Like a Bottle Rocket to the Moon

Re: Is the BLM shooting straight in the Dakotas when it dismisses risks to ranchers as like "shooting a bottle rocket to the moon"?

No.

Right; you've got to aim slightly ahead of the Moon and allow for a curved path.

From other articles I've seen, the contamination risks are extremely low. The opposition seems to fall into either the NIMBY category, or the professional hysteria crowd.

People here in Pennsylvania have moved (or been moved) out of their houses because their wells have been contaminated with methane (and other things) since fracking has started. (Actually, some of the houses have blown up--hmm, I guess that does have some analogies to a bottle rocket. ;-)

I should look for reference to an article, but I probably won't.

Some articles I'd seen recently:

http://reason.com/blog/2011/04/04/anti-fracking-enviros-attempt

http://volokh.com/2011/04/16/in-defense-of-fracking/

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2010/10/environmental-defense-fund-admits-propaganda-effort-against-natura#ixzz15SnTxEO8

I was impressed when I saw this video and there are many others. Couldn't find any video on youtube of a bottle rocket getting to the moon. It certainly seems a lot less likely than a documented fact.

My guess is that the BLM have about as much chance of guaranteeing that fracking will not pollute the water as they do of getting themselves to the moon in a bottle rocket.

As someone who has actually spent time in the North Dakota oil fields and has had considerable time well spent hauling water and talking with the people on the actual drilling and fracking rigs I am quite certain there is no chance that the fracking of the Bakken, Three Forks or Goliath formations will contaminate our ground water.

The three primary oil formations all have a large natural salt water barrier between them and the ground water tables which is about 5000 feet below the surface that is by natural causes extremely nasty water to begin with. That salt water aquifer is where all the production water (returning frack and drilling water from producing wells) and related dirty or similarly contaminated water goes to be disposed of being the aquifers natural water is as bad or in many cases worse that what comes out of the wells themselves.

As far as our natural potable ground water tables go there are very few places in the state where a well over 400 feet deep is required to get good water. Most places 50 to 200 feet is more than enough to reach an active water table that has potable quality water.

For a visual comparison 400 feet is about 3/4 of one city block and 5000 feet is about 9 city blocks and 2 miles is 20 city blocks. Visualize that as you drive though town once.

Wow, are you implying the same chemical composition in the hydraulic fracturing fluids as the deep saline aquifer? Or, are you implying that water contaminated by natural salt is bad enough that the addition of highly toxic organic compounds (possibly even carcinogens) can not make it any worse? How would you know since they do not disclose the chemical composition? Bear in mind agent orange was mostly safe in the 1960s, except the very minor constituent of dioxin that could arise in it during preparation.

If you google just gasland, you find: Gasland: The Movie

"In the American West, the BLM manages 250 acres of federal land..."

Cool; that'll keep 'em from doing much harm (or good, for that matter).

Hi Del, I agree with you, if it can happen then one day it will happen, and as you said, the man is a complete idiot!

Spencer.

Anything is poisonous in sufficient concentration.

If I were getting methane in my drinking water from fracking, which seems plausible, then I would want mitigation, or the fracking to stop. That the mining/drilling companies are hiding something ("a process whose chemicals many companies refuse to reveal") puts the burden of proof on them as far as I'm concerned.

It's perfectly possible for a bottle rocket to fly to the moon. Just not under its own power.

The mere fact that there is no disclosure regarding the components in "fracking fluid" suggests this bs artist is not on the up and up.

From what is my understanding here in New York State our Dept. of Conservation (NYDEC) has placed a moratorium on HF based on groundwater contamination problems encountered in other states, including those in PA.

IMO, as an Environmental Engineer I feel that the USEPA should mandate that the HF companies fully disclose what chemical constituents are present in the drilling fluids (presently and in the future if substitutes are utilized).

BTW, I also feel that Mr. Ward is an idiot.....errrrr "talkinh head"? My statement is based on his remarks. He, the politicians and our government (and it's cronies and agents) should totally ween themselves off of Big Oil's teet..... I also wonder if he is and his center are receiving any payola from the oil companies.

Don't get me wrong here. I have nothing against oil and oil exploration, especially if it leads to reduction in oil importation and the survival of this nation, but I do have BIG problems with endangering the environment, PACS, graft, greed and corruption.