Myth ? No, certain fracking fluids are just not suitable around water tables. A lot of alternative fracking fluids is being looked at now because of the concern from the environmentalist.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...ale-wells.html

I read where they were able to light the groundwater on fire is somewhere back east (Pennsylvania?). Apparently this is a natural phenomenon due to how shallow the hydrocarbons are to the surface. The Indians knew of this area and had a name for this which I don't recall and, no, it was not firewater. The environmentalists did not disclose this was a naturally occurring issue in their film because it opposed their agenda.

It hasn't, yet. They just don't want it to.

I base a lot of my business off of the oil and gas projects in the US and it's in the pipeline news all the time somewhere.

But it's changing due to the concern, let the little birdies chirp.

Sorry, but you are presenting that article as evidence of a destroyed environment?

I see nothing wrong with expressing concern for our water resource ... not that it's done much good so far, of course.

FAX

Nor do I. But I think that such overly-dramatic and unfounded prognostications aren't exactly beneficial.

Complicated question when you look at it from a life cycle perspective.

From the stand point of putting the well in place oil drilling and NG fracking are roughly equivalent.

The main risk of fracking a well is the impact on overall water resources (how much water are you losing to the fracking process that you might need for other uses) and the removal of pollutants from the production water (the water that comes back up the well) before disposal.

For both types of wells, I think it is important to control NG emissions during the initial period before the well is put into productive operation.

During transport there is potential for natural gas leakage. Since methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, that needs to be monitored and controlled.

Oil has to be refined and there are environmental risks associated with that process, largely regulated.

Oil is a dirtier fuel than natural gas when you burn it.

Done properly with fuel reprocessing nuclear is potentially the cleanest. Fuel reprocessing is currently politically infeasible in this country. And the number of actual accidents shows that the risk of accidents is far underestimated. The financial risk for utilities is also huge, but that isn't an environmental risk.

Chemical waste disposal doesn't really fit with the others. It is a collection of diverse operations that get rid of an environmental liability, while energy production is concerned with obtaining an asset. So I'll leave that one out.

I'll throw in coal and renewables for reference.

So I'd rank them with respect to environmental friendliness once the fracking regs come to steady state:

renewables > fracked natural gas > nuclear > oil > coal

So far nothing has happened. Oil drillers have guidelines they must go by with the fracking, especially in the area and knowing the potential it could do to waterways, above and in the ground.

Bad wells. Not the fault of the technology per se.

Someone has played Civilization. :LOL:

Oh, please.

Every election cycle, people claim "But gas prices were less under "John Doe"!

The POTUS nor his policies do very little, if anything, to affect the price gasoline and anyone that claims as such is either a liar uninformed.

:spock:

Why are you bringing up politics?

I was referring to there relatively suddenly being a new flow of oil coming into the global market. One of the items that is very closely watched is the global spare capacity. If we start putting millions more barrels of crude into the market, it eases the space capacity concerns.

That has nothing to do with politics.

Evidence that the water supply can be in danger in areas that are being fracked.

That article is about how energy companies may have difficulty finding water for fracking when water supplies are scarce, not about local people having difficulty. It's pretty unlikely that local populations will put energy company access to water ahead of their own, IMO.