APP - Fracking for Gas

Mott the Hoople

Mott the Hoople

Sweet Jane
Fracking for gas in shale deposits has created unanticipated problems. For those who are not familiar fracking is a long used practice in conventional oil well drilling in which a combination of water, chemicals and abrasive media are injected into a well under pressure in order to fracture friable rock deposits which in return releases the gas or oil into the well.

One of the problem with gas, that's not as much an issue with oil, is the volatility of the gas. The primary problem is that of fugitive emmisions. Oil, for obvious reason, is much easier to control fugitive leaks. Fugitive emmisions of natural gas are much more difficult to control and detect, which is a problem. Also a problem is that since this is a relatively new industry being implemented on a wide scale the human health and environmental impact are not well known. At the root of the problem are the emmisions of gaseous compounds that like methane, aromatics and PAH's which are hazardous and cause known human health problems from chronic exposure.

Since developing and expanding natural gas technology appears to be key to future US energy strategies it is important that the appropriate level of controls or regulations are put into place. Now of course the business community wont' care to hear that but they need to listen loud and clear on this issue and agree to comply with an appropriate regulatory framework cause if they don't and the public loses faith and confidence in natural gas technology due to it's impact on human health and the environment then their investments will, pardon the pun, be sunk!

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/amid-us-...QDBHBzdGNhdANzY2llbmNlBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z;_ylv=3
 
You liberals would love to stop natural gas exploration to help destroy the US economy, but the fact is that natural gas under pressure is going to leak out into the atmosphere if we don't extract it. Since unburned methane is much more harmful a greenhouse gas then the CO2 emitted when burned, your desire to control greenhouse gases just destroyed your argument against natural gas exploitation. :)
 
You must not have read my post or the link. This isn't an issue about ACC. It's about practices which are exposing people to hazardous materials in such a way as to have a negative impact on peoples health and the environment. Are you familiar with fracking liquids? The chemicals they use and how the returned process water is exempt from CWA and RCRA regulations? What would you think if a company was storing process water with significant levels of Hydrofluoric Acid in an unlined pit near your home? Are you familiar of the consequences of exposure to HF? Is it your stance that these practices by gas drilling and production operations are not a legitimate public health concern?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You must not have read my post or the link. This isn't an issue about ACC. It's about practices which are exposing people to hazardous materials in such a way as to have a negative impact on peoples health and the environment. Are you familiar with fracking liquids? The chemicals they use and how the returned process water is exempt from CWA and RCRA regulations? What would you think if a company was storing process water with significant levels of Hydrofluoric Acid in an unlined pit near your home? Are you familiar of the consequences of exposure to HF? Is it your stance that these practices by gas drilling and production operations are not a legitimate public health concern?
Click to expand...

yes, why the exemptions - because they cannot make enough of a profit without them, but what of the aquifer after the extraction is done
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You must not have read my post or the link. This isn't an issue about ACC. It's about practices which are exposing people to hazardous materials in such a way as to have a negative impact on peoples health and the environment. Are you familiar with fracking liquids? The chemicals they use and how the returned process water is exempt from CWA and RCRA regulations? What would you think if a company was storing process water with significant levels of Hydrofluoric Acid in an unlined pit near your home? Are you familiar of the consequences of exposure to HF? Is it your stance that these practices by gas drilling and production operations are not a legitimate public health concern?
Click to expand...

Dude, the reason behind the exemptions is that you are dealing with deposits that are full of natural occurring hazardous materials. These are called "petroleum deposits". :palm:
 
Damn Yankee said:
Dude, the reason behind the exemptions is that you are dealing with deposits that are full of natural occurring hazardous materials. These are called "petroleum deposits". :palm:
Click to expand...
Wow....you've left me in a quandry......how do I find the tact to tell you that you don't know what you're talking about.
 
I have heard some disturbing things about the damages to the natural water supply where this fracking you has been used.
 
Damn Yankee said:
You can explain to me how petroleum deposits are not hazardous.
Click to expand...
To be honest with you, from a regulatory stand point, that depends on how hazardous is defined but for the sake of discussion, since were dealing with an issue of waste management, lets go with EPA/RCRA definition of hazardous waste. If a petroleum deposit waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous characterisitics of ignitabilty, corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity as defined under 40 CFR Section 261, then it would not be considered a hazardous waste.......but that's a moot point.

Why is that moot? It's because under EPA/RCRA regulations petroleum and gass drilling waste (called E&P Wastes in the industry) are excluded from hazardous waste regulations. So regardless of what their actuall hazard characteristics may actually be, E&P waste do not have to meet any of the treatment standards required for hazardous waste even if that E&P waste exhibits the characteristics of a hazardous waste.
 
WinterBorn said:
I have heard some disturbing things about the damages to the natural water supply where this fracking you has been used.
Click to expand...
Here's an example that drives people nuts. Say the fracking liquid contains concentrated acid and needs to be disposed of. It must be managed as a hazardous waste and treated before disposal but if the same fracking liquid is injected into the well and then pumped out and contains the very same concentrated acid, it's excempted from hazardous waste regulations and does not require treatment before disposal.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
To be honest with you, from a regulatory stand point, that depends on how hazardous is defined but for the sake of discussion, since were dealing with an issue of waste management, lets go with EPA/RCRA definition of hazardous waste. If a petroleum deposit waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous characterisitics of ignitabilty, corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity as defined under 40 CFR Section 261, then it would not be considered a hazardous waste.......but that's a moot point.

Why is that moot? It's because under EPA/RCRA regulations petroleum and gass drilling waste (called E&P Wastes in the industry) are excluded from hazardous waste regulations. So regardless of what their actuall hazard characteristics may actually be, E&P waste do not have to meet any of the treatment standards required for hazardous waste even if that E&P waste exhibits the characteristics of a hazardous waste.
Click to expand...

In other words, petroleum deposits are hazardous, so to extract millions of gallons of them by first inserting thousands of gallons of other hazardous materials into the mix is exempt from hazardous waste regulation. And for some reason you have a problem with that.
 
I'll look for the link again, but I was reading a bit about Fracking this morning, and one of the problems is that the water picks up all sorts of natural contamination from being forced into the layers of rock. According to the source I found, the water is 10x more contaminated than any of the by-products of oil production.
 
WinterBorn said:
I'll look for the link again, but I was reading a bit about Fracking this morning, and one of the problems is that the water picks up all sorts of natural contamination from being forced into the layers of rock. According to the source I found, the water is 10x more contaminated than any of the by-products of oil production.
Click to expand...
That's true and mainly due to the very corrosive additives that they add to many fracking liquids which often enough are the primary problem. Hydrofluoric Acid (HF) is a very common acid used in fracking liquids. Google an MSDS on HF and tell me what you think of that not needing to be treated prior to disposal.
 
Damn Yankee said:
In other words, petroleum deposits are hazardous, so to extract millions of gallons of them by first inserting thousands of gallons of other hazardous materials into the mix is exempt from hazardous waste regulation. And for some reason you have a problem with that.
Click to expand...
If they are harming human health and the environment, yes, I do have a problem with that. E&P waste were excluded for the same reason used oil has been excluded from RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Because they are produced in large volumes with ussually low hazard risks. One of the problems I have with that is that unlike used oil, which has it's own specific program for waste management under RCRA that generators must comply with, E&P waste does not. Now if drillers are adding additives that evade the intent of the E&P excemption and are substantially increasing the hazards associated with E&P waste then either the exemption must be re-evaluated or a specific program for managing E&P waste should be developed and implemented. It would be very wise of the petroleum and gas industry to be very proactive about that in this regard cause if they create to much of a problem States can over ride federal exemptions and implement far more stringent treatment standards.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
If they are harming human health and the environment, yes, I do have a problem with that. E&P waste were excluded for the same reason used oil has been excluded from RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Because they are produced in large volumes with ussually low hazard risks. One of the problems I have with that is that unlike used oil, which has it's own specific program for waste management under RCRA that generators must comply with, E&P waste does not. Now if drillers are adding additives that evade the intent of the E&P excemption and are substantially increasing the hazards associated with E&P waste then either the exemption must be re-evaluated or a specific program for managing E&P waste should be developed and implemented. It would be very wise of the petroleum and gas industry to be very proactive about that in this regard cause if they create to much of a problem States can over ride federal exemptions and implement far more stringent treatment standards.
Click to expand...

Well we all know how most people and especially those evil oil corporations love to pollute and discharge crap into the environment, especially when the chemicals are expensive and folks are drinking water downstream. We should have EPA regulations and oversight for everything, and make it illegal for a guy to change his own motor oil.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
That's true and mainly due to the very corrosive additives that they add to many fracking liquids which often enough are the primary problem. Hydrofluoric Acid (HF) is a very common acid used in fracking liquids. Google an MSDS on HF and tell me what you think of that not needing to be treated prior to disposal.
Click to expand...

Holy shit! They are pumping that into the ground and hoping they get it all back out?

https://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/00758.htm

There is the MSDS for anyone interested. SM, I would say this is a tad more serious than someone changing their oil in their driveway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top