It's not fracking's fault, study says...

[Little Star]

MSNBC
By Alan Boyle


It's not fracking's fault, study says

A university study asserts that the problems caused by the gas extraction process known as hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," arise because drilling operations aren't doing it right. The process itself isn't to blame, according to the study, released today by the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin.

The report is likely to add new fuel to a blazing controversy over fracking. Researchers reviewed the evidence contained in the reports of groundwater contamination from three prominent shale-rock formations where the process is employed: the Barnett Shale in North Texas, the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania, New York and other areas of Appalachia; and the Haynesville Shale in western Louisiana and northeast Texas.


The groundwater contamination is graphically portrayed in the documentary "Gasland," which showed residents near shale-gas operations setting their drinking water on fire as it came out of the tap. Worries about such contamination have sparked political resistance to fracking, leading some states and countries to hold up new drilling operations.

At the same time, shale gas is seen as an increasingly important domestic energy source. About a quarter of U.S.-produced natural gas currently comes from shale, and that proportion is projected to rise to nearly half by 2035. Last month, President Barack Obama suggested that the natural gas industry could support 600,000 jobs in America by the end of the decade, in large part due to the rise of hydraulic fracturing. In its latest budget request, the White House proposed new studies by the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that fracking is done safely.

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/16/10426765-its-not-frackings-fault-study-says?chromedomain=usnews


I don't think I'm buying this. You?

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. That was on the front page of the Houston Chronicle today.

And I was all "yeah right..."

[AnOhioan]

2. Nobody but an industry shill would buy it

[rustydog]

3. Well, YEA! That is why the BP disaster occurred: They weren't doing it right

By choice. Money over safety, money over your faucet on fire,money over earthquakes...duh

[blue neen]

4. Then they need to stop doing it!

Chernobyl didn't melt down by itself, either.

More psyops from Big Oil and Gas...today's Robber Barons.

[Agony]

5. The chemicals used to make the fracking fluid aren't part of the fracking?

What a fucking idiot, his own study states the following.

"•Surface spills of the fluids used in the fracking process were judged to pose a greater risk to groundwater sources than the fracking itself."

An EPA study found that fracking fluid contaminated groundwater in the Pavillion WY gasfield, well guess what, the geology is different than here in the northeast. Yeah it is different...it is riskier here due to surface recharge of the groundwater.

[JesterCS]

6. yeah right. IT's COMPLETELY SAFE! go back to your TV set *sarcasm* n/t

[EC]

7. What a cop out.

It's not the process, it's the stupid people doing it wrong? Is that what they are saying? Weasels.

[saras]

8. Where's all DU's hardcore defenders of "science" when they're needed?

The "right" way of doing fracking wouldn't fracture any rock, because that process damages aquifers, even BEFORE they pump any fluids down there. And the fracking fluids all mix with any groundwater, so the right way wouldn't pump any toxic substance into the earth. The right way also wouldn't risk earthquakes, even small ones, by pumping enough fluid into the earth to cause them, so that rules out water too. And the right way wouldn't contribute to the total amount of hydrocarbons burned on the planet by any significant amount, so wouldn't actually produce any significant quantity of gas.

It begins to look like the "right" way is to frack the skulls of the executives and extract the fatty matter for fuel.

[Kalidurga]

9. The study was probably done by the same people...

that say that the Gulf Coast shellfish are safe to eat.

[davidthegnome]

10. Hah

Of course not - but we'll still probably have to "buy" it.

In a rational world, we'd have alternatives by now, available at a better price than what we're paying at the pumps. Wish we lived in a rational world.

Six hundred thousand jobs would be great, Mr. President - but have you considered the effects of 600,000 people working for such projects? Can "fracking" really be done safely? I doubt it. I doubt it can be done at all without significant risk to the environment and to the people who have to live in it. Are we so desperate for gas that we'll drink, shower in, cook... in flammable water? Flammable water... Hey mom... the table is on fire... "Get some water from the sink honey... put it... oh... uhm, grab the coffee, er, no... the apple juice" Can a purifier make that drinkable? Make it safe? I honestly don't know, but I wouldn't trust it.

We should not be doing this. I don't know enough regarding the science to determine the long term effects but I suspect they would be unpleasant. I don't care if we have to go back to riding horses, it's far preferable to destroying the world our children will have to live in after we're gone.