It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Earthquake-Causing Fracking to Be Allowed within 500 FEET of Nuclear Plants

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:15 AM
reply to post by rickymouse

Their isn't any left. Most of the people running the gas and oil companies have no what they're doing be sides making a quick buck.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:35 AM
reply to post by ObjectZero

Oh, they know what they are doing. They just don't care. They want to create jobs, they want to make America oil rich, they want to fill their pockets and wallpaper their rooms with gold.

Don't they care about their descendants? Soon there will be nowhere to run and hide. Nuclear fallout, quakes, bad water, it is catching up to us all.

edit on 23-10-2012 by Doodle19815 because: Spelling gets the best of us.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:53 AM
I drive a truck hauling gas production drilling liquids. (I'm the bad guy)

I sometimes service wells near a nuclear plant. Although the five hundred foot claim
sounds a little fishy to me. Maybe it's true, but I had to undergo an extensive background
check (in addition to the normal checks required by my haz-mat license) before I was
allowed anywhere near the nuclear facility.

As you would imagine, there is quite a large security perimeter around the nuclear site, and
there are no wells within this secure area. The area where the wells lay, that require
permits, background checks, and training, is somewhere within a mile to three mile radius.

I don't think that a mile, or 500 foot, makes much difference when you're talking about
earthquakes. They say close only counts in horseshoes and hand-grenades....well
I would add earthquakes to that list. So the 500 foot claim seems intentionally provocative.
I'd be more worried about the security risk posed by the many gas well-workers, or the danger
of explosive equipment failure that near a reactor than I would be about an earthquake.

Anyway, I've said this before....the amount of water pumped downhole during frac'ing is
insignificant to the amount of water pumped downhole at any of the waste-water disposals
in the area. ......Wells that are being frac'ed use about 150 truckloads of water and sand...ONCE.
And that water comes right back up within a month.

Waste water disposals in the area take 150 truckloads of water A DAY....everyday....for decades.
And it stays down there. There are literal lakes of waste water beneath some of these
disposals...but they are never mentioned in the news

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:04 AM
Its only going to get a whole lot worse:

The Wall Street Journal previews a speech Clinton will give today, stating the case for the important role energy plays in the country’s overseas agenda:

Mrs. Clinton also is expected to make reference to a flood of domestic natural gas that has upended traditional energy markets and given the U.S. more leverage in dealing with rivals. Russia in recent years has wielded its vast energy reserves against smaller countries in Europe.

The U.S. is actively working to encourage other countries in Europe and Asia to develop their own shale-gas resources.

“We have an interest in resolving disputes among nations over energy, and ensuring that countries don’t use their energy resources, or proximity to transit routes, to force others to bend to their will or forgive their bad behavior,” she is expected to say, based on the excerpts.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:27 AM
reply to post by PuterMan

Will wonders never cease?

S&F Thanks for posting.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:29 AM
Michael Crichton was fairly aware of this kind of thing. That's what inspired him to write "STATE OF FEAR", which is about the faux climate change debate and the idea of ECO-TERROR using new technology (and old).

Standing waves, resonant charges, cavitation machines, etc. That's what he wrote about.
Causing quakes and tsunamis

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 01:47 PM
reply to post by KhufuKeplerTriangle

Okay. I have to re-read that book. Totally missed the point apparently. Must have been sick or something.


posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 02:27 PM
One comment to someone who has spent FAR more time than was literally healthy for myself, learning about every aspect of Fukushima following March 2011.

Earthquakes didn't cause Fukushima to experience 3 core meltdowns. The Tsunami DID NOT cause Fukushima to have 3 meltdowns. Not directly. Fracking had absolutely NOTHING to do with Fukushima having 3 core meltdowns.

It's sad..and it's pathetic...almost to the point of just breaking down over the Reality of what DID cause that place to go tits up.

4 Power Generators failing within about a 5-10 second stretch of time and never to operate again. Water FROM the Tsunami caused that because the short sighted fools figured Generators could be outside, at grade level and why not, they seemed to think...what better place? Well..ABOVE everything else MAY have been a GOOD idea.

Given the fact outside power lines were down, that sealed their fate and made the rest a simple question of time if power wasn't restored. True to what people said would happen, Fukushima control *HAD* to vent the system or sustain MUCH LARGER explosions than they did,. No Choice existed.....and the explosions the venting inside the buildings DID cause, destroyed any real hope of controlling OR containing anything after that.

We can blame God, Tsunami's or little green men from mars. The FACT is...4 damned generators placed by bad planning and arrogance in believing they couldn't all be taken down at once...with outside power lost too. That ONE example of bad judgement is, at the core, the sole reason this has happened at Fuku.
edit on 23-10-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 02:54 PM
reply to post by rival

Wells that are being frac'ed use about 150 truckloads of water and sand...ONCE.
And that water comes right back up within a month.

Do you have any knowledge of the propane gel they are experimenting with, which apparently has a nerve agent in it which thickens the gel?

I have to say I don't like the sound of it al all.

Sorry, meant to ask how many gallons is a truckload?

edit on 23/10/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 05:22 PM
reply to post by PuterMan

All I can say, living in the West Texas Oil Fields for most of my life, is that FRACKING gets the job done. I have yet to see any hard tangible proof that FRACKING causes earthquakes. All I have seen so far is a "liberal" view of possibilities but no proof to back it up or support it.

While I would agree that if you empty a cavern full of oil out of the ground and replace it with nothing, leaves an empty open pocket for the ground to sink into. Backfilling that empty cavern with fluid or solid material would keep it from caving in.

Earthquake techtonics are alot different and go very deep into the ground.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 05:51 PM
reply to post by PuterMan

What the frack!? I hate fracking fracking! Every Fracking worker that fracks for the fracking fracking companies should be fracked!

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 06:05 PM
Due to your information, I need to build a cloud buster of considerable power in order to neutralize the radioactive materials.

Thanks for the Info. S&F for you bub.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 06:34 PM
reply to post by PuterMan

There is no doubt in my mind that drilling has got to stop!!

There are other means than oil!

These companies know this, yet they keep on drilling because they are too damn greedy and can't see what is happening to the Earth!

I remember replying to a post couple years ago about this topic with near enough the same reply and i'm no Scientist! if I can see that this is a problem, surely these CEO's can but like I say 'greed' spurs them on.

No wonder the Earth is cracking up right underneath our feet!

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 07:02 PM
ARCO sign in seattle reads:

"Your Car would LIKE ARCO
if your car was into social networking"


It's a war to BURN oil

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 07:34 PM
Puterman's example of my wild theory is really one of my more tame ideas. I believe Ohio will be rocking again very soon. There is a gas glut right now. New York Times just did a piece. Wait til the temporary pause in drilling is over.

Here's another wild idea and it's still on the mild side- the Ohio fracking will cause a major earthquake which will produce a tsunami on Lake Erie which hit Buffalo, New York. I want to mock myself and I want to erase all of what I just wrote. But it's not impossible. Maybe one of those new fangled gas storage unit blows up near or under the lake. They use old salt domes like you would a silo on a farm for wheat or soy bean to store the gas. Soon, they'll be toting around those big liquid gas monsters. Gas underground, under pressure. Great idea. I'm sure Puterman can add the stories on gas storage in Lousiana. It would be sorta like one of those hydro-thermal explosions under Yellowstone Lake which have produced inland tsunamis.

But really, would anyone frack 500 feet away from a nuke plant?
How many feet are in a mile? I can't remember. I try to use metric since it's the only system that makes sense.
Is a mile too close???

edit on 23-10-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-10-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)

This next geologists didn't get the message and says that fracking can cause earthquakes. Didn't he get the memo. NO. NO. NO.

Want proof of earthquakes caused by fracking? There's more than more source now. The body of evidence is growing.

Want proof that fracking contaminates the water?

Pavillion, Wyoming.

Want fracking?
No fracking way!!

edit on 23-10-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:20 PM

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by rival

Wells that are being frac'ed use about 150 truckloads of water and sand...ONCE.
And that water comes right back up within a month.

Do you have any knowledge of the propane gel they are experimenting with, which apparently has a nerve agent in it which thickens the gel?

I have to say I don't like the sound of it al all.

Sorry, meant to ask how many gallons is a truckload?

edit on 23/10/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

Gel is frowned upon. I've never heard of propane gel. The idea behind using gel is to help
suspend the frac-sand in the solution so that the cracks from frac'ing are held open more

Gel is used very little because it is not cost effective. Disposals don't want it, so companies
pay extra disposal fees at special sites. That means they are also paying me extra to drive
farther both is used very little and is non-toxic. There is no MSDS on the gel solution.
That is not to say, that there isn't something harmful in it, but the guys with suits at OSHA
aren't concerned about it, and THOSE guys are tough on anything safety related....real tough.

A truckload of water is about 7000 gallons.

Once again (and I wish I could get this thru to you activists) frac'ing is not what you should be attacking.
If you think it is bad, put a stop to the permitting of disposals.

Here's how it works. A well is fracked. 150 truckloads of water go down the hole. A month later
150 truckloads of sandy water comes back up and then the well is put into production.
Once production begins (well starts producing gas) residual water from the frack-job
comes up with the gas, BUT, more water comes up than went down....ALOT more.

So an average well has 150 truckloads pumped down (and that amount quickly comes back up
and is disposed) and then the residual water productions begins. I have seen wells produce
twenty (this is extreme) truckloads of extra-water a day, for years. So there is water down there
already. A general average is three truckloads a day for the life of the well. This is ALOT
of waste water.

So what do we do with it?

We take it to disposals, which are wells dug according to Railroad Commission rules and oversight
that pump all this water beneath the aquifer. LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of it. In purpose and
intent, a disposal is a continual frac job, never ending. We dispose of 150 truckloads a day at these
sites ever day. That means Sunday, and Saturday, and Labor day, and Thanksgiving....we don't
even skip Christmas. In my area there are twenty disposals, and when I say that there are literal
lakes of water beneath some of these, I am actually being literal.

150 truckloads is 150 times 7000 gallons times 365 times several years, (in some cases decades).
That's more water than it takes to fill an olympic-sized pool pumped into the ground
at a static site. And that's every day normal, business as usual....that's the elephant in the room.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:22 PM
reply to post by Doodle19815

I wonder what those people will say when their beloved fracking causes an earthquake that levels their homes....

Not to mention if they live near a nuke plant.

[OP: S&F'd on this awesome topic]

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:39 PM

So Jennifer Young is the “go to” expert on this subject…. Here is what she said about the Davis-Bette power plant in Jan 2012

A bit off topic, but the classic film buff in me has to give a bit of a chuckle to the name of that Nuke plant.

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:39 PM

Originally posted by PuterMan
An addendum to the comment that the earthquake on September 28th was not caused by fracking. Whilst I said earthquake depths are not easily determined, the statement that this one would have at around 2000ft has a distinct whiff of pork pies about it.

2000ft is about 615m or 2/3rds of a kilometre. If that is th case why does the USGS page about it put the quake at 5km - pretty much fracking depth?

48.048°N 103.350°W depth=5.0km (3.1mi)

Why do they not say 0.5 or 1 km? They do for other quakes.

Note also on the technical page the depth uncertainty ia + or - 0 so they are confident of 5km. (Yeah right!)
edit on 23/10/2012 by PuterMan because: to add more information

Gas well laterals are typically fracked at 6000-10000 feet.

The lateral is usually around 1500-2000 feet.

An example of a 10000 foot well would be some 8000 feet deep and 2000 feet of lateral.

The idea that fracking will "cause an earthquake" is pretty funny. Also the idea that a drilling rig would be allowed to drill within 500 feet of a nuclear power plant.

The foolishness of actually putting that number into legislation says more about the sheer stupidity of politicians than anything else.

edit on 23-10-2012 by badgerprints because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:57 PM
Here's the other thing about greed. It is not just corporate greed that drives domestic gas
production. It is everyone's greed. From the top down.

From the bottom up it begins with the landowner. Imagine being offered 5k to 30k a month
for several years or more to have a well on your property. Or being offered another large
sum to allow a pipeline under your property that (once in place) you will never know is there.

Then the workers. Semi-skilled welders and roustabout types, working in a Wal-Mart
warehouse, or pouring concrete, or doing gravel work and landscaping, are suddenly
offered twice, or three times the wages to work in the gas field. And truck drivers away from
home for a month or more, are offered 150% of their usual salary to be home every night
with their families. Plus the boon to the local economy and the local business owners.

And penultimately the greedy corporate types who plot to destroy...

And last of course, is you, or someone like you, who use the cheap gas to heat their homes
and dry their is all of us.

This is a ~screw you hooray for me~ world. And if you can honestly say that you would
refuse 15k a month based on your principles then you are in a small minority. I think
most folks would start in with the equivocations instantly when faced with a 300k a year
windfall. Although we all believe ourselves to be morally incorruptible, when push comes to
shove, we all generally cave in and take the cash.

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in