Tree growth rings disprove that the earth is warmer now than during Roman times and or even 1000 years ago.

"HeyBub" wrote in message news:VZSdnYqSkvZVxpbNnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com...

Han wrote:

You're sorta correct and I misspoke. There are STATE regulations on fracking but there are NO federal regulations on fracking. A lot of people in eastern Pennsylvania are getting rich from fracked natural gas while their neighbors, just across the state line in western New York are really pissed because New York doesn't allow the process.

I do believe that New York has put a plan/law in effect or being considered. Google 'New York fracking policy.'

In the early days of fracking, there was some waste; companies dumped the semi-polluted water anywhere they pleased. Now, however, all the water used is reclaimed. There is NO waste connected with fracking.

NO, Bub, you cannot say there is NO waste connected with fracking. Speaking from experience . . . though recycling used frack water is a growing business, there is still PLENTY of waste water aka, 'blowback' and there are serious efforts [in Karnes County, Texas and, I assume other Eagle Ford Shale play counties] to establish multiple waste disposal injection wells, almost assuredly in close proximity to homes and crops.

formatting link
as just one example. There is plenty of opposition from long-time local framers/ranchers including those that are pocketing some serious bank from their royalties. I know because I know a few of those farmers/ranchers, and land owners. I believe, in the end, the Texas Railroad Commission which "regulates" the oil and gas industry will cow-tow to the industry. The API almost always gets its way; TRRC commissioners need campaign money, too. Those farmers/ranchers, and land owners I refer to, are also afraid that is exactly what will happen. These are died-in-the-wool, anti-Obama conservatives. They've ranched the land their whole lives; lived through the uranium strip-mining of the early '70s. I've seen some evidence that the TRRC is doing it's best to curtail and otherwise short-circuit land owner's objections by restricting public input [filing dates and similar such tactics]. A legal fight is brewing, to be sure. But, you CANNOT say there is NO waste from fracking.

Dave in [Eagle Ford] Texas

Reply to
Dave in Texas
Loading thread data ...

In article , Leon wrote: [HEAVY snipping]

So many things that are now labelled green, aren't. Take a look at the stuff they put in Prius batteries. Oh yummy. One of the biggest NON-green cars is made my a company which brags about their 'greenness'. (Volkswagen Taureg(sp?) A well tuned 327ci Chevy engine from the late 60's can run as clean as anything we've got today. But it seems that the only way to fix anything politically is to throw buckets of bullshit at it. "Make it LOOK green."

Reply to
Robatoy

I read an article that showed the average electric/hybrid car has a much larger carbon footprint than a gasoline car, when you look at its total life, from manufacturing to disposal.

This isn't the original article, but it explains it well enough.

formatting link

Reply to
-MIKE-

Exactly my point to the greenies, The Hummer was better for the environment than the Prius when you consider the energy to

Manufacture, Operate, and Dispose of when their life cycles have been reached.

I think greenies believe that two cars built and operated the same pollute the same unless one them is painted green.

Reply to
Leon

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 13:33:18 -0500, Leon

WHAT? You mean you haven't read the factually confirmed, scientifically proven article that air might slipstream over a green car more easily than other coloured cars?

Geez Leon. Stay up to date!

:)

Reply to
Dave

George W. Bush issued a directive in January 2004 that shut down the shuttle effective 2010. Congress extended the program one year. Obama is working hard to get private industry to take up the slack. The SpaceX Dragon successfully docked with the ISS and delivered supplies on May 25, 2012. SpaceX is working hard to man rate the Dragon.

How's that for cognitive dissonance? Our favorite Socialist is moving a program from government to private industry.

-- Doug

Reply to
Douglas Johnson

Right. Blame Bush. Still, the fact is, the transportation of our space station workers was outsourced under Obama.

Reply to
HeyBub

What makes you think I didn't? That I couldn't find one?

Well, I did look. I DID find several accounts of "damage" to surface installations but the cause of such damage is: a) rank speculation with no empirical proof, or b) symptoms (i.e., flaming water from wells) that existed long before fracking was even invented.

Now if YOU know of a credible example, I'd much appreciate your sharing it with me.

Reply to
HeyBub

Consider:

"Spent or used fracturing fluids are normally recovered at the initial stage of well production and recycled in a closed system for future use or disposed of under regulation, either by surface discharge where authorized under the Clean Water Act or by injection into Class II wells as authorized under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Regulation may also allow recovered fracturing fluids to be disposed of at appropriate commercial facilities. Not all fracturing fluid returns to the surface."

formatting link
are many other references under fracking+fluid+recovery

I don't think anybody trucks tens of millions of gallons of water across state lines...

Reply to
HeyBub

Right. I continue to misspeak. I should have said "there is virtually no waste dumping from a fracking operation."

I'm sure somewhere a valve gets left open for a few minutes...

Reply to
HeyBub

"HeyBub" wrote in news:2NKdncjOhf6FxJDNnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

There is no blame to any President. Other than lack of leadership. But the boys at NASA are really grown-ups. If they really felt that it was absolutely necessary to have a US only capability, they would have fought for it much harder. Point is, the shuttle was an overreach, it was using unproven technology (not a bad thing, but in this case not such a good thing either), and there never was a civilian follow-up. Thus the shuttle was mainly just that, a ferry up and down to the International Space Station. Get it, for an international effort?!!

You mean that if I sign a contract for work to be done when I am not President anymore, I don't get any credit for the contract?

Reply to
Han

"HeyBub" wrote in news:VuCdnZpBFoTCxpDNnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

Exactly. Waste is generated and (supposedly) disposed of properly. Except when the loopholes allow disposal in a cheaper way that fulfills all legal requirements, except the spirit of the law.

The report I saw, as quoted in the New York Times - IIRC, mentioned trucking of waste water accross state borders. I don't recall the quantities. Large tanker trucks hold up to about 10,000 gallons. So ONLY about 100 truck loads is a million gallons ...

Reply to
Han

"Mike Marlow" wrote in news:51608$500d7271$4b75eb81$ snipped-for-privacy@ALLTEL.NET:

Come on Mike. It is not legal to dump more than x gallons of waste containing y ppm of this in the public water ways. So, dilute it 10-fold and then dump it. Or read any of the vignettes here

formatting link
get an idea.

I wish I could express myself better. This is what I did. I looked up the capacity of tanker trucks. Stated as up to 9,000 gallons, so for ease of calculations I rounded it up to 10,000 gallons. Yes I exagerated, so what. The question was about "millions of gallons of waste being trucked or not. By using the 10,000 gallon figure it was easy to see that a mere 100 or so trips with just 1 truck would reach 1 million gallons. The above links also talk about the danger of overworked truck drivers (being asked to drive more and longer than is really legal) and the accidents they cause or can cause.

Again, just to make sure you know where I stand. I am in favor of fracking to make available energy sources that are in principle fairly clean, economical and plentiful. It's just that it should be done safely and properly.

Reply to
Han

"Mike Marlow" wrote in news:79832$500d84ef $4b75eb81$ snipped-for-privacy@ALLTEL.NET:

Mentioned by Heybub in the post I was answering to.

I hope you also think that disposing of waste water that contains hazardous substances is wrong. And I know that almost anything is bad if the concentration or qunatity is high enough ...

Reply to
Han

Right. I continue to misspeak. I should have said "there is virtually no waste dumping from a fracking operation."

I'm sure somewhere a valve gets left open for a few minutes...

I think you pretty well addressed everything I spoke to; covered it all you did.

Dave in Texas

Reply to
Dave in Texas

Let me see if I understand this?

They use explosives to fracture rock to get at the natural gas that's down there SOMEWHERE - but it ONLY comes out at the valve?

Reply to
Richard

Let me see if I understand this?

They use explosives to fracture rock to get at the natural gas that's down there SOMEWHERE - but it ONLY comes out at the valve?

Total drilled depth is usually 15,000-16,00 feet including a 4,000-5,000 lateral. There may be as many as 20 stages of fracking involving more than a million gallons of water, various types of sand and 'secret' chemicals. This animated video gives you the general idea:

formatting link
in Texas

Reply to
Dave in Texas

Call that the path of least resistance.

Reply to
Leon

I think you've wrapped your mind around the concept. Congrats.

Reply to
HeyBub

Yep. They even tried it with atom bombs on three separate occasions. Any gas leakage into groundwater or the like would have been easily detectable (like you point a geiger counter at if and if it goes tick tick you've got a leak). The AEC looked for such leakage and didn't find it.

Reply to
J. Clarke

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.