Fracking, what will this do to the future of no only animals but people too

huntsem said:
Thornton I'm wondering if you work for or have investments in Oil & Gas...
Click to expand...

Yes....in fact, many folks have their investments, pension funds, et al in O&G.
Some likely do not even realize it.

Huntsem, I'm sure that your spinning and parsing of info, addressing apples as oranges and jousting with big windmills issues you some pride and is comforting to you.
But, as I noted, you are missing the real present and future problems re these hydrocarbon plays in favor of the faddish and the environmentally fashionable....and often, the flat-out wrong.
Often happens to folks who are very impressionable with computer access.
Enjoy your surfing....and the siesta.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I figured something like that. No this doubt lends to the pompous ridiculing comments and tunneled vision. I expect if you owned and lived on a ranch that's been in your family for generations and you nor your animals could no longer drink the water resource due to nearby fracking operations you might change your tune...but then again maybe not, money has a way of intensely clouding a person's vision.


*
 
Last edited:
huntsem said:
Yes, I figured something like that. No this doubt lends to the pompous ridiculing comments and tunneled vision. I expect if you owned and lived on a ranch that's been in your family for generations and you nor your animals could any longer drink the water resource due to nearby fracking operations you might change your tune...but then again maybe not, money has a way of intensely clouding a person's vision.


*
Click to expand...


What I ridicule is the profound lack of thought evident in the skimming of issues for points to push by the environmental(or anti-environment, actually) soldiers....correctly pushed being obviously unimportant compared to the shove in Big Whatever's back.
I reckon that reading the same plucked and pimped info posted as reality on numerous boards in order to spread the artificially-created angst does lead me to occasionally expressing a counter thought based in actual experience and a concern for where the O&G related issues truly reside.....that not being with hydraulic fracturing of a producing zone.

Surface water quality has been an issue for a long time and, as I noted earlier, is a problem with any of these latest Plays. ;) Much the same problems as shallow water pollution in Iowa from Big Ag which renders "city water" more and more wise in more and more places.
I know...not what you wanted to hear....it appears easiest to assume a Them vs. Us mentality or that "Them" really don't care.
Only seeing one side to an issue or only black vs. white is a sign of immaturity....we need to be more mature and therefore wiser with any of these or future threats to air, ground, water and well beyond.
We do not need to separate into Shirts and Skins and play some silly game of ignore those who do not know the handshake.

You easily switch your comments from Pennsylvania to western ranches with the ease discovered by avoiding that which is uncomfortable to realize or inconvenient to accept.
An old story that and a sad one for the lack of solutions it renders available to the problems that evermore come OUR way.
Money can indeed cloud a vision...as can eyes made starry from imagining a large green "E" on the chest and a fluttering cape on the back.

The problem is not when enviro younkers post tripe, as blind hogs can always stumble upon an important akern....the problem is when the younkers believe their tripe or shut their eyes to learning.
Personally, I've better things to do these days then play the games of children....the woods are beginning to be littered with fallen leaves.
 
Last edited:
Thornton,

To ridicule those who point out the environmental damages from and greater need for monitoring the fracking industry is a pretty sad and lopsided commentary no matter how you tell it. Adding personal insults and ridicule all the more weaken the argument. Some of these effects from fracking and the waste disposal have long term, far reaching effects and we are in the early stages of an industry that has been pushing ahead at a far faster pace than the science regarding these effects has been able to keep up with. The desperate desire for Gas and Oil is not a reasonable justification for blindly going forward without proper monitoring and practice. To report and discuss these problems is actually a smart idea.



*
 
Last edited:
huntsem said:
Thornton,

To ridicule those who point out the environmental damages from and greater need for monitoring the fracking industry is a pretty sad and lopsided commentary now matter how you tell it. Adding personal insults and ridicule all the more weaken the argument. Some of these effects from fracking and the waste disposal have long term, far reaching effects and we are in the early stages of an industry that has been pushing ahead at a far faster pace than the science regarding these effects has been able to keep up with. The desperate desire for Gas and Oil is not a reasonable justification for blindly going forward without proper monitoring and practice. To report and discuss these problems is actually a smart idea.
Click to expand...

I have publically pointed out the need for monitoring and holding industrial feet to the fire....many times.
Also, expressing concern through all phases of a well, producing or not.....any concern does not begin and end with the fracture treatment...no matter how popular a buzz word "fracking" is at the moment.
At the base, you are clueless as to the realities and actual concerns in all phases of oil and gas production.
That is apart from the false fear of hydraulic fracturing treatments in the Bakken or the Berea; the ignorance of shallow gas present in water zones well before the first O&G well was ever drilled; the promoting of the false science of the agendized environmental loons and on and on.

As to trying to hang any "desperate desire" tag....that may have been implied by others...not by me.
I believe there to always be a need to look fairly and honestly at any development cloaked as Progress....production of hydrocarbons on or offshore(I detest the "Drill, baby drill" BS so popular with your counterparts across the aisle), a ski resort or a 4-lane slapped through a family farm.
The difference for me is that I do not hate Big Anything; I have enough experience to understand that any extreme is a p-poor goal and cherry-picking the Internet is the sign of a short-roller.

Huntsem, you try to take the high road now, naturally, but your manner of spinning and parsing is clearly found on the lowest road as you've posted the same far too many times in too many places.
The smartest idea leading to making good decisions is to not assume as blindly and narrowly as you apparently find so comfortable.
Nice back pedal but your attitude and words illustrate a different truth than that which you promote.

Now, on to the leaf litter and cold noses a-twitch.
 
Last edited:
"The US Department of Energy calculates that fracking requires 0.6 to 6.0 gallons of fresh or brackish water per million Btu of energy produced. By comparison, corn-based ethanol requires 2,500 to 29,000 gallons of fresh water per million Btu of energy-and biodiesel from soybeans consumes an astounding and unsustainable 14,000 to 75,000 gallons of water per million Btu!" -from an article by Paul Driessen.

"We are already plowing an area bigger than Iowa to grow corn for ethanol-millions of acres that could be food crops or wildlife habitat" - from an article by Paul Driessen.

Without government subsidies for ethanol, bio-fuel, solar and wind energy how many more acres would be available for the working middle income hunter?
 
Fresh water used for fracking in most cases ends up being contaminated and so that waste water gets pumped thousands of feet underground with the intention that it never returns to the water cycle but fresh water used for agriculture does return to the fresh water life cycle. I'm really not much of a proponent of ethanol production from crops as it implicates so many other environmental problems too.

Here's an interesting recent pro and con article on the issue of fracking;
Fracking Pro & Con
 
Dog Gun Time said:
Without government subsidies for ethanol, bio-fuel, solar and wind energy how many more acres would be available for the working middle income hunter?
Click to expand...

A crap load!

40% of the US Corn crop is made into ethanol currently and that number will be increasing by law. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-110hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-110hr6enr.pdf
By 2015 15 Billion gallons of ethanol will have to be mixed into the gasoline supply.

You can get roughly 300 gals of ethanol per acre from corn. Do the math on how many acres of corn that will mean will have to be grown - by law.

It's stupid. It's hubris to believe that central planning can make the correct decisions or even decisions that are better than the collective action of 300 million consumers.
 
AtTheMurph said:
A crap load!

40% of the US Corn crop is made into ethanol currently and that number will be increasing by law. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-110hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-110hr6enr.pdf
By 2015 15 Billion gallons of ethanol will have to be mixed into the gasoline supply.

You can get roughly 300 gals of ethanol per acre from corn. Do the math on how many acres of corn that will mean will have to be grown - by law.

It's stupid. It's hubris to believe that central planning can make the correct decisions or even decisions that are better than the collective action of 300 million consumers.
Click to expand...


And sadly I hear that corn is one of the worst things to make it out of, switch grass in much easier and more efficient I have read but ADM does not deal in switch grass and the seed companies don't like it you only plant it once, or chemical companies cause it chokes out most of it own weeds for harvest!! How many more places to hunt if all that corn were grass!! :cheers:
 
A friend of mine was talking a few years back about how much per acre the CRP can be turned into ethonal.
The only thing i know is my atv's have been fowling plugs lie crazy since they started putting that crap in gasoline.
 
thornton said:
Well, I won't really prove you wrong as to the timeline of hydraulic fracturing but perhaps you are generalizing incorrectly a bit re oil in a way that can have the information misunderstood and then repeated incorrectly.
Any parroting of 1+1=3 is never good and is exactly how some of this silly, fear-mongering blather like "3rd eyes" re fracture treatments gets spread about the Internet town like firewood on a wagon.
We as a country need truth to win out, independent of the side the truth lies.

Truth is, hydraulic fracture treatments in oil producing zones are quite common across the country as a way to introduce proppants to created fractures in a producing zone. Some areas even use crude oil as the fracturing fluid itself, as opposed to gelled water or whatever.

As I implied previously, there are negatives and positives associated with any boom and this latest Bakken, Marcellus or Utica Play is not without either....in the Present or the Future....and affecting Man, Critter and the Land.
No need to go through that again.
However, there is always a need to understand where the legitimate concerns should lie.
It is a shame to see that need so often go wanting.
Click to expand...

Well what is your concern. You prove nothing. Epa and others can't prove it, so what are you saying?
 
I earlier stated some circumstances where I place concern re the latest Plays, from the Baaken to the Marcellus..."you're not paying attention?", as Phil said to Bing.
There can indeed be negatives, there is with any industry or Boom and there always will be....not particularly with the actual process of fracturing itself, though accidents will also always be on any horizon.
"edited"...not worth the key taps for the monger mention.

You earlier stated that hydraulic fracturing had nothing to do with oil production...I disagree.

Not sure what you mean by the EPA mention....I hold the present and recent past EPA heads in very low regard.
Yes, I am a Friend of Coal.:thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Why worry about, I will be sixty next year, at the way I am going, energy will be around for my lifetime, let the next generation solve it. As long as my investments are secured and poisonous air won't give cancer or emphysima, I don't drink water now, before something else gets me. All this frankenhieser system, or coal burning, the next generation will pay the cost, afterall, we don't owe them anything, do we?
 
oldandnew said:
Why worry about, I will be sixty next year, at the way I am going, energy will be around for my lifetime, let the next generation solve it. As long as my investments are secured and poisonous air won't give cancer or emphysima, I don't drink water now, before something else gets me. All this frankenhieser system, or coal burning, the next generation will pay the cost, afterall, we don't owe them anything, do we?
Click to expand...

As a start, we owe the next generation a future built upon facts, not fables, re energy search; we owe them a Life that is not saddled with debts from poor decisions based upon impractical ideas and, we owe the next generation to simply exhibit more commonsense and less political showmanship than God gave to a spavined goat.

At 61 now, I have seen short-rolling, agenda-blinded complainers enough to make me sick....w/o drinking or eating or breathing.
If we are not prudent in viewing what cherry-picked Internet tripe is pushed upon us or if we fall further to a Them vs. Us mentality regarding all things, then the extremists on each side of Big Coal, Big Environment or Big Whatever are sure to prevail and that will be the real downfall of this country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top