What's in the 'frac' fluid???

wgmiller

wgmiller

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
2,827
Saw on WGAL's website that Halliburton is starting to disclose the fluids they're using:

http://www.halliburton.com/public/projects/pubsdata/Hydraulic_Fracturing/fluids_disclosure.html

Nothing nasty in there... :roll:
 
Thanks for the link.
Now, can we believe Halliburton?
 
whheff wrote:
Now, can we believe Halliburton?

Unbeliveable cynicism and ingratitude. Is that the way we show our appreciation for the company that ran our country for 8 of the last 10 years? I cannot believe this kind of rhetoric is tolerated here. Mods?
 
Good one Jack!!! Two thumbs up...
 
http://www.paflyfish.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=15490&forum=6&post_id=205516#forumpost205516

the thread posted above lists a couple of companies websites where they post the MSDS sheet for the fluid. The ingredients are pretty common knowledge at his point withing the industry.
 
I don't believe anyone, anywhere, at anytime!
 
Good prior discussion link, Tom. Much is answered there. In reading that, though, I wonder if there isn't an exception for proprietary chemicals and formulas, so that no public access to the information is allowed? I don't know the answer, but I would bet something is in the law and regs to protect the intellectual property of the company.
 
I think your right Jack. the dep and/or relate industrial types may get that data, the general public probably isn't allowed access, which is fine if nothing harmful is happening, but when they are pumping the crap past your well water under extreme pressure, I'd sure as hell like to know what's in it! just wondering, if the pressure they pump it in at is high enough to fracture rock, wouldn't it be able to frackure the concrete casing also? I mean, if it can fracture rock that is up to 2 miles beneath the surface of the earth, that would take some serious pressure. maybe they don't think concrete can crack.
back to the topic. I don't care what's in it, I don't want to drink it. I don't want it pumped past my water supply. would the drillers pump it past thier own wells at home? maybe we should ask them
 
There are companies that are voluntarily disclosing fracking, since there are many federal and state agencies breathing down their neck. They know perfectly well that they are going to have to disclose the "proprietary" formulas, so some companies are voluntarily disclosing the information is a gesture of "goodwill".

Biker it is my understanding that the concrete liner is going in after the fracking process not during. Unless you are talking about something else with the concrete liner thing . . .

I'd like to know how some of these school districts are putting wells on their land and the parents are allowing it. I mean it takes all of five seconds for find video of exploding wells.

As far as Haliburton goes, don't think they release their proprietary fracking formula out of the kindness of their hearts.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/e-p-a-subpoenas-halliburton-on-fracking/

PS: THERE IS NO SUCH THING A PROPRIETARY FRACKING FLUID INGREDIENTS!!!!!
 
I still find it amazing that these operations are exempt from the Clean Water Act...
 
wgmiller wrote:
I still find it amazing that these operations are exempt from the Clean Water Act...

Thank Bush 43 and the republican congress for that.
 
wgmiller wrote:
I still find it amazing that these operations are exempt from socialism...

I fixed it for the wingnuts among us.
 
They don't have to make it public...and in a sense they don't make it public. What they do is make it available to those who must use the chemicals and by law they are required to disclose anything hazardous that a worker may be exposed to. Its an OSHA thing rather than a EPA or DEP thing.

Regardless, those who "need" to know, know what's in it but I think the specific hazards are irrelevant. The big questions are "can they and are they being used in a safe and responsible manner?" Unfortunately, I think that remains to be seen and nothing will change until there is a negative impact. Never has been a lot of proactive environmental protection.


A list of these chemicals as used in Marcellus
shale wells in New York can be seen here:

http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/58440.html

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/materials_minerals_pdf/ogdsgeischap5.pdf

read on...
 
TomG is right , the MSDS at the worksite or shop where the employees have acess to the information of what they are exposed to while at work "Material Safety Data Sheet" legally must contain the information to anything the employees might come into contact with while on the Job and it's an OSHA regulation. I don't ever remember anything about "trade secrets" entering into this area and i was through this whole thing in the Steel Industry. I started in 1974 and was through the asbestos issue which subsequently gave rise to OSHA creating the MSDS regulations.
 
This article seems to suggest that fracking fluid contents are not wholely disclosed on the material safety data sheets:

In response to yesterday’s announcement, the EPA said Halliburton still must respond to the subpoena. The agency is seeking very detailed information, such as chemicals in the solutions that might not be found on publicly accessible material safety data sheets; ....
 
Since the legal questions regarding proprietary info are somewhat in my specialty, just a little info:

Patents: Publicly disclosed information. Protects the mixture from being used (without permission) by other companies for the length of the patent. Patents do expire. The implied exchange is a temporary monopoly on the product in exchange for that public disclosure. And since its public, other companies have the option of tinkering with the mixture, and if they are able to make an advancement that "wouldn't be obvious to one reasonably skilled in the art", they can then patent that advancement.

Trade Secrets: Company does not disclose information to public, patent office, or anyone else. Protection lasts indefinitely, so long as the company makes a reasonable attempt to keep the secret. Many employees may not know the information, and those who do have signed agreements with the employer to not disclose. If any outside work is done, the company can obtain a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) first. Other companies cannot obtain info via industrial espionage.

The protection given to a trade secret is in if it is improperly disclosed (by an employee or outside party under an NDA) or discovered (industrial espionage), the company is entitled to damages. However, the danger is that other companies CAN attempt to reverse engineer the process or independently discover it on their own, and if they discover it, there is no protection.

In most states, the interest of protecting trade secrets outweighs other legal interests, such as health, safety, environment, etc. So companies are within their legal right to deny the information even if the DEP, etc. orders them to disclose. One of those areas where "legal" rights and "moral" rights may not be in harmony. Of course, one would hope in some situations companies would do the morally right thing to protect public perception of their brand, even if not legally required.
 
JackM.........Looks like a showdown looming between Haliburton and OSHA will be interesting to see how it shakes out. It's kinda sorta Obama vs Cheney should be a good indication of things to come. I'm not sure who the director of OSHA is , i used to have to know that stuff , or if he is an Obama appointee or is a Bush holdover. Since i heard recently that a move was made to put ammunition under OSHA jurisdiction away from ATF i'm gonna guess that it's not a Bush holdover. Having worked in an industry as a worker represented by a Union the procedure that is required is for one or more of the workers to file an OSHA complaint on the MSDS violation. Being the Devils' Advocate for a moment I'm going to bet that if that happens those employees will be fired , lacking a collective bargaining agent they will have to appeal to the NLRB. It just dawned on me that there might be an organizing opportunity here unless my gut feeling is wrong I doubt that very many of the workers involved with Marcellus are represented by a Union. If for example they were represented by the United Steelworkers of America they could not be fired for filing an OSHA complaint , don't get me wrong the LAW says all workers have the right but a worker that doesn't have a Union to back them up will be fired for some fabricated reason , NOT for filing an OSHA complaint which they have the right under law to do. Looks like the ball is in OSHA's court. Next?
 
Just saw this on WGAL.com:

http://www.wgal.com/news/25901948/detail.html

I'm sure the first of many that will occur! :-?
 
The first of what? There were several wells exploded and they could light their water with a match in Dimock , PA which was featured in the film Gasland , if you mean the first spring/well ruined from the Lycoming county spill then i apologize , if you mean the first report of an accident GOOD MORNING it's good to see you're up.
 
Oh, I'm aware there have been several accidents already. Perhaps I should have stated "another contamination". No need to shoot the messenger ;-)
 
Back
Top