Turning Natural Gas Into Water

[editec]

The FORCE OF STUPID is strong in this board.

Embrace the force and become one with the confederacy of dunces.

 

[RGR]

...... water is poisoned.

Unless there is some huge, easily noticeable failure in the structural integrity of the well, hydraulic fracturing doesn't poison water. Sorry.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - cause dey come out a buncha puddin'-headed lib'rals after listenin' to dem lefty looney professors...

Study: US College Students Advance Little Intellectually
April 06, 2012 - After 2 years, 45% show no significant improvement

This is the time of year when millions of American high-school seniors and their parents scramble to complete the process of finding, and getting accepted by, a college to begin the higher education process in September. But there’s some doubt about how high that level of learning will be. The title of a new book tells the story. Based on a recent study by sociologists Richard Arum of New York University and Josipa Roska of the University of Virginia, the title is: "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses."

The professors interviewed 2,300 U.S. college undergraduates and reviewed their academic records. They concluded that after two years in college, 45 percent of the students showed no significant improvement in key intellectual and creative skills such as critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing. These results come at a time when President Barack Obama, his education department and outside reformers are all saying that the United States had better start producing smarter college graduates if it wants to remain competitive globally. The study of students’ behavior during those first two years in college may provide a clue as to what’s breaking down.

The researchers found that freshmen and sophomores are more concerned with socializing and communicating with friends than with what used to be called “cracking the books.” Their “critical thinking” would appear to involve choosing the right pizza joint or bar at which to meet those friends. “It’s good to lead a monk’s existence [in college]," says Eric Gorski, an Associated Press writer who reported on the study. "Students who study alone and have heavier reading and writing loads do well.” Unfortunately for U.S. educational achievement, not many monastic types appear to be applying to college these days.

Source

 

[Mr. H.]

Well, I can't be too critical. I pretty much partied my college days away.

 

[RGR]

Students at Northampton Community College, Bloomsburg University and Lock Haven University get the rest of the story on Marcellus Shale and natural gas development:

College Students Getting Educated on Marcellus Shale | Energy In Depth – Northeast Marcellus Initiative

Why do you continually pimp the same blog?

 

[Mr. H.]

Tell us more. In your own words.

 

[Mr. H.]

And you don't have to view your own thread 60 times to see if someone has responded.

 

[RGR]

It's time to take concrete action toward development of New York's Marcellus Shale resources.

Put Your John Hancock Here for Natural Gas | Energy In Depth – Northeast Marcellus Initiative

Do you have the ability to tell us why we should take concrete steps towards Marcellus development (in an environment of very low prices), or are all you are capable of is dropping in links pimping a single formations development in a single state?

 

[RGR]

We are wrapping up our first year with a review of all that's happened including background on that great team of folks we have out in the field:

Natural Gas, Hydraulic Fracturing and Our Future | Energy In Depth – Northeast Marcellus Initiative

If you are an advocacy group, why don't you come right out and say it, instead of carpet bombing this forum with threads, the cumulative result of which is we know you have an advocacy position, and don't appear to have any ability to talk about your position?

 

[uscitizen]

Is this spam and therefore to be banned from this site?

 

[Old Rocks]

On the contrary, in some cases it has. And then there have been cases of careless handling and disposal of said chemcals by the drilling companies. Problem here is accountability over time. If the well pollutes the aquifer ten years down the road, who pays for the damages?

 

[editec]

...... water is poisoned.

Unless there is some huge, easily noticeable failure in the structural integrity of the well, hydraulic fracturing doesn't poison water. Sorry.

How does one "easily" notice a fracture that's hundreds of feet below the surface?

By noting the lost injection fluids?

If that is how it is easily noticed then the damage to the aquifer is done BEFORE anything can be done about it, no?

Educate me, please.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Why would anyone support more pollution, when they can support clean energy that costs less? I guess because they are tools of oil companies

 

[RGR]

Why would anyone support more pollution, when they can support clean energy that costs less? I guess because they are tools of oil companies

It has been claimed that the group Tom heads up (his self proclaimed title is "Campaign Manager") is industry funded.

Here is Tom, campaign manager for what some consider to be an industry funded front.

Who We Are | Energy In Depth – Northeast Marcellus Initiative

Here is Tom's resume, loaded with PR and business type consulting

http://www.shepstone.net/Resume.pdf

Notice the fine lack of oil and gas experience, and claim of "land use development". Gee...I wonder who might profit from certain types of "land use" development....perhaps the people who sponsor the blog he continually pimps on this website?

Energy in Depth - Tom Shepstone...Paid for By American Petroleum Institute?

Are there rules here for industry shills who just carpet bomb the place with links, and are apparently paid to do it? Noticeable by their inability to actually SPEAK on the topic they reference, is there any way to keep paid industry shills out of here?

 

[Mr. H.]

I like the articles, but not the delivery method.

 

[RGR]

Is this spam and therefore to be banned from this site?

Apparently it is. Tom is apparently part of a paid industry front group to pimp Marcellus.

Energy in Depth - Tom Shepstone..Pimping for the American Petroleum Institute

 

[RGR]

On the contrary, in some cases it has.

To know for sure, we would have to be more specific about the terms. For example, I have certainly fraced into a shallow aquifer before, old faithful suddenly appearing up the backside of a well (casing hanger on the 4-1/2 rather than a wellhead) indicating that I had burst the pipe, and without sufficient depth to the surface casing...presto....I put frac fluids into contact with shallow aquifer.

Did I poison anyone? Of course not. Did anyone notice besides me and the frac crew? Nope. So is THAT the kind of poison someone is talking about? Certainly this type of failure is easier to spot than a slow, insidious one, but a slow insidious one has one huge problem working against it, long term....differential pressure.

And then there have been cases of careless handling and disposal of said chemcals by the drilling companies. Problem here is accountability over time. If the well pollutes the aquifer ten years down the road, who pays for the damages?

How does a well pollute an aquifer for 10 years without someone noticing? Certainly I will admit it is possible, but having some experience with even poorly managed companies, THEY can spot these things pretty quicker. Maybe someone as ignorant as our Jiggsy the Parrot would be that stupid, but the companies would rather put the gas into a pipe and get paid for it then allow it thief zones to steal it from them. And this is more of a production problem now, not a hydraulic fracturing problem.

 

[RGR]

...... water is poisoned.

Unless there is some huge, easily noticeable failure in the structural integrity of the well, hydraulic fracturing doesn't poison water. Sorry.

How does one "easily" notice a fracture that's hundreds of feet below the surface?

Depends on what is going on. You see such things on the surface during a frac job by watching the flow rates and pressures, during production you tend to notice differences between sandface and surface flow rates, indicating a thief zone. There are also anomalous pressure and production profiles, suddenly your annulus gains pressure for an unexplained reason, a local shallow well suddenly starts bubbling up in someone's driveway, etc etc. All sorts of ways to notice when things go back with pipe integrity.

If that is how it is easily noticed then the damage to the aquifer is done BEFORE anything can be done about it, no?

Educate me, please.

You will have to define what you consider "damage" to an aquifer. For example, if I put 8,000 psi against a shallow aquifer for 10 seconds, is that "damage"? If I then remove the pressure to a point lower than the hydrostatic of the aquifer, reversing the flow, do I then "fix" the damage?

 

[Mr. H.]

I'd like nothing more than to comment in support of the article and this thread, but you don't rate it.

You're doing a disservice to a very deserving industry. Unless you can expound on a topic with your own original input, preferably from experience, then you have no purpose here.

 

[RGR]

The U.S. Supreme Court's Sackett decision may have forced EPA to start applying reason and back up on its forays into the natural gas debate with ill-considered attacks on hydraulic fracturing:

Tom, do you even know what hydraulic fracturing is? And tell us, how much are you paid to SPAM the forums with what is obviously an advocacy position?