Page 9 of 10 < 1 2 ... 7 8 9 10 >
Topic Options
#1263641 - 15/05/2014 09:02 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Kev in Bello Offline
Occasional Visitor

Registered: 23/09/2001
Posts: 5021
Loc: Bellingen NSW 2454
http://m.smh.com.au/nsw/bentley-coal-sea...0515-zrd2w.html Bentley csg exploration referred to ICAC smile

Top
#1263645 - 15/05/2014 09:29 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Kev in Bello]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4040
Loc: El Arish
Hopefully there will be a positive outcome to that one!

However You watch more and more of these coal seam gas projects come online thanks to the scabbot Gov, they don't care about the environment, they are just here to rape,pillage and plunder for a quick buck.

They don't care about food producing areas, as mining brings in more wealth than farming.

you just have to look at all the environmental "green tape" that has been slashed, programs axed, agencies closed and funding pulled.

What will australia become? a toxic waste dump, thanks to it's mining inheritance?
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1263958 - 17/05/2014 22:09 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
THIS CONCLUSION OF THIS U.S.REPORT IS TO END ALL CSG URGENTLY
The explosion of hydraulic fracturing in the last several years, according to a new report, is creating a previously 'unimaginable' situation in which hundreds of billions of gallons of the nation's fresh water supply are being annually transformed into unusable - sometimes radioactive - cancer-causing wastewater.

According to the report, Fracking by the Numbers, produced by Environment America, the scale and severity of fracking’s myriad impacts betray all claims that natural gas is a "cleaner" or somehow less damaging alternative to other fossil fuels.

The report explores various ways in which gas fracking negatively impacts both human health and the environment, including the contamination of drinking water, overuse of scarce water sources, the effect of air pollution on public health, its connection to global warming, and the overall cost imposed on communities where fracking operations are located.

“The bottom line is this: The numbers on fracking add up to an environmental nightmare,” said John Rumpler, the report's lead author and senior attorney for Environment America. “For our environment and for public health, we need to put a stop to fracking.”

In fact, the report concludes that in state's where the practice is now occurring, immediate moratoriums should be enacted and in states where the practice has yet to be approved, bans should be legislated to prevent this kind of drilling from ever occurring.

Though the report acknowledges its too early to know the full the extent of the damage caused by the controversial drilling practice, it found that even a look at the "limited data" available - taken mostly from industry reports and government figures between 2005 and 2012 - paints "an increasingly clear picture of the damage that fracking has done to our environment and health."

So what are the numbers?

The report measured key indicators of fracking threats across the country, and found:

• 280 billion gallons of toxic wastewater generated in 2012,

• 450,000 tons of air pollution produced in one year,

• 250 billion gallons of fresh water used since 2005,

• 360,000 acres of land degraded since 2005,

• 100 million metric tons of global warming pollution since 2005.

“The numbers don't lie," said Rumbpler. "Fracking has taken a dirty and destructive toll on our environment. If this dirty drilling continues unchecked, these numbers will only get worse."

The Environment America report comes on the heels of a study released by researchers at Duke University earlier this week that found a "surprising magnitude of radioactivity" in the local water near a fracking operation in Pennsylvania.

And Climate Progress adds:

The report also pointed out the weaknesses of current wastewater disposal practices - wastewater is often stored in deep wells, but over time these wells can fail, leading to the potential for ground and surface water contamination. In New Mexico alone, chemicals from oil and gas pits have contaminated water sources at least 421 times, according to the report.

Those toxic chemicals are exempt from federal disclosure laws, so it’s up to each state to decide if and how the oil and gas companies should disclose the chemicals they use in their operations - which is why in many states, citizens don’t know what goes into the brew that fracking operators use to extract oil and natural gas. Luckily, some states are beginning to address this - California recently passed a law ordering fracking companies to make their chemicals public, an order similar to laws in about seven other states.

The report also noted the vast quantities of water needed for fracking - from 2 million to 9 million gallons on average to frack one well. Since 2005, according to the report, fracking operations have used 250 billion gallons of freshwater. This is putting a strain on places like one South Texas county, where fracking was nearly one quarter of total water use in 2011 - and dry conditions could push that amount closer to one-third.

In addition to the impact on surface and ground water supplies, fracking is a well-known contributor to global warming and numerous studies have shown that the methane emissions created by the extraction and transportation of natural gas far outweighs any benefit generated by its ability to burn "cleaner" than oil or coal.
http://yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/27248
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264131 - 20/05/2014 11:36 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
4 states confirm water pollution from drilling

PITTSBURGH (AP) — In at least four states that have nurtured the nation's energy boom, hundreds of complaints have been made about well-water contamination from oil or gas drilling, and pollution was confirmed in a number of them, according to a review that casts doubt on industry suggestions that such problems rarely happen.

The Associated Press requested data on drilling-related complaints in Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and Texas and found major differences in how the states report such problems. Texas provided the most detail, while the other states provided only general outlines. And while the confirmed problems represent only a tiny portion of the thousands of oil and gas wells drilled each year in the U.S., the lack of detail in some state reports could help fuel public confusion and mistrust.

The AP found that Pennsylvania received 398 complaints in 2013 alleging that oil or natural gas drilling polluted or otherwise affected private water wells, compared with 499 in 2012. The Pennsylvania complaints can include allegations of short-term diminished water flow, as well as pollution from stray gas or other substances. More than 100 cases of pollution were confirmed over the past five years.

Just hearing the total number of complaints shocked Heather McMicken, an eastern Pennsylvania homeowner who complained about water-well contamination that state officials eventually confirmed.

"Wow, I'm very surprised," said McMicken, recalling that she and her husband never knew how many other people made similar complaints, since the main source of information "was just through the grapevine."

The McMickens were one of three families that eventually reached a $1.6 million settlement with a drilling company. Heather McMicken said the state should be forthcoming with details.

Over the past 10 years, hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, has led to a boom in oil and natural gas production around the nation. It has reduced imports and led to hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue for companies and landowners, but also created pollution fears.

Extracting fuel from shale formations requires pumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the ground to break apart rock and free the gas. Some of that water, along with large quantities of existing underground water, returns to the surface, and it can contain high levels of salt, drilling chemicals, heavy metals and naturally occurring low-level radiation.

But some conventional oil and gas wells are still drilled, so the complaints about water contamination can come from them, too. Experts say the most common type of pollution involves methane, not chemicals from the drilling process.

Some people who rely on well water near drilling operations have complained about pollution, but there's been considerable confusion over how widespread such problems are. For example, starting in 2011, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection aggressively fought efforts by the AP and other news organizations to obtain information about complaints related to drilling. The department has argued in court filings that it does not count how many contamination "determination letters" it issues or track where they are kept in its files.

Steve Forde, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, the leading industry group in Pennsylvania, said in a statement that "transparency and making data available to the public is critical to getting this historic opportunity right and maintaining the public's trust."

When the state Environmental Department determines natural gas development has caused problems, Forde said, "our member companies work collaboratively with the homeowner and regulators to find a speedy resolution."

Among the findings in the AP's review:

— Pennsylvania has confirmed at least 106 water-well contamination cases since 2005, out of more than 5,000 new wells. There were five confirmed cases of water-well contamination in the first nine months of 2012, 18 in all of 2011 and 29 in 2010. The Environmental Department said more complete data may be available in several months.

— Ohio had 37 complaints in 2010 and no confirmed contamination of water supplies; 54 complaints in 2011 and two confirmed cases of contamination; 59 complaints in 2012 and two confirmed contaminations; and 40 complaints for the first 11 months of 2013, with two confirmed contaminations and 14 still under investigation, Department of Natural Resources spokesman Mark Bruce said in an email. None of the six confirmed cases of contamination was related to fracking, Bruce said.

— West Virginia has had about 122 complaints that drilling contaminated water wells over the past four years, and in four cases the evidence was strong enough that the driller agreed to take corrective action, officials said.

— A Texas spreadsheet contains more than 2,000 complaints, and 62 of those allege possible well-water contamination from oil and gas activity, said Ramona Nye, a spokeswoman for the Railroad Commission of Texas, which oversees drilling. Texas regulators haven't confirmed a single case of drilling-related water-well contamination in the past 10 years, she said.

In Pennsylvania, the number of confirmed instances of water pollution in the eastern part of the state "dropped quite substantially" in 2013, compared with previous years, Department of Environmental Protection spokeswoman Lisa Kasianowitz wrote in an email. Two instances of drilling affecting water wells were confirmed there last year, she said, and a final decision hasn't been made in three other cases. But she couldn't say how many of the other statewide complaints have been resolved or were found to be from natural causes.

Releasing comprehensive information about gas drilling problems is important because the debate is no longer about just science but trust, said Irina Feygina, a social psychologist who studies environmental policy issues. Losing public trust is "a surefire way to harm" the reputation of any business, Feygina said.

Experts and regulators agree that investigating complaints of water-well contamination is particularly difficult, in part because some regions also have natural methane gas pollution or other problems unrelated to drilling. A 2011 Penn State study found that about 40% of water wells tested prior to gas drilling failed at least one federal drinking water standard. Pennsylvania is one of only a few states that don't have private water-well construction standards.

But other experts say people who are trying to understand the benefits and harms from the drilling boom need comprehensive details about complaints, even if some cases are from natural causes.

In Pennsylvania, the raw number of complaints "doesn't tell you anything," said Rob Jackson, a Duke University scientist who has studied gas drilling and water contamination issues. Jackson said he doesn't think providing more details is asking for too much.

"Right or wrong, many people in the public feel like DEP is stonewalling some of these investigations," Jackson said of the situation in Pennsylvania.

In contrast with the limited information provided by Pennsylvania, Texas officials supplied a detailed 94-page spreadsheet almost immediately, listing all types of oil and gas related complaints over much of the past two years. The Texas data include the date of the complaint, the landowner, the drilling company and a brief summary of the alleged problems. Many complaints involve other issues, such as odors or abandoned equipment.

Scott Anderson, an expert on oil and gas drilling with the Environmental Defense Fund, a national nonprofit based in Austin, notes that Texas regulators started keeping more data on complaints in the 1980s. New legislation in 2011 and 2013 led to more detailed reports and provided funds for a new information technology system, he said.

Anderson agreed that a lack of transparency fuels mistrust.

"If the industry has nothing to hide, then they should be willing to let the facts speaks for themselves," he said. "The same goes for regulatory agencies."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/busi...illing/4328859/
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264132 - 20/05/2014 11:50 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Alan Jones is on a crusade to end the mining invasion. The corruption being uncovered is astounding, in that it ever happened at all. It's incredible just how brazen these politicians are. Completely ignoring the will of 100% of a small farming community, even after Penny had uncovered the fact that gas company only had $100 in the account and absolutely no assets. This is a damning report on the morbid state of affairs in government. They have sold us out to destructive mining interests. Personally, the only reason I can see why the government is allowing small inept companies onto the playing field, is to pave the way for the big companies, implicated in numerous environmental and human rights abuses, to move in and buy up the leases. This is the only way these piddly little companies make any money.

Penny talks to Alan about the battle against coal seam gas mining in north-western New South Wales
http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/45191#.U3lgC1PVqVA.twitter


Edited by Loopy Radar (20/05/2014 11:50)
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264153 - 20/05/2014 14:01 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
This video is about living and working in a gas field by Richard Golden
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8rVNH

If my last few posts don't convince you just how ruthless this industry is, then I guess money talks louder.
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264206 - 21/05/2014 09:02 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Wrecking the Earth: Fracking has grave radiation risks few talk about
http://rt.com/op-edge/fracking-radioactive-uranium-danger-ecology-057/

Environmentalists point to various dangerous consequences of using fracking technology, but none can be compared to the issue of radiation exposure and radioactive contamination of the development areas it poses.

UK government plans to use fracking technology in populated areas of the country recently drew hundreds of people to the streets in protests. Protesters pointed to the dangerous example of the US, the worldwide leader in fracking, where hydraulic fracturing (which consumes vast amounts of water) led to areas of Arkansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Wyoming facing a dire water crisis.

Fracking involves toxic chemicals being lowered into kilometer-deep holes drilled in the ground to isolate gas and oil from shale. The toxic chemicals can then float into lakes and rivers or contaminate the ground. Also, fracking produces a disproportionate amount of waste, including radioactive water, which then has to be dumped somewhere.
The key to fracking

Uranium is the key element to fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, to use its proper name. In the real-world version of Phineas Fogg’s “Eighty Days Around the World,” burning the ship’s masts and furniture to make steam, governments are now encouraging the oil and gas merchants to blast their way deep into the Earth to squeeze the last ounce of oil and gas from that poor creature. But there will be a terrible revenge. Locked up in the strata into which they pump the pressurized process water, to fracture and thus create the huge surface area sponge which will yield up its cargo of gas and oil, is a monstrous amount of natural uranium and its deadly daughter Radium-226. And vast amounts of the radioactive alpha emitting gas Radon-222, and its own daughters Bismuth 214, Lead-210 and the alpha emitter Polonium-210. Remember Polonium-210? That was the material used when a few millionths of a gram poisoned ex-Russian agent Alexander Litvinenko.

Deep down in the earth, there is a lot of radioactivity, which is safe enough, so long as it is not brought up to the surface. The technical term is NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material). When it is brought to the surface it becomes Technologically Enhanced, or TENORM, and it is a serious health problem near oil wells and gas production sites. It is in the production water, in the oil, in the gas, around the production sites, the groundwater, in the pipes and tanks – and in your kitchen.

he easy oil and gas deposits are those where there are subterranean reservoirs, and the oil and gas can obtained by drilling into the reservoir and then pumping down water to displace the oil back up the drill pipe. These are now running out, or are owned by people who control the flow and the price. But there are many other deposits, where the resource is spread throughout the rock, like water in a sponge. Fracking comprises any method employed to break up the solid rock, shale or sandstone to provide channels that allow the oil or gas in the strata to more easily be pumped to the surface. Fracking is not a new idea, but there are some new technologies being employed that make it easy to obtain gas economically from such hitherto unassailable rock sources. For reasons which I will outline, this development has some worrying aspects.

The gas or oil will not normally be available because it is trapped in and interspersed through solid rock. To get it out you have to drill horizontally along the solid organic clay material, the shale, (or whatever oil-bearing rock type is there) and then break that unto small pieces in various ways so that the gas or oil can be pushed by the water you pump in back to the well pipe and up to the surface. The methods of breaking up the rock and holding the subsequent channels apart vary; put together they are “fracking”.

The shale strata are between 1,000 and 8,000 feet deep. Owing the weight of rock above, the pressure on the rocks in the gas bearing strata at these depths is enormous. The drill has to pass a tube (the “gun”) along the stratum for as long a length as possible and then this has to become perforated along its length with holes that allow the gas or oil to get into the tube and up to the surface.

Historically difficult. But technology has come to the rescue in the manifestation of specially designed explosives called “shaped charges.” These are cone-shaped dense metal explosive devices that send the explosive energy in an enormously powerful directed jet of metal atoms that act as a drill and melt the rock or shale along the length of the jet. This creates a radially distributed set of channels along and around the length of the drill tube, in the shape of a bottle-cleaning brush. Once this is done, water containing a whole range of acids and chemical additives is injected under immense pressure and this is followed up by small balls and sand or grit, termed “proppant” like the pit props in a mine, to hold the channels formed open. The extreme pressure pushes the weight of the upper layers of rock upwards and releases the tension in the strata where the gas is trapped. It has been noticed that the effect of all this on geophysical stability of the local deep earth results in small earth tremors and shocks, noticed by people living nearby. But the real cause of these tremors may be more sinister.
Nuclear implications

The metal which was formerly employed for the shaped charge head or “gun” was copper. This creates a pressure of 300,000 atmospheres which pushes the rock aside by plastic deformation. But in 1984 a US patent (US 4441428) was filed by one Thomas Wilson, entitled “Conical Shaped Charge Liner of Depleted Uranium.” The patent begins: “this invention relates to a novel blasting device especially adapted for drilling oil and gas wells.” Wilson records that DU is 5-times as efficient as copper in terms of the length of the jetted hole, creating a pressure of 600,000 atmospheres. Because of the uranium’s greater chemical reactivity it actually creates new chemical compounds with the material in the rock (and the oil and gas).

The DU cuts through the rock like butter, just as the military versions of this technology, which we believe has been fitted to missiles can cut through concrete reinforced bunkers. The multiple-shaped charge explosions will certainly shake the ground. The earth tremors and earthquakes are then not so hard to explain. Where do the process water acids, chemical compounds end up? At the surface? In the local aquifer? In the local rivers? Yes. But where to the DU nanoparticles from the shaped charge end up? Perhaps the mix of process water and chemicals spilled at the surface. Perhaps in the oil or in the gas. In your kitchen? No one looks, but someone should, since we know from the Iraq wars what these things can do to human health.

In case you might think this is all scaremongering, academic and unrelated to fracking, another patent was filed more recently in 2011 (US Patent 20110000669) by Halliburton (think: oil, gas, armaments, missiles, Dick Cheney) entitled “Perforating gun assembly and method for controlling wellbore pressure during perforating”. The patent specifically refers to Depleted Uranium.

So not only is there a lot of natural radioactive material surfacing in the gas or oil stream, and the production water, there is the possibility also a lot of unnatural radioactivity coming up from the DU shaped charges. And besides the fact that Depleted Uranium is the most efficient of these shaped charge metals, let’s not forget the attraction to the US nuclear industry of a way of getting rid of its vast stocks of Depleted Uranium, or even natural Uranium, or even nuclear waste. I mean, who is going to look at the radioactivity in the process water? It will be radioactive from the Radium and Radon daughters anyway. You would need to carry out some sophisticated analysis to see if it contained any nasty man-made radionuclides, especially DU nanoparticles. Who will do that?
Fracking contamination

The issue of natural radioactivity and fracking gas was raised by my friend, Marvin Resnikoff, who was an expert on the NORM cases. He has examined the fracking situation in relation to the exploitation of the Marcellus Shale gas, New York State. He pointed out that there were two critical issues. There is the concentration of Radium-226 in the rock. Then there is the length of time it takes for the gas to get to the kitchen.

Radon has a half-life of about four days, and so if the gas takes a short time to get from the well production site to the consumer, then levels in the kitchen can be significant. He calculated that there would be between 1,000 and 30,000 extra lung cancers in New York State from such an exposure. And that no one in environmental protection agencies had paid any attention to this issue.

This is certainly of concern, but there are other issues. The process water (and chemicals) certainly contaminates the areas around the gas production machinery. In a recent court case I was involved with in Louisiana there was a gas distribution plant that was scarily radioactive, and the land around it was also radioactive. I also studied oil well production areas in a Kentucky court case. The process water dissolves Radium-226 and this precipitates as scale on the pipes and tanks and is left on the ground near the wellheads and distribution facilities. The transfer pipes are radioactive. One of the worst radionuclides left behind is the Radon daughter Lead-210 which has a longish half-life (22 years) and builds up in these situations as a fine dust. It gets into the gas stream as nanoparticles and I believe it remains in the gas stream. It decays to Bismuth-210 which immediately decays to the alpha emitter Polonium-210 with a half-life of 138 days.

Fracking will increase the amount of Radon in the extracted gas. Why? Because of the high surface area created by smashing up the rock. In the simple gas or oil well there is a big cavern. The radon seeps out of the wall which has a surface area equal to that of the cavern wall. But in the case of the fracked strata, the surface area out of which the Radon can seep is enormously enhanced. So a faster Radon transfer can occur.
Burning our ship

So I conclude that fracking carries with it some serious health issues relating to radiation exposure and local contamination, issues which, as Marvin Resnikoff points out in his articles, have not been addressed properly (or at all) by the environmental impact statements published by the operators, or by the Environmental Protection Agency in the USA. The well heads and distribution areas will become radioactively contaminated. Isolated wells along the south coast of England, the Texas-ification of Sussex being encouraged by Prime Minister David Cameron, will not be like windmills. The contamination from the process water will get into the ground

don’t want to be all negative: oil and gas are valuable resources, and techniques for increasing availability have to be applauded, even if examined with more caution than they have been. But let’s finish by stepping back from all of this and asking what it’s for. The short answer, of course, is that it’s for money and cheaper energy, security, independence in energy terms from remote suppliers. But we know what it’s really for. It is the necessary fuel for the continuing economic system, the market-forces-driven, short-attention-span, continued global extravaganza of manufacturing, working, buying and selling that life has now become. Of course this can’t last since (fracking or not) the fossil fuel (and other fuels) will eventually run out, and/or the limited biosphere will die off from the toxic waste products of the activity, something that is currently happening at a frightening rate. But fracking will buy them more time.

As Phineas Fogg is completing his “Around the World in 80 Days” trip, he is forced to burn the cabin furniture, the masts and other critical pieces of the ship carrying him back on his final leg, to win his wager. But in the dismantling and burning of our planet, there is no wager, just greedy and powerful individuals. We are burning our ship – when it’s all we have.
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264262 - 21/05/2014 17:33 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
One example of the lives being ruined by being forced to live in a gas field.

Unconventional Gas / Coal Seam Gas - Collateral Damage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAoJfmRISg
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264279 - 21/05/2014 21:26 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Jessica Ernst Exposes Drilling and Fracking Crimes in Alberta
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zPsefMA-70
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1264302 - 22/05/2014 07:42 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
paulcirrus Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 08/08/2011
Posts: 1415
Loc: Brisbane - Windsor
Been on the sidelines on this one for years, and have to say now that the majority of reports say how bad fraccing is. Why aren't their massive protests from the dudes on the land about this. If i was living on the land i would form a team of fraccing site destroyers and damage as many i could find. I think its disgusting what they are doing. You have the advantage of remoteness that would give you the edge.
I'm only ready very bad things about this method of mining.
_________________________
If it's Flooded - FORGET IT

Top
#1265088 - 30/05/2014 21:36 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: paulcirrus]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Originally Posted By: paulcirrus
Been on the sidelines on this one for years, and have to say now that the majority of reports say how bad fraccing is. Why aren't their massive protests from the dudes on the land about this. If i was living on the land i would form a team of fraccing site destroyers and damage as many i could find. I think its disgusting what they are doing. You have the advantage of remoteness that would give you the edge.
I'm only ready very bad things about this method of mining.


In NSW at least, communities everywhere are uniting to fight the invasion of CSG and new coal mines.
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1265264 - 01/06/2014 22:30 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Fracking house explosions, suicides, miscarriages cover up
by human rights reporter, Deborah Dupre'
Copyright Deborah Dupre' 2013

Fracking-related house explosions, suicides and miscarriages and infant mortality in Faulkner County have been hidden, according to local human and Earth rights defenders who met with Deborah Dupré in Greenbrier in late Jan. 2013, part of a "Vampire of Macondo" national book tour.

During a "Vampire of Macondo" book signing in Faulkner Country, Concerned Citizens of Faulkner County members described deaths, suicides, miscarriages, abnormal bleeding, passing out, respiratory and neurological diseases, rashes and boils, along with house explosions and over 1400 earthquakes.

Fayetteville Shale play has been touted as an economic boom for Arkansas communities such as Faulkner. Environmental and human costs of health, safety and security rights abuses, however, overbalance these dubious financial gains.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIyrwHUOlwg
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1265993 - 11/06/2014 22:53 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
desieboy Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 31/12/2002
Posts: 3139
Loc: Broome

The land of the free?
Now I wonder what their trying to hide???


_________________________
Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get.
- Mark Twain

Top
#1265994 - 11/06/2014 23:05 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
desieboy Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 31/12/2002
Posts: 3139
Loc: Broome
More about last post..

From facebook re previous post..
_________________________
Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get.
- Mark Twain

Top
#1270756 - 22/07/2014 21:01 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
GDL Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 17/02/2008
Posts: 630
Loc: Bowen Mountain NSW
While the E.P.A in the US has its nickers in a knot about Co2 the miners are allowed to pump that crap underground, go figure.

Top
#1270829 - 23/07/2014 17:49 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
desieboy Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 31/12/2002
Posts: 3139
Loc: Broome

Some good news for the Kimberley with the local aboriginals having vote on fracking in their area.

Standing Strong, Holding the Ground

Yesterday the Yawuru and Djugun people met to vote on the matter regarding Buru Energy's threat to country with their proposal to hydraulic fracture (Fraccing or Fracking) in Yawuru country for the mining of Shale gas. Option 1 was successful... The Yawuru and Djugun people said "NO" to fracking on Yawuru country! Option 1 had 76 votes, Option 2 had 6 votes, And option 3 had 12 votes. Something to be proud of

Option 1 was successful... The Yawuru and Djugun people said "NO" to fracking on Yawuru country!


https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/h...649da93861e6d99
_________________________
Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get.
- Mark Twain

Top
#1290107 - 09/12/2014 22:20 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Fracking Produces More Radioactive Waste than Nuclear Power Plants

Fracking puts more hazardous radioactive material into the environment than all the US nuclear power plants combined. About a Fukushima worth a month. Another Chernobyl every six months. Three Mile Island ? Fracking child’s play – one truckload of frack sludge has more radioactive TENORMs in it than all the leakage at Three Mile Island.

That plus the fatalities from fracking, gas compressor explosions, and gas line blasts make fracked gas by far the deadliest form of energy in the US. A bigger body count in a month than nuclear energy in 50 years. More fatalities in a quarter than coal in a year. More accidents in a year than in the history of solar and wind energy.

We are not talking about the theoretical release of radioactive material into the air and water. We are talking about an industry that is effectively mining billions of pounds of radioactive material as a byproduct of drilling horizontal wells through shale. Then processing those radioactive materials into even more concentrated radioactive sludge.

The feds can’t regulate it at all and the state regulators get the fat envelopes to look the other way. So a lot of fracking’s radioactive legacy just gets dumped. In a river, on roads, in landfills, or abandoned barn near you. So much for “Clean Energy.” Has your town or county banned frack waste ? What are you waiting on ? Another frackastrophe ?

Lots more here..
http://www.nofrackingway.us/2014/05/04/f...r-power-plants/
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1290123 - 09/12/2014 23:41 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
DR. ANTHONY INGRAFFEA AT HAMPTON HIGH 1/12/11 PART 1

Dr. Ingraffea explores myths and realities of large-scale development of unconventional natural gas resources.

On a local scale, these concern geological aspects, and the resulting use of directional drilling, high-volume, slickwater, hydraulic fracturing, multi-well pad arrangements, and the impacts of these technologies on waste production and disposal.

On a global scale, he explores the cumulative impact on greenhouse gas loading of the atmosphere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjdhiZJCyzU
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1291612 - 14/12/2014 21:41 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
http://coalseamgasnews.org/news/world/testimony-of-a-csg-worker-auspol/
I contacted the Gasfield Community Support group after hearing Laurence Springborg saying on the radio that no workers in the CSG industry had become sick, and the air and water tests were good quality.
I started in the industry in 2008, and worked for 3 ½ years on a mobile drill rig. Initially I was employed by Mitchell drilling who were taken over by AJ Lucas. With the exception of one well, at all other times Mitchell drilling /AJ Lucas were contracted to Santos. I was employed as the “offsider” initially, graduating to senior drillers assistant. One of the tasks was mixing chemicals into the mud pits to pump down the drill string. There were different polymers used. They pumped “mud” down the drill string. (Salt water, KCL and polymer JK261, (a lubricant)). On an average lease, if they were not taking losses, you would use an average of 12 tons of KCL and 15 pallets (720 drums /10,800kg of polymer) to keep the viscosity up and lubricate the drill bit. The polymer was mixed in the pits through a hopper. The polymer had to be sprinkled into the hopper and it was blowing in the face, in the eyes; we were constantly breathing it in. This happened for hours at a time. We had masks, with
a diaphragm sometimes, otherwise paper. The masks were also used when mixing the cement for the casing if Halliburton did not come in and we were doing the cement job ourselves.

"When drilling down, going through the Permian or Jurassic riverbeds which were very permeable, sometimes the drilling muds would disappear. They could take huge losses We took core samples when Santos told us to. They took core samples on every drill hole, usually
about 600 metres in depth. 80% of the time they got pretty good returns- getting most of the returns back up the drill into the pits. But 20% of the time, especially in Fairview, east of Injune, they couldn’t stop the losses."

"They could use approximately 20 tons of KCL (semi-trailer loads full) with water. There was 50,000 litres of water in each of three pits. On one rig, in a 12 hour shift we used 27tons of KCL along with 100,000 litres of water and multiple other chemicals. The next 12 hour shift would then come on and this could go on for days doing exactly the same thing until the losses were stopped. They would use 9.4 heavy- saturation point- lots of KCL, JK261, CR650-polymer. The KCL was to “weigh down” the gas bubble. When they were taking losses they would use ‘frac seal fine’, composed of silver paper, coarse saw dust, trying to fill the hole, to block it. They tried to stop the loss by plugging the hole. They would use maybe 10 different chemicals including bentonite, they would keep pumping down, trying to fill the losses. If the muds were going disappearing) gases could be coming in; they had to try and block it off with a different medium, and keep pumping it down the drill string to seal the hole. They tried to weigh down the gas bubble. They were worried about gases coming back in and the risk of explosion; it was a very dangerous time and happened often (maybe 20%of the time)"

more here
http://coalseamgasnews.org/news/world/testimony-of-a-csg-worker-auspol/
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1291614 - 14/12/2014 21:45 Re: Fraccing or Fracking - Natural Gas and your farm [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Recorded April 27, 2013 at Holy Trinity Lutheran Church, Elmira, NY. Three Southern Tier events, in Bath, Spencer, and Elmira, highlight true stories from those sickened by Pennsylvania fracking, medical and legal issues.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSvMhmF4Myw
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
Page 9 of 10 < 1 2 ... 7 8 9 10 >


Who's Online
8 registered (DaveM, EddyG, rainiac, Wave Rider, Matt Pearce, Remy, Stargate, 1 invisible), 276 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
Greg Spencer, K-Town King, sammyb79
Forum Stats
29315 Members
32 Forums
23642 Topics
1456422 Posts

Max Online: 2925 @ 02/02/2011 22:23
Satellite Image