What's up with TARGET: EPA! ??
POSTED BY: pizmobeach
UPDATED: Friday, December 23, 2011 01:45
VIEWED: 10574
PAGE 1 of 1
It's pretty obvious if you flip through the news channels and read even a little MSM, that the people running the Rep party have decided that the EPA is a good common enemy to have for ALL candidates. I've heard almost all of the candidates use them in their stumps/sound bites as evil bad guys. The term "Regulation" is now synonymous with anti-America, and when I surf FOX (I can last about as long as I can hold my breath under water), they're doing segments on how bad the EPA is for job creation, etc.
How do all these people accept their marching orders? Who is giving them - obvious contender is Big Coal, but really? Candidates and Fox just line up and ask how high?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
EPA, Dept. of Education ( big union safe haven ) lead the way to for targets of reform in this country.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
EPA, Dept. of Education ( big union safe haven ) lead the way to for targets of reform in this country.
Thx AU, but, eh? I didn't ask right maybe... there always seems to be the first screen of reasoning (the ones the candidates use on air) and then there's the REAL reason they are attacking something. The EPA is a Rep brainchild isn't it? Nixon? Are rep voters really expected to believe the EPA is bad for jobs? More like "bad for jobs" is a buzz phrase that the casual, unthinking voter will latch onto safely and clap along to. So who's pulling the strings and for what? I just can't believe Big Coal has that much pull with all the Rep. candidates and Fox, and if not them, then is it rep strategists? I don't get the angle.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nah, any and ALL businesses whose bottom line is affected by any kind of regulation, not just coal, is the answer (with the backing of the Kochs). Did you catch my thread on their latest battle with regulation? The right hates anything that gets in the way of profits...you know, like not polluting with their waste, paying the money to ensure oil rigs are safe, not being able to drill whereEVER they want to, minor stuff like that.
And yes, it was predicted a while ago that the EPA would be the next target. The Republicans you speak of were our daddy's Republicans. Just as today's Tea Party isn't Ron Paul's Tea Party, these right-wing, corporate shills aren't our daddy's Republicans. They figure they've got carte blanche to go as far right as they can possibly imagine (and beyond), and are gettin' it while the gettin's good.
Don't pay Raptor any attention; he doesn't join conversations or answer questions, he just spouts party line.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Nah, any and ALL businesses whose bottom line is affected by any kind of regulation, not just coal, is the answer (with the backing of the Kochs). Did you catch my thread on their latest battle with regulation? The right hates anything that gets in the way of profits...you know, like not polluting with their waste, paying the money to ensure oil rigs are safe, not being able to drill whereEVER they want to, minor stuff like that.
And yes, it was predicted a while ago that the EPA would be the next target. The Republicans you speak of were our daddy's Republicans. Just as today's Tea Party isn't Ron Paul's Tea Party, these right-wing, corporate shills aren't our daddy's Republicans. They figure they've got carte blanche to go as far right as they can possibly imagine (and beyond), and are gettin' it while the gettin's good.
I missed your thread - I'll definitely look for it. I guess I can't imagine how the Reps and their handlers (Kochs etc) think they can get away with such a self-serving message that serves so few >IN THIS DAY AND AGE< of easy access to so much information. Even the laziest, busiest voter can stumble upon contrary info. In the old days of newsprint, sure, that made sense. But now? It's so weak to see them try something so obvious, embarrassing even, that I almost can't believe that's it.
BTW - I welcome hearing what Auraptor has to say.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Simple: Kill the people.
In order to kill the people, you need to poison the Earth. Merchants of Death have decided the EPA is in their way.
This isn't reform, this is about attacking America. It's terrorism, plain and simple. The fossil fuel industry is synthesizing one trillion gallons of chemical weapons which they are using to destroy the country and kill all the people. This is the agenda. There is no profit. No one makes money by pouring chemicals into the Earth here, it's extraneous to the industry. It serves one purpose: To kill Americans.
It's that simple. And effective. More effective than striking America with a nuclear weapon.
Already, more explosives have been dropped on America by this so called "industry" then were dropped on Iraq and Afghanistan. Now they've already hit the US with a million times the amount of chemical weapons that Saddam Hussein had, and I concede all of Rap's claims of Iraqi WMDs.
The BP oil "spill" was a test run of a chemical weapons attack on the USA by terrorists.
Auraptor,
I know which side I'm on, but which side are you on?
When mountaintop removal came up, IIRC, you were appalled. Now America is under the largest terrorist attack ever conceived. You appear to be siding with the terrorists. I don't think you hate America, but I have to ask: Do they not teach you anything about chemical warfare at military intelligence?
The purpose of getting rid of the EPA is not "reform" - that's idiotic.
The purpose is that the EPA is one of the forces defending America. The terrorists want to attack America. Ergo, they are disarming our defenses, just like they did in 9.11.
The problem is that the terrorists are cleverer than you think, and more insidious. Who they are isn't the issue, I don't know who they are. But how they operate is very simple:
They operate however they damn well can.
Any terrorist can declare themselves anything they want.
You can say "I'm an energy company" or "I'm a tea party candidate" even if you're nothing of the kind.
Do you really think America's enemies are so dumb that every time they attack they're going to say "I'm an Islamic Jihadist" ? - no, for real now, if you look into some of these attacks in the ME, a lot of these guys just said "I'm a jihadist" directly before attacking. Before that, who knows what they were.
Because people can relabel themselves however they want whenever they want. I can go over right now and relogon to FFF and set up an account as a right wing republican, or as a far left democrat, and start spouting whatever I want. If I have lots of resources, I can do the same on a much larger scale.
Your country is under attack and you are not defending it.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sounds outrageous but I know you are serious. So given that, are you saying that these candidates and FOX are knowing accomplices in this plan to kill Americans? Or just following orders?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It IS outrageous, and the only "conspiracy" at work is the GOP and corporate interests. It's business interests, and the blatantly illegal actions under the "Bush EPA", not some kind of terrorist, responsible for the attack on the the Obama EPA. First off, the GOP has had it in their sights for decades, essentially since not long after it began. Secondly, regulations get in the way of making the most bucks the fastest and if you hadn't noticed, corporate interests are ALWAYS against regulation of any kind. Lastly, the Obama EPA is trying to undo illegal acts which went through the courts and were JUDGED illegal during the Bush Administration, which Bush delayed and ignored until he was out. Remember the kerfullfle of what the Bush EPA was doing when it came to BP? Extrapolate that throughout the EPA under Bush at that time.
Pundits were already saying it before it even began, that now that they'd started the "war" against abortion, unions, government workers, etc., the EPA would be next on their list. If you look back at Bush's Presidency, you'll see that they already made a "beachhead", a pretty good one at that The "Bush EPA" was unquestionably an oxymoron, and Obama is trying to undo the damage, as he is legally bound to, so of course the GOP is fighting:Quote:
As long as Bush had control of the EPA, you didn't hear anything from them, as he was doing an excellent job of UNdoing everything the EPA stood for. Now that the Obama administration is trying to rectify those illegal acts, the GOP will fight them tooth and nail. Wanna hear what they have to say about it?
In April 2008, the Bush EPA released a 20-page spreadsheet [PDF] of 94 EPA rules or actions under just the Clean Air Act that had been challenged in court until that point during the Bush administration.
As of August 2011, 37 of those cases have been decided by a court, and in nearly two-thirds of those cases (23), the courts overturned the Bush EPA rules. (The remaining 57 cases have either settled, been voluntarily dismissed, voluntarily remanded, or are still pending in court.)
In 15 of those 23 adverse rulings, the courts found that the Bush EPA had contradicted or disregarded the plain language of the Clean Air Act. This is the worst way for EPA to lose a federal environmental lawsuit, because it reflects a court’s judgment that the agency defied the plain instructions of the law.
Public health and environmental groups were the prevailing parties in 18 of those 23 Clean Air Act rulings against the Bush EPA. These groups prevailed in 13 of the 15 “plain language” court decisions. EPA lost this startling number of Clean Air Act cases because the Bush administration had adopted unlawful regulations that benefited polluting industries at the expense of human health and the environment, despite unambiguous statutory directives requiring otherwise. This was truly out-of-control behavior.
….
When the Obama administration took office in January 2009, it inherited the legal obligation to respond to court orders in not just these 23 Clean Air Act cases, but also in numerous other losing cases under other environmental statutes that EPA administers. The current administration inherited the responsibility to fix a decade-long mess consciously created by the Bush administration and industry supporters out of a shared ideological-economic agenda to violate environmental laws and weaken public health safeguards.
It is striking how thoroughly today’s fiercest EPA critics ignore this history and its implications. Conservative politicians like the House members quoted above, pundits like the Wall Street Journal editorial board, and industry lobbyists ignore this unprecedented wave of Bush administration lawbreaking that the Obama EPA now must rectify. http://www.grist.org/politics/2011-08-08-gop-attacks-the-epa-for-doing
-its-jobQuote:
"[T]he scariest agency in the federal govern
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks Niki - that to me is THE war we are engaged in, not some shadow group trying to kill us all, just the super rich trying to grab more power and protect their wealth even more. It's what they do, it's what's made them who they are, so no one should be surprised. I am just shocked that so many of the Rep candidates think we don't see that or are too gullible to question them with the wealth of revealing information available. I think the serious question is whether Knowing the Truth is enough to stop them, and what are our options? Protest votes mean nothing in the end - who ever gets in could care less.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, to an extent that's true, certainly. But Obama HAS made it part of his mission to undo the environmental damage caused by the Bush EPA and to follow through on the courts' judgments, and he's making strides in that direction. Can't speak to whether his reasons are legit or just politics (or something else), but it's a start in the right direction.
And yes, given what everyone knows by now are my priorities, obviously I agree that it is, in my opinion, one of if not THE biggest threats facing us and the world today and should be a major priority.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
pizmo, I was snarking rap.
There is no mono conspiracy. Conspiracy is a model that works, and so people will reinvent it forever.
The merchants of death exist, and they worry me. A few others worry me as well. The greedmongers are harmless by themselves, it's only when they're manipulated that they're a danger.
FOX NEWS is a traffic monger. They manipulate influence, which they then sell, in this case, to the greedmongers. They are dangerous in chain reaction here.
The powermongers, the fascist police state, they're in tnis game to: they would like to control our supply to water, now that they control our supply to oil and healthcare. They also want to control food, but water is more powerful, you can only survive three days without it.
Even Powermongers and fascist overlords may not know that merchants of death are there.
Now, if you really understand this, then we have something to talk about. I know four people on the forum who really get this, and I have them to thank for me getting it at all.
If you disagree, or "don't get it" but are willing to try, I have one seed of doubt to feed you first:
If TPTB own the printing press which mints the bills and issues the currency of the world, what purpose could they possibly have for profit?
Think about it. Keep thinking until it stops making sense. Money is a means to an end. No logical flow will lead you to the conclusion that it is an end in itself.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
If TPTB own the printing press which mints the bills and issues the currency of the world, what purpose could they possibly have for profit?
Hokay Riddler, riddle me this: what purpose could they possibly have for mass Death? Aliens in human form? Blood sucking Fangers?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
To propagate your own genetic line by eliminating the competition.
That would be why there is genocide, and war, and weapons, and violence, or why men evolved to be strong, to fight off other men, in short, the one of the cornerstones of evolution.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
To propagate your own genetic line by eliminating the competition.
That would be why there is genocide, and war, and weapons, and violence, or why men evolved to be strong, to fight off other men, in short, the one of the cornerstones of evolution.
So, Evolution = Bad?
Curious - who's genetic line is the culprit here?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
So, Evolution = Bad?
Idiocy = good?
I'm sorry, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and not applying any logic to the connections above.
I give up.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
So, Evolution = Bad?
Idiocy = good?
I'm sorry, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and not applying any logic to the connections above.
I give up.
Your logic = idiocy?
And you are just rambling for the sake of attention. Give up, you always do.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'd like an answer to that question, too: "who's genetic line is the culprit here?"
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm going to step away from the genetics here, and say that I feel we need the EPA, are they always perfect? Of course not, but its way better, things are cleaner now, than it was before they came along. Dirty rivers are cleaner than they were in, say, the 70s. Loggers replant more etc. I think that more needs to be done to improve things and maybe the EPA doesn't always go about it the perfect way, but they do something which is more than I can say for this country before they were invented.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm not saying DT is right here, but he's not all wrong, either.
According to the powers that give the GOP its marching orders, regulations are "job killing". Ergo, if a thing is viewed as being job-killing, it's necessarily bad. And in the simple us-v-them, black-v-white thinking of the modern neo-conservative, if it is viewed as being anti-jobs, then anything OPPOSITE that must necessarily be PRO-jobs.
So, if regulations and regulatory agencies are killing jobs, then the way to bring jobs to life is to kill the regulations and the agencies.
It's not that they actively want to KILL people; it's just that in the conservative view, attacking everything you view as evil - whether it be Iraq or the EPA - is justifiable and right, and everyone who dies as a direct or indirect result of that attack is nothing more than "collateral damage".
So as I said, they aren't TRYING to kill people; they just don't give two shits that people will die as a result of their actions.
In the end, they truly, deeply, unfailingly love money far more than they love humanity and life.
But, as the Cree Indians put it,
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Posted by DreamTrove:
This isn't reform, this is about attacking America. It's terrorism, plain and simple. The fossil fuel industry is synthesizing one trillion gallons of chemical weapons which they are using to destroy the country and kill all the people. This is the agenda. There is no profit. No one makes money by pouring chemicals into the Earth here, it's extraneous to the industry. It serves one purpose: To kill Americans.
It's that simple. And effective. More effective than striking America with a nuclear weapon.
Already, more explosives have been dropped on America by this so called "industry" then were dropped on Iraq and Afghanistan. Now they've already hit the US with a million times the amount of chemical weapons that Saddam Hussein had, and I concede all of Rap's claims of Iraqi WMDs.
See, I think you're looking at the wrong end of this thing.
The fracking fluids are basically made of up every evil thing that sloughs off as a by-product of the refining processes. It is classified as toxic waste by any rational definition of the term. And as such, petroleum companies - or "energy companies" as they like to be called this year, since "petroleum" brings up all those nasty images of oil spills and such - are responsible for disposing of it properly.
Or they would be, if they weren't able to get the government to allow them to use pretty much ANYTHING as fracking fluids ("proprietary blends" means you can't even ask, and they don't have to tell), and rather than PAY to dispose of toxic waste, you jam it down a hole under pressure to release natural gas which you then SELL. So you made money refining petroleum products, but you also made metric tons of toxic sludge (I'd bet mine tailings can be "fracking fluids", too!) which you must now get rid of, so you get rid of it NOT by paying money to have it dealt with ethically, but by flushing it down the water table to force gas out of the ground, which you then turn around and sell. You net two times to sell your goods, and no times to pay to dispose of your poisonous runoff, for a net profit of 3X.
Is it any wonder energy companies can print money faster than the federal reserve?
Instead of thinking about it as a direct attack on the U.S., DT, think of it as an incidental one. It's more an "I don't really care what happens next week, because my bonus check will have cleared my Swiss bank by then" kind of afterthought attack. It's not that they meant to kill the water, the soil, and the ecosystem; it's just that they thought they'd be gone before the bills came due.
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
This reasoning is rational.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony,
Thanks, but I'm afraid it's cold comfort under the circumstances. I would sincerely like to HOPE that both DT and I are very wrong on this, but the pieces are falling into place rather too easily, it seems. :(
And I'm not sure being inadvertently killed by evil actions is really any better than being killed by PLANNED evil actions.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mike
I considered that angle, but looking into it what I found was that while you have a point: "industrial byproducts are being added to fracking fluid as a means of getting rid of them" it doesn't seem that this matches the scale and scope of what's going on here.
I can't find any reference to the industry either spinning or CFCs or haloalkanes, or spinning off the billions of gallons being used here. It does seem to me that the WMDs in this case are being intentionally synthesized for the purpose of adding them to the fluid.
I don't want to say "source it or surrender" but I am genuinely interested if this is the case, if you have anything on the quantity and toxicity of byproducts that would lead to this conclusion. It's certainly a logical one, OTOH, you have to consider that all three fracking major backers, BP capital, Bechtel and Halliburton, are heavily invested in water monetization schemes, so there's a 4x for the money. Obviously, these guys are cheap bastards, so even if they wanted to intentionally poison the water supply, they would go with toxins they had on hand if they had them.
I also wonder if the US govt's plans to get rid of its own CFC based chemical WMD stockpiles, if this is how they decided to do that: By using them on America.
I was, of course, snarking Rap, but I'm also serious: If he sees his job as defending America, then America is right now under attack, and he's not defending it, which makes him useless, and another piece of excessive govt. spending which could be cut.
I'm quite serious about the terrorism. This is a threat, just like on 9.11 we were attacked by terrorists, I don't think there's a single dissenter on that, we just happen to disagree on who those terrorists were.
MTR and horizontal hydraulic fracturing are forms of attack, they're actual bombings of america, and these CFCs are WMDs, the kill people, and are banned from use in warfare for that reason. The military actually keeps TCE and DCM on hand as "industrial cleaning agents" instead of non-toxic ones, a fact which kills more soldiers than the enemy. You know, or at least Frem does, that the *reason* they do this is so they they will always have chemical weapons on hand in case they want to throw all the rules of engagement in the trash if they actually need to win instead of just running a constant grinding war for economic and political purposes.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
To propagate your own genetic line by eliminating the competition.
That would be why there is genocide, and war, and weapons, and violence, or why men evolved to be strong, to fight off other men, in short, the one of the cornerstones of evolution.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko: but by flushing it down the water table to force gas out of the ground,
It should be noted that the fracking fluids are not being pumped into the water table, but well below it. Water wells are normally around a few hundred to maybe 3000 feet deep. Gas wells are in the order of 5000 to 6000 feet deep.
It should also noted that deep well injection has been used to dispose of waste materials since the 50's.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
DT:
Hundreds Arrested (Including Me) in DC: The Protest Against the Keystone XL Pipeline and Why the Uproar
Kate Follot
Quote:
I'm just a person who is passionate about helping breech the gap between the public and real life events, especially internationally.
Ending only September the 3rd, a group is planned to protest every day for two weeks, and more than 2100 people have signed up. Already, an estimated 222 people have been arrested, 65 on Saturday, 45 on Sunday, 52 on Monday and 60 on Tuesday, including Canadian actors Margot Kidder (best known as Lois Lane in four of the original Superman movies) and Tantoo Cardinal (indigenous actor best known for her roles in Legends of the Fall, Dances with Wolves, and Smoke Signals).
Arrestees whose ID stated they resided in DC were released after paying a $100 fine while 55 other participants from last Saturday’s demonstration were kept in jail for two nights before having all charges dropped and being released. On Tuesday afternoon, they were greeted with food and drink outside the Superior Court of the District of Columbia Moultrie Courthouse by a group of supporters.... {more}
http://planetsave.com/2011/08/24/hundreds-arrested-including-me-in-dc-
the-protest-against-the-keystone-xl-pipeline-and-why-the-uproar/
Of course, you will not find this covered by the major media.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
NICK I took... oh, less than three seconds... to type "deep well problems" into google, the very first citation from the Journal of Water Pollution Control (1977... not a new problem!) said
Quote:Stuff like this happens all the time... sometimes catastrophically like the BP well blowout, sometimes little by little. Deep well injection- like (ahem!) nuclear power is not a 100% safe, foolproof technology. You have to think about the consequences of failure, because failure is part of the real world.
The growing use of deep wells for disposal of wastes seems to suggest that the earth has an enormous capacity to store liquids. This, unfortunately, is not true: The earth actually contains few empty spaces and liquids can only be accommodated by compressing or displacing existing fluids or deforming the surrounding strata. Nearly three-quarters {Prolly more now- Signy} of the existing wells in the US operate at pressures greater than gravity flow. The possible consequences of high pressure injection include the fracturing of geologic strata, migration of wastes along existing faults and fractures, rupture of rock formations many miles away and movement of waste up the well casing, resulting in the aquifer contamination, and the triggering of seismic activity.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko: but by flushing it down the water table to force gas out of the ground,
It should be noted that the fracking fluids are not being pumped into the water table, but well below it. Water wells are normally around a few hundred to maybe 3000 feet deep. Gas wells are in the order of 5000 to 6000 feet deep.
It should also be noted that fracking fluids aren't SUPPOSED to be pumped into the water table, and yet they keep showing up in the water. It's probably coincidence, though. Maybe the fracking tapped into a heretofor unknown vein of chlorofluorocarbons and dioxyns...
Thing is, you (and the people doing the actual fracking) don't really know HOW and WHERE the rock is going to fracture, or where the fluids will go once the rock DOES fracture.
Quote:
It should also noted that deep well injection has been used to dispose of waste materials since the 50's.
Heck, they used to use depleted uranium in Fiesta Ware dishes, too, but I'm sure it's okay. The 50s were that quaint time when we were actually told that dying of radiation sickness was really not a bad way to go, as it was actually quite painless.
Sorry, but arguing from a point of view that "that's the way it was done in the 50s" doesn't really fly very well with me. Heck, why not have a cigarette and a shot of whiskey before your commute, just to calm your nerves?
Not picking a fight, Nick - just pointing out what I see as a few flaws in your reasoning.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
NICK I took... oh, less than three seconds... to type "deep well problems" into google, the very first citation from the Journal of Water Pollution Control (1977... not a new problem!) saidQuote:Stuff like this happens all the time... sometimes catastrophically like the BP well blowout, sometimes little by little. Deep well injection- like (ahem!) nuclear power is not a 100% safe, foolproof technology. You have to think about the consequences of failure, because failure is part of the real world.
The growing use of deep wells for disposal of wastes seems to suggest that the earth has an enormous capacity to store liquids. This, unfortunately, is not true: The earth actually contains few empty spaces and liquids can only be accommodated by compressing or displacing existing fluids or deforming the surrounding strata. Nearly three-quarters {Prolly more now- Signy} of the existing wells in the US operate at pressures greater than gravity flow. The possible consequences of high pressure injection include the fracturing of geologic strata, migration of wastes along existing faults and fractures, rupture of rock formations many miles away and movement of waste up the well casing, resulting in the aquifer contamination, and the triggering of seismic activity.
I never claimed they where 100% safe, or that they where a good idea. Just stated that have been used for quite some time.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
It should also be noted that fracking fluids aren't SUPPOSED to be pumped into the water table, and yet they keep showing up in the water. It's probably coincidence, though. Maybe the fracking tapped into a heretofor unknown vein of chlorofluorocarbons and dioxyns...
Thing is, you (and the people doing the actual fracking) don't really know HOW and WHERE the rock is going to fracture, or where the fluids will go once the rock DOES fracture.
Your right they do show up in water, but not just places where fracking is going on. Most of these chemicals have been used for years in other industries.
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Heck, they used to use depleted uranium in Fiesta Ware dishes, too, but I'm sure it's okay. The 50s were that quaint time when we were actually told that dying of radiation sickness was really not a bad way to go, as it was actually quite painless.
Sorry, but arguing from a point of view that "that's the way it was done in the 50s" doesn't really fly very well with me. Heck, why not have a cigarette and a shot of whiskey before your commute, just to calm your nerves?
Not picking a fight, Nick - just pointing out what I see as a few flaws in your reasoning.
The point was that pumping chemicals into the ground is not new. Is it a good idea, no. We are all not dead or dying yet. Hell the vast majority of ground water is not contaminated. So while fracking may not be a good idea it is not going to be the end of everything.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko: but by flushing it down the water table to force gas out of the ground,
It should be noted that the fracking fluids are not being pumped into the water table, but well below it. Water wells are normally around a few hundred to maybe 3000 feet deep. Gas wells are in the order of 5000 to 6000 feet deep.
It should also noted that deep well injection has been used to dispose of waste materials since the 50's.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
I can't tell if this is ignorance or propaganda.
2/3 of that water comes back up to the surface where it either splashes back to a surface pool, is sent to a water treatment plant or is spread on the roads as salt. Then it enters the groundwater.
Oh, and what Sig said, which I just saw. The nature of geology, you know.
Sig, thanks for the link. Josh Fox is putting himself in a Julian Assange level of danger. He's a hero, and I think we have to recognize that before they get him, not just after.
Quote:
Originally posted by KWICKO:
Maybe the fracking tapped into a heretofor unknown vein of chlorofluorocarbons and dioxyns
This cracked me up. After just listening to another Josh Fox clip Sig just posted, I'm thinking it works especially well if delivered in the total deadpan.
Quote:
Originally posted by M52NICKERSON:
It should also noted that deep well injection has been used to dispose of waste materials since the 50's.
Ooh, and industry favorite. No, it hasn't, that's actually a lie, just an ordinary one. Water has been used to displace fossil fuels since the 50s, but no one was pumping a million gallons of chemical WMDs into the bedrock of America's agricultural heartland until the Halliburton loophole of 2005 made it legal for them to do so.
But, Mike has a point: They used to tell women to paint their faces with lead paint so they would look good on their way to the watch factory where they would lick the radium so as to stick it on the watches, and make them glow in the dark. Of course, they did it then, so I'm sure it's safe.
BTW, for those who do not recognize it, the excuse flags Nick as an industry spokesman, as no one else uses that line.
Quote:
We are all not dead or dying yet.
This is either a clever or just unfortunate word ordering.
No, flat out no. All of us are not "not dead or dying." Many of us are dead, and many of us are dying. That's why they're adding 5 floors to the local cancer center. We've been told we live on a primary brain cancer hotspot. A waitress at the local soda fountain just died of it. This is becoming amazingly common for a one in a million condition. I've now known as many people to die of fracking contamination as from war, gang violence, suicide and AIDS. the only thing it hasn't displaced is car crashes, and perhaps what we might call old age. Also, medical malpractice, which is still way up there.
So, it's only been running a few years, and already we're dying.
Pizmo,
No, everyone is not in on it. But if there weren't a willful hand of evil in it, then the lawsuit-conscious businessmen would curb the damage to avoid the liability.
I think you have to believe in the existence of evil in order to understand this one. Greed alone does not explain it.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
2/3 of that water comes back up to the surface where it either splashes back to a surface pool, is sent to a water treatment plant or is spread on the roads as salt. Then it enters the groundwater.
...and the treatment plants would be where chemicals would be removed or made inert.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Ooh, and industry favorite. No, it hasn't, that's actually a lie, just an ordinary one. Water has been used to displace fossil fuels since the 50s, but no one was pumping a million gallons of chemical WMDs into the bedrock of America's agricultural heartland until the Halliburton loophole of 2005 made it legal for them to do so.
Water to displace fossil fuels is not deep well injection to get ride of waste, which has indeed been around for some time.
http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/history.cfm
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
BTW, for those who do not recognize it, the excuse flags Nick as an industry spokesman, as no one else uses that line.
Yes, because industry is so worried they sent me to Firefly.net to cover up the truth!
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
No, flat out no. All of us are not "not dead or dying." Many of us are dead, and many of us are dying. That's why they're adding 5 floors to the local cancer center. We've been told we live on a primary brain cancer hotspot. A waitress at the local soda fountain just died of it. This is becoming amazingly common for a one in a million condition. I've now known as many people to die of fracking contamination as from war, gang violence, suicide and AIDS. the only thing it hasn't displaced is car crashes, and perhaps what we might call old age. Also, medical malpractice, which is still way up there.
See, it far more likley that you are making shit up then it is that I'm a industy plant.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That was a snark intended to imply that you were swallowing the company line, and now regurgitating it.
This is something regulators do a lot. And yes, it's worth it to industry to go to regulators and feed them nonsense so that they will spew it. Industry doesn't care where they spew it. They don't care where anything gets spewed.
IIRC, this was a thread on the EPA, and I can tell you that, while I admit they do not agree with me on the issue of a possible Blue Gold* conspiracy, they do think that there is no gas. The feeling at the agency seems to concur with the NYT piece that fracking is a ponzi scheme and they are suspicious of yield claims. They are also seriously concerned about the groundwater and biosphere contamination with CFC and other additive toxins. Far more concerned than you are posting here, and a good number of those are industry people.
* the idea that water monetization firms like BP capital, Bechtel, and Halliburton, are pouring money into the fracking business because they see profit from another channel.
So, sure, I may see holocaust-like conspiracies where they don't exist, but much better that someone see them and herald the possibility that there is a stealth terrorist attack when it's not there then that no one be allowed to dare suggest such a thing if that is the case that this is what is happening.
I guess, IOW, consider me to be the anti-pirate news. I'll occasionally say "It's the Nazis" just in case it is.
I would snark you for throwing out the baby with the bathwater by rejecting everything I say just because you disagree with some of it, but so far, it looks to me like you've rejected everything everyone has said on the board thus far. So, at least it's not personal 
ETA: The point was the inject of the chemicals themselves, not to displace them.
Also, there's a fundamental logical flaw in the belief that water treatment by vaporizing volatiles or diluting solutes (legally 10:1 is sufficient) has any serious mitigating effect on the end macro contamination.
Specifically, doctors say my sister was likely not poisoned by drinking the affected water, but by inhaling the fumes that evaporated from it, containing light weight CFCs such as TCE.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Not as far as I'm concerned; when one is constantly seeing conspiracies, one is not living their life in my opinion; living in fear and seeing conspiracies everywhere (which you do seem to do) is not living. I think psychologists would find you an example of what they have discovered in holocaust-survivor children:
So, sure, I may see holocaust-like conspiracies where they don't exist, but much better that someone see them and herald the possibilityQuote:
I've not mentioned it before and won't again, and I have no right to judge you. I could also be totally wrong. I've just seen a pattern in your thinking which gravitates to conspiracies about so many things, it made me wonder. Some of your bliefs and opinions are so far out in left field, I don't know where they could possibly come from. And all this IS my HUMBLE opinion...I've just not been able to figure out where else some of the stuff you believe--and in some cases think EVERYONE believes--could possibly originate
Evidence shows that the children of Holocaust survivors, referred to as the “Second Generation”, can be deeply affected – both negatively and positively -- by the horrific events their parents experienced. The intergenerational transmission of trauma is so strong that Holocaust-related influences can even be seen in the “Third Generation”, children of the children of survivors.
According to studies, the long-term effects of the Holocaust on the children of survivors suggest a "psychological profile." Their parents’ suffering may have affected their upbringing, personal relationships and perspective on life. Eva Fogelman, a psychologist who treats Holocaust survivors and their children, suggests a second generation 'complex' characterized by processes that affect identity, self-esteem, interpersonal interactions and worldview. http://judaism.about.com/od/holocaust/a/hol_gens.htm commonalities Gorko sees in children of survivors are feelings of being separate or “different” from the rest of the world; having an “escape plan” and security issues... http://www.chron.com/life/houston-belief/article/Holocaust-survivors-t
rauma-filters-through-1702341.php
I sincerely hope your sister makes a full recovery, by the way. I just think what she experiences and what you see around you is not necessarily indicative of the wider world. Nor do I deny the existence of such pollution; I would be the last person on earth to do so, given my priorities. I just don't think it's a "conspiracy", except insofar as there's certainly a "conspiracy" to do away with regulation, which I believe inhibits maximizing profit.Quote:
Certainly greed explains it; liability isn't a deterrent. Surely you've heard of all the times the corporation has made more money off what they do than any "fine", to the point where they figure that into the equation--how many people might sue versus how much profit can be made. Liability can be hidden (a normal human failing), can be delayed (and corporations know just how to do so), avoided (with enough money you can hire great attorneys) and can be calculated (there's a word for just that about people in insurance companies); that you need to believe in "the existence of evil" is something that's personal to YOU, not everyone.
if there weren't a willful hand of evil in it, then the lawsuit-conscious businessmen would curb the damage to avoid the liability... I think you have to believe in the existence of evil in order to understand this one. Greed alone does not explain it. Quote:
I don't know how you come to that, as I've seen no such thing on the board as a whole.
it looks to me like you've rejected everything everyone has said on the board thus farQuote:
BTW, for those who do not recognize it, the excuse flags Nick as an industry spokesman, as no one else uses that lin
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
That was a snark intended to imply that you were swallowing the company line, and now regurgitating it.
This is something regulators do a lot. And yes, it's worth it to industry to go to regulators and feed them nonsense so that they will spew it. Industry doesn't care where they spew it. They don't care where anything gets spewed.
I get that sometimes. When people like you don't want to listen to reason and hear why some of your arguments are incorrect.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
IIRC, this was a thread on the EPA, and I can tell you that, while I admit they do not agree with me on the issue of a possible Blue Gold* conspiracy, they do think that there is no gas. The feeling at the agency seems to concur with the NYT piece that fracking is a ponzi scheme and they are suspicious of yield claims. They are also seriously concerned about the groundwater and biosphere contamination with CFC and other additive toxins. Far more concerned than you are posting here, and a good number of those are industry people.
Really, well you can't tell that by the EPA website!
http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/i
ndex.cfm
You can even see in a past study of fracking the EPA found no evidence of ground water contamination, but as they should left the door open for more research.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
So, sure, I may see holocaust-like conspiracies where they don't exist, but much better that someone see them and herald the possibility that there is a stealth terrorist attack when it's not there then that no one be allowed to dare suggest such a thing if that is the case that this is what is happening.
I guess, IOW, consider me to be the anti-pirate news. I'll occasionally say "It's the Nazis" just in case it is.
I would read the story of Chicken Little if I where you.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I would snark you for throwing out the baby with the bathwater by rejecting everything I say just because you disagree with some of it, but so far, it looks to me like you've rejected everything everyone has said on the board thus far. So, at least it's not personal
Not everything, just the things that are not true, which has been a lot.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
ETA: The point was the inject of the chemicals themselves, not to displace them.
citation needed
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Also, there's a fundamental logical flaw in the belief that water treatment by vaporizing volatiles or diluting solutes (legally 10:1 is sufficient) has any serious mitigating effect on the end macro contamination.
No those are facts. Volatiles breakdown in the air. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp19.pdf Trichloroethylene has a half life of about in the air of about a week.
Also water treatment is more involved then diluting anything.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Specifically, doctors say my sister was likely not poisoned by drinking the affected water, but by inhaling the fumes that evaporated from it, containing light weight CFCs such as TCE.
Really, I would ask how he is coming to that conclusion since not many CFC have been definitely linked to cancer.
research and learn
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't have to rely on the website, I know people in the EPA. Also, though the CFCs in question are labeled as carcinogens in your own link, I don't need to rely on govt. labeling, as I am in a scientific cancer research group.
Let me leave you with a little story. Years ago, after just completing my grad school prep in biochem, I felt pretty smart. I was sitting in a bar and talking to a guy, and telling him all I knew about nutrition. A friend of mine pulled me aside and said "That man that you're talking to just coached his team to his country's first ever gold medal in the olympics. You might want to shut up and listen." So, I took it to heart. A few weeks later I found myself seated next to a man sipping on Cappuccino and talking about chess. I'm very good at the game, and have a lot to say on it, but I remembered the words, and decided to shut up and listen. The man sitting across from me had a number of valuable tips to share, and though I did not recognize him, as I had never seen him, I had in fact read several articles by him, he was Gary Kasperov. I was very glad I'd quelled the impulse to talk and tell him what I know.
That is all I have to say.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
So while fracking may not be a good idea it is not going to be the end of everything.
Well, for those whom it kills, it rather WILL be the end of everything...
I don't think Nick's any kind of plant, industry, potted, or otherwise. I think he's seeing things from a different perspective, one that is more trusting of government and industry than mine, DT's, or Frem's, for instance. But I absolutely don't think Nick is arguing from a position of maliciousness.
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think a lot of the hostility towards the EPA is it's protective function. The EPA is like a condom. Condoms are no fun. Like a condom, the EPA comes between our sensitive bits and the free market. That's no fun. Hence, the EPA must be destroyed.
Also, the EPA is good for us, like broccoli. Things that are good for us are no fun, like broccoli. Therefore, devil take the EPA, and also the broccoli from my plate.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Mike
I considered that angle, but looking into it what I found was that while you have a point: "industrial byproducts are being added to fracking fluid as a means of getting rid of them" it doesn't seem that this matches the scale and scope of what's going on here.
I can't find any reference to the industry either spinning or CFCs or haloalkanes, or spinning off the billions of gallons being used here. It does seem to me that the WMDs in this case are being intentionally synthesized for the purpose of adding them to the fluid.
I don't want to say "source it or surrender" but I am genuinely interested if this is the case, if you have anything on the quantity and toxicity of byproducts that would lead to this conclusion. It's certainly a logical one, OTOH, you have to consider that all three fracking major backers, BP capital, Bechtel and Halliburton, are heavily invested in water monetization schemes, so there's a 4x for the money. Obviously, these guys are cheap bastards, so even if they wanted to intentionally poison the water supply, they would go with toxins they had on hand if they had them.
I don't have links to specific sources or cites; this is entirely my opinion on the matter, based on what I've been hearing from several different sources, none of whom seem to have made the link yet - government deregulation of fracking fluids, allowing industry to claim them as "proprietary" mixes so that they needn't disclose WHAT they're sending down the hole, and the knowledge that pretty much every refinery site in the nation is basically a Superfund site in the offing. It all starts to make sense when you start linking them, but then it gets even worse, with the increased efforts at tort reform aimed at limiting the maximum fiscal exposure of corporations in lawsuits, AND the Supreme Court's rulings in the recent WalMart and AT&T class-action suits which broke up the class action status of said suits and in effect may do away with such things completely in the near future.
So this is industry being told, "Do whatever you want; we don't care. And furthermore, if anyone ever tries to come after you, the courts are on your side, because you paid for them to be."
We are rapidly approaching the tipping point where the only recourse left to the victims of corporations will be violent action in the form of suicide attacks and car-bombs aimed at company headquarters. I don't condone it or cheer it, but I definitely see it coming. But let's just all pretend to be surprised when it starts happening, okay? ;)
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by mincingbeast:
I think a lot of the hostility towards the EPA is it's protective function. The EPA is like a condom. Condoms are no fun. Like a condom, the EPA comes between our sensitive bits and the free market. That's no fun. Hence, the EPA must be destroyed.
Also, the EPA is good for us, like broccoli. Things that are good for us are no fun, like broccoli. Therefore, devil take the EPA, and also the broccoli from my plate.
I like broccoli. I don't like condoms. Condoms are so unlike broccoli.
Apologies to Gandhi. ;)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I know DT is notorious for seeing conspiracies in things, not as bad as PN but well known for it nonetheless. I think that in this case he has had a lot of personal and familial experiences with this issue and, though I'm not a conspiratorialist about most things, I can understand what he means. Do I agree with all he says? No, but do I agree that he has a few good points, that fracking is super dangerous and that the government and corporations don't really care about the everyman? Yes. Do I always agree with DT? No, he has some rather extreme views on things that don't square with my experiences in life, but just because we don't agree on some things doesn't mean I can't understand where he's coming from and believe him, at least a decent chunk of the way, on this.
DT, you told me that story once.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I UNQUESTIONABLY agreeQuote:
What's behind it is what I disagree with. With only one exception, I think I am the most pro-environmentalist here, and it would be pretty impossible to get me to disagree with how everything the EPA was created for is being screwed, trashed, and attacked by the right. It's that the logic of the reasons why oil companies and other corporations try to avoid restrictions that seems to me much more reasonable than that it's a global conspiracy bent on genocide.
that fracking is super dangerous and that the government and corporations don't really care about the everyman
Now, see, DT, I could have taken your story as a personal snark that I (and everyone else) should "shut up and listen" to the things you post...even see it as an attack or something. But I don't. While the intent MAY have been that, I see it as a good point, but one which doesn't apply to me. When you make a good, valid point, I agree with you--and you make quite a few. It's the ones that don't make sense with which I disagree.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mike, you left out Kelo vs. the City of New London, the 2005 supreme court case that ruled that any corporation could seize any private property for corporate use by supplying the govt. with a prospectus showing that this would increase profits, even if the information on the prospectus was false.
Niki,
It was aimed at Nick, and I didn't mean shut up and listen to me, I meant that it's a life lesson that Nick might want to apply. I watched him talk over everyone else for a month before even responding to him. I mostly interjected because he was talking over Byte, who is a geologist, and he was lecturing her on geology, which I think she knows a bit more about than he does. I sort of assume that Nick is a student or recent grad, 'cause he has the air of that newly appointed king of the world to him. Reminds me of my somewhat former self. I was top of my class, I learned a lot of things and suddenly I was smart and I wanted to tell the world about it. Someone shoulda clopped me on the head right proper.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I don't have to rely on the website, I know people in the EPA. Also, though the CFCs in question are labeled as carcinogens in your own link, I don't need to rely on govt. labeling, as I am in a scientific cancer research group.
Here is that thing about the internet, people can, and do claim to be things they are not. So you can spare me personal stories and your pedigree unless you can prove them.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nick,
I believe you when you say that you are a pool inspector.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Nick,
I believe you when you say that you are a pool inspector.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
I'm glad it shows you are paying attention....oh wait!
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I humbly submit that this thread has widely deviated from its purpose, and is no longer serving to deepen the wisdom of mankind, nor foster goodwill between fellow humans.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, let us get back on track.
New York State is not waiting for the EPA and plans on impementing it's own regulations when it comes to Fracking.
http://www.propublica.org/article/new-york-environment-commissioner-ex
pects-little-from-epa-fracking-study/single
Perhaps the states are going to have to take a more active role in writing their own regulations and not rely on the EPA.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:He's a total tool. The NY DEC is much more corrupt than the EPA. They want to pretend that they've taken every precaution, but they're really chanting drill baby drill. I was at an local govt. meeting on this last night, and there were about 100 people there, about 10 pro-drilling, and the rest anti. I couldn't confirm that any of the pro-drillers were actually from our town.
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Well, let us get back on track.
New York State is not waiting for the EPA and plans on impementing it's own regulations when it comes to Fracking.
http://www.propublica.org/article/new-york-environment-commissioner-ex
pects-little-from-epa-fracking-study/single
Perhaps the states are going to have to take a more active role in writing their own regulations and not rely on the EPA.
Cuomo is another fracking pawn. I suspect it's going to take some more major action on our part.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
He's a total tool. The NY DEC is much more corrupt than the EPA. They want to pretend that they've taken every precaution, but they're really chanting drill baby drill. I was at an local govt. meeting on this last night, and there were about 100 people there, about 10 pro-drilling, and the rest anti. I couldn't confirm that any of the pro-drillers were actually from our town.
There you go again. You have to attack the science, the studies and not the men.
I by no means is pro-fracking, mainly because of the waste products after they come up from the wells. Accidents will happen. I don't see the fluids pumped into the ground as an issue with the ground water. There is no conclusive evidence of contamination from the fracking fluids. Finding contaminates in wells that they use in the fluids is not concrete proof that is where is came from. Hell I see those contaminated in Florida, where there is no fracking. Those chemicals have been used in other industries for some time.
So if you want action to work, you need solid scientific proof, or you will be easily ignored.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You know, they have what's called" secondary recovery" of (sour heavy) crude out of California wells - where they pump hot liquid and chemicals under pressure into the geological structure to get oil back out. And it's all cool until something breaks. Which it does btw. I spent about 60 hours straight analyzing the stuff coming up out of parking garage floors, fire hydrant openings, street manhole coverings etc. That was a big OOOPs on the part of the oil company. And did you hear the one about the gas company? They have these geological structures where they pump natural gas into them under pressure to store locally until they need to draw it out during high demand. Until they pressurize it too much and it breaks, which has also happened here in CA. And THEN, there is one PROVEN case of water table contamination due to fracking.
This whole scenario - breaking geological structures in an unanticipated way - is completely known by those in the biz. The whole idea that it's just a theoretical possibility is pure corporate BS.
And you are just a shill. Or, maybe, abysmally ignorant.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I might sic my mom on you. She has details on this stuff ;)
Kiki,
Also people's houses blowing up because the basements filled with methane.
Nick,
again, I say, just as a new yorker being familiar with our DEC, it's pretty thoroughly corrupt. If they're trying to cut ahead of the conclusion of the EPA study, you need no science to conclude that it is an action in favor of the gas companies.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
You know, they have what's called" secondary recovery" of (sour heavy) crude out of California wells - where they pump hot liquid and chemicals under pressure into the geological structure to get oil back out. And it's all cool until something breaks. Which it does btw. I spent about 60 hours straight analyzing the stuff coming up out of parking garage floors, fire hydrant openings, street manhole coverings etc. That was a big OOOPs on the part of the oil company.
....and what did you find? Was it ever determined where the "stuff" came from? I ask because you stated "it's all cool until something breaks", does that mean something went wrong and the "stuff" was pumped out of the well through a crack closer to the surface?
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:And did you hear the one about the gas company? They have these geological structures where they pump natural gas into them under pressure to store locally until they need to draw it out during high demand. Until they pressurize it too much and it breaks, which has also happened here in CA.
They do the same with treated water, the problem they are finding is not over pressurizing, but increased Arsenic levels in the water when recovered.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:And THEN, there is one PROVEN case of water table contamination due to fracking.
Are you talking about methane contamination or contamination from fracking fluids?
If you are talking about fracking fluids you maybe talking about this. http://www.propublica.org/article/does-an-old-epa-fracking-study-provi
de-proof-of-contamination
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=chemicals-found-in-dr
inking-water-from-natural-gas-drilling&page=3
The contamination in Wyoming very well may lead to conclusion that fracking was the cause, in one way of another. Or it may not.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:And you are just a shill. Or, maybe, abysmally ignorant.
Whats wrong? Don't like people asking questions and challenging your views?
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Nick,
again, I say, just as a new yorker being familiar with our DEC, it's pretty thoroughly corrupt. If they're trying to cut ahead of the conclusion of the EPA study, you need no science to conclude that it is an action in favor of the gas companies.
....that maybe so, but that argument will not advance your cause. Unfortunately the burden of proof is on the opponents of fracking.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"....and what did you find? Was it ever determined where the "stuff" came from? I ask because you stated "it's all cool until something breaks", does that mean something went wrong and the "stuff" was pumped out of the well through a crack closer to the surface?"
Well, yes, we DID figure out where it came from. It came from an oil company that had over-pressurized the field and broke the rock, the pipes, and the well-casing - and the pressurized oil and extraction fluids, moving up to areas of lower pressure, came out wherever they encountered a surface penetration - alongside pipes and foundations - in downtown LA.
Did you not understand that? I thought it was abundantly clear. Do you need me to use smaller words? Or simpler concepts?
They broke the ground and pushed nasty out.
Got it now?
"They do the same with treated water, the problem they are finding is not over pressurizing, but increased Arsenic levels in the water when recovered."
That's a completely pointless bit. What does that have to do with companies accidentally breaking geological structures by over-pressurizing them? Unless you mean to say that they ALSO accidentally break geological structures with water. In which case - THANKS! - for making my point for me!
As for ground water contamination due to fracking: "Researchers from Duke University added to the debate, publishing a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that found a correlation between shale drilling activity and the seepage of contaminants, particularly methane, into drinking water wells.[4] "
[4] Methane Contamination of Drinking Water Accompanying Gas-Well Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Apr. 2011).
So, sit down and shut up, unless you want to further look like a fool, and a tool.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I think it may be possible to discuss this, and even disagree, without insulting one another.
Slinging insults is unnecessary when you have good science, logic, and evidence on your side.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My very bad. I got caught up early in the snark like this: I would read the story of Chicken Little if I w(h)ere you. Shoulda' stepped back and remembered - this is a very small part of my life, which is an infinitesimally small part of the world.
It's just that - I know what happens in the biz by experience. Shit happens. It has happened more than once in my very small area of the world in a very short span of time - less than a half-dozen years. Anyone who tries to pretend like it doesn't is, well ... annoying.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"....and what did you find? Was it ever determined where the "stuff" came from? I ask because you stated "it's all cool until something breaks", does that mean something went wrong and the "stuff" was pumped out of the well through a crack closer to the surface?"
Well, yes, we DID figure out where it came from. It came from an oil company that had over-pressurized the field and broke the rock, the pipes, and the well-casing - and the pressurized oil and extraction fluids, moving up to areas of lower pressure, came out wherever they encountered a surface penetration - alongside pipes and foundations - in downtown LA.
Did you not understand that? I thought it was abundantly clear. Do you need me to use smaller words? Or simpler concepts?
You simply said something broke, you where not specific as to what. It makes a difference that the well casing broke and allowed the fluid to be pumped out much closer to the ground.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
They broke the ground and pushed nasty out.
Got it now?
Yes, now that you added details above.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"They do the same with treated water, the problem they are finding is not over pressurizing, but increased Arsenic levels in the water when recovered."
That's a completely pointless bit. What does that have to do with companies accidentally breaking geological structures by over-pressurizing them? Unless you mean to say that they ALSO accidentally break geological structures with water. In which case - THANKS! - for making my point for me!
The point was that underground storage is not unique to the gas industry, nor are problems with it. Also I have not argued that this type of storage does not breaking geo structures.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
As for ground water contamination due to fracking: "Researchers from Duke University added to the debate, publishing a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that found a correlation between shale drilling activity and the seepage of contaminants, particularly methane, into drinking water wells.[4] "
[4] Methane Contamination of Drinking Water Accompanying Gas-Well Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Apr. 2011).
Have I at any time stated that I did not believe reports regarding the Methane concamination. No. Perhaps you should know what I'm arguing against before you jump on me.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nick, you're buying into the level of discourse, just as Kiki did, and it doesn't gain you any respect. Disagreeing is normal, but HOW we disagree says more about us than any facts or figures we offer. I know you can do better.
As to your remarks being aimed at Nick rather than at me, DT, there is a perfect example of how things that are not aimed or intended for one person can be misunderstood by another; something you've had happen to you.
As toQuote:
And that's how you come across to a good number of US, as has been mentioned previously by myself and others. Trust me, that's not your "former" self, by any means!
...he has the air of that newly appointed king of the world
You have no problem hurling insults at others, yet are so sensitive to being "attacked", even when there are no attacks there (I'm not speaking of this thread, which has had its share of snarks going both ways).
You said you watched him "talk over others"...how exactly is that possible on a forum? He's free to express his opinion just as you or anyone else is; if what he says or how he says it pisses you off, you have as much right to respond. But if you respond with snarks, expect no sympathy when you complain about being picked on. At least Nick has never done that, and you have, repeatedly.
Anthony is quite right. He tried twice, but seems to have remained unheard, except by Kiki:Quote:
I humbly submit that this thread has widely deviated from its purpose, and is no longer serving to deepen the wisdom of mankind, nor foster goodwill between fellow humans.Quote:
I'm sure glad you came back, Anthony, you are probably our most civil poster and often act as our conscience, for which I thank you (whether it works or not).
think it may be possible to discuss this, and even disagree, without insulting one another.
Slinging insults is unnecessary when you have good science, logic, and evidence on your side.
I would love it if we could get back to the ACTUAL original point of this thread, but it may be to late for that, and that's fine. Threads go where they go, but it's sad to see those of us who AREN'T Raptor or Wulf, etc., dive into the gutter.
I will now shut up and stop acting like a mother hen; if nobody wants to hear what Anthony has to say, there's no point in trying further.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm civil. ... Most of the time, plus its not like Anthony is the head saint of fireflyfans.net. I agree with him often, but he can be snotty and lack understanding sometimes, just as all of us can.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"its not like Anthony is the head saint of fireflyfans.net."
Hello,
Thank you for defending me against such spurious accusations.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Can't help but smile. :) that would be rather no fun.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Auraptor,
My apologies for the delay. This account is linked to a long dead email so I don't get PMs, I just managed to dig out one from you sent on Aug 1st 2011 in response to my post above.
In answer to your question: From both. Under attack from both at home and abroad. The powers attacking this nation through environmental degradation, also known as attrition, also know, in an earlier definition used by our country, as terrorism.
The war of attrition targets civilian population. The nature of this attack is to turn the US into a resource mining colony, much like western powers have used Africa for much of the 20th c. Many of these attackers are international corporations, but some are foreign govts., China, in particular.
The nature of radical mining techniques such as fracking is that they do untold and unnecessary damage to the surface of the US, for the purpose of extraction of resources at minimum cost. This is standard colony rape. We witnessed it all over Africa. We're becoming someone else's resource bitch, and it's a serious problem.
But, if you will entertain a little conspiracy, there is also an element of chemical contamination that seems to me at least partially deliberate. The use of fracking fluid does not seem to have a significant impact on the yield of wells, yet represents more industrial pollution than all of US industry combined. The effect of this could easily be permanent contamination of vast swaths of rural America. Each individual well uses more chemical nerve agents than we claimed (and were right to claim,) that Saddam Hussein had (and he did have them) prior to the invasion of Iraq. This means every time a well gets "fracked" it amounts to a massive chemical weapons assault* on the united states.
* It's important here to distinguish between horizontal fracturing c. 2005, which is what we mean by "fracking"; and vertical fracturing which is a long standing natural gas extraction technique, c. 1950.
Also, it's worth adding that MTR, or mountaintop removal, is radically destructive to the Appalachian mountains including including the blue ridge, and that in this process, the offenders have detonated more explosives to deface America than were used in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Sorry for the necropost, but it seemed the most logical way to respond.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sig, you got it before I did. Nicely done.
Yes, releasing fluid under pressure deforms overlaying strata. Combined with earthquakes caused by fracking, which makes use of existing fault systems, and the horizontal arrangement of the layers, contamination can spread wide laterally and find upward cracks in the system, and also the pressure alone can force it all upwards through the strata.
The oil in the BP oil spill was not JUST coming from the partially exploded well... the explosion deformed strata and pressure forced oil to the surface, through thousands of feet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I don't see the fluids pumped into the ground as an issue with the ground water.
If you mean dumping fracking fluid on roads as brine, that's how leaching HAPPENS. Leaching to groundwater. You put enough on the soil, some will sorb on the soil particles but the stuff is heavier than air, gravity pulls the rest down through the pore space until it hits the saturated zone.
If the stuff is an LNAPL, lighter than water, it'll spread out on the surface. If it's a DNAPL, it'll sink in the system until it hits an impermeable layer and either pools or passes through, or you have flow in a strata that mobilizes, or it disperses into solution, or all of the above.
If you're pumping it in deep, you're pumping it in to the groundwater system. When you fracture a strata, you release fluid into overlying layers, and potentially to strata subject to the recharge/discharge flow pattern. And even when you're in impermeable layers, transmissivity is not zero. This stuff WILL eventually migrate as dictated by groundwater flow.
No matter what, dumping or pumping these fluids is an issue with groundwater. The question YOU'RE meaning to ask is if it is an issue with drinking water. But that's not the only issue here, many of the impacted areas have a shallow water table, and so vapour intrusion is a concern.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oops, necropost. I wonder how I didn't see this before.
well, it's an important topic.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
If you mean dumping fracking fluid on roads as brine, that's how leaching HAPPENS. Leaching to groundwater. You put enough on the soil, some will sorb on the soil particles but the stuff is heavier than air, gravity pulls the rest down through the pore space until it hits the saturated zone.
If the stuff is an LNAPL, lighter than water, it'll spread out on the surface. If it's a DNAPL, it'll sink in the system until it hits an impermeable layer and either pools or passes through, or you have flow in a strata that mobilizes, or it disperses into solution, or all of the above.
If you're pumping it in deep, you're pumping it in to the groundwater system. When you fracture a strata, you release fluid into overlying layers, and potentially to strata subject to the recharge/discharge flow pattern. And even when you're in impermeable layers, transmissivity is not zero. This stuff WILL eventually migrate as dictated by groundwater flow.
No matter what, dumping or pumping these fluids is an issue with groundwater. The question YOU'RE meaning to ask is if it is an issue with drinking water. But that's not the only issue here, many of the impacted areas have a shallow water table, and so vapour intrusion is a concern.
I was talking about pumping it into the ground. The thing is that you can pump deep enough that you are not affecting the ground water. Useable ground water is only found so far down.
Now since this thread started the EPA has found evidence of fracking fluids contaminating ground water. The chemicals are either being forced up into the ground water table, or are leaking into it from the walls of the bore holes.
How ever it is with this evidence the fracking should be stopped.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
DT,
Saw this today. Thought you might find it of interest.
http://judicial-corruption.net/2011/12/the-fracking-industry-has-bough
t-off-congress-here-are-the-worst-offenders-thanks-to-our-morally-bankrupt-political-system-the-supreme-courts-ruling-on-citizens-united-the-fracking-lobbys-po/
-----
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want - and their kids pay for it." - Richard Lamm
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I was talking about pumping it into the ground. The thing is that you can pump deep enough that you are not affecting the ground water. Useable ground water is only found so far down.
While it's true that pore space in strata at depth becomes so small that it no longer permits groundwater, that does NOT generally occur within 5,000 feet of the surface (it's more like a few miles down, not just one). While this does depend on the area, this is especially true in deposition basins with a lot of unconsolidated sediment from nearby mountains... Such as east of the Appalachians, or perhaps here in Salt Lake City, where in places we have more than 10,000 feet of unconsolidated sediment, and water all through it.
Companies are very much drilling into saturated strata.
You might be able to argue about usability of that deep groundwater, but the biggest problem it'll have is that it'll be mineralized, which is easily treated. In fact, my understanding is they were trying to TREAT some of the waste water for drinkability, though they were ending up still with a lot of radiological contamination.
And this also is not giving credence to the actual fracturing of the strata in question allowing pressurized fluid into overlaying strata, nor is it considering that the well construction and casing is often slipshod, nor that there's been a rash of blowouts from well misuse and undermaintenance. All of which could release contamination in strata closer to the surface than the layer being drilled.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Also worth noting two things about deep injection well. "Up to 8,000 feet" is often much shorter than that. Ithaca shale can be seen its entirety, as can the Geneseo shale formation beneath it, at Taughannock Falls which is 200 feet high. Frackers are planning to drill not far from there. It is safe to say that it is both shale formations are above the base of the water table in this area because you can see the water literally run straight through the entirety of both formations.
If fracking were to create, as it intends to, long fissues horizontally through shale formations, all major shale formations break the surface at some point. This is a fold mountain range, rock formations are not lying flat under ground.
That said, the brine is also a major threat.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME