Fracking (& I don't mean the expletive)

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15716
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Fracking (& I don't mean the expletive)

Post by Lalaith »

I am interested in everyone's views on this procedure. We've had some earthquakes recently here in Ohio due to the aftereffects of fracking. The more I read about it, the less I like it, but I want to make sure I am justified in that dislike.

Here's a Wikipedia article about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fracking


This is the article about the earthquakes in Ohio:

http://news.yahoo.com/expert-wastewater ... 01529.html
CLEVELAND (AP) — A northeast Ohio well used to dispose of wastewater from oil and gas drilling almost certainly caused a series of 11 minor quakes in the Youngstown area since last spring, a seismologist investigating the quakes said Monday.

Research is continuing on the now-shuttered injection well at Youngstown and seismic activity, but it might take a year for the wastewater-related rumblings in the earth to dissipate, said John Armbruster of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y.

Brine wastewater dumped in wells comes from drilling operations, including the so-called fracking process to extract gas from underground shale that has been a source of concern among environmental groups and some property owners. Injection wells have also been suspected in quakes in Ashtabula in far northeast Ohio, and in Arkansas, Colorado, and Oklahoma, Armbruster said.

Thousands of gallons of brine were injected daily into the Youngstown well that opened in 2010 until its owner, Northstar Disposal Services LLC, agreed Friday to stop injecting the waste into the earth as a precaution while authorities assessed any potential links to the quakes.

After the latest and largest quake Saturday at 4.0 magnitude, state officials announced their beliefs that injecting wastewater near a fault line had created enough pressure to cause seismic activity. They said four inactive wells within a five-mile radius of the Youngstown well would remain closed. But they also stressed that injection wells are different from drilling wells that employ fracking.

Armbruster said Monday he expects more quakes will occur despite the shutdown of the Youngstown well.

"The earthquakes will trickle on as a kind of a cascading process once you've caused them to occur," he said. "This one year of pumping is a pulse that has been pushed into the ground, and it's going to be spreading out for at least a year."

The quakes began last March with the most recent on Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve each occurring within 100 meters of the injection well. The Saturday quake in McDonald, outside of Youngstown, caused no serious injuries or property damage.

Youngstown Democrat Rep. Robert Hagan on Monday renewed his call for a moratorium on fracking and well injection disposal to allow a review of safety issues.

"If it's safe, I want to do it," he said in a telephone interview. "If it's not, I don't want to be part and parcel to destruction of the environment and the fake promise of jobs."

He said a moratorium "really is what we should be doing, mostly toward the injection wells, but we should be asking questions on drilling itself."

A spokesman for Gov. John Kasich, an outspoken supporter of the growing oil and natural gas industry in Ohio, said the shale industry shouldn't be punished for a fracking byproduct.

"That would be the equivalent of shutting down the auto industry because a scrap tire dump caught fire somewhere," said Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols.

He said 177 deep injection wells have operated without incident in Ohio for decades and the Youngstown well was closed within 24 hours of a study detailing how close a Christmas Eve quake was to the well.

The industry-supported Ohio Oil and Gas Association said the rash of quakes was "a rare and isolated event that should not cast doubt about the effectiveness" of injection wells.

Such wells "have been used safely and reliably as a disposal method for wastewater from oil and gas operations in the U.S. since the 1930s," the association's executive vice president, Thomas E. Stewart, said in a statement Monday.

Environmentalists are critical of the hydraulic fracturing process, called fracking, which utilizes chemical-laced water and sand to blast deep into the ground and free the shale gas. Critics fear the process itself or the drilling liquid, which can contain carcinogens, could contaminate water supplies, either below ground, by spills, or in disposed wastewater.

Permits allowing hydraulic fracturing in Ohio's portion of the Marcellus and the deeper Utica Shale formations rose from one in 2006 to at least 32 in 2011.
Image
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

"That would be the equivalent of shutting down the auto industry because a scrap tire dump caught fire somewhere," said Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols.
I'm more or less in favor of doing exactly that, or rather, forcing all industries to factor in responsible disposal methods for their waste products into the costs of their products. Better still, design industrial methods so that your waste feeds into another process's start. You know, the way the natural world has been doing it for BILLIONS of years.
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15716
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

That quote by Kasich really irked me, but, then, he has proven himself to be a real gem on a lot of issues. <sarcasm>
Image
User avatar
narya
chocolate bearer
Posts: 4904
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:27 am
Location: Wishing I could be beachcombing, or hiking, or dragon boating
Contact:

Post by narya »

My brother Gregg produced several excellent shows on fracking, which you can find here:

http://aworldofpossibilities.net/progra ... s-fracking

After listening to these three programs, you will definitely dislike fracking!
In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer. ~ Albert Camus
User avatar
Griffon64
Posts: 3724
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 6:02 am

Post by Griffon64 »

axordil wrote:I'm more or less in favor of doing exactly that, or rather, forcing all industries to factor in responsible disposal methods for their waste products into the costs of their products. Better still, design industrial methods so that your waste feeds into another process's start. You know, the way the natural world has been doing it for BILLIONS of years.
Amen. I'm in favor of this too, as a part of a general "you're free to do what you want to, but pay the true cost for what you consume and do" philosophy. Humans are innovative and intelligent. If the will is there, the methods can be found. Unfortunately, right now the will seems mostly bent towards "get rich at whatever cost to everything that isn't you you can get away with".
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

Until quite recently we could always move West after we messed up our dwelling places. But we've gone about as West as we can go and the crap is piling up.

I keep reading that we should go into space and I think, sure, let's ruin another planet.

When did we decide that we didn't have to stop pooping in our own nests? Why didn't we realize - or maybe why DON'T we realize - that we can't keep dumping poison on the earth and in the water, spewing poisons into the air, killing every living thing in our path, without harming ourselves?
Dig deeper.
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15716
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

Seems I'm in good company with my dislike of this procedure. :D


narya, I will watch those! Thanks!
Image
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13431
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Post by River »

I think the only people who like fracking are the people making money from it.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46144
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

Lalaith wrote:Seems I'm in good company with my dislike of this procedure.
Most definitely.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6809
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Post by Dave_LF »

Is there another way to get that gas?
I keep reading that we should go into space and I think, sure, let's ruin another planet.
The planets around here are already barren, lethally hot/cold, and exposed to cosmic radiation. Couldn't mess them up too bad (from Earthlife's perspective, anyway).
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

River wrote:I think the only people who like fracking are the people making money from it.
My thoughts as well.
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Frelga
Meanwhile...
Posts: 22487
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:31 pm
Location: Home, where else

Post by Frelga »

I absolutely think people making money off fracking should pay for any damages associated with the process. Other countries achieve this by regulation, here I guess a class action lawsuit would be the tool.

I was skeptical about the claims that fracking can cause earthquakes, simply because an earthquake is such a huge force, but Scientific American seems to be pretty positive.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.

Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6809
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Post by Dave_LF »

I don't think they're the plate-shift kinds of earthquakes; more the "earth resettling because you dug out what had been holding it up" types.
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15716
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

Well, I think it seems to be more along those lines, Dave. In the Youngstown, Ohio, case, they seem to have disturbed some previously unknown fault lines. And this is partly why I think this procedure is bad news. Besides the whole earth-settling thing, we run the risk of disturbing fault lines and otherwise causing damage we have no idea about yet. :nono:

This is where I get really frustrated--when greed overreaches the science.
Image
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6809
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Post by Dave_LF »

Lalaith wrote:Well, I think it seems to be more along those lines, Dave. In the Youngstown, Ohio, case, they seem to have disturbed some previously unknown fault lines.
I guess I can see how that could happen--if pressure already existed along a fault line, distrubing the earth around it could cause it to slip sooner and differently than it would have on its own.
This is where I get really frustrated--when greed overreaches the science.
Is it all greed though? I mean, I'm sure someone (lots of someones) somewhere in the chain is being greedy, but whether the whole operation is greedy depends on whether there are better ways to get the gas out (and I don't know whether there are other ways or not).

It isn't generally known how close the US came to running out of gas in the middle of the winter on several occasions in the 00's. There was at least one winter where a government had to ask some industrial consumers to shut down operations in order to preserve the stuff before people started freezing to death. Dow Chemical moved some of its facilities overseas in the aftermath of that, citing the need for a more reliable gas supply. Now, less than a decade later, we have so much of the stuff that producers are fretting about price collapses, and fracking is the reason.
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

This is the tail end of fracking in particular posing an issue: disposal of the contaminated water byproducts. You can frack and do something other than sweep them under the rocks. I think what's happening is less outright greed and more "well, we know how to inject stuff into the ground, so let's just do that for disposal too." You know, greed's ugly brother laziness.
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

vison wrote: When did we decide that we didn't have to stop pooping in our own nests? Why didn't we realize - or maybe why DON'T we realize - that we can't keep dumping poison on the earth and in the water, spewing poisons into the air, killing every living thing in our path, without harming ourselves?
The answer may be inferred from River's comment here:
I think the only people who like fracking are the people making money from it.
Generally speaking the people making the decisions can afford to live away from or otherwise protected from the fallout of their activities. Of course as everything is polluted now their immunity is failing. Perhaps that is why going to space seems so attractive to those who can afford it?

ETA. Dave I get where you are coming from, but the answer would appear to be get away from a gas propelled society. Wind farms in Ontario are already producing surpluses to the extent the utility actually has them switched off a great deal of the time. If you take gas (and coal) powered electricity generation out of the mix that would kill much of the demand for the stuff.

But there's the rub as moving away from gas power generation, jobs would also be lost (which is the last thing anyone wants). Leaving Greed out of it entirely, it is astonishing what a cruel dictator the Capitalist Economy can be. We can't make this decision because (again not counting profit opportunities lost) people will starve as we transition to a healthier way of doing things.
Last edited by SirDennis on Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46144
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

SirDennis wrote:
vison wrote: When did we decide that we didn't have to stop pooping in our own nests? Why didn't we realize - or maybe why DON'T we realize - that we can't keep dumping poison on the earth and in the water, spewing poisons into the air, killing every living thing in our path, without harming ourselves?
The answer may be inferred from River's comment here:
I think the only people who like fracking are the people making money from it.
Which supports my oft-repeated position that unless we find a way to do away with the very concept of money the species (and perhaps the planet itself) is doomed.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Griffon64
Posts: 3724
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 6:02 am

Post by Griffon64 »

SirDennis wrote:But there's the rub as moving away from gas power generation, jobs wo1uld also be lost (which is the last thing anyone wants).
So gas power generation is a lot more labor intensive than wind farms, then? Else the "lost" jobs would migrate in some form to the replacement power generation method, won't it? ( The jobs further up the supply chain, eg. at the power grid level, would stay, since the power still flows through it. )
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

Griffy--

My guess (and it's just that) is that wind and renewables in general are less labor intensive overall, for a couple of reasons.

First, renewables lack a labor intensive exploration phase. You don't drill to find wind or sunlight, you do some research and leave out some sensors.

The resource collection site/process is also separate from the energy production site/process for gas/oil et al, while they're one and the same for wind and solar, so there's likely some added efficiency (translated--fewer jobs) from that. You don't have a separate pumping station and power plant for wind or solar: the point of collection is the point of energy production, more or less.
Post Reply