The problem with "fracking".

[Michael]

Sewage Plants Struggle To Treat Wastewater Produced By Fracking Operations | Chemical & Engineering News

To learn more, Kyle J. Ferrar, a graduate student at the University of Pittsburgh, and his colleagues analyzed water from treatment facilities that initially processed fracking water and then later complied with the state’s recommendation. They took water samples from one private and two public facilities in Pennsylvania that treated water from the nearby Marcellus Shale region, the largest shale basin in the U.S. They collected samples both before and after the department’s request.

Using a variety of spectroscopic techniques, the team measured levels of chemicals found in gas production waste but aren’t typically present in other industrial wastewaters. Although levels of these chemicals varied widely among the three treatment plants, in general, concentrations dropped significantly after the plants stopped taking the fracking waste, Ferrar says. For example, at a municipal plant in Greene County, average barium concentrations fell from 5.99 to 0.14 mg/L.

But when the plants still handled the waste, levels of several of the chemicals exceeded drinking water standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. At the Greene County plant, the levels of barium and strontium, two toxic metals found in fracking wastewater, were on average 5.99 and 48.3 mg/L, respectively. EPA drinking water standards for these metals are 2 and 4 mg/L, respectively.

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

But are they processing the water to drinking quality, or just to reuse in fracking operations? In the frack jobs I'm familiar with, they treat the water so it can be reused for future frack work, but don't introduce it into the drinking water supply.

 

[Michael]

But are they processing the water to drinking quality,

No. The plants involved are sewage treatment facilities that accepted (or not) fracking discharges for treatment at their plant. The article later points out that the facilities are not designed to treat the waste water to drinking water standards.

or just to reuse in fracking operations? In the frack jobs I'm familiar with, they treat the water so it can be reused for future frack work, but don't introduce it into the drinking water supply.

In this case the fracking operations were apparently *not* treating the waste water on site, but were sending it into the local sewer system as I understand it.

I think the basic "lesson" here is that it would be best for the waste water to to treated on site, and reused rather than simply dumped into the public system.

 

[juvenissun]

Sewage Plants Struggle To Treat Wastewater Produced By Fracking Operations | Chemical & Engineering News

This is not a right reason to stop the development of shale gas.

 

[Tomk80]

This is not a right reason to stop the development of shale gas.

Nobody here or in the article quoted was advocating to stop shale gas development.

 

[juvenissun]

Nobody here or in the article quoted was advocating to stop shale gas development.

But his study will be easily misused by the crowds to voice opposition. Who knows the intention behind this study?

 

[Tomk80]

But his study will be easily misused by the crowds to voice opposition.

And? We shouldn't do a study because the results might make some people draw conclusions we don't like?

Who knows the intention behind this study?

They explain the intention behind the study in the article. You could try reading it, instead of just spouting random responses. Just a tip.

 

[juvenissun]

And? We shouldn't do a study because the results might make some people draw conclusions we don't like?

They explain the intention behind the study in the article. You could try reading it, instead of just spouting random responses. Just a tip.

What they should do is to propose a good way to manage the problem, so people know it is OK to develop the shale gas.

 

[Tomk80]

What they should do is to propose a good way to manage the problem, so people know it is OK to develop the shale gas.

Which was one of the goals of the study. Again, read the article before you make dumb comments.

 

[juvenissun]

Which was one of the goals of the study. Again, read the article before you make dumb comments.

If you said so, that is fine. But I will not read it.

 

[Tomk80]

If you said so, that is fine. But I will not read it.

And this, boys and girls, is the epitome of acting like a complete moron.

 

[Michael]

Largest Oklahoma Earthquake Linked to Oil Extraction Wastewater - Yahoo! Weather

FYI, this is another "potential" problem with fracking, although this incident wasn't technically related to fracking.

Though the process that caused the Oklahoma earthquake didn't involve hydraulic fracturing, fracking often involves injecting spent water into the ground, which carries the same risks. In fracking, water, sand and other substances are injected into a well under high pressure in order to fracture the rock, creating fissures that help natural gas flow out.
There hasn't been much oil extraction on the East Coast, but as fracking takes off in areas like Pennsylvania, the risk of big quakes in the region needs to be considered, Keranen said.

 

[juvenissun]

Largest Oklahoma Earthquake Linked to Oil Extraction Wastewater - Yahoo! Weather

FYI, this is another "potential" problem with fracking, although this incident wasn't technically related to fracking.

It is only a scare tactic. (If you like to know the reason, I can tell you some)

 

[Tomk80]

It is only a scare tactic. (If you like to know the reason, I can tell you some)

Go right ahead, nobody is stopping you.

 

[juvenissun]

Go right ahead, nobody is stopping you.

Nobody is asking either.

 

[Michael]

It is only a scare tactic. (If you like to know the reason, I can tell you some)

Please do.

 

[juvenissun]

Please do.

Earthquakes ever triggered artificially are all minor ones (less then Richter Scale 5). Also, if ANY activity which can successfully trigger earthquake, then it would be extremely welcome. Because it can minimize the chance of getting a big one.

Besides, the gas shale region (the Appalachian Basin) is not likely to have any significant earthquake by all means.

 

[Michael]

Earthquakes ever triggered artificially are all minor ones (less then Richter Scale 5).

As of the Oklahoma quake, you'll have to bump that number to 5.6.

Also, if ANY activity which can successfully trigger earthquake, then it would be extremely welcome. Because it can minimize the chance of getting a big one.

You might not feel that way if your spouse or child happens to be one of the few victims of a relatively 'minor' earthquake in a region that is not prepared for such earthquakes. Here in California we have building codes to help protect us from a never ending series of "small" quakes. That's not actually the case East of the Mississippi.

Besides, the gas shale region (the Appalachian Basin) is not likely to have any significant earthquake by all means.

I'm inclined to agree with you on that point, but the "possibility" can't simply be ignored. IMO the whole process is "fine by me" as long as we take "logical" precautions, and product waste is dealt with adequately.

 

[juvenissun]

As of the Oklahoma quake, you'll have to bump that number to 5.6.

You might not feel that way if your spouse or child happens to be one of the few victims of a relatively 'minor' earthquake in a region that is not prepared for such earthquakes. Here in California we have building codes to help protect us from a never ending series of "small" quakes. That's not actually the case East of the Mississippi.

I am not sure what was going on there. But if it were true, then it should be a very good news for seismologist.