Fracking - Solution or Problem?
- Thread starter Keith1
- Start date
It has its good points, making new oil reserves accessible and reviving old wells. Fracking is not a new technique and has been used for decades.
It also has its bad points. I am living at the edge of a huge oil reserve in west central TX in a city of about 100,000. We also live in an arid environment that has been in a drought for at least the last 3 years (until June of this year we had 0.7 inch of precipitation and then got a "frog floater" that brought us to near average of 10 inches!). We ae now in the "moderate" drought condition category. Up until the great rain our reservoir had only 4 months water reserve for the city of 100K! We are now at 10 months reserve. Our population is steadily increasing due to the oil "boom" at a rate of 16K per year! Six new hotels are under construction. This will put pressure on our water reserves.
The oil companies need a large amount of water to drill and frack, of which they obtain this from our underground waters. They are buying ranchers existing wells which further depletes our reserves. Then there is the issue of contamination of the underground aquifer by the fracking process itself. Where water resources are already limited, this could be catastrophic to the community. We ration home use of our water but it seems the oil industry does not.
So.....mixed feelings.
And, what happens to the community when the oil goes "bust"? Empty hotels, unemployment up, support businesses closed, housing bust, etc.
Since a property owner without "mineral rights" only owns the first 6 feet on the surface, the owner of the mineral rights can prospect and drill on the land with almost NO restrictions or payment to the surface rights owner! That owner could be living in China or elsewhere, several generations from the original owner of the mineral rights as well!
It also has its bad points. I am living at the edge of a huge oil reserve in west central TX in a city of about 100,000. We also live in an arid environment that has been in a drought for at least the last 3 years (until June of this year we had 0.7 inch of precipitation and then got a "frog floater" that brought us to near average of 10 inches!). We ae now in the "moderate" drought condition category. Up until the great rain our reservoir had only 4 months water reserve for the city of 100K! We are now at 10 months reserve. Our population is steadily increasing due to the oil "boom" at a rate of 16K per year! Six new hotels are under construction. This will put pressure on our water reserves.
The oil companies need a large amount of water to drill and frack, of which they obtain this from our underground waters. They are buying ranchers existing wells which further depletes our reserves. Then there is the issue of contamination of the underground aquifer by the fracking process itself. Where water resources are already limited, this could be catastrophic to the community. We ration home use of our water but it seems the oil industry does not.
So.....mixed feelings.
And, what happens to the community when the oil goes "bust"? Empty hotels, unemployment up, support businesses closed, housing bust, etc.
Since a property owner without "mineral rights" only owns the first 6 feet on the surface, the owner of the mineral rights can prospect and drill on the land with almost NO restrictions or payment to the surface rights owner! That owner could be living in China or elsewhere, several generations from the original owner of the mineral rights as well!
Fracking takes place 3500 to over 4000 feet below the aquifer. The holes are cement lined and the process is safe for people and the environment. The people that are against it for the most part are ignorant of the process and would be against it if it were "beam me up Scotty" out of the ground. They are against the end product and stopping the fracking stops the product. How environmentally safe is it to carry millions of gallons of crude oil thousands of miles across the ocean? We will use clean energy when it becomes practical and available, until then oil and gas are the answer and buying it from US companies that produce it in the US is good for jobs and the economy.
fracking | What is fracking fluid composed of? - Oilpro
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/06/21/ten-things-to-know-about-fracking/
fracking | What is fracking fluid composed of? - Oilpro
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/06/21/ten-things-to-know-about-fracking/
Last edited:
Al,
I agree that the risk of direct contamination of the aquifer is miniscule, I wanted to bring up the myriad of "side-effects" to the communities nearby. I am not opposed to the method.
The rancher's well is usually not tapping into the aquifer per se. But, it is still a vital resource that is being utilized by drilling companies (where their 99% of the fracking compound comes from). The depletion of the subsurface water, some of which replenishes the community's reservoir can have a more devastating impact than fracking paradigm. I have had seismic testing done on one of my ranches, one in which I have no mineral rights. Not looking forward to the prospect of well pumps, tanks and misc. equipment, trucks, workers having almost unlimited use of a portion of my property. I have relatives in the drilling industry and one attorney specializing in mineral rights so I could anticipate some of the surface consequences of the seismic testing and what might be expected if oil is found (not too likely on my property). I realize that this is a complex issue with both benefits and risks and that "fracking" has become the focal point for debate. But I contend that there are other issues that more directly impact a community.
I agree that the risk of direct contamination of the aquifer is miniscule, I wanted to bring up the myriad of "side-effects" to the communities nearby. I am not opposed to the method.
The rancher's well is usually not tapping into the aquifer per se. But, it is still a vital resource that is being utilized by drilling companies (where their 99% of the fracking compound comes from). The depletion of the subsurface water, some of which replenishes the community's reservoir can have a more devastating impact than fracking paradigm. I have had seismic testing done on one of my ranches, one in which I have no mineral rights. Not looking forward to the prospect of well pumps, tanks and misc. equipment, trucks, workers having almost unlimited use of a portion of my property. I have relatives in the drilling industry and one attorney specializing in mineral rights so I could anticipate some of the surface consequences of the seismic testing and what might be expected if oil is found (not too likely on my property). I realize that this is a complex issue with both benefits and risks and that "fracking" has become the focal point for debate. But I contend that there are other issues that more directly impact a community.
Doc, I've read that the water used for fracking is pumped from the ground and re-used. I imagine there is a percentage of loss.
"In Texas, where there are three major fracking regions, some residents struggle for clean drinking water. According to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, about 30 cities could run out of water by the end of the year. The state has already been plagued with severe drought since 2011, and fracking’s water use is draining water reservoirs even further. In the small town of Barnhart, Texas, it’s already too late. The Guardian reported that the community ran out of water for five days before a work crew revived an abandoned railway well to pump water to the city’s residents. Some believe the solution is just a temporary fix and won’t allow them to have clean drinking water for long." - from EarthEasy site....albeit not a refereed journal site for sure.
Much of the waste water remains deep and will not be recaptured and returned to the hydraulic cycle, thus the need for ground water sources for fracking. It is estimated that the average well (if there is such a beast) will use over 4 million gallons of water! Now, state-wide the impact on water use is minimal from the oil industry. Much more is used in agriculture and manufacturing. But this could be misleading. There could be a much larger impact to local communities such as the incident in Barnhart (which in fact did take place).
Much of the waste water remains deep and will not be recaptured and returned to the hydraulic cycle, thus the need for ground water sources for fracking. It is estimated that the average well (if there is such a beast) will use over 4 million gallons of water! Now, state-wide the impact on water use is minimal from the oil industry. Much more is used in agriculture and manufacturing. But this could be misleading. There could be a much larger impact to local communities such as the incident in Barnhart (which in fact did take place).
Ian Anderson
Lifetime Supporter
In areas near the coast can they utilise sea water or do the additional minerals "block the pores" that the fracking opens up?
It appears to be a big use of the scarce resource (clean water) - coming from Zimbabwe and being in a semi drought area for years I know how tight it can be waiting for rain. At one stage we were limited to 200 litres per househould per day (Picture your 44 gallon drum) and that's what we had to wash launder and flush with - it was all used twice and deodorant sales soured!
Ian
It appears to be a big use of the scarce resource (clean water) - coming from Zimbabwe and being in a semi drought area for years I know how tight it can be waiting for rain. At one stage we were limited to 200 litres per househould per day (Picture your 44 gallon drum) and that's what we had to wash launder and flush with - it was all used twice and deodorant sales soured!
Ian
Gentlemen:
I ask you...would oil companies lie to us?
Would greenies lie to us?
Would gubmunt lie to us?
There're only three facts of which we can be sure - (1) we'll need oil and gas until a reliable, economically viable alternative can be created, (2) we need to be completely energy independent, because (3) our present 'suppliers' are as reliable as politicians' promises.
So, until we actually know if all the anti-fracking stories are true (just as with all the global warming hysteria...and a LOT of that we now do know has proven to be either bald-faced lies or just plain wrong), we're going to have to 'trust' the 'experts' who actually WORK in that field, because they're the people who ought to know (as best as 'man' can know) what the story really is.
That's just they way things stand right now IMHO.
I ask you...would oil companies lie to us?
Would greenies lie to us?
Would gubmunt lie to us?
There're only three facts of which we can be sure - (1) we'll need oil and gas until a reliable, economically viable alternative can be created, (2) we need to be completely energy independent, because (3) our present 'suppliers' are as reliable as politicians' promises.
So, until we actually know if all the anti-fracking stories are true (just as with all the global warming hysteria...and a LOT of that we now do know has proven to be either bald-faced lies or just plain wrong), we're going to have to 'trust' the 'experts' who actually WORK in that field, because they're the people who ought to know (as best as 'man' can know) what the story really is.
That's just they way things stand right now IMHO.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Mostly an honest, polite discussion!
I'm an attorney in the energy industry and I can't begin to explain what a sea change the recent discoveries (well, actually, what happened is we can now economically get oil and natural gas we couldn't before) in Canada and the US are having in the business and will have on world politics.
We will FINALLY be free of the stranglehold that cesspool on the Persian Gulf has on the world. Having the free world controlling a large chunk of the world's fossil fuels (Norway, UK, US, Canada, Brazil, Argentina) will be a huge factor in how world politics plays out. It will weaken Putin and Russia, and make the Middle East almost irrelevant, like it was until the 50s/60s.
Fracking is a part of that and to me, while there are environmental risks (like with everything), the benefit is too high to ignore it. Plow ahead, do it right, absorb the losses it causes, but enjoy the benefit as well.
I'm an attorney in the energy industry and I can't begin to explain what a sea change the recent discoveries (well, actually, what happened is we can now economically get oil and natural gas we couldn't before) in Canada and the US are having in the business and will have on world politics.
We will FINALLY be free of the stranglehold that cesspool on the Persian Gulf has on the world. Having the free world controlling a large chunk of the world's fossil fuels (Norway, UK, US, Canada, Brazil, Argentina) will be a huge factor in how world politics plays out. It will weaken Putin and Russia, and make the Middle East almost irrelevant, like it was until the 50s/60s.
Fracking is a part of that and to me, while there are environmental risks (like with everything), the benefit is too high to ignore it. Plow ahead, do it right, absorb the losses it causes, but enjoy the benefit as well.
Good stuff and some interesting responses. However, I'm not at all sure I'd be too happy with the idea of someone slant drilling under my property and the issue about water supplies is worrying.
However, look at the upside!
Can the USA really be self sufficient by fracking alone? Isn't there also a danger that the essential research for non fossil alternative fuels will be seriously weakened as a result?
Fossil fuels are part of the problem, not the solution, at least to me anyway.....
However, look at the upside!
Can the USA really be self sufficient by fracking alone? Isn't there also a danger that the essential research for non fossil alternative fuels will be seriously weakened as a result?
Fossil fuels are part of the problem, not the solution, at least to me anyway.....
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Keith, I agree -- fracking is dnagerous and should be treated as such. But it can be managed. It's caused some problems, but in other places (most actually) its been done without problem.
You are completely correct that continued reliance on fossil fuels is not sustainable, that we need alternatives and that a mixed bag of energy sources is what we need -- basically the energy policies of both Presidents Bush and Obama.
Wind, hydro (Canada is huge on hydro), solar, natural gas/LNG, coal, nuke, all used together will get us energy independence by 2020 was I think the last estimate I saw. We will be an oil exporter (I think Canada already is) somewhere in that time frame to.
But yo uare right, this new oil boom has slowed development of other sources, which is problematic. Just 5 years ago, there were 40 nuke plants on th edrawing boards. Probably 3-4 will be built. Wind and solar investment is down. Why? Basically because natural gas is so plentiful and cheap.
Good discussion, I agree.
You are completely correct that continued reliance on fossil fuels is not sustainable, that we need alternatives and that a mixed bag of energy sources is what we need -- basically the energy policies of both Presidents Bush and Obama.
Wind, hydro (Canada is huge on hydro), solar, natural gas/LNG, coal, nuke, all used together will get us energy independence by 2020 was I think the last estimate I saw. We will be an oil exporter (I think Canada already is) somewhere in that time frame to.
But yo uare right, this new oil boom has slowed development of other sources, which is problematic. Just 5 years ago, there were 40 nuke plants on th edrawing boards. Probably 3-4 will be built. Wind and solar investment is down. Why? Basically because natural gas is so plentiful and cheap.
Good discussion, I agree.
Doc, I'm not saying you are wrong with the gallon amount, but that seems like a lot of water. I drilled wells in my early 20s and I know a 6" hole is 1.5 gallons per foot and a 12" is roughly 6 gallons per foot. So if the hole is 5000 feet vertical and 2000 feet horizontal or 7000 feet, that would be 42,000 gallons in a 12" hole and 3,958,000 gallons someplace else. I'm just knowledgeable enough about fracking to be dangerous, could you give me an idea where I can find those numbers? Thanks.
Water Content in Pipes
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Well (pun intended) I have no fracking idea so can't comment.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Keith, yes I know it hasn't stopped me in the past:laugh:
Terry Oxandale
Skinny Man
I'm enjoying the benefits of this as well, but end the end, the benefit is in the eye of the beholder. The farmer or resident whose water is no longer drinkable does not see the same benefit as the shareholder living a thousand miles away from the earthquakes and polluted water. And obviously, the industry's response will never admit even a scintilla of doubt that their process is responsible for any impact other than available gas. Any questions as to the undesired side effects are dismissed by the industry or political supporters as "greenies" or "un-patriotic" in the latest political ads.
I've yet to see proof of polluted water or earthquakes directly attributed to fracking. A lot of supposition but no hard proof. But the evil shareholder is sometimes enough.
Terry Oxandale
Skinny Man
The problem with that is ideological and emotional differences rule over the observation of evidence to the contrary of those beliefs. Would you really want to know if your bread-and-butter was causing grief to other people, or would you rather sleep better at night believing in what you do is without question, the right thing for them regardless of their pain.
These "experts" also answer to the stakeholders, and I know you are not so naïve to believe they tell all, and show all, and give equal consideration to both sides of the debate...are you?
Then there is moronic BS like this.
https://www.google.com/#q=pollution+or+earthquakes+directly+attributed+to+fracking
And it causes two headed babies!
https://www.google.com/#q=pollution+or+earthquakes+directly+attributed+to+fracking
And it causes two headed babies!
Terry Oxandale
Skinny Man
Great side-step.
You go out to wash your car and notice a unidentifiable rough, never-seen-before, surface on the paint and glass, and then remember your neighbor next door was spray painting a part of his car yesterday. You come to a reasonable conclusion the overspray was blown onto your car, and now you've no easy way to remove it. You confront your neighbor about it, and he says "I see no proof that my painting in anyway had anything to do with what-ever it is on your car". Done...end of problem.
Last edited:
Al,
Here are some references:
<cite class="_Wd">fracfocus.org/water-protection/hydraulic-fracturing-usage</cite>
<cite class="_Wd">https://cogcc.state.co.us/.../Oil_and_Gas_Water_Sources_Fact_Sheet.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/08/u...o-water-supply-fears.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Eagle Ford Shale Water Use and Concerns
Again, this is only a very small percentage of total water utilization state-wide. But it is the specific locale where the drilling is taking place that is affected disproportionately. Unfortunately, I only have anecdotal information concerning contamination of potable water sources, eg., individual ranchers/homesteads that have lost their individual water supplies, usually due to above ground waste water ponds that have leaked into the local ground water/wells. The number of wells being drilled here is phenomenal and that's why there is concern for the water supplies of the surrounding communities, not to mention the arid conditions aggravating the situation and the rapid population growth.
</cite>
Here are some references:
<cite class="_Wd">fracfocus.org/water-protection/hydraulic-fracturing-usage</cite>
<cite class="_Wd">https://cogcc.state.co.us/.../Oil_and_Gas_Water_Sources_Fact_Sheet.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/08/u...o-water-supply-fears.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Eagle Ford Shale Water Use and Concerns
Again, this is only a very small percentage of total water utilization state-wide. But it is the specific locale where the drilling is taking place that is affected disproportionately. Unfortunately, I only have anecdotal information concerning contamination of potable water sources, eg., individual ranchers/homesteads that have lost their individual water supplies, usually due to above ground waste water ponds that have leaked into the local ground water/wells. The number of wells being drilled here is phenomenal and that's why there is concern for the water supplies of the surrounding communities, not to mention the arid conditions aggravating the situation and the rapid population growth.
</cite>