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.

 

Fracking Chemicals Detected in Pennsylvania Drinking Water.

page: 2
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

I'm hesitant to respond, because if you're going off on how you THINK it works, rather thank KNOW how it works, it's not smart for me to get involved in this. It would just leave me aggravated because instead of you denying science, take a step back and think rationally for one second. I might need to take a different approach at this and have you answer my questions, because it doesn't seem to be working for me by showing you reliable and proven sources.



if this was true, there would be no way that fracking could cause an earthquake of any size, yet fracking is causing quakes.


What are you talking about, it is true. I provided sources, yet you have not. You have no sources to contradict my claims, other than "THIS IS HOW I THINK IT WORKS, THEREFOR THAT'S HOW IT WORKS." No, it doesn't work like that, if you want to provide a good discussion, please disprove tensile strength and brittle fracturing due to max stresses. Where is the strain shortening and the strain elongation of a fractured rock? Again, what you're saying is if I was to hit a concrete block with a hammer, the cracks propagate through the center of the earth, and shatter the earth into two halves?



If it was true, there would be no way that radioactive elements would be entering the water of some cities in Indiana and Illinois


Fracking caused this? Source? Back up your claims, I back up mine.

It's verifiable, it's seen in real world situations, I'm not making this # up. You're confusing fracking with the process of drilling from planning to completion. \I don't think people understand what they're trying to argue.

Link

Please read that. Please.

Oh yeah, how are the micro-fractures mapped out? Is it magic? Is it the way how you think it works? I want you to do a little research, because instead of me feeding you the answers which you wont believe no matter the source that I provide (academia) I want you to play a little game and show me how companies can map out where the cracks propagate from fracking. It's a little trick they use, and it's verifiable because you can factor the pressure loss, get the seismic data, and fluid loss from the system to VERIFY the results.

Did you know football games cause earthquakes? Lets ban football and sue God. When you fracture the shale, you get movement of the cracked granular structure. What does that mean?




posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Laxpla

I'll link some sources for you to read.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.wou.edu...

homepage.smc.edu...



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Laxpla

You're right about the radiated water. There is no accepted evidence that the radioactivity actually came from fracking in the area. The articles I read on this used coincidence to show a connection, that is not the scientific way of doing it. I read both sides of the story and sometimes mix up the evidence. The fact that this happened when there was fracking going on in areas does not mean fracking caused it. Just like the methane in the wells of some people, it has not been proven that fracking in the areas actually caused it to happen even though it started after they started fracking. The fracking companies use geological projections to verify that this cannot be happening.

I know when I cut glass the glass doesn't always break where the score is, but evidently when someone with a degree does it it does.

I am not against fracking, we need the gas and oil. I am against letting many companies do it instead of some that make sure that all precautions and conditions are right. How many fracking companies are in the USA today? I am a business man. I know many businessmen. Many will take risks and deviate from things to make more profit. I just happen to be one who tried to do things right and as a result of my doing this I did not get rich.

Now you are trying to tell me an oil exploration company is not run by businessmen? The human involvement. I know people who follow regulations to the tee and no more, and they have problems because they did not go the extra mile and require extra precautions.

I may not know a real lot about the process, but I do know people and businessmen are out to make money just like regular people. In fact they have to show profit to their investors. Those layers that were in the drawings are susceptible to changes in elevation and this can make the evidence flawed if only using the drawings. Those elevations were formed long ago and the earth has moved also, glaciers have changed the lay of the land too, stripping evidence from the surface. I actually did a lot of research on how the science of geology was formed and how to interpret the evidence. It did not address the layer with the gas and oil in what I researched though, what I was looking for was if geological evidence used for evaluating mining could be flawed. Much of the science was formed long ago and a lot of what is taught is based on assumptions related to an area formed long ago. There is no ground radar that can show what you are trying to tell me, and drilling a core hole a half mile from another can come up with much different results. I learned this from talking to someone who drills test holes for mines.

So who am I going to believe, someone who drills holes for a living or someone who pushes a pencil to try to show something is safe so someone can make money to pay for their services. Most evidence is gotten to show whether it is profitable, not to verify if it is completely safe.

When you have lived almost all your life in mining towns, you get to understand how it works if you have an interest in the subject. I know a couple of mining engineers and also people who do blasting at the mine. I even knew a guy who had the job of testing areas for the seismographic effect of blasting when people complained. I live seven miles from the mine and our pictures are always crooked when they blast the thick plate of dolomite.

It's great having an interest in things and knowing you do not have to believe everything because it looks goon on paper. I'm sure the state of the US economy looks great on paper..

I'm not trying to discredit you, I am just trying to inform you that the evidence may have been structured so it can be used to show it is safer than it is because of the interests of the people involved. A geologist company that constantly flunks places because of concerns that might not ever be a problem will never get hired again by anyone.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse



You're right about the radiated water. There is no accepted evidence that the radioactivity actually came from fracking in the area. The articles I read on this used coincidence to show a connection


I know I'm right. The cracks can't propagate to the water aquifer. If it did, you would have much larger problems than water pollution. It would require time and money wasted, to even think of how much water you would need to reach the water aquifer is pretty discouraging. You target the shale layer, you don't target other layers which are useless and offer no use to the operator. Just like you said, money is everything. Why would you waste money on cracking layers other than the target layers? We can map out the cracks pretty efficiently and accurately.



I know when I cut glass the glass doesn't always break where the score is, but evidently when someone with a degree does it it does.


Again, you're not grasping what I'm saying. You got different rock layers, and those layers fracture at different stresses. We know what kind of rocks those layers are composed of, and if you know what they're composed of, we can see how the layers are situated (folded, anticline, syncline, etc.) in the ground. A little off topic, but that is how you get the pressure gradient of the formation and when you drill in a formation, you have to sustain the drilling fluid at a certain density so you don't fracture the formation. If the density is too high, there is too much hydrostatic pressure which will crack layers, and you will get fluid loss which is the BIGGEST concern when drilling. If have a too low of a density, you will get a blowout. This applies to the drilling fluid when drilling, that is why it's important to know what layers you're drilling and that is why there is a well log analysis. This is done BEFORE any fracking goes on.

Now back to fracking, cracks mitigate in a certain way, while you can't predict exactly where they go, you can get a great idea and when you map the microseisms, engineers and geologists can control where they go. Again, I brought up the point and claim that you said you don't know where cracks can go, but we do know where they go. We can use basic physics, and the understanding of the layers to understand the formation that is being fracked.



When you have lived almost all your life in mining towns, you get to understand how it works if you have an interest in the subject. I know a couple of mining engineers and also people who do blasting at the mine. I even knew a guy who had the job of testing areas for the seismographic effect of blasting when people complained. I live seven miles from the mine and our pictures are always crooked when they blast the thick plate of dolomite.


Sweet, I know many, many petroleum engineers, that's why I got into it myself. I know petroleum geologists and my best friend is a senior drilling engineer for a major operator who runs # and is pretty much a badass. Without giving out too many details which can reveal too much identifying information, I came to learn the industry pretty well over the years and gained knowledge and taken a neutral standpoint. I mean, nothing is completely safe, you think placing asphalt all over the continental US is good for the environment? Where is the bitching about that? Look how much landscape is harmed from asphalt being placed for roads, we are #ing up the environment. You think treating roads with chemicals and poison and smacking it on the ground to lay roads impacts anything?



It's great having an interest in things and knowing you do not have to believe everything because it looks goon on paper. I'm sure the state of the US economy looks great on paper.


What I showed you, was not just to look good on paper. It's basic geology which any undergrad would understand, any geologist would understand, and anyone who works in the field would understand. It's not really magic. It's the truth.



I'm not trying to discredit you, I am just trying to inform you that the evidence may have been structured so it can be used to show it is safer than it is because of the interests of the people involved.


You're not discrediting me, you're discrediting yourself by denying the basics. I came and told you that we do know pretty accurately where the cracks go, and showed you why and how.
edit on 7-5-2015 by Laxpla because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Laxpla

Like I said, I am not against fracking, I am against leaving so many companies, some of which may not be so reliable, do it on such a large scale across the Country. I mean, they fracked so much they reduced the price of natural gas to a point that it wasn't even worth doing it for a while. On a conservative scale it is not bad, but to be doing it so much is not good.

When you see that happening so fast and widespread, you start to think why are they going overboard. Maybe because they know that sooner or later there will be evidence found that will stop all new wells? I believe in conservatively doing things like this, increasing slowly over a decade or two to make sure that it does not have bad unseen effects. The quakes were not supposed to be happening at all.

You are conditioned to see things the way you were taught as were geologists. I won't condemn a whole business for a few problems but I will condemn the ones overseeing this. Some of the gas pipes are just running over hills, not buried at all, they could be hit by a bullet. I'm not that worried about the fracking fluid, you can see the problems with that. What you can't see is what may occur in the future from these wells. Now are they going to seal these wells when they are done to make sure everything is closed up well, or they just going to let them sit there in case they recharge for fifty years like some of the oil wells that were never fixed right..

What happens to closing the wells if a company goes bankrupt. That is actually an important issue as many mines left things go and went bankrupt and the government picked up the tab decades later. I want to make sure these things do not negatively effect my grandchildren and the grandchildren of others.

Like I said, I know more about how people blow things off than I know about oil and gas exploration and I have researched the shabby jobs that have been done closing up mines and businesses.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If anyone is interested in facts please see the above post.



new topics

top topics
 
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join