U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-31-2014, 03:32 AM
 
Location: the Permian Basin
4,183 posts, read 3,046,939 times
Reputation: 5862

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bspray View Post
I will say that at some point, fuel for our vehicles is going to be a lot less important than water to drink once the bulk of the water is toxic.
The OP is deliberately spreading false information.

The bulk (97%) of Earth's water is ocean water - salty, but non-toxic. Lakes only account for 0.00783% of Earth's water.


Energy companies don't use lake water. They buy groundwater (which is 0.903% of Earth's water).

Frac operators and third-party environmental companies have the technology to recycle frac water, so that it can be reused in future frac jobs. Some frac companies don't use water at all. They use gelled LPG instead. But these technologies and methods are very costly.

If if were less expensive to use waterless or recycled-water frac methods, there would be a mind-blowing reduction in the amount of groundwater pumped for use in frac jobs. Allowing companies to write off the cost of these methods would make groundwater the least attractive - and least used - method of getting a frac job done. But unless there is an overwhelming show of public support for such a measure, Congress won't do anything to encourage alternatives to groundwater pumping.





http://www.pacificwater.org/userfile...arthswater.gif
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-31-2014, 05:48 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
1,251 posts, read 1,748,546 times
Reputation: 1355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
The OP is deliberately spreading false information.

The bulk (97%) of Earth's water is ocean water - salty, but non-toxic. Lakes only account for 0.00783% of Earth's water.


Energy companies don't use lake water. They buy groundwater (which is 0.903% of Earth's water).

Frac operators and third-party environmental companies have the technology to recycle frac water, so that it can be reused in future frac jobs. Some frac companies don't use water at all. They use gelled LPG instead. But these technologies and methods are very costly.

If if were less expensive to use waterless or recycled-water frac methods, there would be a mind-blowing reduction in the amount of groundwater pumped for use in frac jobs. Allowing companies to write off the cost of these methods would make groundwater the least attractive - and least used - method of getting a frac job done. But unless there is an overwhelming show of public support for such a measure, Congress won't do anything to encourage alternatives to groundwater pumping.





http://www.pacificwater.org/userfile...arthswater.gif
What a lesson!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 07:36 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
3,725 posts, read 3,827,008 times
Reputation: 3155
Quote:
Originally Posted by majormadmax View Post
It's ironic that with all this arguing about Medina Lake that no one has addressed the real cause of its current state, that being the over-development of that part of San Antonio.

I was out on 471 yesterday and amazed at the new housing and apartments that are sprouting up all over the place. Where do you think the water is going to come from for all these new residents? People complain about the traffic situation, but they should be more worried about where we are going to get our drinking water in the future. A human can go for more than three weeks without food, but the maximum time an individual can go without water under absolutely perfect conditions would be several days and in some cases a week; but that would certainly be a lot shorter in difficult conditions, like broiling heat.

So tell me again how important it is to have a green lawn?

Illegal watering should be a $1000 fine for the first offense, and double that for every subsequent violation. It's the only way these idiots who are wasting our limited water supply to keep their grass green will learn!
Wrong.

Quote:
Medina Lake was constructed between 1911-1912 as an irrigation reservoir. An extensive canal system delivers water to 34,000 acres of blackland prairie farmlands below the Balcones escarpment around Castroville, La Coste, Natalia, and Devine. Portions of the canal extend to urban San Antonio, just outside Loop 1604. At the time it was constructed, it was the biggest irrigation project west of the Mississippi. At spillway capacity, Medina Lake covers about 5,575 acres, has a length of 18 miles, a maximum width of three miles, 110 miles of shoreline, and a storage capacity of 254,823 acre-feet. In addition to the main dam, there is a smaller dam about four miles downstream that creates Diversion Lake, from which discharges are made to the canal system.
Medina Lake and Canal System
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 08:04 AM
 
Location: Brentwood
818 posts, read 979,819 times
Reputation: 1380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
The OP is deliberately spreading false information.

The bulk (97%) of Earth's water is ocean water - salty, but non-toxic. Lakes only account for 0.00783% of Earth's water.


Energy companies don't use lake water. They buy groundwater (which is 0.903% of Earth's water).

Frac operators and third-party environmental companies have the technology to recycle frac water, so that it can be reused in future frac jobs. Some frac companies don't use water at all. They use gelled LPG instead. But these technologies and methods are very costly.

If if were less expensive to use waterless or recycled-water frac methods, there would be a mind-blowing reduction in the amount of groundwater pumped for use in frac jobs. Allowing companies to write off the cost of these methods would make groundwater the least attractive - and least used - method of getting a frac job done. But unless there is an overwhelming show of public support for such a measure, Congress won't do anything to encourage alternatives to groundwater pumping.





http://www.pacificwater.org/userfile...arthswater.gif
What false information am I spreading? Fracking uses fresh water. More than 260 billion gallons from Texas just last year. Texas is in a severe drought for it's 3rd straight year and there is no end in sight. Where have I said anything other than that? Every bit of what I said is true.

What difference does it make if some fracking efforts don't use water? Most do and you know it.

Obviously if it were less expensive to go waterless, the fracking companies would. It's not, so they won't. They will continue wasting billions of gallons of fresh water in Texas so billionaires can get even richer and people can save pennies on fuel.

There is absolutely zero effort being made to actually recycle toxic water caused by fracking. Who cares if the technology exists, they're never going to do it because it would cost too much. Even if fracking companies did decide to try and get 'mildly' conscious of the environment, would you drink water that had been toxic but is now certified as drinkable by the fracking industry? If you say yes, you are full of crap and you know it.

You clearly have a vested interest in fracking. Coming on here and presenting a bunch of irrelevant information to try and make fracking companies look less destructive to the environment than they are is ridiculously futile. That effort would be similar to a lobbyist for big government coming in here, linking to an irrelevant pie chart and saying that there is no fraud or waste of tax dollars in the government because they have a colorful pie chart. You're not going to convince even the most brain dead readers on this forum that fracking isn't killing the environment AND wasting billions of gallons of water annually.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 10:23 AM
 
117 posts, read 131,785 times
Reputation: 218
I guess all the property and sales tax paid by people who work in the industry only benefits billionaires too?

Small businesses and restaurants don't benefit at all.

Wait staff must send their tips directly to billionaires.


I've never understood why people who are against something think the best way to convince other people of their point of view to is purposefully be so extremist and reactionary as to cause no one else to ever listen to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 01:29 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
11,927 posts, read 12,785,523 times
Reputation: 17166
I thought the tittle was Medina Lake...😏
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 05:15 PM
 
5,609 posts, read 6,389,579 times
Reputation: 3585
Quote:
Originally Posted by geargrinder70 View Post
So is being off topic. I do believe the original topic was Medina Lake not fracking.
Did you read the first post in this thread by OP? Fracking was mentioned there. OP asked how does fracking affect the area when we are in a drought.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 05:43 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
243 posts, read 282,215 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure110 View Post
Did you read the first post in this thread by OP? Fracking was mentioned there. OP asked how does fracking affect the area when we are in a drought.
The diatribes about fracking have gone way past the question in the the OP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 06:01 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
11,927 posts, read 12,785,523 times
Reputation: 17166
Quote:
Originally Posted by geargrinder70 View Post
The diatribes about fracking have gone way past the question in the the OP.
Can't argue with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2014, 08:25 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,081,622 times
Reputation: 4435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure110 View Post
Did you read the first post in this thread by OP? Fracking was mentioned there. OP asked how does fracking affect the area when we are in a drought.
But fracking has nothing to do with the low water level of Medina Lake, the topic of discussion. There are other threads on fracking that would benefit from the comments posted here; but this one should stay focused on why the water level has reached such a low point.

Again, as previously stated, the creation of Medina Lake was not the best idea in the first place but knowing the large network of irrigation canals that were a part of that system to help farmers in Medina, Bexar, and Atascosa counties. A good history of the lake can be found at The Handbook of Texas Online:

MEDINA LAKE | The Handbook of Texas Online| Texas State Historical Association (TSHA)

Here is a map of the irrigation network from Edwards Aquifer website (the best source of information on the lake, dam and canals!):



As you can see from this graph from the same source, the level of the lake has fluctuated greatly over the last 100 years...



And even moreso, over the past decade...



Bottom line: We need to quit wasting water just to have green grass (and any HOA that requires it should be sued by the state!) and start praying for a lot of rain!

Cheers! M2
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top