It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Study Finds Radioactive Fracking Water In Stream

page: 1
23

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Study Finds Radioactive Fracking Water In Stream


A two-year study examined the water in a stream not far from a fracking location. The treatment plant was the Josephine Brine Treatment Facility on Blacklick Creek.

The findings were not flattering.

"Their analyses, made on water samples collected repeatedly over the course of two years, were even more concerning than we’d feared," Smithsonian reported. "They found high concentrations of the element radium, a highly radioactive substance. The concentrations were roughly 200 times higher than background levels. In addition, amounts of chloride and bromide in the water were two to ten times greater than normal."



Avner Vengosh, an earth scientist from Duke, did not beat around the bush: “Even if, today, you completely stopped disposal of the wastewater, there’s enough contamination built up that you’d still end up with a place that the U.S. would consider a radioactive waste site.”


Pennsylvania and now Ohio has seen two fracking companies, one from Texas and one from Louisiana, come in and run fracking sites like they were a joke - openly dumping toxic wastewater onto the ground or into sewers. The article mentions that no standards exist for how to handle this waste. It now gets transported to municipal-owned water treatment plants as a byproduct but these plants have no means to treat it.


Federal standards for cleaning up fracking wastewater do not exist. The EPA says: "No comprehensive set of national standards exists at this time for the disposal of wastewater discharged from natural gas extraction activities. As a result, some shale gas wastewater is transported to treatment plants (publicly owned treatment works or private centralized waste treatment facilities, many of which are not properly equipped to treat this type of wastewater."

It is not impossible to treat fracking wastewater, but wastewater plants may not be ready yet. As one environmental group, the Catskill Mountainkeeper, put it: "Theoretically, this toxic cocktail [of wastewater] could be treated at treatment facilities assuming these plants were properly equipped to remove these chemicals and radioactivity, however, there are few if any plants that currently have the technology to do this."


This is what you get when you elect pro-corporate leaders who only work for the energy sector that spent unlimited dark money to get them in office. People of Ohio and Pennsylvania will be paying the price for fracking for many years to come.
edit on 8-11-2014 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

In the search to find fuel, for the good of the people, testing is often not required that deals with issues that may occur. Our regulatory system only looks for certain things, they do not require testing outside of what they deem necessary. In this case, the evidence may not apply if there was no testing done before hand. No testing is usually done for radioactivity in a stream before fracking is done, so there is no proof that fracking caused this so no action can be taken against the company.

Fracking the rock can also cause radioactive water that is trapped in the rock to escape through cracks that are created. I guess this is considered acceptable. Even if methane starts to come into people's wells, there is no baseline evidence to prove it is not natural. The gas companies are not liable. It would be advisable to pay for testing of your well if they start drilling near you. The evidence may not be allowed to be used as evidence though and because of the basis of the regulations it may not apply to your claim. For the good of the people applies. What people is the question, I think it is for the good of the people doing the fracking.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 08:38 AM
link   
OMG This truly is beyond disgusting.

It's time the people began to market just like companies do. For elected reps to allow this to happen at all in the areas they represent would be the thing to set me off and demand they either resign or account for their criminal negligence and list what action plan they have to deal with it. If they have none, expose that. As for the companies, expose the sob's all over the place, both locally and internationally. They are killing people. They are killing the land . For the good of all this must be stopped.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   
It certainly puts prophecies and predictions from so many sources- both modern, and ancient- in perspective.

I remember thinking about how all the water world-wide could possibly become undrinkable, and just couldn't fathom how it would be possible.

I no longer have to stretch my imagination; I am watching it in person.




posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Why does everybody act like this is something new? Fracking has been going on since the 30s its just now its in new areas.

As much as it sucks that it pollutes the land its almost a lesser of the two evils kind of thing.

I live in West Virginia where there is fracking going on and even illegal dumping from companies coming over from Ohio and Pennsylvania so I've seen some of the fish die offs and the effects on the streams. But that isn't a problem with the fracking its a problem with the people and the regulations.

What needs to be done is independent testing on the areas. Not testing done by the companies or the people in the area. Like with natural gas getting in peoples wells. This part of the country is on top of one of the biggest natural gas deposits in the world. Anytime you dig a hole in the ground you're going to hit some. Our house has had the same well since the 40s and there's always been gas in it. Most people that have that problem know but now they have an opportunity to get paid so they're taking it even going as far as pumping propane into their water lines the videoing the burning water so o cell again its people thats the problem.

No matter how you feel about its what we have until sustainable energy is ready and it still.pollutes a whole lot less then shipping it across the ocean.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Collect fracking water and start serving it to the energy company execs in their tea and coffee.
Then we'll see just how safe they think it is.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

I have questions.

The article states that the companies performing the hydraulic fracturing procedure, have installed concrete wells to provide a barrier between the areas upon which they are working, and the rest of the groundwater under the surface of the Earth. If this is the case, then how is the stream referred to in the article being contaminated exactly?

Furthermore, the article states that the water treatment plants to which the radium infused waste water is sent, are not set up to remove either the radioactive elements, or the chloride, or bromide from the water either. So what happens to the water once it gets there? Is it stored right there on site in enormous vats? If so, how is that safe? And if not, what exactly are they doing with it, and what measures are taken to ensure that it is not released into the environment during that process?

And with regard to there being no federal standard for dealing with fracking waste, I am pretty sure there are laws which apply to any and all release of toxic or radioactive substances into the wider world, which could be applied to this scenario! One does not actually REQUIRE a statute to know that this is, or ought to be, highly illegal activity, since the only possible result is harm coming to human beings and wildlife alike in time to come!



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Here is an interesting quote from the Smithsonian Magazine concerning the proper treatment of fracking waste water:

Vengosh notes that there are better methods of treating fracking wastewater (he points to the plants operated by Eureka Resources as a model for adequately removing radioactivity), but these are more expensive to operate. But currently, without the push of federal regulations, companies looking to dispose of waste water have no incentive to pay for this type of solution.


And where are the federal regulations? Well, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, also known as the "Halliburton Loophole," provides exemptions for waste water from gas and oil construction activities for most of the EPA rules and regulations. For more information check out the exemptions for fracking under US law.

So, let's see, how does the free market come into play here: We get cheap fossil fuels until our teeth start falling out, and we start dying of lung and breast cancer. Then we get to spend all of that money we saved on fuel to buy false teeth and pay for chemotherapy. Makes perfectly good sense to me.




Dex



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
These bastards won't stop until all the water is polluted, the air blocks out the sun, the last tree is cut down to make toilette paper and we are all dead. People, You'd better wake the hell up before its too late and put an end to this sociopathic bullsh$t! NOW!



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: HUMBLEONE

I have to agree with Your Post!! However, it is probably too late in some ares for anything to be done now to fix the problems there. Alas...... Syx.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

This is a filthy process, period.

Look at where a lot of this water comes from:


Water used for drilling and making up frac fluids can come from several sources: surface water bodies, groundwater, municipal potable water supplies, or reused water from some other water source (most commonly this is flowback water from a previously fractured well)

...

A large portion of the Marcellus Shale underlies the Susquehanna River basin watershed. Any water usage within the watershed is subject to oversight by the SRBC. Hoffman (2010) notes, that as of January 2010, the SRBC had data for 131 wells. The total volume of water withdrawn through that date is 262 million gallons, with 45% coming from public water supplies and the other 55% coming from surface water sources. The average total volume of fluid used per well is 2.7 million gallons, with 2.2 million gallons of that coming from freshwater sources and 0.5 million gallons coming from recycled flowback water


Look at what they tell you they're doing with the used frac'ing fluid:


Not all of the injected frac fluid returns to the surface. GWPC and ALL (2009) report that from 30% to 70% of the original frac fluid volume returns as flowback. However, anecdotal reports from Marcellus operators suggest that the actual percentage is at or below the lower end of that range. The rest of the water remains in pores within the formation. The SRBC data set described in the previous section shows that about 13.5% of the injected frac fluid is recovered (Hoffman 2010).

...

Operators must manage the flowback and produced water in a cost-effective manner that complies with state regulatory requirements. The primary options are:

Inject underground through a disposal well (onsite or offsite), Discharge to a nearby surface water body, Haul to a municipal wastewater treatment plant (often referred to as a publicly owned treatment works or POTW), Haul to a commercial industrial wastewater treatment facility, and Reuse for a future frac job either with or without treatment.

Chapter 3 describes each of these different processes in more detail and identifies those options that are actually being used by gas operators in the Marcellus Shale region


All emphases mine.

Someplace else it ends up:

Here's a lovely report that talks about "Technology Solutions for Mitigating Environmental Impacts of Oil and Gas E&P Activity."


In a project focused on the Powder River Basin of the Rocky Mountain region, NETL is engaged in research to evaluate subsurface drip irrigation as a potential beneficial use for coalbed methane produced waters. This could provide a low-cost means to dispose of produced water while increasing crop production and improving relationships between natural gas operators and ranchers




edit on 8-11-2014 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: DisIllusioned PatRiot
Why does everybody act like this is something new? Fracking has been going on since the 30s its just now its in new areas.

As much as it sucks that it pollutes the land its almost a lesser of the two evils kind of thing.

I live in West Virginia where there is fracking going on and even illegal dumping from companies coming over from Ohio and Pennsylvania so I've seen some of the fish die offs and the effects on the streams. But that isn't a problem with the fracking its a problem with the people and the regulations.

What needs to be done is independent testing on the areas. Not testing done by the companies or the people in the area. Like with natural gas getting in peoples wells. This part of the country is on top of one of the biggest natural gas deposits in the world. Anytime you dig a hole in the ground you're going to hit some. Our house has had the same well since the 40s and there's always been gas in it. Most people that have that problem know but now they have an opportunity to get paid so they're taking it even going as far as pumping propane into their water lines the videoing the burning water so o cell again its people thats the problem.

No matter how you feel about its what we have until sustainable energy is ready and it still.pollutes a whole lot less then shipping it across the ocean.


Hi, just a correction, as I cannot afford, morally, to contemplate this subject. The one nice thing about fracking is that you no longer have real estate worries regarding America, or wherever fracking is running rampant, for that matter. Just scratch the entire area off your shopping list. Best to not pass through. But if you do, then don't drink the frackin' water.

I recall reading about the recent passing (2013) of Georgre Mitchell (94), the Father of Fracking (FoF). In the story, it was mentioned that fracking is only 50 years old, and not 80 years, as you suggest. A relevant distinction, imo, since we're talking about obscuring any and all proof.

Proof of what they are doing….(from SG†)

or, somewhat more direct:

sips
"The water's changed…"
"Gone bad, hasn't it."

-Father to Son dialogue, in "Downhill Racer"


From Wikipedia:

"Hydraulic fracturing began as an experiment in 1947, and the first commercially successful application followed in 1949."

Link to Mitchell's story: www.bloomberg.com...

# 320 Legend: † Soylent Green
edit on 8-11-2014 by TheWhiteKnight because: Oh, my goodness



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   
no surprise to me.
very similar to how the government and mining corps told the navajo how safe all the uranium mines were.
i know 3 navajo families living in a canyon near grants new mexico who live below some old mine sites.
just about every one of them has or has died from cancer and related complication.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Collect fracking water and start serving it to the energy company execs in their tea and coffee.
Then we'll see just how safe they think it is.


Problem those guys live in a world of their own. I work in architecture and the firm I used to work for did an estate for a certain credit card magnate and former owner of a major sports team in the Cleveland area, and on the grounds of his estate was his own water filtration plant. There's a level of wealth that affords them the ability to be insulated from the environmental effects their mega-corporations cause. Most of us are directly impacted by fracking waste that is passed through a municipal waste water treatment plant, or contaminating ground water for our farms.



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 03:52 AM
link   
If you think that's bad, just wait. With Republicans in charge, what little oversight that has to do with the environment just may disappear. They want to gut EPA, which is already lame. Profit over safety, profit over health, profit over all.



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Oh don't I know it. I worked for a couple of extremely wealthy people and their level of insulation is amazing. Small wonder they forget how normal people live really when they can have anything they want in minutes. The few who still act like regular folks and treat everyone with respect are really something. There are few things that test one's humanity more than becoming filthy rich.



new topics

top topics



 
23

log in

join