"Did Fracking Cause a 4.0 Magnitude Earthquake...?"

Post Reply New Topic

Get it another way.

The first thing to understand is that water wells are shallow. The deepest private residential wells go perhaps a couple hundred meters, though most are much shallower. Fracking takes place kilometers deeper underground; and in most places, the fracked shale beds are separated from the surface watersheds by multiple rock formations of different types. There's little or no transference of anything — gas or liquid — between fracked layers and surface layers; they're simply too far apart and separated by too much rock.

However, the burning water is an undisputed fact. So where is this methane coming from, if not from fracking? As it happens, it's natural, worldwide, for anyone who has a well in a natural gas area. Natural gas is not found only in the deep shale beds, it's in shallower layers as well; so we always expect some gas to make it into well water in particular regions. But the mining of natural gas also has a few consequences that can force methane into aquifers. First, the underground changes in pressure can prompt methane to migrate from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. Second, poorly sealed natural gas wells can (and do) leak methane into adjacent strata. These poorly sealed wells are human errors that it's the responsibility of the driller to repair. Third, old abandoned wells do the same thing, but often without anyone repairing them. None of these problems are related to fracking, per se.

When the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission investigated the burning water of the well owner most prominently featured in Gasland, whose tap water was gray and actually effervesced, they found that his methane was naturally occurring and had nothing to do with any natural gas drilling. His water well had been drilled directly into a shallow natural gas deposit. Nevertheless, Gasland portrayed this as a consequence of fracking, which is wrong at two levels.

I didn't watch the movie. Although, while we're on the subject...

I sometimes wonder if Gasland isn't, in part, a gas company conspiracy. Might be paranoid, but it makes sense to me: While people are ranting and raving about burning tap water, other more damaging but less sensational travesties (like the COLONIAL ECONOMY) and flagrant violations of existing laws (like the stream dumping) are unnoticed.

It's called the "door-in-the-face" technique. It's a lesser-known sales pitch, the inversion of the "foot-in-the-door" technique. In essence, you confront people with a presentation that is so egregious, so unreasonable, that what you really want looks OK by comparison.

Aspies are supposed to be infuriated by injustice.

And I'm engaging in some not-so-subtle coalition-building in a probably completely inappropriate place.

The idea that Fracking can cause an earthquake is sooooo romantic.

ruveyn

At this very moment, I am setting within 20 ft. of a so called "evil" oil and gas company executive. I can assure you these people do not have the time to plot these half-witted conspiracies that they are constantly accused of.

Just after he said that he also mentions that methane can leak into aquafiers due to human error. The process isn't perfect. He even says that it's true that hundreds of chemicals could be used to frack the shale. And because of an imperfect process, those chemicals can seep into the water. I've seen studies done that suggest there aren't any poisonous chemicals using in fracking that make it to well water, but I can't really take those studies seriously, because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic. I don't think they really know the complete picture of what they are doing.

I've seen studies done that suggest there aren't any poisonous chemicals using in fracking that make it to well water, but I can't really take those studies seriously, because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic. I don't think they really know the complete picture of what they are doing.

you are pretty worked up over this issue.

No you

I don't think methane has lead or arsenic in it. I think you confused your terms, you are pretty worked up over this issue.

I like how "we're going to investigate the situation" always turns into "SEE!! THEY'RE HIDING SOMETHING!! !!"

I suggest everyone reads the Skeptoid piece before posting further. It blatantly says LET THE SCIENTISTS DECIDE IT. Not some media report with spin. Not some sensationalist piece demonizing it.



I don't think methane has lead or arsenic in it. I think you confused your terms, you are pretty worked up over this issue.

because methane is known to contain lead and arsenic.

Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.