Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2)


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2009/2/10 16:30
From SE PA
Posts: 4681
Offline
Quote:

pcray1231 wrote:
Umm, are you talking about the elder, or younger, Bush? Fracking has only recently picked up again. The working wells that are out there were fracked 10-50 years ago.


I'm referring to Brownout's post which says that Bush (Jr) allowed significantly more drilling than other administrations and nine out of ten natural gas wells during this time were fracted.

The point is even if only two or three thousand wells were drilled using fracking we would start to see some evidence of well water contamination. It doesn't appear to be much of a problem. Wonder if there are any statistics around?

Posted on: 2009/7/9 12:05


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13344
Offline
Well, first, the vast majority of wells use fracing, and always have.

Second, its not 2 or 3 thousand wells. There's better than 12,000 working wells in the ANF alone, and over a hundred thousand in the state of Pennsylvania, the vast majority of which were frac'd at least once in their histories. If you add in the ones that are no longer producing, and the # of ones that were frac'd more than once, then you probably have over half a million frac'ings in our state that were already carried out.

If you go just by recent history, the renewed interest in gas in PA happened around 2007, 2008. The # of new wells PER YEAR went from just under 1000 to closer to 1500 for just the ANF, which is a county sized area. The numbers outside of the forest, for a similar sized area, are similar.

Now, I've seen exactly 1 case in PA where a well water contamination was linked to gas drilling. That was in Dimock. And that affected between 10-20 houses. The company was heavily fined, it was a fractured well-head. There was also a spill of frac fluid in SW PA, a pipe burst. Sad indeed, and these incidents should be investigated and prevented. But look at the percentages.

Marcellus is new, and there are some Marcellus wells already producing. The difference between them and the old wells is depth, and because of the depth, they drill horizontally at depth in several directions instead of making several separate vertical wells. Environmentally, this means that you'll have much fewer total wells, but the amount of bore space in a single well is much more. It needs a lot more water for the initial fracing operation, but like the other wells once that is complete, there is no need for continuous water. Due to the heavier drilling equipment, and more water you'll need, it means that the space to be cleared for the operation is larger, which means more siltation. It also means that due to the depth, the frac'ing operation is LESS likely to contaminate water wells. Of course, its still possible, and if the contamination comes from broken concrete above the water table like these other ones, it really doesn't make a difference how deep the well is.

So yes, well water contamination is a problem but not the big one. The big one is land use, water use, and water disposal, and thats where we, as conservationists, need to focus on.

Now, the story in Colorado:

First, its hard to compare drilling in Colorado to here. Different geology, different type of rocks, different elevation differences between valley and mountain. There, if you drill half a mile deep from the high ground, thats still above the water table in the valleys!

Weld County: 1395 producing wells as of the time of the article. 29 residents asked for testing of their water. 9 tested positive for methane that was verified to be natural, i.e. not related to the drilling. Exactly 1 was shown to be due to drilling activity.

Garfield County: This is a little more serious. 1300 producing wells in the county. "Dozens" of wells were found to be at least partially "degraded" due to drilling, though it doesn't state the extent. At least 1 case basically made a house unlivable. One single bad well casing can do that to "dozens" of water wells.

Posted on: 2009/7/9 13:17


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2006/9/10 21:53
From Greensburg, PA
Posts: 13622
Offline
I don't know much about wells but from what I've read and pictures I've seen the biggest impact from this kind of drilling will be water consumption and the vast number new roads being built and the erosion created by them.

Posted on: 2009/7/9 16:47


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2009/7/8 15:02
Posts: 5
Offline
The deep well drilling techniques may be newer in Pennsylvania, but they have been used for some years, with some serious consequences to the environment and people’s health, in other parts of the country. Courts and state & local governments have documented over a thousand cases of water pollution from hydraulic fracturing. Communities’ have seen their air being polluted, because at each step of the drilling process, more than 50 pollutants are released. In Pennsylvania, in Cross Creek Park, a drilling wastewater leak killed aquatic life in 3/4 of a mile of stream. In Bradford Twp, (McKean County), 7 drinking water sources were contaminated by a drilling company.

Posted on: 2009/8/5 12:20


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2009/7/8 15:02
Posts: 5
Offline
How do members of this forum feel about a tax on gas production if a portion of the revenues were invested into land and water projects?

What about the current proposals to open more of our state forests to drilling?

Posted on: 2009/8/5 12:21


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2006/9/10 21:53
From Greensburg, PA
Posts: 13622
Offline
What percentage?

Posted on: 2009/8/5 12:31


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2009/2/10 16:30
From SE PA
Posts: 4681
Offline
Quote:

Elana wrote:
How do members of this forum feel about a tax on gas production if a portion of the revenues were invested into land and water projects?

What about the current proposals to open more of our state forests to drilling?


No, I already pay too much in taxes and what I pay is largely misspent.

Posted on: 2009/8/5 15:27


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22105
Offline
I won't argue about some part of your tax dollars being misspent, but I have my doubts about you paying "too much already."

Posted on: 2009/8/5 16:41
_________________
I don't like spinach, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked it I'd eat it, and I just hate it. --Clarence Darrow


Re: Shale drilling and well water pollution

Joined:
2006/9/18 8:28
From Attitudinally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf
Posts: 849
Offline
>>Still need to do lots of research, but I think this will be one of the biggest problems in the state in terms of conservation in the foreseeable future. I am not too sure what kind of say tax paying citizens of these counties have, but I am guessing the Clean Water Act is the main body of law that would give them a voice.>>

There is a Citizen's Suit Provision in the Federal Clean Water Act that allows any citizen legally determined to have standing to bring action against a polluter in any case where it can be determined that EPA or DEP is not enforcing the law. Usually, these actions are brought by local groups or small foundations and their purpose is more about goosing the regulators into doing their jobs than actually seeking monetary damages from the violator. Once the 60 day notice of intent to sue is issued, 98% or more of these cases are settled without going to court. Most of them are more of a shot across the bow sort of thing.

Occasionally, one will end up in court. I used to serve on the board of one of these foundations in PA and ended up taking standing in a suit against United Refining for long term chronic violations of their discharge permits at Warren into the Allegheny.

They wouldn't talk and wanted to go to Federal court (where these things are heard). So we did and they ended up being fined 250K to be applied to watershed protection and improvement in the National Forest region as well as a court order to fix their discharge.

So, it is a useful tool that can and should be used very sparingly.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_suit

Posted on: 2009/8/5 17:47



« 1 (2)



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com