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.
I don't understand why there isn't more concern regarding ground water contamination from fracking, the science already indicates contamination of drinking water.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.