Gasland

[mdn2000]

Is it?



And, FYI, here's a list of the chemicals added to the water/sand combination used in fracting




Doesn't the above chemical (many of the carcinogenic, I note) read like something YOU want in your kids' water supply?

Do you have any proof? No you say? This is a real problem, real answers are needed, the chemicals you listed are of real concern, yet you have to prove they are in our water table FIRST!!

Instead of yelling wolf, try to work with the O & G industry to come up with real solutions for this concern, the wolf theory is for fairy tales....

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Hey, I got an idea, test your water, cities do it all the time, you can do it as an individual, I know its a crazy idea but in the 21st century we have these things called Labratories, they are actually everywhere and have lots of expensive stuff to test water.

Google it, I am not kidding, we can test our own water, I am not making this up. I just had my well tested. Anyone with a well should get the thing tested at least once a year, if you get city water, just test it.

Its called technology, use it, it works.

Test the water, sounds crazy, huh.

 

[newpolitics]

Do you have any proof? No you say? This is a real problem, real answers are needed, the chemicals you listed are of real concern, yet you have to prove they are in our water table FIRST!!

Instead of yelling wolf, try to work with the O & G industry to come up with real solutions for this concern, the wolf theory is for fairy tales....

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Hey, I got an idea, test your water, cities do it all the time, you can do it as an individual, I know its a crazy idea but in the 21st century we have these things called Labratories, they are actually everywhere and have lots of expensive stuff to test water.

Google it, I am not kidding, we can test our own water, I am not making this up. I just had my well tested. Anyone with a well should get the thing tested at least once a year, if you get city water, just test it.

Its called technology, use it, it works.

Test the water, sounds crazy, huh.

Two things, to respond to your cute little suggestion:

1.) Seeing as how you obviously didn't read the article I linked, New Governor Paterson issued an executive order to insititue a moratorium on fracking until July 1, 2011, to ascertain more conclusively any information as to whether Fracking is or is not harmful- being that I live in New York, I would have no reason to believe that my water is unclean as a result of fracking, since there is no such fracking currently taking place.

2.) I live in New York City. I don't have a well.

Why do you choose to support fracking at this point in time, if the possibility of it harming humans has been reported widely and seems reasonable given the idea of pumping chemicals into the ground? I am really curious. Wouldn't you rather be cautious and suspicious of a process that presents previous evidence of harmful affects to humans an animals to those living nearing fracking wells, like in Dimmock, than simply just 'wait' for a study conducted by the same government who stands to make a buck from this process taking place? I don't understand this passive insistence on just letting things happen because you blindly trust the government. Is this some misguided patriotic zeal to never question those above you? I just don't get it. Given the history of corporate and government creed in the US and the atrocities that have been committed, it wouldn't be implausible to assume far more basic motives for such a push for natural gas than is pre-supposed by the unassuming patriot- greed. Anyway, time will tell. I sincerely hope that fracking is not harmful, although I deeply and instinctively sense that it is, and any study that is published by any government agency that goes to the contrary will only heighten my suspicion and mistrust of that agency. At the same time, I recognize our need for energy independence, and at the very same time, Natural gas will also run out one day, so why not push for renewable energies now, rather than postpone the cost of transition to renewables to future generations. Natural Gas is only postponing the inevitable, and not for very long. They say maybe a hundred years. Wow. That's four generations.

 

[Old Rocks]

New, there are people on this board that still insist that asbestos is harmless. No amount of laboratory evidence will convince someone like mdn that anything to do with fossil fuels is damaging.

 

[mdn2000]

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Hey, I got an idea, test your water, cities do it all the time, you can do it as an individual, I know its a crazy idea but in the 21st century we have these things called Labratories, they are actually everywhere and have lots of expensive stuff to test water.

Google it, I am not kidding, we can test our own water, I am not making this up. I just had my well tested. Anyone with a well should get the thing tested at least once a year, if you get city water, just test it.

Its called technology, use it, it works.

Test the water, sounds crazy, huh.

Two things, to respond to your cute little suggestion:

1.) Seeing as how you obviously didn't read the article I linked, New Governor Paterson issued an executive order to insititue a moratorium on fracking until July 1, 2011, to ascertain more conclusively any information as to whether Fracking is or is not harmful- being that I live in New York, I would have no reason to believe that my water is unclean as a result of fracking, since there is no such fracking currently taking place.

2.) I live in New York City. I don't have a well.

Why do you choose to support fracking at this point in time, if the possibility of it harming humans has been reported widely and seems reasonable given the idea of pumping chemicals into the ground? I am really curious. Wouldn't you rather be cautious and suspicious of a process that presents previous evidence of harmful affects to humans an animals to those living nearing fracking wells, like in Dimmock, than simply just 'wait' for a study conducted by the same government who stands to make a buck from this process taking place? I don't understand this passive insistence on just letting things happen because you blindly trust the government. Is this some misguided patriotic zeal to never question those above you? I just don't get it. Given the history of corporate and government creed in the US and the atrocities that have been committed, it wouldn't be implausible to assume far more basic motives for such a push for natural gas than is pre-supposed by the unassuming patriot- greed. Anyway, time will tell. I sincerely hope that fracking is not harmful, although I deeply and instinctively sense that it is, and any study that is published by any government agency that goes to the contrary will only heighten my suspicion and mistrust of that agency. At the same time, I recognize our need for energy independence, and at the very same time, Natural gas will also run out one day, so why not push for renewable energies now, rather than postpone the cost of transition to renewables to future generations. Natural Gas is only postponing the inevitable, and not for very long. They say maybe a hundred years. Wow. That's four generations.

Where do I support Fracking, just because I am able to see the weakness of ones arguement and I point that out does not mean I am for the process.

Renewable energy, how is Renewable Energy Renewable, first and foremost, you need natural gas and oil to make Renewable Energy so how can you make anything Renewable when the oil and natural gas disappear. All you do is hasten the future, you bring tomorrow here today.

Renewable energy uses massive amounts of energy and produces a tiny bit of energy in return.

How does using more energy to make Renewable Energy which produces less energy make more energy.

If you have no oil or gas, you will not be able to refine Silica into Solar Panels, you will not be able to refine silica into fiberglass, with no oil you can not make the cement to make the foundation for a wind turbine, without oil you can not pump the water to a Solar Plant.

Without oil how do you power a wind farm, a wind farm needs electricity to operate and that electricity must be clean reliable power so a wind farm never supplies its own needs, a wind farm uses electricity from fossil or nuclear power just to operate.

Solar power has gone natural gas if you have read the threads, I kid you not, the are now building natural gas powered solar plants, just to turn the thing on you need to have natural gas fire up the boilers as well as the natural gas is used to sustain the making of electricity throughout the day, without natural gas, California could not claim it makes energy from the Sun.

So, your Clean, Green, Renewable Energy must be built with oil, is operated with energy only produced by oil, and at best, can not power itself.

Yes, lets transition to no industry, no future, high taxes, and extremely expensive electricity to keep milk cold and our pipes from freezing in the winter.

Why am I against or for Fracking, I never made that point, when we need it, I am for it, I simply point out a hypocrite, who supports Hydro Fracking for Geothermal, yet makes the case its too dangerous for oil.

I point out how the Green Anarchist, the Liberal activitist, or the basic Democrat or Republican has their head up their ass thus they have no idea of what they speak. That is for those who state we need to quit using oil.

We need to use more oil, we need to use oil faster, we need to use every drop for what we think is the best use. If you think we are running out, there is no need to get us off Saudi Oil, that day will come on its own.

 

[GWV5903]

Is it?



And, FYI, here's a list of the chemicals added to the water/sand combination used in fracting




Doesn't the above chemical (many of the carcinogenic, I note) read like something YOU want in your kids' water supply?

Do you have any proof? No you say? This is a real problem, real answers are needed, the chemicals you listed are of real concern, yet you have to prove they are in our water table FIRST!!

Instead of yelling wolf, try to work with the O & G industry to come up with real solutions for this concern, the wolf theory is for fairy tales....

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Not at all, I have said it needs to be monitored....

What you fail to see is there is no conclusive proof it has done anything to water tables, in fact there are numerous water wells contaminated that are no where near oil or gas production.....

The MUD District that supplies my own personal water has high PPM in Arsenic, we have over 2,000 homes in the district, we have purchased surface water thru the regional water authority for several years now. The well water in Texas has been forced to make numerous changes over the last few years and it has nothing to do with fracking.....

What I have a problem accepting is that we all to often cry wolf and find out there is no wolf and so far thats all this is.....

 

[mdn2000]

"...in the case of this film, accuracy is too often pushed aside for simplicity, evidence too often sacrificed for exaggeration, and the same old cast of characters and anecdotes – previously debunked – simply lifted from prior incarnations of the film and given a new home in this one."

Energy in Depth

Now if it is so safe, why all the exemptions from existing pollution laws?

It's About Fracking Time! U.S. EPA Lights a Fire Under Hydraulic Fracturing – CleanTechnica: Cleantech innovation news and views

Hydraulic Fracturing and the Clean Water Act
Actually there is a little something called the Clean Water Act. Its primary focus is surface water such as lakes and rivers, though with some wiggle room it could indirectly apply to ground sources like wells and aquifers. There is also something called the Safe Water Drinking Act of 1974 but hydraulic fracturing was exempted from that, an omission that was reaffirmed by the EPA under the Bush administration. Fracking was also exempted from the 2005 Energy Policy Act. Then there’s the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act of 1976, which covers the use and disposal of hazardous substances, but fracking is also at least partly exempt from that. And just to top things off, the chemical brines used in fracking are considered proprietary and companies are under no obligation to disclose what’s in them (so they don’t).

But Old Crock, you are proposing Hydraulic Fracturing when it comes to Geothermal. Old Crock shows how the Green Anarchist lies, you see no EPA rules are good for the Green Anarchist but bad for Oil. Hydralic Fracking is good for toxic Geothermal but baaaad for a powerful, rich source of energy such as Oil or Gas.

Old Crock, tell me your suffering the effects of your age and cannot remember what you post. Old Crock is my greatest source to show Old Crock and the Green Anarchists are liars. I have more Old Crock so do not be too angry and fly off the handle and reply to my posts without thinking, I actually have searched and found my next two or three responses. Lets watch and see if Old Crock takes the bait.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/143346-oil-gusher-in-california-3.html

And so I am to believe a dumbass poster on an internet message board over the scientists at MIT.

Power from down under

Everywhere on Earth, a few miles below the surface, the bedrock is hot, and the deeper you go the hotter it gets. In some places, water heated by this hot rock comes naturally to the surface or close to it, where it can be easily tapped to drive a turbine and generate electricity.

But where naturally heated water is not available at or near the surface, this process can be recreated by drilling one very deep well to inject water into the ground, and another well nearby to pump that water back to the surface after it has been heated by passing through cracks in the hot rock. Such systems are known as Engineered Geothermal Systems, or EGS.

A 2006 report by an 18-member team led by MIT Professor Jefferson Tester (now emeritus, and working at Cornell University) found that more than 2,000 times the total annual energy use of the United States could be supplied, using existing technology, from EGS systems, and perhaps 10 times as much with improved technology.

Old Crock, where are you, I see you posting in response to a bunch of my posts. Since I made this post Old Crock has followed up on every post I have made but this one, Old Crock, you have a response everywhere but here.

Trading insults is fun, it gives me a little comfort. Yet, I find the truth to be much more important where as Old Crock does not give one damn bit about the truth.

This post is the truth Old Crock, your ideology is only sustained by trillion dollar deficits and lies.

 

[Chris]

What do you fuckers have to say...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRRe5X6deNc

Business without government regulation is the Mafia.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now if it is so safe, why all the exemptions from existing pollution laws?

But Old Crock, you are proposing Hydraulic Fracturing when it comes to Geothermal. Old Crock shows how the Green Anarchist lies, you see no EPA rules are good for the Green Anarchist but bad for Oil. Hydralic Fracking is good for toxic Geothermal but baaaad for a powerful, rich source of energy such as Oil or Gas.

Old Crock, tell me your suffering the effects of your age and cannot remember what you post. Old Crock is my greatest source to show Old Crock and the Green Anarchists are liars. I have more Old Crock so do not be too angry and fly off the handle and reply to my posts without thinking, I actually have searched and found my next two or three responses. Lets watch and see if Old Crock takes the bait.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/143346-oil-gusher-in-california-3.html

And so I am to believe a dumbass poster on an internet message board over the scientists at MIT.

Power from down under

Everywhere on Earth, a few miles below the surface, the bedrock is hot, and the deeper you go the hotter it gets. In some places, water heated by this hot rock comes naturally to the surface or close to it, where it can be easily tapped to drive a turbine and generate electricity.

But where naturally heated water is not available at or near the surface, this process can be recreated by drilling one very deep well to inject water into the ground, and another well nearby to pump that water back to the surface after it has been heated by passing through cracks in the hot rock. Such systems are known as Engineered Geothermal Systems, or EGS.

A 2006 report by an 18-member team led by MIT Professor Jefferson Tester (now emeritus, and working at Cornell University) found that more than 2,000 times the total annual energy use of the United States could be supplied, using existing technology, from EGS systems, and perhaps 10 times as much with improved technology.

Old Crock, where are you, I see you posting in response to a bunch of my posts. Since I made this post Old Crock has followed up on every post I have made but this one, Old Crock, you have a response everywhere but here.

Trading insults is fun, it gives me a little comfort. Yet, I find the truth to be much more important where as Old Crock does not give one damn bit about the truth.

This post is the truth Old Crock, your ideology is only sustained by trillion dollar deficits and lies.

Anywhere I want to be, silly ass.

 

[newpolitics]

Do you have any proof? No you say? This is a real problem, real answers are needed, the chemicals you listed are of real concern, yet you have to prove they are in our water table FIRST!!

Instead of yelling wolf, try to work with the O & G industry to come up with real solutions for this concern, the wolf theory is for fairy tales....

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Not at all, I have said it needs to be monitored....

What you fail to see is there is no conclusive proof it has done anything to water tables, in fact there are numerous water wells contaminated that are no where near oil or gas production.....

The MUD District that supplies my own personal water has high PPM in Arsenic, we have over 2,000 homes in the district, we have purchased surface water thru the regional water authority for several years now. The well water in Texas has been forced to make numerous changes over the last few years and it has nothing to do with fracking.....

What I have a problem accepting is that we all to often cry wolf and find out there is no wolf and so far thats all this is.....

My qualm is that you are actually waiting for conclusive proof. From whom? The EPA? The Industry? The EPA is a government agency. The government stands to make a lot of money from this industry, hence they don't want to publish anything that conclusively illustrates something so profound that they have shut down the operation. There may be evidence out there that exists that would indicate that this is overwhelmingly toxic, but we just might not know about it. All I'm saying, is that, you can't trust the government to give you data, especially in this situation. I don't care that it is called the EPA. They are all the same people, the EPA, the politicians, the industry CEO's... all working together to make fracking work. I find this blind trust of the government so odd, especially when it is only in certain instances. For instance, certain people don't trust a damned thing Obama does about anything, from winking an eye lash to wiping his ass. Yet, when big business energy says that everything is okay, you believe them. ??? It's totally inconsistent. It should be the opposite. Obama is a single man. The EPA, Halliburton, and the politicians connecting the two consist of many people who are completely unmonitored and surely all trying to get a cut for themselves. That being the reality, I don't give a shit that there is no conclusive evidence. That doesn't mean anything. It only means they either haven't released it, don't want to know about it, or found a way to test water and air that wasn't truly indicative of the sample, yet are still able to publish it as if it is. Trusting big business and government who are in cahoots? Yeah, bad idea.

 

[newpolitics]

Do you have any proof? No you say? This is a real problem, real answers are needed, the chemicals you listed are of real concern, yet you have to prove they are in our water table FIRST!!

Instead of yelling wolf, try to work with the O & G industry to come up with real solutions for this concern, the wolf theory is for fairy tales....

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Not at all, I have said it needs to be monitored....


What I have a problem accepting is that we all to often cry wolf and find out there is no wolf and so far thats all this is.....

No wolf? have you seen footage the water taps with fire spewing out of them? You really think there is no correlation that and nearby fracking processes? That, after fracking begins in a certain location, all of sudden, out of nowhere, taps start becoming flammable, animals lose their hair, people get sick and even die?? What does that indicate to you?

The EPA and the government will try to find a way to word it that makes you feel safe at night, because inherently, people trust the government, and therein lies the error. They are taking advantage of everyone's naiive trust. Simply because they are called the Environmental Protection Agency and they are a government agency, what they say is truth, is simply not true. They would only blow a whistle on something if the government were indifferent to the financial effects of exposing something. If, by the EPA's own study, the fracking industry would have to be altogether called off, they would find a way to down play the results, such as burying the information by presenting a 'better, more conclusive' study, or using the media, which the government has at their disposal to create positive public image for fracking... who knows how far and deep their methods of public persuasion go. We will never know. My guess, at the very least, is that they would fire the EPA scientist who produced such results, seperate their association with him, label him as a dissentist 'disgruntled' employee or something, begin a PR slandering campaign against him to generate a negative public perception of him, and would re-fortify their position that 'everything is okay' to insure the public, and dissuade them from further inquiry. This has happened time and time again. It just happened in Canada with the Tar-Sands, for which I will post a video soon. The same exact situation is happening in Alberta right now. History repeats itself over and over again when it comes to profit and greed. I don't see why people think this is any different. This has happened a million different times. I don't see why this time is special.

 

[uscitizen]

People lose their hair? Damn it must be my water causing it!

suppose I gould get my head dry cleaned?

 

[newpolitics]

People lose their hair? Damn it must be my water causing it!

suppose I gould get my head dry cleaned?

I said animals have been losing their hair in this areas where fracking takes place. A human is an animal, as exemplified by those who are committing these crimes against the Earth, animals, and humanity and those who are proponents of fracking such as yourself, obviously, but I meant non-human animals. A horse, for example, is an animal. Is that all you got?

 

[newpolitics]

The simple fact that these companies are not required to publish the chemicals in their fracking fluid is evidence of the government protecting these companies. Why wouldn't you require them to divulge these ingredients? It's not like we are baking some secret, unique cake. This is a commodity. The same everywhere. There are too many suspicious details. If there was more transparency in and around this whole process, I wouldn't have such a problem, but profit incentives rarely allow transparency because the only way to gain them is to block the external costs inevitably put onto the public to make only the positives visible. Unfortunately, these externalities will be felt eventually, and when they do, I guarantee the corporations and government are going to throw their hands up and just shrug, saying "we didn't know. we had no way of knowing. It seemed like it was safe. We had tests indicating everything was good." This is such a pile of shit.

 

[newpolitics]

Oh, and about testing my own water, if I even had a well... You can't. You need expensive, sophisticated equipment to detect these chemicals. Are you suggesting that I save up money to buy some government level water tester to prove my point on a political forum. This is supposed to be the job of government, and, as posted by Old Rocks, there has been documented evidence of chemicals being found in wells near fracking operations, chemicals that are commonly used in fracking, such as Toluene, yet the nearby companies denied they are using that particular chemical in their fluid, and because they are not required to disclose their fracking ingredients, no body can dispute this. How convenient.

 

[Samson]

But, like I said, all this discussion of who did what, and who said what... doesn't matter. It's common sense. You intentionally inject our soil with chemicals, it is going to harm somebody, yet, because it is in the name of 'energy independence,' it is okay to do. American propagandist bullshit. Suck my ass.

Interesting.

Perhaps we should all stop consuming every food that lists "chemicals" intentionally added on the ingredient lable.....common sense or fanatical lunacy.

Maybe all technology is dangerous. Hell, if you even touch a high power electrical line, it will kill you!! And what about pharmaceuticals? I don't know what that shit is, but it is chemicals, so they must HARM SOMEBODY!!!



Luddite.

 

[newpolitics]

But, like I said, all this discussion of who did what, and who said what... doesn't matter. It's common sense. You intentionally inject our soil with chemicals, it is going to harm somebody, yet, because it is in the name of 'energy independence,' it is okay to do. American propagandist bullshit. Suck my ass.

Interesting.

Perhaps we should all stop consuming every food that lists "chemicals" intentionally added on the ingredient lable.....common sense or fanatical lunacy.

Maybe all technology is dangerous. Hell, if you even touch a high power electrical line, it will kill you!! And what about pharmaceuticals? I don't know what that shit is, but it is chemicals, so they must HARM SOMEBODY!!!



Luddite.

Umm... yes, we should stop eating food with chemicals on the ingredient list. Thank god they require that they be put on there, or else who knows what would be in our food, and people would get sick. But, then they would lose customers, so they can't do that. They'd only be hurting themselves.

How does putting a pill into your mouth, which only affects you, or touching a power line when you KNOW it will kill you, even in the same realm of comparison as dumping chemicals into the earth? It's not. There are no parallels. Actually, nothing in your post made any progress towards even beginning to make a point. Try again?

 

[GWV5903]

You seem to be unable to accept any possibility that fracking contains contaminants, and hence remove yourself from the responsibility of even having to be aware of it. It is pretty sad my friend. Unless you have absolute proof, you will not believe. What will that take? don't you think that will be a little hard with a government and big business trying to keep that evidence from reaching anyone? There IS evidence, you are just not accepting it as as being sufficient. We, as the little people, have to try and get at the information however we can. We have to search for it, because 'they' don't want you to see it, and 'they' have control over everything (media, big business, legislation, regulation, money, police, FBI, etc...) They can silence the little people pretty easily. It is much harder to dissent than to simply go along with a program to avoid being construed as a dissident. In this case, I would say it is most prudent to be a dissident, because this is going to injure very many people more than it already has, including, you, me, and every person on this board... perhaps we will then all have to buy 'filtered drinking water' at some point... yet another ploy for big business to make money, else we get all get sick from drinking out tap water.

They might be doing fracking that would affect the entire New York City watershed. That's 8 million people (non-business hours). Let's hope Fracking isn't dangerous, or a lot of shit is going to go down.

So far, it looks as though some people don't feel fracking is safe:
New York Governor Vetoes Fracking Bill - NYTimes.com

Not at all, I have said it needs to be monitored....

What you fail to see is there is no conclusive proof it has done anything to water tables, in fact there are numerous water wells contaminated that are no where near oil or gas production.....

The MUD District that supplies my own personal water has high PPM in Arsenic, we have over 2,000 homes in the district, we have purchased surface water thru the regional water authority for several years now. The well water in Texas has been forced to make numerous changes over the last few years and it has nothing to do with fracking.....

What I have a problem accepting is that we all to often cry wolf and find out there is no wolf and so far thats all this is.....

My qualm is that you are actually waiting for conclusive proof. From whom? The EPA? The Industry? The EPA is a government agency. The government stands to make a lot of money from this industry, hence they don't want to publish anything that conclusively illustrates something so profound that they have shut down the operation. There may be evidence out there that exists that would indicate that this is overwhelmingly toxic, but we just might not know about it. All I'm saying, is that, you can't trust the government to give you data, especially in this situation. I don't care that it is called the EPA. They are all the same people, the EPA, the politicians, the industry CEO's... all working together to make fracking work. I find this blind trust of the government so odd, especially when it is only in certain instances. For instance, certain people don't trust a damned thing Obama does about anything, from winking an eye lash to wiping his ass. Yet, when big business energy says that everything is okay, you believe them. ??? It's totally inconsistent. It should be the opposite. Obama is a single man. The EPA, Halliburton, and the politicians connecting the two consist of many people who are completely unmonitored and surely all trying to get a cut for themselves. That being the reality, I don't give a shit that there is no conclusive evidence. That doesn't mean anything. It only means they either haven't released it, don't want to know about it, or found a way to test water and air that wasn't truly indicative of the sample, yet are still able to publish it as if it is. Trusting big business and government who are in cahoots? Yeah, bad idea.

Where did you get I trust the government?

As I stated before, our water supply's PPM for Arsenic is too high for consumption. When I lived in the city limits and had the city water supply I always noticed floating particles when my ice melted, we purchased a reverse osmosis unit some 20+ years ago for consumption....

Our next home will have a RO unit as well....

 

[Samson]

But, like I said, all this discussion of who did what, and who said what... doesn't matter. It's common sense. You intentionally inject our soil with chemicals, it is going to harm somebody, yet, because it is in the name of 'energy independence,' it is okay to do. American propagandist bullshit. Suck my ass.

Interesting.

Perhaps we should all stop consuming every food that lists "chemicals" intentionally added on the ingredient lable.....common sense or fanatical lunacy.

Maybe all technology is dangerous. Hell, if you even touch a high power electrical line, it will kill you!! And what about pharmaceuticals? I don't know what that shit is, but it is chemicals, so they must HARM SOMEBODY!!!



Luddite.

Umm... yes, we should stop eating food with chemicals on the ingredient list. Thank god they require that they be put on there, or else who knows what would be in our food, and people would get sick. But, then they would lose customers, so they can't do that. They'd only be hurting themselves.

How does putting a pill into your mouth, which only affects you, or touching a power line when you KNOW it will kill you, even in the same realm of comparison as dumping chemicals into the earth? It's not. There are no parallels. Actually, nothing in your post made any progress towards even beginning to make a point. Try again?

Try what again?

I doubt you're even capable of understanding the simplest use of industrial, food grade, or pharmaceutical chemicals.

 

[uscitizen]

Actually pharmacuricals passing thru humans and winding up in our drinking water is becoming a problem.

Pretty soon your dr will just prescribe an extra glass of water a day and big pharma will go broke.

 

[Samson]

Actually pharmacuricals passing thru humans and winding up in our drinking water is becoming a problem.

Pretty soon your dr will just prescribe an extra glass of water a day and big pharma will go broke.

What problem?

You don't think we all need an extra dose of Ritalin?