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.

 

Radioactive Waste Dumped by Oil Companies Is Seeping out of the Ground in North Dakota

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
www.www.alternet.org...

Another benefit of fracking:



After oil companies and state executives in North Dakota hid the news from the public that nearly 300 oil spills occured between 2011 and 2013, radioactive toxic sludge is brimming back up to the surface, bubbling forth from the ground and mixing with fresh water across the state.


I found this a new twist:


Radiation testing has confirmed that the sludge secreting up from fracking wells is a mix of corrosive chemicals used in hydaulic fracking and a substance dubbed TENORM (Technologically enhanced normally occuring radioactive material).


Technologically enhanced normally occuring radioactive material. Now what the heck is that?

ah an explaination:


Skekos explained that TENORM is produced when NORM (normally occuring radioactive material) is brought to the surface through fracking. Legally, TENORM must be disposed of in properly designated areas because of the health hazard it poses to humans, but in order to avoid the costs of properly dumping the material (the nearest TENORM waste site is in Colorado), oil companies in North Dakota are spewing the toxic waste wherever is most convenient from them.


You'd think these fine corporation citizens intend to poison the environment and it's inhabitants, that must be to make room for more fine corporate citizens.




posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Yay, america the beautiful.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Luuke123
 


land of the free...



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Hmm, as far as I know the process of fracking (I had to analyze the involved techniques some years ago for a project which.. well.. never happened, but not because of fracking-problems), the so-called NORMS of the OP are from depths which are usually about 2,000 meters or below. The usual groundwater in those depths is highly salinated, with all kinds of salt, not only NhCl.. Radium, Uranium etc. are quite the normal ingredients.

Usually, though, those waters STAY in those depths. It would take millions of years to rise to the surface, with extensive natural filtering at bypassing layers of soil.


Fracking in depths of 2.000m and below can be considered safe. No or at least nearly no water is able to come up to the ground, as the fracking procedure can't open chasms or clefts right up to the surface, as there are many, many different layers which would help to dissipate the fluids horizontally.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Your link is to a right wing bashing website. They even say so in their about page. So I take this with a grain of salt. Not saying it's not true but not confident in the source. Any "news" source with an admitted political agenda should raise an eyebrow.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:19 AM
link   

ManFromEurope

Fracking in depths of 2.000m and below can be considered safe. No or at least nearly no water is able to come up to the ground, as the fracking procedure can't open chasms or clefts right up to the surface, as there are many, many different layers which would help to dissipate the fluids horizontally.


I've read numerous studies which indicate that somewhere between 3 & 6 percent of "ALL" wells drilled leak, in/or around the casing from day 1. That's right, day one! After 30 yrs., that percentage went upwards of 60% and we're just talking about "casing leaks."

Just recently I heard on the news that some 7 to 8 thousand wells in the Dallas/Fort Worth area released more pollution into the air than all the automobiles in the metropolitan area combined. I'm not sure just how many cars they're talking about but they have a population of almost 7 million, so it must be a lot.

When the fluids & gases are leaking up the drill bore hole and around the casing, it doesn't matter how deep the well is or how far it travels horizontally. As the pollutants migrate up the well bore hole, they permeate every porous strata level they encounter along the way up.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Hoosierdaddy71
Your link is to a right wing bashing website. They even say so in their about page. So I take this with a grain of salt. Not saying it's not true but not confident in the source. Any "news" source with an admitted political agenda should raise an eyebrow.


really?....in that case, my eyebrows would be raised to the point of scraping the ceiling every time I came here....by the way, this must be what is meant by doing away with those 'JOB-KILLING REGULATIONS"....hey, let the free market determine what happens in north Dakota...maybe that free market might have citizens going to those corporate .quarters and stringing up some executives, and not having government (cops, sheriffs) interfere with that free market idea.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   

ManFromEurope
Hmm, as far as I know the process of fracking (I had to analyze the involved techniques some years ago for a project which.. well.. never happened, but not because of fracking-problems), the so-called NORMS of the OP are from depths which are usually about 2,000 meters or below. The usual groundwater in those depths is highly salinated, with all kinds of salt, not only NhCl.. Radium, Uranium etc. are quite the normal ingredients.

Usually, though, those waters STAY in those depths. It would take millions of years to rise to the surface, with extensive natural filtering at bypassing layers of soil.


Fracking in depths of 2.000m and below can be considered safe. No or at least nearly no water is able to come up to the ground, as the fracking procedure can't open chasms or clefts right up to the surface, as there are many, many different layers which would help to dissipate the fluids horizontally.


"Can be considered safe". This means the risk is less that there will be problems but it is not Zero. There are problems associated with Fracking even at this depth, but proper evaluation has not been done. Only testing for what is known to be a problem is done most times. Excluding what is not thought of yet is not required and anyone who follows the allowed procedures is not liable for any consequences. In fact, the government will protect the corporations that follow lawful practices even if it is found later to be a concern.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   

jimmyx

Hoosierdaddy71
Your link is to a right wing bashing website. They even say so in their about page. So I take this with a grain of salt. Not saying it's not true but not confident in the source. Any "news" source with an admitted political agenda should raise an eyebrow.


really?....in that case, my eyebrows would be raised to the point of scraping the ceiling every time I came here....by the way, this must be what is meant by doing away with those 'JOB-KILLING REGULATIONS"....hey, let the free market determine what happens in north Dakota...maybe that free market might have citizens going to those corporate .quarters and stringing up some executives, and not having government (cops, sheriffs) interfere with that free market idea.



So you're saying we should not verify information? We should not check sources? I thought this websites motto was deny ignorance. You automatically assumed that an evil corporation was breaking the law. Maybe they were. But I will wait for verification first. If these allegations turn out to be true, go a. with your bashing.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   

ManFromEurope
Hmm, as far as I know the process of fracking (I had to analyze the involved techniques some years ago for a project which.. well.. never happened, but not because of fracking-problems), the so-called NORMS of the OP are from depths which are usually about 2,000 meters or below. The usual groundwater in those depths is highly salinated, with all kinds of salt, not only NhCl.. Radium, Uranium etc. are quite the normal ingredients.

Usually, though, those waters STAY in those depths. It would take millions of years to rise to the surface, with extensive natural filtering at bypassing layers of soil.


Fracking in depths of 2.000m and below can be considered safe. No or at least nearly no water is able to come up to the ground, as the fracking procedure can't open chasms or clefts right up to the surface, as there are many, many different layers which would help to dissipate the fluids horizontally.


Great information. I was aware that deep, fossil water, is often very radioactive. However the piece speaks of ENHANCED normally occuring radioactivity. I'd like to know just what they are doing to this 'radioactive material' to enhance it and what are the consequences of that 'enhancement'.

This also, as you informed us, speaks to a danger in draining these fossil aquafers for drinking water. The radioactivity of such water is fairly easily removed but a by-product of the process is more radioactive waster to store.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Hoosierdaddy71
Your link is to a right wing bashing website. They even say so in their about page. So I take this with a grain of salt. Not saying it's not true but not confident in the source. Any "news" source with an admitted political agenda should raise an eyebrow.


Here's a link to the original article in the guardian a reputable if left leaning site.

It is unfortunate that right leaning and corporate funded (alternet is largely reader funded) media doesn't report on environmental malfeasance. Nor does any, left or right, mainstream media in the US report on anything that might cast a negitive light on corporate interests.

Facts, such as those reported, are neither left or right and I would encourage everyone to do their homework and not 'trust' authorities of questionable sincerity.

Closing ones mind to information, regardless of source, without investigation is the very definition of ignorance.



“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation”
Herbert Spencer quotes (British social Philosopher, 1820-1903)


thinkexist.com...



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Flatfish

Just recently I heard on the news that some 7 to 8 thousand wells in the Dallas/Fort Worth area released more pollution into the air than all the automobiles in the metropolitan area combined. I'm not sure just how many cars they're talking about but they have a population of almost 7 million, so it must be a lot.


Do you have a source for that, by chance?

D/FW metro here. We're spread out. Lots of cars. Transit system is getting better (kinda), but still far behind most other metro areas.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 



I'll take this opportunity to again ask the membership for links to their conservative sources that, in fact, check and cite their sources of information and cite the source of their statistics. And internal, circular references don't count.

I've been asking this question since I joined and have yet to receive one response.

That lack of response leads me to believe that few members really care at all about facts and reason and only repeat close minded sound bites from talking .s.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Living in the Bakken and working here, I can say that the OP's article is spot on. I was here and knew about the train explosion. It wasn't a secret. It is also true they frack at very deep depths- usually around 4,000 feet. They do have salt water dump stations around the area, but they aren't set up for radioactive materials. Trucks haul this stuff on the regular highways and rural roads of the state. No one bats an eye- it's all about the money up here. No one is going to complain until the drinking water is contaminated, and we have to truck in water fit to drink. Until money won't compensate for the damage being done to the environment, nothing will be done.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


With the EPA all over the entire coal industry,

is there any reports that indicate EPA involvement with this story?

Something this "big" would certainly have their attention Yes?



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Just curious, does living and working in the Bakken for several years count as being a reliable source of information? if not, I will stay off these threads. I don't know everything that goes on up here, but I do hear quite a bit.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


I haven't heard of any EPA involvement up here, things like this are usually taken care of by MSHA...Mining safety. I don't think the populace of North Dakota has really absorbed what is happening around here yet, although they like the extra money coming in.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


One would hope so but between 'budget cuts' and corporate tools embeded in governmental (regulatory) bodies I don't expect any help for the public or the planet from them.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SweetKarma
 


Personal experience is certainly a valid source as long as it is attributed as such. And being in the area in revelant in that, as you yourself have said, nothing is being reported on these subjects.

Scary, huh - I wonder what is happening that never gets noted.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   

FyreByrd
reply to post by xuenchen
 


One would hope so but between 'budget cuts' and corporate tools embeded in governmental (regulatory) bodies I don't expect any help for the public or the planet from them.


The budget cuts don't stop their power to talk and criticize.

I don't see them talking too much about this.

What budget "cuts" are affecting this?




top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join