Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 07-04-2013, 12:45 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 11,022,030 times
Reputation: 6192

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
The EPA, for some reason, did not complete their study of this.

EPA refuses to finalize study blaming fracking for water pollution ? RT USA
Refuses?? They spent a ton of money and time trying to find 'evidence' that simply did not exist. Seriously, you are not going to win this because fracking, a practice which has been around for over 40 years, does not cause groundwater contamination. When the most aggressive EPA in modern times desperately wanted to find evidence and was not able to do so, that should have been a sign for you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-04-2013, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,808,661 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
Um, methane occurs naturally and is not the result of fracking. Something else proven by the EPA.

Methane study, EPA debunk claims of water pollution, climate change from fracking - Washington Times

Not in much higher than normal levels!

Quote:
Methane can occur naturally in the area (that’s what draws frackers there). But the researchers’ study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, concludes that levels of the gas were far higher in drinking water wells located close to fracking operations than in other areas.
Study links fracking to drinking water pollution | Grist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 11,022,030 times
Reputation: 6192
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Not in much higher than normal levels!

Study links fracking to drinking water pollution | Grist
I've given the evidence and even though it's there in black and white, supported by the EPA, you continue to choose to ignore it. This is your personal issue for you to work out because the EPA - they've already found out what I've shown - that fracking does not contaminate groundwater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 12:58 PM
 
563 posts, read 807,256 times
Reputation: 339
As long as fracking occurs in areas devoid of residences and water aquifers, I see not much else reason to object.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Staten Island, NY
6,476 posts, read 7,322,267 times
Reputation: 7026
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Drink beer.
Problem solved!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 11,022,030 times
Reputation: 6192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavaturaccioli View Post
Problem solved!
I'm with y'all!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 01:28 PM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,941,561 times
Reputation: 2385
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
Did you read the article I cited? I ask because your examples was where the EPA tried to find groundwater contamination and was unable. So, again - even the EPA, no matter how much they want it to be true, cannot find that fracking contaminates groundwater.

ETA: Hey, look at it this way, the Hollywood celebrities - most of whom couldn't pass a high school chemistry course - say fracking is bad so CLEARLY it must be.
I dont know about groundwater, but I do know that here in Texas, the fracking process uses a whole hell of a lot of sweet water to frack...water Texans need for irrigation, manufacturing, and potable consumption...

I you can point me to any link that shows that we can reclaim contaminated sweet water for our daily use...Im on board 100%.

I dont know how the water issues are in SC, but down here in Texas we don't have an unlimited supply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,808,661 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
I've given the evidence and even though it's there in black and white, supported by the EPA, you continue to choose to ignore it. This is your personal issue for you to work out because the EPA - they've already found out what I've shown - that fracking does not contaminate groundwater.
And I have supplied studies to the contrary. You only want to believe what you want to believe. Did you once believe that there was no link to smoking and lung cancer also?

Here is what was also found:

Quote:
The two simplest explanations for the higher dissolved gas concentrations that we observed in drinking water are (i) faulty or inadequate steel casings, which are designed to keep the gas and any water inside the well from leaking into the environment, and (ii) imperfections in the cement sealing of the annulus or gaps between casings and rock that keep fluids from moving up the outside of the well.

In 2010, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued 90 violations for faulty casing and cementing on 64 Marcellus shale gas wells; 119 similar violations were issued in 2011.
Study links fracking to drinking water pollution | Grist

Gas companies are about as concerned for our best interest as tobacco companies are!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 01:34 PM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,827 posts, read 6,934,706 times
Reputation: 3416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones View Post
I dont know about groundwater, but I do know that here in Texas, the fracking process uses a whole hell of a lot of sweet water to frack...water Texans need for irrigation, manufacturing, and potable consumption...

I you can point me to any link that shows that we can reclaim contaminated sweet water for our daily use...Im on board 100%.

I dont know how the water issues are in SC, but down here in Texas we don't have an unlimited supply.
Most of the water used is brackish water.... Non potable water here in Texas..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2013, 01:34 PM
 
4,278 posts, read 5,176,768 times
Reputation: 2375
Fracking has been around since the late 1940's and has proven to be very safe. As much as the Left tries, fracking works very well and will do a great deal to get us away from Middle East oil.
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:


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top