FRACK NO! extensive Damage to USA's crust since 2001 widespread manmade Quakes - USGS now admits

reply to post by BiggerPicture

Nice, you're doing better. But your sources could still use some work.

What does Deepwater Horizon and the Total gas leak have to do with earthquakes?

Yes, I know what a fault is and what the New Madrid fault is. Do you think that if oil and gas production were halted right now, there would never be an earthquake on the New Madrid fault or anywhere else?

Originally posted by Phage
Yes. Youtube. And this kind of nonsense:

But youtube is not a source.
That is like blaming wikipedia for information gleaned from it isnt it?
What is wrong with youtube exactly?
Anything that is rebroadcast on youtube is automatically discredited?

theres obviously only so much drilling and prodding the crust beneath our feet can take before it starts giving in. oh wait, it already is:

"Extensive Damage to USA's crust". OMG, the crust is failing! Call henny penny!

So some person's written words and not youtube?

I understand the concerns about fracking. I don't understand the hysterical panic over an increase in barely (if at all) perceptible earthquakes. Doom porn.

edit on 4/10/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Come live in my neighborhood for a while and see how much you want to defend fracking by picking on youtube.

What a lame argument.

of course, if fracking stops, new madrid fault area will never experience another quake ever again. i promise!

reply to post by Phage


You're probably aware that the NMSZ is viewed similarly as the CSZ (Cascadia Subduction Zone) or even California's expected "big one" in that it's a "when not if" situation.

So in that regard, if it's gonna go it's gonna go. But the paper I linked discusses the possibility of the smaller quakes triggering a larger quake sooner than would otherwise have happened.

That being the case, and if fracking is responsible for some of the swarms in the midwest, how wise is it to be performing that activity (fracking) in an area known to have previously experienced a large quake?

Especially considering how much more built up the area is since the 1811-1812 series of quakes in the NMSZ.

Regardless of sooner or later (if at all), we are NOT prepared to the extent we should be for such an eventuality.

Can you imagine what would happen should the NMSZ (or a yet undiscovered fault in a nearby area) experience a series of quakes as happened 100 years ago?

Someone, at least, has thought about that:

The results indicate that Tennessee, Arkansas, and Missouri are most severely impacted. Illinois and Kentucky are also impacted, though not as severely as the previous three states. Nearly 715,000 buildings are damaged in the eight-state study region. About 42,000 search and rescue personnel working in 1,500 teams are required to respond to the earthquakes. Damage to critical infrastructure (essential facilities, transportation and utility lifelines) is substantial in the 140 impacted counties near the rupture zone, including 3,500 damaged bridges and nearly 425,000 breaks and leaks to both local and interstate pipelines. Approximately 2.6 million households are without power after the earthquake. Nearly 86,000 injuries and fatalities result from damage to infrastructure. Nearly 130 hospitals are damaged and most are located in the impacted counties near the rupture zone. There is extensive damage and substantial travel delays in both Memphis, Tennessee, and St. Louis, Missouri, thus hampering search and rescue as well as evacuation. Moreover roughly 15 major bridges are unusable. Three days after the earthquake, 7.2 million people are still displaced and 2 million people seek temporary shelter. Direct economic losses for the eight states total nearly $300 billion, while indirect losses may be at least twice this amount.

Impact of New Madrid Seismic Zone Earthquakes on the Central USA, Vol. 1 and 2

I've read one of these (Volume 2, I think) and it's not for the faint of heart.

Again, not emphasizing doom, just looking at a real world scenario which is entirely plausible. This was published in 2009, and since then We've had The Great Tohoku Earthquake and Fukushima happen since then.

Knowing what we now know of BWR's susceptibility to loss of coolant accidents in the event of offsite power being lost, take a look at the location of America's reactors:



Notice how many of them are in the middle of the country that could potentially be affected by a large quake as envisioned.

You're smart enough to know what could happen. I've learned a lot from reading your posts in various threads (not all of which I post in) so I know you've a good knowledge base and can appreciate the larger issues being raised while being able to take a realistic view on things.

We're stuck in an ever growing thirst for more and unless something drastically changes in how we either obtain our energy, or how we use what we have, the downside potential here is quite large.

Of course, this could all be fear mongering and we could have absolutely nothing to worry about as there are some scientists who think that the NMSZ is a "dead" fault and will never produce another large quake as it has in the past.

Do we continue taking that chance?

Leaving earthquakes aside, what about the potential of damaging our water supply?

Low probability, like earthquakes, but HUGE potential downside.

Where does it end?

There are companies that want to frack near Yellowstone...

Something's got to give, I hope it isn't that fault.

reply to post by LErickson

Come live in my neighborhood for a while and see how much you want to defend fracking by picking on youtube.

Please point out where I have defended fracking.

I'm pointing out that the OP's title is absurdly sensationalistic. I'm pointing out that the OP did no actually research into the sources that he used.

Do you think that it's more helpful to spread ignorance and fear rather than facts? Rather than actually trying to learn something about the topic? This is the OP's modus operandi; grab a youtube video or sensationalistic headline (no matter how outdated, misconstrued, or wrong it may be) and start a thread based on it. The more outrageous the headline the better. No further research needed. It's on youtube, it must be true.

reply to post by jadedANDcynical

Well you've thrown a lot of stuff in there.

Yes, another large earthquake on the NMSZ would be catastrophic. It would have been catastrophic if it happened 30 years ago, it would be catastrophic if it happens tomorrow, it would be catastrophic whenever it happened. If the NMSZ is not dead, like the San Andreas fault, it will happen. But for the sake of your argument, what difference does it make if the small quakes induced by oil and gas extraction cause it? It would happen whether or not that extraction was being done.

We're stuck in an ever growing thirst for more and unless something drastically changes in how we either obtain our energy, or how we use what we have, the downside potential here is quite large.

Guess what? I agree. But I don't think it's productive to run around in circles and hysterically distort the situation. That sort of thing tends to discourage rational dialog.

Where does it end?

It ends when the world ends it's dependence on fossil fuels...not for a very long time.

Something's got to give, I hope it isn't that fault.

Yes, if the fault complex is still active something has to give. And it will whether or not fracking continues. Just as Yellowstone will erupt. Those risks exist. They have existed since the Earth formed.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Phage
Yet another BS thread title from the OP.

Please show where "USGS now admits" that any earthquakes are caused by fracking.
.....
Yes, an apparent increase in mild earthquake activity...maybe.
Linked to fracking? Not by the USGS.

edit on 4/10/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Would a USGS scientist do?

The Earthquake / Tremors in Blackpool UK was likely to be caused by Fracking according to the BBC. For a scientist who by nature never jump to any conclusion - is actually a big shout.

reply to post by AQuestion


Have you guys seen this 2011 report from the Oklahoma Geological Society? This probably deserves a thread of its own so people can chew on it, but I'm not one to start a whole new thread when the topic has already been introduced.

www.ogs.ou.edu...

And I quote from page 21:

Question 2: Is there a clear correlation between injection and seismicity? (YES) There is a clear correlation between the time of hydraulic-­‐fracturing and the observed seismicity in the Eola Field.

So, as far as the Eola Field, they did find evidence that there was a correlation. They went on to state that other fields didn't show evidence. But then they go on to say:

Do some earthquakes occur at or near injection depths? (YES) Most of the earthquakes do occur near injection depths.

So, as usual, they don't want come right out and say fracking isn't a smart thing to do, but they come as close as any government agency is willing to come, IMO.

Originally posted by Phage

I'm pointing out that the OP's title is absurdly sensationalistic. I'm pointing out that the OP did no actually research into the sources that he used.

Do you think that it's more helpful to spread ignorance and fear rather than facts? Rather than actually trying to learn something about the topic? This is the OP's modus operandi; grab a youtube video or sensationalistic headline (no matter how outdated, misconstrued, or wrong it may be) and start a thread based on it. The more outrageous the headline the better. No further research needed. It's on youtube, it must be true.

broken record.

*yawn*

reply to post by Phage

But for the sake of your argument, what difference does it make if the small quakes induced by oil and gas extraction cause it? It would happen whether or not that extraction was being done.

My point here is that if we reduce the amount of time we have to prepare (assuming preparations are even taking place) then we reduce the possibility of the successful implementation of those preparedness programs.

If you come across a sleeping bear, you don't poke it with a sharp stick. Yes it will wake up on it's own, but by then you will (hopefully) be elsewhere.

But I don't think it's productive to run around in circles and hysterically distort the situation. That sort of thing tends to discourage rational dialog.

And I agree with you here, which is why I have endeavored to inject some rational though with my posts while also considering the very real danger that is posed.

Perhaps the OP was effused with sensationalism, but a dialogue was begun.

Will anything change a result of this discussion? Probably not, but the possibility is there that perhaps someone will be moved by something that is read and that will have a "butterfly effect" out in the real world. Wouldn't it be great if this did happen?

In that eventuality, even the OP can take some credit for this hypothesized change.

Personally, I'm too cynical to think that anything other than an ELE will have any impact on our current political inertia surround how business is conducted. But I keep trying because I am still slightly hopeful that humanity may eventually "grow up."

reply to post by BiggerPicture


How much fracking will happen before we have entire 100 square mile areas collapse into the earth?
Think about that one.

Fracking is ridiculously dangerous, and should be banned completely.

Phage, can you refute that fracking causes structural damage to the underlying rock / crustal formations?
(not too worried here about it being the cause of large quakes - they do that on their own, with or without intervention)

Fracking does indeed cause damage to the natural foundation. Not only that but weakens existing fault lines near the area.

I don't know......should we start fracking on the San Andreas fault line or on in the New Madrid zone too Soo f ing stupid

Originally posted by dreamfox1

I don't know......should we start fracking on the San Andreas fault line or on in the New Madrid zone too

Soo f ing stupid

edit on 4/5/2011 by dreamfox1 because: (no reason given)

did u know:

- New Madrid fault zone is six times bigger than the San Andreas fault zone?

- it spans at least 7 different states? (Indiana Ohio Missouri Arkansas Kentucky Tennessee Mississippi)

- the biggest earthquakes in the history of the United States involved the New Madrid fault?

- extensive fracking & flooding continues widespread throughout the New Madrid zone, despite all of the above?

This is all just part of the progressive agenda to render the US economy unviable by making energy prices 'skyrocket' and render it dependent on foreign energy sources.


April 10, 2012
Is the EPA Just Sloppy, or Cooking the Books?

There are many who believe that the EPA is out of control and that its unaccountable actions are subverting democracy. That is the point of Jonah Goldberg's astute discussion of radical environmentalism in his book Liberal Fascism. Goldberg is surely correct in his assertion that environmentalism "offers a number of eerie parallels to fascist practices." The most dangerous of these practices is the perversion of science in the service of a "higher" political end.

The EPA is a dangerously out-of-control federal agency that needs to be reined in, if not eliminated, before it does further damage to our economy and future security. A series of hasty and unreliable if not falsified findings coming out of the EPA have already damaged a vital sector of American industry, costing jobs and threatening overall economic growth. The EPA should be held to account, and those who are guilty of deliberate falsification or cover-up should be prosecuted. Read more: www.americanthinker.com...

Originally posted by BiggerPicture

Originally posted by dreamfox1

I don't know......should we start fracking on the San Andreas fault line or on in the New Madrid zone too

Soo f ing stupid

edit on 4/5/2011 by dreamfox1 because: (no reason given)

did u know:

- New Madrid fault zone is six times bigger than the San Andreas fault zone?

- it spans at least 7 different states? (Indiana Ohio Missouri Arkansas Kentucky Tennessee Mississippi)

- the biggest earthquakes in the history of the United States involved the New Madrid fault?

- extensive fracking & flooding continues widespread throughout the New Madrid zone, despite all of the above?

edit on 10-4-2012 by BiggerPicture because: (no reason given)

Yea i know and one day all that fracking will cause it to go

re: it's all just all an EPA agenda, frackin is totally safe!

domestic Gas & Oil utility companies have been FRACKIN away, unregulated, field & residential rigs for over 10 years now all over America

so??



^ he LIES!

Then why are the fuel prices (natural gas/oil & imported gasoline/oil) still skyrocketing then?



this is the sad truth about domestic oil/gas ventures:



yep, just another source for more greedy gouging, utilities hide/hold back extra supply to keep prices HIGH anyways

Now I'm just a Nobody here, but I've been watching this closely to see if anyone puts together Mr. Teslas' 'Earthquake Machine', with the 'Unexplained Quakes & Noise Events' that we have been experiencing of late. Upon his death, the Feds took ALL his records, drawings & devices to study & seek any 'Profitable Uses' for the 'Military'. Maybe someone who has more knowledge can 'Expound & Apply' their knowledge of Tesla to these subjects??? JPK

posted earlier here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks

**Thread Closed**


for future reference:

We Have A New Search Engine--Please Use It!