Why Does the Left Oppose Fracking?

[boilermaker55]

Let's take the chemicals they use in fracking and put them into your water shed.
Tell me would that be acceptable to you?

Is it really about ground water contamination, etc.? I think not.

 

[bripat9643]

You have a serious problem with putting words in others mouths.

If you don't want to ban it, then what's this discussion about?

all the Eco nut-burgers have stated their intention to ban the practice. That's what New York state did, and that's what left-wing politicians in other states are threatening to do.

 

[ClosedCaption]

"Come back".

Look at the latest EPA decision. That's the come back. Idiot.

Post it mr H. Specifically the part that says this report I posted is wrong. Because if it doesn't say that then what I post is still valid even after you stamp your feet

I guess Mr H missed this, so I'll give him another chance

You posted an older article after a newer one was quoted.
The current EPA report is correct.
Go back to your nap.

I know, I know...so post it and don't forget the part that shows what I posted from the EPA isn't true anymore. Did you lose it? Need another 24 hours?

 

[ClosedCaption]

You have a serious problem with putting words in others mouths.

If you don't want to ban it, then what's this discussion about?
all the Eco nut-burgers have stated their intention to ban the practice. That's what New York state did, and that's what left-wing politicians in other states are threatening to do.

About making it safer...

damn...how many times do I have to fight the voices in your head?

 

[bripat9643]

Let's take the chemicals they use in fracking and put them into your water shed.
Tell me would that be acceptable to you?

Is it really about ground water contamination, etc.? I think not.

Why don't we put gasoline in your drinking water?

That is the most idiotic argument imaginable. No one is proposing to allow fracking chemicals to contaminate the ground water. It just doesn't happen. That's pure eco nutburger propaganda.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Let's take the chemicals they use in fracking and put them into your water shed.
Tell me would that be acceptable to you?

Is it really about ground water contamination, etc.? I think not.

Why don't we put gasoline in your drinking water?

That is the most idiotic argument imaginable. No one is proposing to allow fracking chemicals to contaminate the ground water. It just doesn't happen. That's pure eco nutburger propaganda.

Here READ: Newest EPA Report Confirms Fracking Fluids Contaminating Pavillion, Wyoming Water Supply | PlanetSave

The EPA study, based on analysis of water from test well sites in Pavillion, Wyoming, concluded that the contaminants — predominantly glycol ethers — were most likely due to seepage from the gas-drilling process. The analysis showed that the groundwater in this area contained at least 10 organic compounds known to be present in fracking fluid (note: there are believed to be scores, if not hundreds more, chemical compounds in this fluid of unknown identity).
Read more at Newest EPA Report Confirms Fracking Fluids Contaminating Pavillion, Wyoming Water Supply | PlanetSave

Please stop saying things you know nothing about. It makes you look...not smart

 

[boilermaker55]

That is what fracking may do to a watershed , so you argument does not hold any water.
Do you even have any idea of how fracking is done.
If you did then you would know the risk of chemicals being put into the drinking water.
So again, lets take some chemicals and put it into your water. You obviously hate that idea. Those who live in the area where it is taking place take that risk. Do they have a voice in it? If they don't want it then don't ******* do it.
Typical right wing no regulation attitude.

Let's take the chemicals they use in fracking and put them into your water shed.
Tell me would that be acceptable to you?

Is it really about ground water contamination, etc.? I think not.

Why don't we put gasoline in your drinking water?

That is the most idiotic argument imaginable. No one is proposing to allow fracking chemicals to contaminate the ground water. It just doesn't happen. That's pure eco nutburger propaganda.

 

[bripat9643]

You have a serious problem with putting words in others mouths.

If you don't want to ban it, then what's this discussion about?
all the Eco nut-burgers have stated their intention to ban the practice. That's what New York state did, and that's what left-wing politicians in other states are threatening to do.

About making it safer...

damn...how many times do I have to fight the voices in your head?

Wrong. It's about banning it. "making it safer" is just the excuse used to ban it.

Only the morons are fooled.

 

[bripat9643]

Fracking doesn't require pumping any chemicals into the watershed, just as refining gasoline doesn't require oil companies to pump gasoline into your drinking water.

That argument is absolutely moronic.

BTW, my father was a petroleum geologist and a director for exploration at Phillips Petroleum.

I know a few things about the oil business.

That is what fracking may do to a watershed , so you argument does not hold any water.
Do you even have any idea of how fracking is done.
If you did then you would know the risk of chemicals being put into the drinking water.
So again, lets take some chemicals and put it into your water. You obviously hate that idea. Those who live in the area where it is taking place take that risk. Do they have a voice in it? If they don't want it then don't ******* do it.
Typical right wing no regulation attitude.

Let's take the chemicals they use in fracking and put them into your water shed.
Tell me would that be acceptable to you?

Why don't we put gasoline in your drinking water?

That is the most idiotic argument imaginable. No one is proposing to allow fracking chemicals to contaminate the ground water. It just doesn't happen. That's pure eco nutburger propaganda.

 

[ClosedCaption]

If you don't want to ban it, then what's this discussion about?
all the Eco nut-burgers have stated their intention to ban the practice. That's what New York state did, and that's what left-wing politicians in other states are threatening to do.

About making it safer...

damn...how many times do I have to fight the voices in your head?

Wrong. It's about banning it. "making it safer" is just the excuse used to ban it.

Only the morons are fooled.

Hold on...

You asked me what it was about.
I tell you
Then you tell me that I am lying

Ok, I see the only way you can discuss this is to make up shit as you go along.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Fracking doesn't require pumping any chemicals into the watershed, just as refining gasoline doesn't require oil companies to pump gasoline into your drinking water.

That argument is absolutely moronic.

BTW, my father was a petroleum geologist and a director for exploration at Phillips Petroleum.

I know a few things about the oil business.

Because you came from your dads sack

 

[bripat9643]

Let's take the chemicals they use in fracking and put them into your water shed.
Tell me would that be acceptable to you?

Why don't we put gasoline in your drinking water?

That is the most idiotic argument imaginable. No one is proposing to allow fracking chemicals to contaminate the ground water. It just doesn't happen. That's pure eco nutburger propaganda.

Here READ: Newest EPA Report Confirms Fracking Fluids Contaminating Pavillion, Wyoming Water Supply | PlanetSave

The EPA study, based on analysis of water from test well sites in Pavillion, Wyoming, concluded that the contaminants — predominantly glycol ethers — were most likely due to seepage from the gas-drilling process. The analysis showed that the groundwater in this area contained at least 10 organic compounds known to be present in fracking fluid (note: there are believed to be scores, if not hundreds more, chemical compounds in this fluid of unknown identity).
Read more at Newest EPA Report Confirms Fracking Fluids Contaminating Pavillion, Wyoming Water Supply | PlanetSave

Please stop saying things you know nothing about. It makes you look...not smart

Your article is dated Dec 10, 2011. It's 2 years old.

furthermore:

API Says EPA Botched Pavillion, WY Fracking Tests

The American Petroleum Institute (API) issued a press release yesterday taking the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to task over their sloppy work in Pavillion, Wyoming.

You may recall the EPA is on a quest to try and prove fracking has contaminated water supplies in the Pavillion area with fracking chemicals. Never mind that the drilling and fracking done in Pavillion is shallow at around 1,200 feet down (not the one mile or more that’s common in shale plays). Never mind that the water table in Pavillion is deep at 800 feet (not the 300 feet as is typical in the northeast). Never mind that drilling and fracking was done in porous sandstone in Pavillion (not tightly-packed shale deposits). And never mind the EPA drilled just two test wells, one of which didn’t produce enough water for a valid sample. (See this MDN story for more background on Pavillion.)

The API rightly asks in their statement yesterday: If the EPA has botched it so badly in Pavillion, what makes them think their multi-year fracking study in which the EPA will drill the same kind of monitoring wells in other locations will be any more accurate? The EPA can’t even get it right with two test wells in Pavillion, and they’re going to render judgment on the efficacy of fracking for the entire country? It stretches incredulity to the breaking point.

This is what the API said yesterday:

You can read the rest of the article here:

http://marcellusdrilling.com/2012/10/api-says-epa-botched-pavillion-wy-fracking-tests/

The EPA is hostile towards fracking technology and is out to destroy it.

Just admit you're a moron before it becomes obvious to the entire forum

whoops!

TOO LATE!

 

[bripat9643]

Fracking doesn't require pumping any chemicals into the watershed, just as refining gasoline doesn't require oil companies to pump gasoline into your drinking water.

That argument is absolutely moronic.

BTW, my father was a petroleum geologist and a director for exploration at Phillips Petroleum.

I know a few things about the oil business.

Because you came from your dads sack

No, because when I was growing up our house was filled with books and magazines about geology and the petroleum industry, dipshit.

Do you know what an anticline is? Not without Googling you don't.

 

[bripat9643]

About making it safer...

damn...how many times do I have to fight the voices in your head?

Wrong. It's about banning it. "making it safer" is just the excuse used to ban it.

Only the morons are fooled.

Hold on...

You asked me what it was about.
I tell you
Then you tell me that I am lying

Ok, I see the only way you can discuss this is to make up shit as you go along.

It's obvious you're lying because banning fracking is the only position on the Eco nutburger agenda. They aren't satisfied with any other approach.

Environmentalism has always been a cover for communism. It's just another excuse to abolish capitalism, and that's all it ever will be. Lying is the environmentalist's stock in trade.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Wrong. It's about banning it. "making it safer" is just the excuse used to ban it.

Only the morons are fooled.

Hold on...

You asked me what it was about.
I tell you
Then you tell me that I am lying

Ok, I see the only way you can discuss this is to make up shit as you go along.

It's obvious you're lying because banning fracking is the only position on the Eco nutburger agenda. They aren't satisfied with any other approach.

Environmentalism has always been a cover for communism. It's just another excuse to abolish capitalism, and that's all it ever will be. Lying is the environmentalist's stock in trade.

So no matter what I say, you will continue to only believe the voices in your head. If I tell you Its not about Banning, the voices will tell you it is. If I post from the EPA, the voices will tell you that old reports mean...I dunno, the older the more its not true, or something

Then as proof you post from the Petroleum Instistute LOL

That's like me telling you rats are delicious then posting a link to Owl Life magazine

 

[bripat9643]

Hold on...

You asked me what it was about.
I tell you
Then you tell me that I am lying

Ok, I see the only way you can discuss this is to make up shit as you go along.

It's obvious you're lying because banning fracking is the only position on the Eco nutburger agenda. They aren't satisfied with any other approach.

Environmentalism has always been a cover for communism. It's just another excuse to abolish capitalism, and that's all it ever will be. Lying is the environmentalist's stock in trade.

So no matter what I say, you will continue to only believe the voices in your head. If I tell you Its not about Banning, the voices will tell you it is. If I post from the EPA, the voices will tell you that old reports mean...I dunno, the older the more its not true, or something

Then as proof you post from the Petroleum Instistute LOL

That's like me telling you rats are delicious then posting a link to Owl Life magazine

If it's not about banning, then why did you just endorse banning?

If the EPA information is valid, then why isn't the information from the API? Who knows more about drilling than the API? The EPA contaminated their wells. Their results are bogus.

When an eco-nutburger proposes some solution other than banning fracking, then perhaps someone might believe that banning fracking isn't the goal of their agenda. However, we all know that isn't going to happen.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's obvious you're lying because banning fracking is the only position on the Eco nutburger agenda. They aren't satisfied with any other approach.

Environmentalism has always been a cover for communism. It's just another excuse to abolish capitalism, and that's all it ever will be. Lying is the environmentalist's stock in trade.

So no matter what I say, you will continue to only believe the voices in your head. If I tell you Its not about Banning, the voices will tell you it is. If I post from the EPA, the voices will tell you that old reports mean...I dunno, the older the more its not true, or something

Then as proof you post from the Petroleum Instistute LOL

That's like me telling you rats are delicious then posting a link to Owl Life magazine

If it's not about banning, then why did you just endorse banning?

If the EPA information is valid, then why isn't the information from the API? Who knows more about drilling than the API? The EPA contaminated their wells. Their results are bogus.

When an eco-nutburger proposes some solution other than banning fracking, then perhaps someone might believe that banning fracking isn't the goal of their agenda. However, we all know that isn't going to happen.

Voices in your head got to you again.

 

[ClosedCaption]

All the API did was question the EPA they didn't disprove or even ATTEMPT to disprove anything the EPA said. They just accused them of messing up using sarcasm and zingers as opposed to facts and evidence.

Like I said, Rats are delicious...it says so right here in Owl Life Magazine. But Anteater Life has a different choice. Guess

Stop being stupid

 

[Borillar]

Is it really about ground water contamination, etc.? I think not.

What makes you think this is a left - right issue? Everybody needs energy. I am liberal and I am not opposed to fracking. The country needs oil and natural gas. Thousands of farmers and ranchers, my family included, who were trying to eke out a living in the badlands of Eastern Montana and Western North Dakota are now reaping a benefit because of the Bakken shale formation. Fracking and new drilling technologies have been great for us.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The only way they understand any issue is thru the prism of politics. Clean water vs contaminated water isn't even on their radar. If liberals don't like it they'll mainline fracking fluid just because