Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Dakota
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:06 PM
 
36 posts, read 102,807 times
Reputation: 32

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
I don't understand why there isn't more concern regarding ground water contamination from fracking, the science already indicates contamination of drinking water.
Must've watched Gasland...

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:23 PM
 
443 posts, read 806,256 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corbay View Post
the science already indicates contamination of drinking water

Can you point to where this specifically has happened, and not just a guess as to what happened. THEN after that I would like proof that is has happened in the Bakken.

If you understand the geology of the Bakken, you would understand it is basically impossible. The well and water table are thousands of feet apart.

Money isn't everything.
Unless you are broke, and can't put a roof over your head like MILLIONS of Americans.
It is my opinion that the EPA will have its "proof" soon. There was a fracking blow out by Killdeer ND last year. The casing gave at 30' below ground and possibly at 60'. Monitoring wells are in place in the aquifier.
Meanwhile, party on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:43 PM
 
89 posts, read 167,131 times
Reputation: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by FranklinCole View Post
Must've watched Gasland...

lol yup they did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:00 PM
 
49 posts, read 80,927 times
Reputation: 44
follow up: [url=http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/epa-says-fears-about-fracking-moratorium-unfounded/article_8a72ba30-1ae3-11e1-a738-001cc4c03286.html]EPA says fears about fracking moratorium unfounded[/url]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 03:46 AM
 
21 posts, read 54,429 times
Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by fncypnts View Post
you know the saying"you know a politician lying when you see his lips moving"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 04:44 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,247 posts, read 26,186,773 times
Reputation: 15632
Quote:
Originally Posted by FranklinCole View Post
Must've watched Gasland...
No MIT, but what do they know?

Report details benefits, woes of fracking - Times Union
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 03:19 PM
 
2,609 posts, read 4,359,919 times
Reputation: 1887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
First, the report they're linking doesn't work.

Second, that doesn't support your claims about fracking. It's an op-ed piece that's focused on the author's opinion of fracking and the report. Unfortunately, it doesn't include the report and the link to it doesn't work so any factual information that may have been provided by the article is inaccessible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 03:25 PM
 
2,609 posts, read 4,359,919 times
Reputation: 1887
Wait, now I know why it doesn't link to the report... that's because the final report hadn't even been released when the article was written! Date the article was written: 08/30/11. Date that the following article states the final report could be released at it's earliest: 11/18/11.

Shale Gas Subcommittee to release final report - Sep. 26, 2011

I think this is the report that Helms probably misinterpreted as new regulations when in reality it's a report that's going to suggest guidelines to states in order to allow fracking to continue but under safer circumstances.

Here is a link to the actual final report:

http://www.shalegas.energy.gov/resou...nal_report.pdf

I'm going to start reading it now, but won't be able to finish it until later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 03:55 PM
 
16,235 posts, read 25,209,320 times
Reputation: 27047
I agree, I think it is hard to support opinions of folks that don't have a dog in the fight. The folks that have and will live here for the rest of their lives, may be a tad more concerned w/ hearing both sides. Getting the Big picture, rather than the short answer. There is more than money on the table. I will reserve judgment, I remember many situations that became disasters, because of the ineptitude of a few. Lets hope that this is not a repeat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,247 posts, read 26,186,773 times
Reputation: 15632
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisan23 View Post
Wait, now I know why it doesn't link to the report... that's because the final report hadn't even been released when the article was written! Date the article was written: 08/30/11. Date that the following article states the final report could be released at it's earliest: 11/18/11.

Shale Gas Subcommittee to release final report - Sep. 26, 2011

I think this is the report that Helms probably misinterpreted as new regulations when in reality it's a report that's going to suggest guidelines to states in order to allow fracking to continue but under safer circumstances.

Here is a link to the actual final report:

http://www.shalegas.energy.gov/resou...nal_report.pdf

I'm going to start reading it now, but won't be able to finish it until later.
Yes the report could have been released as early as Nov 18,2011, but it wasn't. Keep in mind that this is just a report, the time it takes to turn a report into actual policy and regulations is years. There are 6000 wells in place and growing, by the time regualtions are put in place it will be too late.

I read through the report and it doesn't present any urgency, clean drinking water, lack of water is a huge issue in just about every state. This is a very cavalier approach to something as important as drinking water.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/04/us...f=drillingdown
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Dakota
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top