« Texas Gulf Coast petrochemical boom sparks concerns | Main | Devon sells Johnson County gathering assets to Crestwood Midstream »

July 23, 2012


renewable energy

Your post is really enticing to let readers know about this over pricing in gas production. Thanks to Platt's story for revealing this information. Someone has to be sent in China without the bias influence to get the correct data.

Nadine Haven

Keep working, nice post! This was the information I had to know.

Leland Snyder

We have 10 years max with experience with this industrial scale fracking. Upstate NY townships are being railroaded into fracking, and the issues are too numerous to mention in one post, sound bites which this would be reduced to, are easily defeatable (easily debated).

First let's examine the history.

We know NOW that Cheney had meetings on this with the energy companies, and that he was instrumental in inserting clauses into the clean water act that exempted fracking from these rules. If he had a blind trust in his old company is unknown, but surely he would be rechly rewarded in the revolving door of industy/polotics even in his elderly state now.

Initial disposal technics of the fracking back-wash reads like a chapter of "The Jungle", literally BLM land with frack waste ponds with sprayers (as seen on "GasLand") creating a mist blowing off the pond.

I'm too tired to type all this, let's take one example, a microcosim if you will. The Barnett Shale drilling started about 10 years ago, the majority of the drilling happened 5 years ago. The Dallas-Fort Worth area is the first major population area directly down wind of the Barnett shale and very very close to these drilling sites. An "Article" posted by AP ("bad science") hit over 20 papers or more in the US saying the claims of a Breast cancer rise (in the DalasFW area) is bad science (they never directly state the claim is wrong ... yet the article in the in the best method of popaganda leaves every one with that impression).

Here is a map of the drilling sites in the Barnett Shale:

Here is a population map of the Texas area

Take agood hard look, no one in the industry will spell this out, the people in the Cheney meeting IMHO knew the dangers. Now match that up with this article.

If some one like me, a fairly average Joe has to do reasearch to find this connection, and no one else is bringing to you, then god have mercy you are really (colorful metaphored). But ask yourself, how could an AP article claiming to debunk this be posted in so many papers (with out a comment section). I just realized that a lot of "paper" ownership is centerlized, I hope that does not have anything to do with it. But more to the point ... people are now walking around like nazis with a bad idea, that need to be corrected and chances are they won't beleive you when you tell them.... because ... THEY read it in a paper so it must be true.

The royal scam is if they (the industry) can open up New York State to fracking before these consequences become clear.

If I was a head of a company and I wanted to get rich no mater what the consequences and I knew the long term consequences were (for lack of a better word ... bad) ... I would move as quickly as I could to as many areas to exploit the resource, I would use articles to give people the warm and fuzzies while I push through the agenda with lobbiest. I would make sure a GW denialist is in the NYS DEC and I would sub-contract all aspects of the operation.

When they frack:

*One company creates the well pad.

*One a seperate company drills.

*A seperate company fracks.

*A seperate company disposes of the waste.

*A seperate company caps the well.

Now there is nothing wrong with small companies or Texas, but FYI these are all small companies from Texas that got started in the Barnett shale... the point being, if this "special sauce" starts welling up 10 years laters or more after the fracking.

*There will no longer be any company to sue.

Every square mile of upstate NYS will have one of these well sites, and if you know how things like Benzene and other toxic elements and chemeical quickly raise the cost of cleanup. This could make a good portion of UP NY a toxic superfund site.

Now this is not fear, limestone leaches out of cement eventually, and cement eventually becomes something closer to sand. About 40% of what they pump down stays down there, looking for a way up. This will come up eventually, the macellus shale is the bottom of an ancient inland sea and is up to 8k feet below sea level and (due to pressure) is currently dry as a bone. There are people who will get insanely rich in the next ten years from this process. you decide. Do you really think you have been given all the fact yet? What was discussed in Cheney's secret meeting, shouldn't we know that before Halibuton and the likes cashes out on this process?

Read more here:

Brown Bess

The S-T has a lot of nerve lecturing others about bias in the gas patch. The paper has practically been an extension of the Chesapeake PR department.

Don Young

Jim--Is that a typo in your second sentence? Did you mean "removed?" There may be confusion over breast cancer vs. asthma, which HAS increased dramatically in the Barnett while dropping elsewhere.

Note that PA officials are very pro-drilling so not reliable sources.

As for Platts commie allegatioons... I'm still laughing. The industry must be really desperate to equate anti-fracking with Communism.

The comments to this entry are closed.