Hydrofracking - are we nuts? (OT)

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 261 - 280 of total 327 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jun 3, 2013 - 09:24pm PT
Not too technical at all.


Hope you keep it up


Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Jun 3, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
Base104, I hope you don't give up on us, many lurkers probably appreciate
your responses, even if they are marginally understandable. ;-)
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jun 3, 2013 - 09:47pm PT
Don't let all that radon in those purrdy granite counter tops get too you Rilley
NutAgain!

Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
May 6, 2014 - 03:02am PT
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/05/05/309888859/usgs-okla-fracking-has-increased-chance-of-damaging-quake?ft=1&f=1001

key parts of USGS findings:
The agencies said "183 earthquakes of magnitude 3.0 or greater occurred in Okla. from October 2013 through April 14, 2014. This compares with a long-term average from 1978 to 2008 of only two magnitude 3.0 or larger earthquakes per year. As a result of the increased number of small and moderate shocks, the likelihood of future, damaging earthquakes has increased for central and north-central Oklahoma."

"We hope that this new advisory of increased hazard will become a crucial consideration in earthquake preparedness for residents, schools and businesses in the central Oklahoma area," said Dr. Bill Leith, USGS Senior Science Advisor for Earthquakes and Geologic Hazards. "Building owners and government officials should have a special concern for older, unreinforced brick structures, which are vulnerable to serious damage during sufficient shaking."

The statement says "a likely contributing factor to the increase in earthquakes is wastewater disposal by injection into deep geologic formations."

"The water injection can increase underground pressures, lubricate faults and cause earthquakes – a process known as injection-induced seismicity," according to the statement.

"Much of this wastewater is a byproduct of oil and gas production and is routinely disposed of by injection into wells specifically designed and approved for this purpose. The recent earthquake rate changes are not due to typical, random fluctuations in natural seismicity rates," it said.

I'd like to hear what the industry has learned from this, how it self-regulates to put less waste-water back into the well or not when certain geologic circumstances are present, or to deeper depths, etc.
ydpl8s

Trad climber
Santa Monica, California
May 6, 2014 - 11:15am PT
This has been know about since the induced quakes in the Denver area back in the mid 60's when they were pumping fluids down wells in the old Rock Mtn arsenal site. There were and are a lot of proponents of using this technology to create smaller earthquakes, so as to keep the pressure from building up for a larger quake. The obvious problem here is that a large potential release has already been building and the injection into the fault could trigger it. There are lots of people working on this problem, lots of differences of opinion, still a long way to go.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
May 6, 2014 - 01:36pm PT
Interesting thread revival. Todays news it looks like you, the taxpayer, will soon be paying to try and make coal cleanER. As I satirically called it upthread, "clean coal". The name is total bullsh#t. The US is gifted with amazing reserves of coal, and in many years, when we do figure out how to burn it without the horrific environmental destruction it causes, we'll be in fat city. But if the coal companies want to pay to make their product clean, let them, or let West Virgina (Rockerfeller is one of the West Virgina senators) pay for it. Can we re-title the thread?
"Fracking, not even close to as insane as coal"

"Rockefeller introduces bills for clean coal incentives, research

By Timothy Cama - 05/06/14 08:33 AM EDT

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) has introduced a set of bills aimed at incentivizing carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and funding federal research that could improve the process.

In addition to funding CCS research, Rockefeller’s legislation would expand tax credits for companies that use CCS, fund loan guarantees for constructing CCS facilities and fund retrofits of existing CCS facilities.

CCS is the process of capturing carbon dioxide emissions and moving them into storage, so that they do not enter the atmosphere. One of Rockefeller’s bills specifically targets the process of injecting carbon dioxide into oil wells to increase the wells’ yield, a practice known as enhanced oil recovery.

“The reality for West Virginia and the rest of the country is that we need coal; we can’t meet our energy needs without it,” Rockefeller said in a Monday statement. “It is simply unrealistic to think that we can stop burning coal and shift to cleaner sources of energy instantly.”

Rockefeller said he sees his legislation as a way to preserve coal as an important energy source while reduce its harm to the environment. West Virginia is a coal-heavy state, and the mining industry fears that government efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions could harm its business.

Eileen Claussen, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, praised Rockefeller’s proposals.

“Carbon capture and storage is a critical technology to cut carbon emissions while coal and natural gas remain part of our energy mix,” Claussen said in a statement. “Providing incentives to capture CO2 for use in enhanced oil recovery will help bring more commercial-scale projects online, which will help advance carbon capture technology and lower costs.”"


http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/205279-rockefeller-introduces-bills-for-clean-coal-incentives-research
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 6, 2014 - 03:18pm PT
Interestingly, chouchmaster, US coal exports to Europe have increased dramatically of late.

Of course, all environmental discussions on the internet are settled as soon as the disfavored activity is proven imperfect. . .

John
dindolino32

climber
san francisco
May 6, 2014 - 03:34pm PT
Oh the stupid sh#t humans can come up with! What is wrong with us?
lostinshanghai

Social climber
someplace
May 6, 2014 - 04:19pm PT
Credit: lostinshanghai

Credit: lostinshanghai
couchmaster

climber
pdx
May 6, 2014 - 06:22pm PT
JohnE said:
"Interestingly, chouchmaster, US coal exports to Europe have increased dramatically of late."

True that, chart below - they have an environmental consciousness, sell them all that they want. China (seen in the chart as a goodly part of "Asia" is all but begging for more as well.


The 1 percenters want a new coal terminal to start exporting it much more significant quantities. I like to be for free trade, but knowing that as bad as the coal in this country is (@ 1/2 of our electricity in the nation comes from coal) the Chinese are much less concerned with pollution or making it "clean". They'll burn it and release much more crap into the air which will drift over us, so F em. By the way, last time I was over there it was brought to my attention that they had had a coal mine burning continuously since the late 1800's.



zBrown

Ice climber
Brujo de la Playa
May 6, 2014 - 06:38pm PT
The one way back up there got me a non-existent page message.

This one worked

http://www.egr.msu.edu/tosc/akron/factsheets/fs_btexpdf.pdf


TGT

Social climber
So Cal
May 21, 2014 - 10:06am PT
What frauds!



http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cannes-video-hollywood-environmentalists-anti-706051?mobile_redirect=false
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
May 21, 2014 - 10:12am PT
OK you frackers the report is out - Monterrey Shale Formation has, get this, 96% LESS RECOVERABLE OIL than the hype masters of speculation suggested.

Monterrey formation contains, according to what I read, as much as half of the U.S. shale oil 'reserves.' But those 'reserves' are not recoverable. Hype hype hype hype hype.....

DMT
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
May 21, 2014 - 11:05am PT
You're advising us to believe the gubmint on this?
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
May 21, 2014 - 11:06am PT
Been to McKittrick lately?

DMT
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
May 21, 2014 - 11:09am PT
No, just Taft. I needed my James Dean fix.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
May 21, 2014 - 12:26pm PT
Yesterday morning the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors voted to ban fracking in the county.

Unknown to most, there are in fact a few small producing oil wells immediately adjacent to Big Basin and Castle Rock state parks. Just off Hwy 9 if you know the area. There's also a small production just above Hwy 84 west of La Honda.

Anyway, these oil formations are relatively close to the surface as evidenced by the supposed seeps (I've never seen them myself) in oil creek and coal creek. Since my water well is in an aquifer at 400 ft I have a personal concern.
skcreidc

Social climber
SD, CA
May 21, 2014 - 12:31pm PT
Holy crap High Traverse!!! So I take it the capping unit to your aquifer/groundwater source is the Monterey Shale? Is your well in a confined or semi confined aquifer?

Edit; After reading your post more closely, I don't know the groundwater geology of Santa Cruz well at all. But I would not want fracking near my well, thats for sure.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
May 21, 2014 - 12:37pm PT
Don't know if the aquifer is in Monterey Shale or above it. I know the Monterey Shale is beneath me somewhere.
We have no idea how deep the existing oil wells are.
I do know the strata slope downwards from my canyon towards Hwy 9 at a pretty steep angle. The strata could easily be 1000 feet below the surface at the wells.
Wouldn't know a capped aquifer if it bit me in the arse.
That's why I say I'm concerned about the fracking. Not freaking out. Now looks as if I don't personally have to worry.

To my conservative engineering brain, I'm very concerned about the risks and lack of transparency in fracking. I haven't yet read all of BASE104's posts on this site.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
May 21, 2014 - 12:42pm PT
Besides groundwater contamination, I'm sitting within 1/4 mile of the San Andreas Fault. I've seen reasonable reports that there may be a link between extensive fracking and fault movements.
Again far to many unknowns about this tracking business.
Transparency would be a good thing all around.
Messages 261 - 280 of total 327 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews