From the article:
"Armstrong said about a third of the 32 million gallons referred to in the letter was straight diesel fuel."
Essay, Skip - that's a pretty easy appoximate ppm to calculate. Although the context still seems unclear in terms of how this was spread across how many wells. They mention this happening in up to 19 states.
The industry obviously has a valid point in terms of when the EPA may have gained jurisdiction over this, but being technically correct may win the legal skirmish but not necessarily the publicity war.
I would prefer someone besides the industry decide just how close to aquifers the technique can be used (and if and when it is or is not okay). As the article states - the industry does not do this with coalbed methane due to greater proximity to aquifers, but exactly what is too close? Ultimately if the industry can find an acceptable substitute that eliminates any question of harm to drinking water, it would be better off in the battle of public perception.
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
9 members
120 members
97 members
34 members
386 members
27 members
455 members
440 members
400 members
244 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher). Powered by
h2 | h2 | h2 |
---|---|---|
AboutAs exciting as this is, we know that we have a responsibility to do this thing correctly. After all, we want the farm to remain a place where the family can gather for another 80 years and beyond. This site was born out of these desires. Before we started this site, googling "shale' brought up little information. Certainly nothing that was useful as we negotiated a lease. Read More |
Links |
Copyright © 2017 GoHaynesvilleShale.com