clean fracking

checkitycheckyoself

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Last summer a Halliburton executive did the unthinkable: He took a big ol' swig of hydrologic fracturing fluid.

No, he didn't have a death wish. And yes, he appears to be doing just fine. He did it to prove a point: fracking fluid need not be toxic.

What the exec drank was a new formulation of fracking fluid made with ingredients sourced from the food industry rather than the chemical industry.

As public concern over the controversial practice of fracking mounts, Halliburton and a host of other companies are racing to fill a major void: finding a way of cracking rock to unlock oil and natural gas that is also environmentally benign.

Traditional fracking fluids rely of hydrochloric acids and other chemicals that allow the industry to crack shale rock. The technology has unleashed a boom in domestic energy production, but it's also raised concerns over water contamination.

Halliburton's new fracking formula and methods "don't quite call for the downhole delivery of fruits and vegetables," the company's web site reads. "But it does rely on some of the same acids and enzymes present in those items to create one of the most innovative and environmentally safe fracture solutions ever conceived."

Halliburton (HAL, Fortune 500), which is one of the world's largest hydrofracking companies, wouldn't say how many of the wells it works on have used the new formula or how much more it costs compared to a traditional frack job.

i must admit: it's nice to see them trying to make a buck without directly poisoning mom.

but now i have to wonder: what aren't they "making better" about fracking? i'd imagine that the lube isn't the only danger...

reply to post by ICEKOHLD


Indeed the composition of the "lube" is only part of the problem. Just think logically about what they are doing. They are finding shale gas deposits in the ground, and pumping a chemical cocktail into the ground to loosen up the gas and remove the other material, some of which itself is highly toxic.

So immediately you have three problems;
1 the chemicals used
2 the byproducts of those chemicals and the other material being removed to get to the gas
3 and the most important one, this practice causes minor earthquakes, as you're pumping stuff into the ground with pressure, that pressure is going to move and shift, which releases methane up into areas it wasn't leeching into before, namely, the water table, peoples wells, rivers, lakes, etc etc.

If anyone wants to see some of the impact you can expect, take a look at the documentary H2Oil. It's about the Alberta Tar sands operation and the impact it's having on the environment around it. You can now clearly see the giant toxic sludge ponds from space. These ponds are leaking millions of gallons a day into the surrounding environment. They are currently trying to work out a pipeline deal to take oil/gas right out of the ground in Alberta and pipe it straight to Texas.

A more directly related film would be GasLand, but compared to H2Oil, it's a little more alarmist, but does have vivid examples of the dangers of fracking, regardless of the chemicals used.

Anyways, seeing as it's Halliburton, unless I watched him drink directly out of the pump stream on an active fracking operation, I'm not buying it.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


yeah. i seriously doubt he drank any of it. and even if it was "public" or "seen by others" i'm sure it wasn't the same "food safe" lube they'll be using for their fracking.

thanks for those vids to look up. have some spare time to till this morning anyways.