Started By
Message
locked post

Study Finds Fracing Doesn’t Harm Drinking Water in Texas

Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:01 am
Posted by DaBike
Member since Jan 2008
9183 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:01 am
The Dallas Morning News – What you need to know

quote:

A task force set up by the Academy of Medicine, Engineering and Science of Texas released a 204-page report Monday that found both great economic benefits and areas of concern about the latest drilling boom. Despite the uncertainty, study organizers said they hoped the two-year effort would cut through some of the confusion around fracking and how it impacts Texans and the environment.


quote:

"In an era of alternative facts, this report is bringing together much or most of the scientific evidence about the actual impacts of shale development," said task force chairwoman Christine Ehlig-Economides, who teaches petroleum engineering at the University of Houston. "There's a lot of misinformation about hydraulic fracturing in particular."


The Daily Signal – Fracing doesn’t harm drinking water

quote:

Hydraulic fracturing hasn’t contaminated groundwater in Texas, isn’t an earthquake hazard, and has been a boon for the state’s economy, according to a study released Monday.

To conduct the three-year study, the academy assembled a panel called the Task Force on the Environmental and Community Impact of Shale.


quote:

“In Texas and pretty much everywhere, hydraulic fracturing has not been proven to have an adverse impact on drinking water,” Christine Ehlig-Economides, a professor of petroleum engineering at the University of Houston who is chairwoman of the task force, told The Daily Signal.


quote:

The study also explored the impact of fracking in five other areas: geology and earthquake activity; land resources; air quality; the economy; and society. It found generally positive results for each.


quote:

However, in a sixth category, transportation, the report found that fracking produced a surge of trucks, damaging pavement at an estimated cost to state taxpayers of $1.5 billion to $2 billion per year.

Even so, the study concluded that fracking adds $473 billion to the Texas economy and created 3.8 million jobs
.

quote:

Last year, the Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency completed a five-year study that didn’t find evidence of widespread contamination as a result of fracking. The EPA said fracking can affect drinking water “under some circumstances,” but didn’t cite any confirmed instances and determined there were too many uncertainties about existing data of contamination
.

quote:

A University of Texas study found methane levels from well water in two Texas counties, Parker and Hood, weren’t the result of North Texas’s Barnett Shale, after a sample of 479 wells in those counties.


The Task Force - The Academy of Medicine, Engineering and Science of Texas
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
67116 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:04 am to
Well no sh&t. hydrocarbon wells are often miles deeper than freshwater aquifers. The two do not co-mingle except in the case of a driller allowing drilling fluid, fracking chemicals, or hydrocarbons to leak at the surface and pollute streams and rivers. In order for that to happen, the driller has to be doing multiple things wrong and breaking several laws in doing so.
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
39498 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:04 am to
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43341 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:05 am to
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

FRACKING MOTHEREARTH MINORITIES CHILDREN

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41689 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:05 am to
I'm all for fracing but those derricks are monstrous and an eye sore. There's one near where I live that is just not pleasant to look at.
This post was edited on 6/20/17 at 10:53 am
Posted by DrunkerThanThou
Unfortunately Mississippi
Member since Feb 2013
2846 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:08 am to
But... but...Russia
This post was edited on 6/20/17 at 10:08 am
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118854 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:09 am to
quote:

Well no sh&t. hydrocarbon wells are often miles deeper than freshwater aquifers.


Right.

When fracking gets a bad name it almost always due to bad casing jobs (which are also quite rare). People don't realize that a poor casing job can occur on any well, not just a well where fracking will take place.
Posted by DaBike
Member since Jan 2008
9183 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:13 am to
quote:

I'm all for fracking but those derricks are monstrous and an eye sore. There's one near where I live that is just not pleasant to look at.


The derricks don't stay but the wind turbines do and they kill birds.

Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41689 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:16 am to
This one has been up for about three months now. Once they take it down, it will be fine I'm sure. It's tough to look at right now, though.

Wind turbines are ridiculously unappealing.
Posted by TejasHorn
High Plains Driftin'
Member since Mar 2007
10950 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:23 am to
I've heard that the land can "never" be developed around the wells even when their spent. Is that true?

If so, that's a win for environmentalists. Win-Win.
Posted by Clyde Tipton
Planet Earth
Member since Dec 2007
38741 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:24 am to
quote:

Well no sh&t.
Posted by navy
Parts Unknown, LA
Member since Sep 2010
29049 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:27 am to
quote:

The derricks don't stay but the wind turbines do and they kill birds.


That low-humming will also drive a person insane.
Posted by DaBike
Member since Jan 2008
9183 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:28 am to
quote:

I've heard that the land can "never" be developed around the wells even when their spent. Is that true?



I have seen a number of sites turned back over for development post production.
Posted by el Gaucho
He/They
Member since Dec 2010
53019 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:29 am to
We know that Saudi Arabia was funding the lefty "scientists" saying that fracking was bad, why do people still believe this crap
Posted by Clyde Tipton
Planet Earth
Member since Dec 2007
38741 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:30 am to
quote:

I've heard that the land can "never" be developed around the wells even when their spent. Is that true?





Posted by MrLarson
Member since Oct 2014
34984 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:34 am to
Who is going to need water when you can't live there due to the earthquakes?
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118854 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:35 am to
quote:

I've heard that the land can "never" be developed around the wells even when their spent. Is that true?


Use Google Earth and got to Odessa, TX. Tell me what you see.
Posted by Clyde Tipton
Planet Earth
Member since Dec 2007
38741 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:38 am to
quote:

when you can't live there due to the earthquakes?


Absolutely, just look at the ghost towns of Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35412 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:40 am to
The report is a good start. The earthquake activity is concerning when you consider how stable Texas is compared to just about anywhere.
Posted by TitleistProV1X
Member since Nov 2015
3513 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:41 am to
Yea the only people that believe Fracking harms drinking water are people that literally know nothing about the oil and gas industry. These people should be forced to take a freshman level PETE introduction class so that they can learn something.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram