Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by essay on March 3, 2010 at 15:45

oh they'd like to, alright. just remember these are the same people who think that solar and wind will soon lead the way to phasing out evil, evil hydrocarbons. i've stated before that personally, i just don't think they're going to have the wherewithal to actually get a national moratorium on fracturing passed. state by state, maybe somewhere like new york... but i wouldn't worry about say, texas or louisiana, or arkansas

there is not one, not one single instance, of groundwater contamination resulting from the actual process of hydraulic fracturing. inhofe made obama's people admit this on camera.

http://www.energyindepth.org/2009/12/not-even-one-top-brass-from-ob...

this is more bugaboo-under-the-bed tactics from our friends on the left. (by way of the coal and renewables lobby, perhaps)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on March 3, 2010 at 21:20

There are attempts being made with several legislative pieces in Congress to rein in the EPA.

http://murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=SponsoredLegislation

Scroll down to the bottom of that page and look for SJ Res 26. Note who the co-sponsors are.

80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roughneck on March 9, 2010 at 12:35

thank's for the info, thought that this just might be more scare tactic's

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on March 11, 2010 at 0:04

roughneck - From what I'm reading, at least one other shale state is grappling with this, has involved the EPA. Again, however, there are those in Congress making efforts to clarify EPA's role in some of these matters.

80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on March 12, 2010 at 19:20

Also, some state reps seem to be on the ball with regard to some of these issues. I was at the Bossier City meeting yesterday (Thurs.) and was rather impressed with Shaw's & Adley's assertive insistence that agencies account for their responsibilities & actions taken to date. They were also clear to these agency reps that they wanted sufficient information and answers given so that constituents could "rest well at night."

I wish this article would detail more of what Dr. Hanson presented with regard to his involvement with water issues.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20100312/NEWS01/3120315/1060

80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ur dern tootin' on March 13, 2010 at 3:07

A good source documenting the statements regarding hydraulic fracturing of the regulators in oil and gas producing states. Check it out.

http://Iogcc.com/Websites/iogcc/Images/2009StateRegulatoryStatement...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on March 13, 2010 at 13:49

tootin' - Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen that one. The statement by Welch for LA in that doc is interesting in that there is no mention of surface water issues.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on March 13, 2010 at 14:03

That is a good concise read, tootin', thanks for the link. I 'm not sure what surface water issues have to do with the EPA regulating fracs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on March 13, 2010 at 14:18

Spring - I'm thinking that Shaw & Adley were covering all the bases with regard to all water issues. I'm thinking if they can demonstrate, through the type of meetings held Thurs., that they are proactive in disseminating information and listening to constituent concerns, that they can lend support to our federal representatives who are behind the discussions & actions being taken to limit the powers of the EPA, thus allowing the states to retain more of their powers.

One comment that was made Thurs. was that LA apparently has some of the most stringent regulations in the nation, that other states sometimes look to what we have on the books to help guide them.

80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on March 13, 2010 at 14:36

Makes sense, Sesport. My thinking is what's next.........the EPA regulating surface water for crop irrigation. Your thought process is highly logical. I'm not sure that logic is used much in our Nation's Capital.........except that they become very logical when they review which groups provide them the most financial support. Read C O A L! Those guys will look you right in the eye and try to convince you that clean coal is NOT an oxymoron.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on March 13, 2010 at 19:14

Spring - I'm sure the coal states, industries, lobbies & citizens that work in those sectors believe there is such a thing as "clean coal" just as much as those who believe renewable energy sources are needed because their states, industries, lobbies & citizens need or want such. lol And we, just as much, believe that ng is the next best energy source for similar reasons.

And the whims of our government & it's agencies swing on a pendulum based on what the majority of US citizens vote for happening. Which is why it is so important to look into what the candidates really support and who provides their financial backing. Oh, and it sometimes helps for citizens to join a tea party or coffee party movement. ha, ha

80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ur dern tootin' on March 13, 2010 at 16:03

Sesport, I have some knowledge of the specific question asked to the various state regulators by IOGCC, and the question was specifically asked about any contamination to ground water aquifers from fracing operations (ground water is really all that the feds are trying to control). So I feel that's why Welch made the limited statement that he did. Did you know that fracing has been occuring safely in Louisiana for about 50 years?s

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page