Interesting article.

Livestock falling ill in fracking regions - Open Channel (http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/29/15547283-livestock-falling-ill-in-fracking-regions?lite)

That is interesting... Never know what effect you'll get when you start spreading chemicals around.

Stop believing these lies! They have been frac'ing in Oklahoma for 60 years and we have never had these issues. The liberal media and environmentalists are telling lies to stop progress. Do your own studies! Frac'ing uses 98% water and very few chemicals.

This is part of why the media gets a bad name and shows how they take one or 2 problems out of a million and sensationalize it.
But gullible people still swallow it.

Trains kill far more farm animals but you never hear about any effort to ban or restrict trains over the animals they kill.
Things that cause us to be a less prospers nation only weaken us…..
It’s becoming increasingly clear that a weaker nation is exactly what some of these people want and the gullible believe their lies.

http://www.oerb.com/Portals/0/docs/OERB%20What%20is%20in%20Hydraulic%20Fracturing%20F luid.pdf

I am not in favor of poisoning animals, plants, and people but we need to be smart about how we address these issues. It is highly unlikely (next to 0% chance) hydraulic fracturing is responsible for most of problems that are often attributed to the process. This technology is a large component, along with conservation and efficiency, of what will enable the US to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources. Constantly blaming the energy companies for the slightest problem in these locations is counterproductive and merely obscures the true cause. Furthermore, hydraulic fracturing is what has made huge expanses of land viable for energy resource development and enabled us to NOT drill in national parks and wildlife refuges. I hope the conservationists would objectively look at the benefits of this process rather than blindly casting blame. I think the energy companies have done a pretty good job minimizing the impact of drilling on the environment while recovering resources that benefit all of us.

Stop believing these lies! They have been frac'ing in Oklahoma for 60 years and we have never had these issues. The liberal media and environmentalists are telling lies to stop progress. Do your own studies! Frac'ing uses 98% water and very few chemicals.

Ahhhh, yes, a New York veterinarian, a professor of molecular medicine at Cornell, and a peer-reviewed journal are all lie-spreading, liberal whackos that brainwashed NBC into reporting this story.

I make my living as an environmental scientist for a civil engineering firm. Part of my work entails taking groundwater and soil samples, putting them in jars, and sending them off to a laboratory for analysis. I've done this for more than one drill site. I've also done this for property adjacent to drill sites, where the adjacent land owner wants to sell the property, and the prospective landowner's lender won't give a loan until subsurface testing has been completed. And I've seen sites where VOCs and solvents were found in concentrations far exceeding regulatory thresholds...sites that were formerly used as nothing more than agricultural purposes for the past 80 years.

To say the process is foolproof with regards to contaminants that pose health risks to humans/animals is absurd. Yes, the fracking process generally relies upon solutions that are comprised of 98% water. But it also uses solvents and petroleum hydrocarbons that, when encountered in concentrations of a few parts per million, are toxic. The EPA Region 3 carcinogenic tapwater threshold for naphthalene, for instance, is 0.00014 mg/L. It is very possible (and likely) that cattle or other livestock drinking from a stock pond that has been fed by fracking fluid runoff or eating plants that have been contaminated with fracking fluids could fall ill or die.

Does anyone know is drillers are required to take before and after samples of ground water at these sites? It makes sense to me but I don't know for sure. I do not doubt there are some cases of ground water contamination, but I do not think it is as common as some sources claim.

The article cited isn't anything to base a serious theory on - it admits it hasn't made the correlation between the death of the animals and the fracking. It doesn't amount to much more than someone's theory based on incomplete data collected in uncontrolled and incomplete circumstances. That being said, it would make sense, to me, to have a real study done in a controlled, scientific manner to obtain information that is scientifically valid. This is an important issue.

Problem is, this whole anti fracking movement blames everything on fracking from animal deaths to earthquakes. It isn't serious absent much better data. There have been similar claims about the deaths and deformations of livestock in close proximity to wind farms and in those circumstances, they've laid the blame at the stress caused by the sound. If we haven't had widespread deaths of wild animals who also drink from the farm tanks, I'd be skeptical that the deaths of the animals are caused by that. I'm not saying the fracking isn't causing it because I have no idea. And they don't, either. I wish they'd do a real study.

The hydraulic fracking process is supposed to be regulated through the EPA via the Safe Water Drinking Act of 1974. The EPA delegates power to the states to administer the Underground Injection Control program, which regulates the subsurface emplacement of fluid. However, due to language added by the Energy Policy Act in 2005, hydraulic fracturing operations for the purpose of oil and gas are exempt.

You can view a list of Oklahoma's few UIC permits here:

UIC Permits (http://www.deq.state.ok.us/lpdnew/UIC/UIC.html)

The article cited isn't anything to base a serious theory on - it admits it hasn't made the correlation between the death of the animals and the fracking. It doesn't amount to much more than someone's theory based on incomplete data collected in uncontrolled and incomplete circumstances. That being said, it would make sense, to me, to have a real study done in a controlled, scientific manner to obtain information that is scientifically valid. This is an important issue.

Problem is, this whole anti fracking movement blames everything on fracking from animal deaths to earthquakes. It isn't serious absent much better data. There have been similar claims about the deaths and deformations of livestock in close proximity to wind farms and in those circumstances, they've laid the blame at the stress caused by the sound. If we haven't had widespread deaths of wild animals who also drink from the farm tanks, I'd be skeptical that the deaths of the animals are caused by that. I'm not saying the fracking isn't causing it because I have no idea. And they don't, either. I wish they'd do a real study.
Panic and fear is rarely rooted in fact...

Like everything else these days this devolves into partisan politics where there is no truth just uninformed pundits sticking in there two cents on subjects they lack any qualifications to speak intelligently about. I have no clue about the dangers of frackintg but I do know regardless of the truth we'll get one side telling us one thing and the other side telling us the opposite. What can you do?

Like everything else these days this devolves into partisan politics where there is no truth just uninformed pundits sticking in there two cents on subjects they lack any qualifications to speak intelligently about. I have no clue about the dangers of frackintg but I do know regardless of the truth we'll get one side telling us one thing and the other side telling us the opposite. What can you do?

Pick up your guitar and play . . . just like yesterday . . . and hope we don't get fooled again?

What can you do?

Look at the over 60 years of evidence with over one million fracturing jobs done just in the USA with very few problems, most of which were not very serious.

I’m far more worried about blowing dirt.

Panic and fear is rarely rooted in fact...

I am a strong advocate for severely penalizing a company when they willfully, or negligently, cause harm to the environment and/or people who reside in areas affected by their company's activities. But there really is not enough evidence, or even number of incidents, to indict energy companies who safely extract hydrocarbons from the earth in an environmentally sensitive manner. The development of that technique has yielded benefits that most people are not aware of much less understand. I am not a drilling expert nor do I work for one of the OKC based energy companies, but they seem to be good stewards of the land where the operate. I think hydraulic fracturing gets a bad rap purely from misunderstandings about the process. If anything, I could understand asking some questions if earthquakes suddenly become common or more intense in areas where this procedure is done.

Interesting article.

Livestock falling ill in fracking regions - Open Channel (http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/29/15547283-livestock-falling-ill-in-fracking-regions?lite)

So . . . Just out of curiosity--of the non-axegrinding/socio.political-economic kind--is it possible that Vegan Vegans and/or Masonic Illuminati Bilderburgers got tired of CropCircles/CowTipping/CattleMutilation and decided to Celebrate December 22 on The Mayan Calendar?

It makes as much sense as the preceeding bullstuff . . .
Doesn't it?

(really: it's the contrails . . .)

This is part of why the media gets a bad name and shows how they take one or 2 problems out of a million and sensationalize it.
But gullible people still swallow it.

Most of the fracing concerns are in the "potential concern" category, but there are places with legitimate fracing related problems. You'd be correct to assert that a well properly sealed isn't really an environmental threat. From what I'm reading, the big concern is that many abandoned wells never were sealed and that fracing chemicals and brine and methane and such are able to seep into the water supply in unsealed wells. That's actually a pretty valid concern seeing as there are hundreds of thousands of abandoned well sites out there.


Trains kill far more farm animals but you never hear about any effort to ban or restrict trains over the animals they kill.
Things that cause us to be a less prospers nation only weaken us…..
It’s becoming increasingly clear that a weaker nation is exactly what some of these people want and the gullible believe their lies.

You win worst analogy of the day award. We don't care much about trains killing a few farm animals because as a result, trains don't potentially enter the food supply.

What's also of concern is the immediate rush to defend the industry despite knowing there are some real concerns out there. I'm also concerned about some of the pro-industry blogs which are basically in the same camp as the folks who used to tell us to smoke for our health. Acknowledge and deal with the safety concerns in your industry. They're very real. I believe one of the reasons we haven't had too many issues here in Oklahoma is because of our local industry and government working together to make sure abandoned wells get sealed properly. That apparently doesn't happen everywhere else and mistakes will be made.

Most of the fracing concerns are in the "potential concern" category, but there are places with legitimate fracing related problems. You'd be correct to assert that a well properly sealed isn't really an environmental threat. From what I'm reading, the big concern is that many abandoned wells never were sealed and that fracing chemicals and brine and methane and such are able to seep into the water supply in unsealed wells. That's actually a pretty valid concern seeing as there are hundreds of thousands of abandoned well sites out there.



You win worst analogy of the day award. We don't care much about trains killing a few farm animals because as a result, trains don't potentially enter the food supply.

What's also of concern is the immediate rush to defend the industry despite knowing there are some real concerns out there. I'm also concerned about some of the pro-industry blogs which are basically in the same camp as the folks who used to tell us to smoke for our health. Acknowledge and deal with the safety concerns in your industry. They're very real. I believe one of the reasons we haven't had too many issues here in Oklahoma is because of our local industry and government working together to make sure abandoned wells get sealed properly. That apparently doesn't happen everywhere else and mistakes will be made.

Wells have been sealed with cement for the past several decades. Old wells that were drilled before this became industry standard are being plugged and in most cases it’s being funded by the industry, including associated clean up. Most states now have a program to plug abandon wells.
Except for one or 2 cases new fracturing just isn’t a threat to cause problems.


Trains spill chemicals that enter the environment all the time, yet environmentalist oppose pipelines that are statically safer for the environment and cheaper for the consumer. Your indignation should start with the environmentalist who actually make pollution more likely and drive up the cost of consumer goods and help make people poorer.

The opponents of fracturing / well completion are really like dealing with a bunch of conspiracy freaks that are driven more by a kooky ideology than anything else. They are not really worth time of response.

Wells have been sealed with cement for the past several decades. Old wells that were drilled before this became industry standard are being plugged and in most cases it’s being funded by the industry, including associated clean up. Most states now have a program to plug abandon wells.
Except for one or 2 cases new fracturing just isn’t a threat to cause problems.

But at least you acknowledge that old unplugged wells are a problem and while the industry is addressing them, you can never rule out that there's some unplugged well near a fracing site and it can allow some chemicals to get into the water supply. It's unlikely and it hasn't happened very many times at all, but it's possible. That's where I get upset at sites (obvious industry astroturf situations) make silly claims like fracing has "never" caused water supply contamination or that it's impossible.

You're right in saying that environmentalists acting as if this is commonplace are just being ridiculous and are ultimately harming their own cause. Just be honest with the public. There are some issues, but the upside of fracing is bigger than the downside.



Trains spill chemicals that enter the environment all the time, yet environmentalist oppose pipelines that are statically safer for the environment and cheaper for the consumer. Your indignation should start with the environmentalist who actually make pollution more likely and drive up the cost of consumer goods and help make people poorer.

The opponents of fracturing / well completion are really like dealing with a bunch of conspiracy freaks that are driven more by a kooky ideology than anything else. They are not really worth time of response.[/QUOTE]

But at least you acknowledge that old unplugged wells are a problem and while the industry is addressing them, you can never rule out that there's some unplugged well near a fracing site and it can allow some chemicals to get into the water supply. It's unlikely and it hasn't happened very many times at all, but it's possible. That's where I get upset at sites (obvious industry astroturf situations) make silly claims like fracing has "never" caused water supply contamination or that it's impossible.

You're right in saying that environmentalists acting as if this is commonplace are just being ridiculous and are ultimately harming their own cause. Just be honest with the public. There are some issues, but the upside of fracing is bigger than the downside.



Trains spill chemicals that enter the environment all the time, yet environmentalist oppose pipelines that are statically safer for the environment and cheaper for the consumer. Your indignation should start with the environmentalist who actually make pollution more likely and drive up the cost of consumer goods and help make people poorer.

The opponents of fracturing / well completion are really like dealing with a bunch of conspiracy freaks that are driven more by a kooky ideology than anything else. They are not really worth time of response.

It must be understand that vitually all unplugged wells were abandon long before fracturing was ever done. Factoring was not the cause of these problems.

In some cases there are no records of the wells at all. Some wells were drilled even before statehood. Like almost everything else things are done in better and smarter ways today than 100 years ago.

It must be understand that vitually all unplugged wells were abandon long before fracturing was ever done. Factoring was not the cause of these problems.

In some cases there are no records of the wells at all. Some wells were drilled even before statehood. Like almost everything else things are done in better and smarter ways today than 100 years ago.

I'm not saying your companies are culpable for wells being unplugged, but they are a factor environmentally that you can't just overlook because it's an inconvenient fact. Oklahoma is pretty good about plugging those things, other states, not so much. They are in fact an actual danger. Saying the danger doesn't exist is disingenuous.

I'm not saying your companies are culpable for wells being unplugged, but they are a factor environmentally that you can't just overlook because it's an inconvenient fact. Oklahoma is pretty good about plugging those things, other states, not so much. They are in fact an actual danger. Saying the danger doesn't exist is disingenuous.

But this is 2 different issues.

But this is 2 different issues.

Not really, I'd even think it reasonable to speculate that most of these fracing (is that the right spelling?) groundwater contamination cases are caused by unsealed wells and that the drillers really aren't at fault and did nothing wrong. That's probably of little comfort to the family who now has to have its water trucked in and kept in outside storage tanks though.

I agree with you, environmentalists who say fracing *by itself* causes these sorts of issues are for the most part full of it. It may have happened, but considering the depths involved, it seems really unlikely.

Not really, I'd even think it reasonable to speculate that most of these fracing (is that the right spelling?) groundwater contamination cases are caused by unsealed wells and that the drillers really aren't at fault and did nothing wrong. That's probably of little comfort to the family who now has to have its water trucked in and kept in outside storage tanks though.

I agree with you, environmentalists who say fracing *by itself* causes these sorts of issues are for the most part full of it. It may have happened, but considering the depths involved, it seems really unlikely.

It is 2 different issues because it’s 2 different procedures or in this cases the lack of a procedure with a properly plugged well. If there is pollution the cause is for 2 entirely different reasons.

However to a land owner it would probably make little difference except for the fact that he/she would be much more likely to be able to recover damages today than if the damage was caused 100 years ago.

Wells that were not plugged can and do cause problems. 100 years ago pluging old wells or keeping good records was not the standard. But in most states it has been standard procured since before the invention of fracing to plug wells after they become uneconomic to produce. Many properly plugged wells have been brought back on line when oil prices are high by a procedure known as a wash down.

Sometimes the wells are fraced again.
Frac is the industry jargon…. for a frac job.
Frack is how most outside of the industry use the word.
As much attention as this issue has received either is probably acceptable.

Virtually all of the pollution problems associated with modern day fracing occurs at the surface with the spillage of fracing fluids. This can be caused by several reasons but it is usually caused by malfunctioning equipment or by an act of god / weather. Typically this can be quickly isolated and cleaned up.

Stop believing these lies! They have been frac'ing in Oklahoma for 60 years and we have never had these issues. The liberal media and environmentalists are telling lies to stop progress. Do your own studies! Frac'ing uses 98% water and very few chemicals.

This is 100% INACCURATE. I actually have a friend that works for a Frac company that's partially owned by CHK now. She helps develop the recipe for the crap they pump into the ground. Water, while it does make up part of it, is also mixed with a whole SHLEW of crap. If it wasn't, there would be no need for engineers to spend so much time developing, testing, checking those chemicals. AND, there wouldn't be issues with that "water" contaminating ground-water.

The ground water contamination happens when people don't do it in a responsible way, so i'm not going to say all Fracing is bad. But there are a LOT of companies out there that do a piss-poor job of being responsible with it. And while we might have been doing it for 60 years, we also haven't been doing it to the extent, depth, and pressure that we are today. When you go down 100 feet in 1960, it's a far cry from where we are today and the amount of land we cover now. Scale means EVERYTHING.

I am a strong advocate for severely penalizing a company when they willfully, or negligently, cause harm to the environment and/or people who reside in areas affected by their company's activities. But there really is not enough evidence, or even number of incidents, to indict energy companies who safely extract hydrocarbons from the earth in an environmentally sensitive manner. The development of that technique has yielded benefits that most people are not aware of much less understand. I am not a drilling expert nor do I work for one of the OKC based energy companies, but they seem to be good stewards of the land where the operate. I think hydraulic fracturing gets a bad rap purely from misunderstandings about the process. If anything, I could understand asking some questions if earthquakes suddenly become common or more intense in areas where this procedure is done.

I'm not against fracking per se, but energy companies always make arguments like yours about everything always: deep water drilling, pipelines, mining etc. It's like a broken record. There's inherent risk with all kinds of energy production. We have to weigh those risks. We also need energy. We get it.

But nothing ever is a problem until it's a problem and then suddenly it's a giant, "Oops, no one could have foreseen this." When you're dicking with the water supply and the health of citizens we need open and thorough discussion and research -- on both sides of the equation. I'm not necessarily an environmental alarmist, so I don't always align with the environmental lobby. But there's a reason the energy industry spends billions on lobbying (buying) politicians and even going to the dramatic step of producing junk science. Industry is not often in favor of thorough research and often tries to delay / subvert negative findings to keep the profits rolling in.

I think you make good points. I think there should be oversight of drilling operations for the reasons you outlined. But so far there is no evidence that shows properly performed hydraulic fracture operations pose a threat to the water supply. The key is your statement about inherent risks - they are part of nearly all methods of providing sources of energy. The alarmists have nearly killed the nuclear power industry in the United States much to our detriment. Improper operations at nuclear power plants can be catastrophic yet I think the safeguards required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are sufficient to make it one of the best methods of generating power. Similar oversight of drilling operations should be enough to protect the environment and people living near the sites while still allowing the energy companies the ability to extract hydrocarbons and make a profit.

The "fracking debate" got a little heated in Boulder County this week. After watching the video it would have been hard for me to not clean one of the protestors clocks. What idiots like that don't understand is his type of behavior doesn't help his cause.

9News.com - Boulder County Board of Commissioners creates security plan after Tuesday's meeting (http://www.9news.com/rss/story.aspx?storyid=303386)
Denver Post - Carroll: The anti-fracking goons in Boulder (http://www.denverpost.com/carroll/ci_22141490/carroll-anti-fracking-goons-boulder)