2 replies »

1. Hopefully some links to experiences might come in useful to visitors interest:

   Click to access Final-Rebuttal-Exhibits.pdf-Adobe-Acrobat-Pro.pdf

   UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
   COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
   MINORITY STAFF
   APRIL 2011

   CHEMICALS USED IN HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

   Concludes:
   it appears that the companies are injecting fluids containing unknown
   chemicals about which they may have limited understanding of the potential risks posed to
   human health and the environment.
   VI. CONCLUSION
   Hydraulic fracturing has opened access to vast domestic reserves of natural gas that could
   provide an important stepping stone to a clean energy future. Yet questions about the safety of
   hydraulic fracturing persist, which are compounded by the secrecy surrounding the chemicals
   used in hydraulic fracturing fluids. This analysis is the most comprehensive national assessment
   to date of the types and volumes of chemical used in the hydraulic fracturing process. It shows
   that between 2005 and 2009, the 14 leading hydraulic fracturing companies in the United States
   used over 2,500 hydraulic fracturing products containing 750 compounds. More than 650 of
   these products contained chemicals that are known or possible human carcinogens, regulated
   under the Safe Drinking Water Act, or listed as hazardous air pollutants.

   http://earthjustice.org/features/campaigns/pennsylvania-and-fracking logs fraccidents in Pennsylvania
   In Pennsylvania, where the pace of drilling has tripled oil and gas companies are contaminating water faster than the state’s treatment plants can handle it. In some cases, people’s wells have even exploded, residents can light the water from their faucet on fire, and pets have gotten sick from drinking tap water. The Monongahela River, a drinking water source for 350,000 people, was poisoned. Pristine state forest is being handed over to oil and gas companies

   Gas proponents might continue to insist that gas drilling has never damaged a single water supply, yet we now know there are plenty of instances where it has. As it turns out, PA DEP knows this, too, though they had to be sued to produce the evidence. They claimed, unsuccessfully, that the public records requested by The Times-Trbune were “too burdensome” to find. In The Times-Tribune’s Sunday Times Review of DEP Drilling Records Reveals Water Damage, Murky Testing Methods, Legere reviews the pages eventually furnished by the civil servants of this hyper-reluctant state agency:
   “State environmental regulators determined that oil and gas development damaged the water supplies for at least 161 Pennsylvania homes, farms, churches and businesses between 2008 and the fall of 2012, according to a cache of nearly 1,000 letters and enforcement orders written by Department of Environmental Protection officials and obtained by The Sunday Times.”

   http://www.frackingcanada.ca/alberta-the-campbells/
   lab test revealed methane, ethane, propane, butane and isobutane. The contents alone tells you that it is not naturally occuring or biogenic (from bacteria) because bacteria cannot produce propane, butane and higher order hydrocarbons.
   The ERCB hired a company to take soil samples in our area after we pointed out an area of dying trees close water well. In 2012, three horizontal wells were drilled near us. One less than a quarter mile away has had a constant flare burning since. In 2012, three horizontal wells were drilled near us. One less than a quarter mile away has had a constant flare burning since.
   Their sampling results indicate the sour gas is coming from the aquifer, not our wellbore………………We’ve learned that some of the side effects of sour gas exposure are impaired eyesight, loss of smell and loss of brain cells

   Sadly it would seem many of pro fracking politicians in this country have been exposed to the latter!

   Reply
2. Pingback: Campaign Againts Climate Change – Latest News – Brighton Climate Action Network