Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All chemicals forced into the ground and rock while drilling wells will eventually enter underground aquifers, it’s a matter of time. Once the aquifer is contaminated the water is or maybe unfit for drinking. Not all well water is tested for all the potential chemicals that are harmful.
Here’s a list of superfund sites in AZ that show most sites have contaminated groundwater. Chemicals leach threw the soil, sand and rock into the water table or aquifers. It’s not unlike most other southwest states where corporations are using chemicals. They don’t even have to drill wells with chemicals and it gets into the water tables. List of Superfund sites in Arizona - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the Phoenix area, drinking water is provided primarily though surface water (95%) and limited groundwater (5%) from areas located outside of the the Motorola 52nd Street Superfund Site.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/sfund/r9sfdocw.nsf/3dc283e6c5d6056f88257426007417a2/4f7fa8d5f77b24fc882578c5008149f5/$FILE/m52map.pdf
Goodyear AZ (southwest metro valley) contaminated groundwater.
While southwest Valley communities’ drinking water is safe, officials in Goodyear, Avondale and Litchfield Park have fought for years to contain the plume, which destroyed some wells in Goodyear and threatened those cities’ drinking-water wells.
For too long, cleanup efforts were inadequate, city officials say.
Chemicals seeped from dumping sites into underground aquifers, an important source of water. Over time, the pollution spread throughout some aquifers.
When chemicals are mixed with water and forced at high pressures into the soil sand and rock to drill those chemicals are not recovered and remain in the earth where they may potentially contaminate the local ground water source. If chemicals spilled on the surface filter through the earth and into the water aquifers that cause problems like the above links show, how are the chemicals filtered when they are applied directly into the earth below the surface? How are they recovered?
Over 41 years, the federal government detonated 921 nuclear warheads underground at the Nevada Test Site, 75 miles northeast of Las Vegas. Each explosion deposited a toxic load of radioactivity into the ground and, in some cases, directly into aquifers.
In a study for Nye County, where the nuclear test site lies, Buqo estimated that the underground tests polluted 1.6 trillion gallons of water. That is as much water as Nevada is allowed to withdraw from the Colorado River in 16 years -- enough to fill a lake 300 miles long, a mile wide and 25 feet deep.
At today's prices, that water would be worth as much as $48 billion if it had not been fouled, Buqo said
A few things about water wells. The movie that is circulated showing the homeowner lighting the gas coming out of his water hose. His gas is methane, a natural gas present in some aquifers. After the movie was made, he admitted that the gas had BEEN THERE BEFORE FRACKING and he had connected his hose to a gas vent installed by the driller to let the methane out of the system.
Second, as aquifers decline, non-hazardous bacteria will form in the well head putting off hydrogen sulfide gas.
Are there some well failures? Possibly. Is fracking the problem that is asserted by the enviro nuts? No. Far too often this is just anti-drilling hysteria.
Example is the argument over fracking in Denton, TX. A petition was presented requiring the city council to put an anti-fracking law on next city election cycle. This arose because a driller was drilling on a well site that existed before a subdivision was built. The noise aggravated the people who bought in the subdivision, KNOWING THE DRILLING WAS PRESENT. So the residents presented the petition as an anti-fracking petition, when the problem was not fracking but the drilling itself. And the Luddites in town signed onto the petition not really understanding what was actually driving the petition. There has not been any water table damage, no well contamination.
Don't jump onto something because some advocacy group says 'it is for the kids' etc. Far too often there are other things driving the advocacy group.
A few things about water wells. The movie that is circulated showing the homeowner lighting the gas coming out of his water hose. His gas is methane, a natural gas present in some aquifers. After the movie was made, he admitted that the gas had BEEN THERE BEFORE FRACKING and he had connected his hose to a gas vent installed by the driller to let the methane out of the system.
Second, as aquifers decline, non-hazardous bacteria will form in the well head putting off hydrogen sulfide gas.
Are there some well failures? Possibly. Is fracking the problem that is asserted by the enviro nuts? No. Far too often this is just anti-drilling hysteria.
Example is the argument over fracking in Denton, TX. A petition was presented requiring the city council to put an anti-fracking law on next city election cycle. This arose because a driller was drilling on a well site that existed before a subdivision was built. The noise aggravated the people who bought in the subdivision, KNOWING THE DRILLING WAS PRESENT. So the residents presented the petition as an anti-fracking petition, when the problem was not fracking but the drilling itself. And the Luddites in town signed onto the petition not really understanding what was actually driving the petition. There has not been any water table damage, no well contamination.
Don't jump onto something because some advocacy group says 'it is for the kids' etc. Far too often there are other things driving the advocacy group.
Can you provide a source? Otherwise, it is an opinion of little value.
It’s easy to focus on flammable drinking water as a danger with so many wells now close to the areas of oil/natural gas fracking operations. There may be issues where misinformation and false statements are made pertaining to fracking. Possible fraud of flammable water news in ND doesn’t support or take away from all of the “other” valid news information of locations across the country where fracking issues are reported. There are many reports coming from NY, PA, TX, OK and WY that are appear to be valid truthful documented cases of contaminated wells.
If you remove the topic of methane gas and flames from the discussion here there still remains the numerous toxic (nonflammable) chemicals that appear in the drinking water in so many areas and different states.
There is still the continued issue of water well contamination with toxic chemicals that are used in fracking that cannot be explained away?
Trying to stay on topic, the southwest part of the country is having a water shortage.
Fracking Victim Sued for Defamation After Proving Drinking Water Flammable
Quote:
In a culture where the oil and gas industry spends millions on PR campaigns and hires representatives with military backgrounds in psychological operations to intimidate private citizens, where regulatory agencies and scientists risk harassment when their results are not ’industry friendly’, where lawyers don’t want to take on clients who have cases against industry for fear of losing business with energy producers, and where industry campaign contributions taint politicians and judges all the way up the ladder, how many people will fight back as staunchly as Steve Lipsky has?
What is ironic about this subject matter is we've had more than 2" of rain this past week with standing water in puddles here in the high desert. Hopefully, we'll get buried in snow this Winter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.