Canada BS Thread

This ^. I've been involved in the evaluation of Agricultural chemical that includes ground water testing. If something is persistent there is no telling how far from the target depth it could move over time.

 

The whole thing reeks of short term thinking

 

It's probably like a lot of risky things. Okay in low risk area's and not good near major aquifers. As long as the faults in the area are well know and there isn't major residential envelopment within a few km I doubt the risk is very high to the environment or the people in the surrounding area.

 

Percolation would occur if the products stayed in the ground. These frac fluids are returned through the production of the wells and the flow back immediately after the frac is completed. If groundwater was disturbed then you would know almost immediately upon it occurring but the only confirmed time it has happened in Canada was due to the idiots running the equipment.
My main worry is also the water usage, but this has started to be looked at by our provincial governments finally after the droughts we are having. They want to centre the usage around saline aquifers or reuse products. These too have known consequences too though.

 

Still a risk that those products will end up where they aren't supposed to. In agricultural chemical anything with a half life in situ in the soil longer than a year is nearly impossible to register now for that reason. I'm surprised that's not the case for fracking compounds.

I already mentioned the saline and sulfurous water use plans. As long as the support of those aquifers is properly studied before and during the removal of the water it should work with minimal risk.

Hope everything is going okay btw man. I think it was you that had the layoff a few months ago?

 

Wha ?

"Some studies have shown that more than 90% of fracking fluids may remain underground. Used fracturing fluids that return to the surface are often referred to as flowback, and these wastes are typically stored in open pits or tanks at the well site prior to disposal"

and

" According to the EPA study, studies conducted by the oil and gas industry, and interviews with industry and regulators, 20 to 85% of fracturing fluids may remain in the formation, which means the fluids could continue to be a source of groundwater contamination for years to come." -

- See more at: https://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/hydraulic_fracturing_101#.Vd-1kopHbCQ

 

Nicely worded

 

100% agree

 

All good. Thanks for asking though. Everything is coming up Milhouse!

 

This is a nice site...but is a bit biased obviously.
The fluids that that do not return immediately in the flow back will return to surface over the course of the production of the well. This is just saying they don't get them all back right away.

 

You don't believe the 2nd paragraph I linked there ?

 

https://www.propublica.org/article/new-gas-wells-leave-more-chemicals-in-ground-hydraulic-fracturing

 

http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/wells_coalbedmethanestudy.cfm

 

these all relate to CBM wells which are not what we are fracing in Canada. We are not allowed under regulations to frac in any CBM area in Canada. These are all US EPA studies and propaganda pieces.

 

So you're saying 100% of the fracking chemicals come out of the ground in fracking operations in Canada ?

 

Nope not saying that either. Over the course of a wells life it produces hundreds of cubic meters of produced water and the remaining frac fluids. As most of what folks are worried about is lighter end propellants these types of fluids usually are collected soon after the well is turned over to production. Seeing as most companies have moved over to slick water technology to reduce costs the actual % of toxic chemicals in the actual frac is less than 1-2% of the total fluid sent down. Not all the water is collected after but the majority 1-2% is soon after.
Slick water is probably the safest for our groundwater sources but horrible on our surface water sources.

 

Great movie. Damn might need to watch that tonight

 

When toxic chemicals are measured in PPM .. sorry, not really reassuring to me.

 

http://youtu.be/6b0ftfKFEJg

 

That's "if" it was ever a problem. Which it isn't.