Things are about to change..............maybe.

[darthtang aw]

Saudi Royal Family Getting a Little Freaked Out About US Energy Boom
Katie Pavlich | Jul 30, 2013
Katie Pavlich
The fracking and natural gas boom in the United States has the potential to overtake Saudi Arabia in terms of energy production and the Saudi royal family is getting very nervous about it.

A Saudi prince has warned that his oil-reliant nation is under threat because of fracking technology being developed elsewhere around the world.
Billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal said the Gulf Arab kingdom needed to reduce its reliance on crude oil and diversify its revenues.
His warning comes as rising shale energy supplies in the United States cut global demand for Saudi oil.
In an open letter to his country's oil minister Ali al Naimi and other government heads, published on Sunday via his Twitter account, Prince Alwaleed said demand for oil from Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) member states was "in continuous decline".
He said Saudi Arabia's heavy dependence on oil was "a truth that has really become a source of worry for many".
He added that the world's biggest crude oil exporter should implement "swift measures" to diversify its economy.
Prince Alwaleed, owner of international investment firm Kingdom Holding, is unusually outspoken for a top Saudi businessman.
But his warning reflects growing concern in private among many Saudis about the long-term impact of shale technology.
It is allowing the US and Canada to tap unconventional oil deposits which they could not reach just a few years ago.
The United States becoming more energy efficient and therefore giving the Middle East less power over energy supply? This is exactly what we have been waiting for.
The fracking boom has already led to major economic gains in America. States that have embraced the practice of breaking apart rock to release oil have seen unemployment numbers drop significantly. In addition, despite all of the fear mongering about the practice of fracking contaminating water, study after study has shown there is no link between the two.
A landmark federal study on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, shows no evidence that chemicals from the natural gas drilling process moved up to contaminate drinking water aquifers at a western Pennsylvania drilling site, the Department of Energy told The Associated Press.
After a year of monitoring, the researchers found that the chemical-laced fluids used to free gas trapped deep below the surface stayed thousands of feet below the shallower areas that supply drinking water, geologist Richard Hammack said.
Although the results are preliminary — the study is still ongoing — they are a boost to a natural gas industry that has fought complaints from environmental groups and property owners who call fracking dangerous.
Drilling fluids tagged with unique markers were injected more than 8,000 feet below the surface, but were not detected in a monitoring zone 3,000 feet higher. That means the potentially dangerous substances stayed about a mile away from drinking water supplies.

Keep on fracking America.

 

[2quills]

Love the idea of energy independence. However, living in an area that is about to boom with fracking I'm not entirely convinced that it's necessarily safe or a good idea for our lands and property long term.
These gas companies spend billions and employ teams of dozens devoted to employing military style tactics to quial the public out cries of the damages and contamination left behind.
Really good docentary on this is called Gas Land, for anyone who wishes to look into it. If you live in a shail area you might want to do some digging into fracking.

 

[beth]

Love the idea of screwing OPEC and there being no more excuses for the USA trying to manage the Middle East; however, there are plenty of oil sources in North America that we have, for some reason, left in the ground in favor of getting into bed with our enemies.
The issue of oil is more a political one rather than anything else.

 

[theclemsonkid]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/396032/things-are-about-to-change-maybe#post_3527723
Love the idea of screwing OPEC and there being no more excuses for the USA trying to manage the Middle East; however, there are plenty of oil sources in North America that we have, for some reason, left in the ground in favor of getting into bed with our enemies.
The issue of oil is more a political one rather than anything else.
Yeah that's kind of the issue. We could get ALL our oil domestically, and we still wouldn't see any price difference at the pump. It might make a difference in international policy, but big oil likes their money way too much to ever give any of it back to the public...

 

[beth]

On the face of it, pumping chemicals underground to break loose trapped gas deposits does not sound too safe to me.

 

[2quills]

http://grist.org/news/leaked-epa-document-raises-questions-about-fracking-pollution/
It isn't safe. Dispite the overwhelming amount of evidence left behind in the areas that have already been fracked, the EPA who initially began seeing this as a problem has conveniently became hush hush on the issue.
Pennsylvania, has been on the front lines already for a while now. The former governor who initially pressed very hard to stop the drilling in that state ultimately did a 180, allowing a free pass to the oil companies. After he left office him and members of his team took jobs working for the same companies they tried to stop. How convenient.
Bottom line is they say its safe, when they know full well that it is not.

 

[beth]

I looked at parts of that doc you mentioned. I'd say if you can set your tab water ablaze where there was fracking nearby, that is a good indication of a serious problem.

 

[reefraff]

LOL! They have been using hydraulic fracturing for about 50 years. This EPA isn't exactly oil and gas friendly and they found one instance where they thought an improperly completed well that was fracked had caused an issue but it seems now they are even backing off that assessment.
Fracking into an aquifer would ruin the well. It's expensive to pump fluid to the surface, especially when it has to be treated and disposed of rather than sold.

 

[2quills]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/396032/things-are-about-to-change-maybe#post_3527867
LOL! They have been using hydraulic fracturing for about 50 years. This EPA isn't exactly oil and gas friendly and they found one instance where they thought an improperly completed well that was fracked had caused an issue but it seems now they are even backing off that assessment.
One instance in 50 years of pumping toxic chemicals into the ground which fractures structure under ground that causes gas to seep upwards through the earth and they've only screwed up one time?
Problem is the current administrations agenda towards this natural gas boom that is currently under way. Gas companies realistically don't know what the long term effects are and almost certainly aren't saying anything about it if they did. Their claim would be that there is no evidence to support that it is bad or even very very bad for that matter. This instance in Pavillion, Wyoming is supposed to be the largest and most indepth look into the matter by the EPA.http://grist.org/news/epa-delays-fracking-safety-study-until-2016/
The EPA wasn't backing off. They are conveniently having to wait to release their data. Initially they were being backed off with those results until 2014. But now it's being kicked back untill 2016. I don't know, it's just strange to me. Why should the people of that community have to wait for EPA results to tell them their drinking water is contaminated when the USGS and other indipendant studies have said that it was?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=is-fracking-behind-contamination-in-wyoming-groundwater

 

[reefraff]

In the case of a gas well you have to dewater it to get it to produce. If for some reason they need to service down hole they shut off the gas flow by running water down the well bore. Once they are done it's pumped back out.
Fracturing is used to crack the formation. Once they do that the water must be pumped back up to the surface to allow the gas to flow. Typically the wells they frac are better than 3,000 feet deep. Our water isn't coming from anything close to those depths. The case in Pavilion is unusual because those wells are really shallow. And they still believe if the problem is related to the fracking it is the result of a well that was improperly completed being the issue rather than the fracking process. That is what they are unsure of. Personally I wouldn't have an issue with them not allowing fracking of wells less than 1500 or a couple thousand feet deep just to be safe depending on the depth of the aquifers in the area.
This whole controversy started when people were claiming methane in their water wells had to be coming from gas wells. However it is well documented that methane is naturally occurring in some aquifers and there have been cases of gas in water wells where there are no gas or oil wells in the area.

 

[2quills]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/396032/things-are-about-to-change-maybe#post_3527869
In the case of a gas well you have to dewater it to get it to produce. If for some reason they need to service down hole they shut off the gas flow by running water down the well bore. Once they are done it's pumped back out.
Fracturing is used to crack the formation. Once they do that the water must be pumped back up to the surface to allow the gas to flow. Typically the wells they frac are better than 3,000 feet deep. Our water isn't coming from anything close to those depths. The case in Pavilion is unusual because those wells are really shallow. And they still believe if the problem is related to the fracking it is the result of a well that was improperly completed being the issue rather than the fracking process. That is what they are unsure of. Personally I wouldn't have an issue with them not allowing fracking of wells less than 1500 or a couple thousand feet deep just to be safe depending on the depth of the aquifers in the area.
This whole controversy started when people were claiming methane in their water wells had to be coming from gas wells. However it is well documented that methane is naturally occurring in some aquifers and there have been cases of gas in water wells where there are no gas or oil wells in the area.
Dude, you sound like you work for the gas companies lol. The city that I live in exists because of the oil and gas industry. Practically everyone that I've worked with down here has been in the oil or gas industry at some point in time, via the rigs, refineries or fields. And they all have horror stories about their experiences in the industry. Miss calculations, blow outs, accidents, miss handling of materials are all common every day occurrences in the industry. It's not so much the concept as it is everything else that comes along with drilling.
Problem is everybody is all distracted by obama care to see what him and his natural gas loving buddies are really up to. The EPA came out backing up what was going on in Wyoming which is the same thing that was going on in Pennsylvania. But reports are coming out of Texas, Arakansas, Colorado, West Virgina to name of few. These instances where the gas is being found in water supplies is only occurring after the fracking has occurred. The EPA had launched a multi million dollar investigation into Wyoming, came out confirming the other studies initially, and now all of a sudden has completely called of the investigation and turning it over to the state and gas companies hands. Can't be touched again untill 2016. That's what happened in Pennsylvania when the former governer (Rendell), gave the gas companies a free pass and then went on to lobby for them. http://nyagainstfracking.org/pa-gov-rendells-drinking-water-failure/
They are fixing to open up the Eagle Shale here in Texas and our town is already booming with people coming in. They plan on doing this for the next 100 years all over the nation. Now that we've been conditioned to high gas prices we will never see them come back down. They plan to harvest our nations resources for wealth and they are going to rape the land to get it as long as they can. That's the ugly side of energy independence that nobody wants to see. We really haven't even scratched the surface yet.

 

[reefraff]

I literally grew up in an oil field and have always had an interest in it but haven't worked in it since I was like 15 LOL!
Just because someone makes a claim doesn't make it true. 0bama has been very hostile to oil and gas production on federal lands. Permits take longer etc. The thing is this stuff is the next motor fuel. Very soon a company is bringing out a nat gas engine that will power a big rig. We have a near inexhaustible supply of the stuff and it can actually be produced from things like landfills or by using pig and cattle manure. It's here to stay.
Of course you'll have spills and blowouts but they are few and far between. Even without the government fines the companies have an economic interest in not having accidents. It wastes product and is costly to clean up. The town I grew up in had real, live backyard oil wells. These people claiming they get sick off fumes and stuff are full of crap. I grew up in the 60's and 70's when the regs weren't anything like what we have today. No vapor controls, widespread use of sumps, minor spills allowed to just soak into the dirt etc. If it was so bad there would be widespread cases of illness in places like Huntington Beach and Long Beach out in California. Heck, Beverly Hills High School to this day has working oil wells on the school grounds.

 

[2quills]

I hear ya, Reef. But there is a difference between the wells of yesterday and the fracking of today.
I just wouldn't be so quick to pass it all off as B.S. They fracture the rock under ground in order to release the trapped gas, and they do this under neath peoples property. We've already witnessed earth quakes down here from it. Think about it. Of course there's naturally occurring gas in the areas where these claims are coming from. That's exactly what the gas companies are there to get. I don't think it's turned into a major issue in every single location. But it does appear to be happening in several places and they are trying to keep a tight lid on it. That is just my opinion. Ofcorse you aren't required to believe it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/epa-water-contamination-investigation-fracking_n_2484568.html

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/396032/things-are-about-to-change-maybe#post_3527879
I hear ya, Reef. But there is a difference between the wells of yesterday and the fracking of today.
I just wouldn't be so quick to pass it all off as B.S. They fracture the rock under ground in order to release the trapped gas, and they do this under neath peoples property. We've already witnessed earth quakes down here from it. Think about it. Of course there's naturally occurring gas in the areas where these claims are coming from. That's exactly what the gas companies are there to get. I don't think it's turned into a major issue in every single location. But it does appear to be happening in several places and they are trying to keep a tight lid on it. That is just my opinion. Ofcorse you aren't required to believe it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/epa-water-contamination-investigation-fracking_n_2484568.html
But you can't economically produce gas from a water source. There isn't enough gas for the amount of water you would have to remove. Oil and gas is found in formations. You have layers of rock above and below the formations that are impermeable. That rock isn't what they fracture when they do fracking. It's the shale rock the oil and gas is trapped in they crack. Again, if you were to crack the impermeable rock it would allow uncontrolled water entry and ruin the well. There's a diagram at the top of this page that shows what I am talking about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing
Imagine that zone in the diagram filling with water. Now instead of the gas naturally flowing to the pipe and out to the surface you have to pump the water up to the surface, and you have to do it faster than it can run into the zone. It isn't economically viable. They do use water injection in a lot of oil wells but that is done from specific areas in the zone and only for a certain amount of time. Then they will inject from a different area and use the first injection well to produce.

 

[2quills]

I agree there, Reef. I wasn't suggesting attempting to harvest from water supplies. More or less the ground water supplies are becoming contaminated with gas and in some cases are showing elements present in fracking fluid and or waste water disposal.
There have been a slew of testing done independantly and even universities in different states with anecdotal evidence in all of these cases that is everything but a smoking gun. Its all just starting to paint a bigger picture of the ugly side of the whole thing.
As more and more is learned it seems less and less safe to do this in our own back yards.
While Obama stands up for the protection of federal lands he is sitting back and letting the states make their own decisions. Hardly seems characteristic of his typical progressive behavior when it comes to the well being of this nations citizens if you ask me.
While these farmers, ranchers and states are screaming for help with proof that there should be some serious red flags they are being ignored at the federal level.
People who have spoken out agaisnt the gas companies claiming to have direct evidence are being suppressed with threats of legal action by the gas companies that folks simply can't afford to fight.
I just think this is going to keep getting worse the longer it goes on. We're only at the tip of the ice burg in regards to the recent surge in domestic production.

 

[beth]

It seems the issue is that tons of water mixed with chemicals is used to extract gas/oil resulting in leakage into water table. I read an article on dry fracking, that does not involve pumping and extracting the contaminated water.
Also, why do this in areas where people are using wells for their farms or in communities where there is not much choice but to use wells? I know that here in FLA we rely heavy on the Fla aquifers for our water. Personally, I would not want this going on in my area. Our water is pumped directly from the aquifer.

 

[reefraff]

The EPA has been looking at this for years and has come up with one instance of a possible issue. What can I say? It isn't like they are pro oil and gas production.
I have been interested in this since I was a kid and I took the time to learn how all this works. Mixing aquifers with oil and gas zones don't work. Water is heavier than oil and gas. If you break the barrier between the water zone and the oil and gas zone the water will flood in uncontrolled and ruin the well. It isn't about the environment, it's economics that makes it a bad deal for the companies. That is the only way you get aquifer pollution unless you have major surface spills and that can happen just as easy with unfracked well. People seem to think the fracking fluid is a one time use deal. They pump up and reuse as much as they can recover following the job and what remains will be pulled out with the naturally occurring water that is produced and must be treated before being disposed of too.
But believe what you want.

 

[2quills]

That's the problem my good man. One instance. Meanwhile the EPA was in the middle of multiple investigation including Texas when they suddenly and abrubtly halted all investigations in all area and are not releasing anymore information to the public on what they've found so far. Its a complete 180 in all instances. Yes, I do find it suspicious.
My good friend works for Bay Industies, they primarily build rigs, tanks and other equipment for the oil and gas companies. Last year they had about 3000 guys working in their yard. Currently there is only several hundred. Everybody has been at a stand still because our state is asking for more research to be done on the federal level to either prove or disprove all of the evidence that has surfaced in the recent years.
The EPA initially was all over this. And now they suddenly went silent. Guess we are on our own as well.
2 (if the wool fits) Quills

 

[darthtang aw]

While everyone is "worried" and focused on Fracking ruining drinking water, the following is already present in Albuquerque's city water.
Lead, which enters drinking water supplies from the corrosion of pipes and plumbing fixtures and can cause brain damage in infants and children
Pathogens (germs) that can make people sick, especially those with weakened immune systems, the frail elderly and the very young
By-products of chlorine treatment such as trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids, which may cause cancer and reproductive problems
Arsenic, which may cause cancer, serious skin problems, birth defects and reproductive problems
Radon, the rocket fuel perchlorate and other carcinogens or otherwise toxic chemicals
This is city wide. Not a couple areas here and there.
My city has one of the worst water pollution control in the country...and everyone wonders why I drink Scotch.........
Darth (Macallan) Tang

 

[2quills]

Well there ya go...nothing much to worry about in your case because it can't get much worse. Well, untill sombody flicks a lit cigarette into your yard while you're watering your grass and your house goes up in flames lol