations or papers.

I have been reading the posts and see that there could be a problem but it probably is not critical in itself. Add it to the chemicals from flooded garbage dumps, sewers overflowing, and agricultural pesticides and other chemicals and there could be a problem. There are many sources of problems here, not just fracking. But it does add to the problem. We have to start dealing with the big picture. We have to stop producing so much stuff that poisons the earth, it will come back to haunt us.

I see more problem in fracking causing release of gasses to the surface. There is often a lot of radon or radioactivity down there, and fracking can cause some problems if all unknowns of the area are not evaluated. There are old natural tunnels in the earth and crystal aquifers that the gas can possibly get into. There could be cracks in the rocks nearby that the gas released from fracking can flow to, cracks created by old earth movement. There could be gasses coming out ten miles from the site. Dangerous gasses. Look at rock formations, often they are striated and cracks can go way down. Sedimentary rock on it's side from upheavals millions of years ago. To me I don't think that they evaluate risk enough in this business.

But who am I, just a carpenter, What do I know about this stuff. Just because I got curious and read fifty articles on how they do it, I still have no experience or conditioning in the field. All I have is an opinion. They are going frackin nuts with the number of wells. Why? I think they want to get them developed before they ban drilling new wells because of future problems and changing opinion about the safety of the drilling. Once they are drilled, they are drilled, nothing can be done to change it. Might as well use the gas.

you know i saw drilling mud mentioned a couple of times here.
i got a question, what is the difference in drilling mud used in the gulf and the mud that is used in fracking?

reason i ask is a i have a few friends that work the rigs and crew boats in the gulf.
they told me that when there is a drilling mud spill, the Coast Guard and EPA get all bent out of shape and there are companies that are fined thousands of dollars and boat captins and crews loose their license.

i was told that one company was shut down due to a mud spill.

a 1 in 50,000 ration of lysergic acid diethylamide
in drinking water would be catastrophic.

reply to post by rival


hahahahahaha i wouldnt say catastrophic.... it would be interesting to watch hapen tho

Whenever there is a large scale flood like this, I think we need to be aware of the nuclear power plants and where they are in relation to the flooding. Fukushima should make us worried whenever water and nuclear come together in an un-managed way.

The nuclear authorities are not going to tell us about problems until they absolutely have to, so it is in our interest to keep an eye on these facilities and report problems as soon as we (or our friends/relatives) are aware of any.

reply to post by desertguy


Im in San Luis Obispo. Its our summer now and probably no rain in sight until December.

pasiphae
reply to post by rival

 

i think that's what the concern is with the massive flood waters. the waste water not being contained and mixing with the flood and spreading all over the darn place. the media isn't even looking at that at all....... granted there are other priorities right now such as finding missing people and helping the ones that have lost their homes.

You are right. That is the topic of this post and my comments may have strayed.

As one poster put it and I believe also, I think the threat of run-off from
sewage, and junkyards, and landfills, pose more of a threat than run-off
from well sites. These sites usually have 1 to 3 tanks of wastewater that is
mostly comprised of salt and minerals from the shale strata.
The chemicals and sand used during the frac'ing process are generally
removed quickly after the frac is done (within a week or two).

After that the waste-water returning to the surface is called
production water and is a naturally occurring water around the shale.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


I don't know the difference between onshore and offshore drilling mud.

Offshore they are drilling for oil much deeper than onshore drilling for gas.
Drilling mud onshore basically start with freshwater and gel. As the drilling
begins the earth that is displaced mixes with the water and gel--hence you
end up with "drilling mud".

It ends up as a very thick, and very slick, slurry of dark, icky goo. As a novice
I once covered myself from head to toe (accidentally) in this stuff, and didn't
know whether to be scared or not....the old hands just laughed at me.

Like I said before, we often take drilling mud to farmers who request
we pump it unto the fields as fertilizer. We will dump truckload
after truckload and then the farmer will get on his tractor and
plow it into the topsoil.

reply to post by pasiphae


I find it utterly amazing that people have to be told to not water their lawns during a drought.
hope you get some rain soon.

The earth is not fragile, as evidenced by the fact that it has been around for at least 7000 years that can be proven.

There are tsunamis, volcanoes, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes and the like and guess what. The people live 80 years and the earth is still here.

rival
I have worked in the gas industry for seven years now.

There is nothing about frac'ing that flooding could affect to the detriment of
anything other than the crew and equipment.

Frac'ing involes pumping high-pressure fresh-water and sand into the ground
to open fissures in the shale strata---that's it. The water from frac'ing comes
from farmer's ponds, area lakes, and local resources. The water is sometimes
pumped into man-made ponds for convenience but it is clean.

The drilling process, however, uses drilling mud which is kept in small man
made ponds or frac tanks or some other type of reservoir. There is generally
not very much of it (a few truckloads) but if a pad were flooded it could pose
a leaking hazard, or spill completely.

Still, not to worry. Guess what we do with drilling mud when the drilling
process is over? We take truckloads of it to farm lands and dump it onto onto
the fields....it makes excellent fertilizer

edit on 15-9-2013 by rival because: (no reason given)

You fail to mention all the chemicals put into that 'fresh' water before it's forced into the ground. Nor what is done with it afterwards.

Oh great drilling mud is dumped on farm land - are any of the components even words that you can pronounce?

Geez - I realize you have to make a living - but don't delude youself in the process.

reply to post by pasiphae


Media blackout?? It's the only thing on the news this weekend.

reply to post by skuly


Looks like just a diesel tank.

reply to post by pasiphae


No containment drums to be tipped over... do you know how ridiculous this sounds? Each well uses 3-5 million gallons of water PER FRACK. That would be a crapload of little "Containment drums." I also call BS on you being from Texas. It sounds like the closest you have been to Texas is Austin.

reply to post by jssaylor2007


i really don't understand your comment. the pictures show whatever it is that holds the water... tipping over due to flooding. i'm just passing on what i read about. i'm not there and can't see it with my own eyes but it appears to me that it's not good......

is the bit about austin supposed to be a "that's not really texas" joke (because i agree that it's not like the rest of texas)? i've lived in texas all my life outside of about 3 years in another state.