Rapid expansion of gas drilling has led to problems with disposal, contamination

[Frankcoz]

What can be done with wastewater?
:beingsick:

 

[Ryan R]

Oh Frank, don't you know we're being ridiculous? Some of these issues couldn't possibly be from Marcelus drilling acitvity because the fracking process is safe. Our concerns for a much more cautious and planned approach to the extraction of this resource should not be getting in the way when there is potential new income to make off the land.

 

[WBDluver]

Dont worry Pa DEP is on it. Guardians of the enviroment. Open the Dams up stream because "dillution is the solution to polution" :beingsick:

 

[Future Fanatic]

Oh Frank, don't you know we're being ridiculous? Some of these issues couldn't possibly be from Marcelus drilling acitvity because the fracking process is safe. Our concerns for a much more cautious and planned approach to the extraction of this resource should not be getting in the way when there is potential new income to make off the land.

Ryan, why do you twist my words? I wrote that your logic was ridiculous.

Since you chose not to reply in the other thread but in this one...

Is lubricating internal combustion engines with oil a "safe process"? Does the fact that huge amounts of oil drip onto the pavement to be washed into our waterways or the fact that multitudes of people dump used oil on the ground mean that the use of oils in engines should be halted?

Of course not, that would be stupid. Just because someone chooses to do something illegal, does not mean the process is unsafe.

Of course, it hasn't even been determined as of yet that it WAS fracking fluid in the river, (OR just the same problem that the coal mines have been causing for years and years) but let me not spoil things for you.

And by the way, who is the guy that has been calling for the use of a closed loop system, the reusing of frack water and/or the use of gas in the well to evaporate off the water so the chemical additives can be concentrated and disposed of properly? Yeah, he's obviously more cautious and into planning than your state(and its people by default)are.

 

[Ronbo]

Stay tuned folks coming to a Catskill stream by you. uking-smiley:
:down:

 

[Agust]

Ryan, why do you twist my words? I wrote that your logic was ridiculous.

Since you chose not to reply in the other thread but in this one...

Is lubricating internal combustion engines with oil a "safe process"? Does the fact that huge amounts of oil drip onto the pavement to be washed into our waterways or the fact that multitudes of people dump used oil on the ground mean that the use of oils in engines should be halted?

Oh my god I have seen the light. Since one form of pollution is tolerated we should simply roll over and allow a potentially devastating process of "secret" fluids be used to pollute our waters unfettered. After all John could be getting rich, and we can't let a little thing like the drinking water for 25 million people get in the way. Oh and fish might die too, but that means nothing if John can get a new benz and a condo in Miami.

Face if fanatic, you won't find anyone here who thinks that proceeding with haste and ignoring the danger is wise or practical.

Agust

 

[Future Fanatic]

Oh my god I have seen the light. Since one form of pollution is tolerated we should simply roll over and allow a potentially devastating process of "secret" fluids be used to pollute our waters unfettered. After all John could be getting rich, and we can't let a little thing like the drinking water for 25 million people get in the way. Oh and fish might die too, but that means nothing if John can get a new benz and a condo in Miami.

Face if fanatic, you won't find anyone here who thinks that proceeding with haste and ignoring the danger is wise or practical.

Agust

How insightful. Yes, this is about ME getting rich.

By the way, which 25 million people is that?

And it's NOT "secret" anymore. If they want to drill in NY, THEY MUST DISCLOSE... keep up...

 

[WBDluver]

If the problem was the mines then how come it developed at the power plant and in the homes of the residents AFTER drilling has started??? There is none so blind as those who refuse to see. You dont need an enviromental study for the next couple of years, use common sense. And to say because we have pollution in other areas of life we should tolerate more is ignorant.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

This article is about a condition that was never in doubt, yet PA failed to plan for it. It has been known since before the recent energy rush that fracked wells in the Marcellus Shale would require millions of gallons of water per well and that water, along with any groundwater that ends up in the well bore, has to be disposed of somewhere. It was also common knowledge that there were few if any sewage treatment plants that could handle the water coming out of the wells and that new plants would have to be built to handle the increased volume and the new contaminants.

Based on this article, PA roundly failed to plan for this contingency and is now doing horrifying things like trying to dilute the pollution by opening dams and by spreading it around to multiple river systems. The waste water at issue here is most definitely from fracking wells, so there's no doubt where the problem has come from. It's really disappointing that such a basic aspect of the process was not accounted for. At this point, if PA cannot plan for the things we know will result from drilling we can only assume that they will be equally unprepared when something unexpected occurs. I'm not anti-drilling, I'm against irresponsible drilling. If we can't do it right we shouldn't do it, and that includes waste water disposal.

Since the basic theory of corporate governance is essentially at odds with environmental responsibility we have no choice but to rely on the government and here it seems clear that the government has failed completely. Somebody needs to bring a Clean Water Act case against the PA government to stop them from dumping this stuff in the rivers before they do some real damage.

 

[Ryan R]

Ryan, why do you twist my words? I wrote that your logic was ridiculous.

Since you chose not to reply in the other thread but in this one...

Is lubricating internal combustion engines with oil a "safe process"? Does the fact that huge amounts of oil drip onto the pavement to be washed into our waterways or the fact that multitudes of people dump used oil on the ground mean that the use of oils in engines should be halted?

Of course not, that would be stupid. Just because someone chooses to do something illegal, does not mean the process is unsafe.

Of course, it hasn't even been determined as of yet that it WAS fracking fluid in the river, (OR just the same problem that the coal mines have been causing for years and years) but let me not spoil things for you.

And by the way, who is the guy that has been calling for the use of a closed loop system, the reusing of frack water and/or the use of gas in the well to evaporate off the water so the chemical additives can be concentrated and disposed of properly? Yeah, he's obviously more cautious and into planning than your state(and its people by default)are.

Gee, I must've struck a nerve.

Actually I tried a lengthy reply twice but had problems for some reason so I gave up, pointless anyway you don't care what I have to say, after all I'm being ridiculous. I realize it hasn't been proven that it is fracking water and I never said that it had been. The PFBC is currently conducting it's own through investigation because it does not necessarily buy WV's explanation and it also realizes that our own PA DEP is woeful in it's oversight, regulation, and "environmental protection." It's a sore point with many conservationists and we've been fighting it for quite some time. In some good news, PATU was personally asked by our governor to aid in develping better regulation and recommendations for best practices in handling the extraction of this resource. Speaking of twisting words, I was talking about all Marcellus activities, not pigeonholing the issue to just whether the fracking process is safe. If their are harmful activities or events, legal or illegal, used in common practice by these companies than IT IS PART OF THE ISSUE. I could care less about your potshots at Pennsylvanians and your attitude that we're getting what we deserve, I just hope you've read thru all 800 pages of "what you're getting" as far as Marcellus drilling. Maybe those of us that are calling for a more cautious and planned approach will be proven wrong and while you're making income from any wells on your property, your land will retain its beautiful rural countryside, your water wells will uncontaminated, and your livestock will still be healthy. In the meantime I'll keep writing my legislators pushing for things like a severance tax so that Pennsylvanians are not left with the bill for cleaning up another legacy of pollution like we we're with the coal industry.

As far as where I learned about the legality of dumping used frackwater on highways a roomful of conservationists we're told it straight from a PFBC Commissioner's mouth.

It's odd, anytime one of us posts here about being concerned over this mad rush with Marcellus activities or calling for more caution you can't wait to post a lengthy word to the contrary. Whether it's a concern over water withdrawals, the expanse of dirt & gravel roads into forest areas, etc. you throw out things comments like we're being ridiculous" or "I thought you had a science background... you shouldn't be posting this or that."

BTW, they must disclose what toxins they use but are you sure they must disclose what amounts of each toxin is in use?

 

[Future Fanatic]

Oh my god I have seen the light. Since one form of pollution is tolerated we should simply roll over and allow a potentially devastating process of "secret" fluids be used to pollute our waters unfettered. After all John could be getting rich, and we can't let a little thing like the drinking water for 25 million people get in the way. Oh and fish might die too, but that means nothing if John can get a new benz and a condo in Miami.

Face if fanatic, you won't find anyone here who thinks that proceeding with haste and ignoring the danger is wise or practical.

Agust

Must I type slower? My point wasn't that ANY pollution should be tolerated, but in part that given the SCOPE of the problem with engine oil:

What's the problem with motor oil?

Oil doesn't dissolve in water. It lasts a long time and sticks to everything from beach sand to bird feathers. Oil and petroleum products are toxic to people, wildlife, and plants. One quart of motor oil can pollute 250,000 gallons of water, and one gallon of gasoline can pollute 750,000 gallons of water! Oil that leaks from our cars onto roads and driveways is washed into storm drains, and then usually flows directly into a lake or stream. Used motor oil is the largest single source of oil pollution in lakes, streams, and rivers. Americans spill 180 million gallons of used oil each year into the nation's waters. This is 16 times the amount spilled by the Exxon Valdez in Alaska!

with no one posting on this site about calling for stopping the use of the internal combustion engine or even not "proceeding with haste and ignoring the danger", why the fracking process?

How is it that illegal acts (supposed) be used as evidence that the fracking PROCESS is unsafe (does illegal dumping of waste oil mean that internal combustion engine use should be stopped)?

With the average US golf course using 51 million gallons of water out of watersheds each year, why no calls for that to be stopped? How about the paper industry's use of water?

Why are the conservationists focused on THIS and not those? Why are these things "tolerated"?

 

[Ryan R]

Must I type slower? My point wasn't that ANY pollution should be tolerated, but in part that given the SCOPE of the problem with engine oil:

What's the problem with motor oil?

Oil doesn't dissolve in water. It lasts a long time and sticks to everything from beach sand to bird feathers. Oil and petroleum products are toxic to people, wildlife, and plants. One quart of motor oil can pollute 250,000 gallons of water, and one gallon of gasoline can pollute 750,000 gallons of water! Oil that leaks from our cars onto roads and driveways is washed into storm drains, and then usually flows directly into a lake or stream. Used motor oil is the largest single source of oil pollution in lakes, streams, and rivers. Americans spill 180 million gallons of used oil each year into the nation's waters. This is 16 times the amount spilled by the Exxon Valdez in Alaska!

with no one posting on this site about calling for stopping the use of the internal combustion engine or even not "proceeding with haste and ignoring the danger", why the fracking process?

How is it that illegal acts (supposed) be used as evidence that the fracking PROCESS is unsafe (does illegal dumping of waste oil mean that internal combustion engine use should be stopped)? It is very relevant if these are the practices of the companies involved in Marcellus drilling activities. It's still a relatively new venture here in the Northeast and already evidence of illegal practices are mounting. That's not scary to you or reason for a dramatic pullback in approving these permits, etc.? Especially considering what's on the line for our future generations and what we've learned from the coal industry legacy? Let's take the money and run I guess.


With the average US golf course using 51 million gallons of water out of watersheds each year, why no calls for that to be stopped? How about the paper industry's use of water? Who are you trying to kid here? Conservation groups have been speaking out on these issues for years and fighting or questioning new proposals locally all the time.

Why are the conservationists focused on THIS and not those? Why are these things "tolerated"? They aren't being tolerated but maybe you're not reading about it in your monthly "Alpaca Farmers for Marcellus Drilling" newsletter

Type your agenda as slow as you want.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Oil doesn't dissolve in water. It lasts a long time and sticks to everything from beach sand to bird feathers. Oil and petroleum products are toxic to people, wildlife, and plants. One quart of motor oil can pollute 250,000 gallons of water, and one gallon of gasoline can pollute 750,000 gallons of water! Oil that leaks from our cars onto roads and driveways is washed into storm drains, and then usually flows directly into a lake or stream. Used motor oil is the largest single source of oil pollution in lakes, streams, and rivers. Americans spill 180 million gallons of used oil each year into the nation's waters. This is 16 times the amount spilled by the Exxon Valdez in Alaska!

So when will you begin your campaign? I look forward to reading your articles and donating to your non-profit organization that tracks down these dumpers of oil and brings them to justice. It's not that hard given how strict our laws are on oil dumping so I look forward to your great success. I't wonderful that you're so concerned about this issue since I assumed you didn't care much about the environment and seem content to lease it to the gas companies unfettered. What a refreshing break with tradition! We have so much in common. Let me know when it starts.

 

[Agust]

Must I type slower? My point wasn't that ANY pollution should be tolerated, but in part that given the SCOPE of the problem with engine oil:

What's the problem with motor oil?

Blah Blah Blah apparently typed very slowly snipped.

With the average US golf course using 51 million gallons of water out of watersheds each year, why no calls for that to be stopped? How about the paper industry's use of water?

Why are the conservationists focused on THIS and not those? Why are these things "tolerated"?

Whoa, you appear to be the only one here with a single minded agenda, to defend frack drilling, which has a history of failure, followed by a history of really excellent PR to avert blame.

Maybe the last 40 years you have been asleep or had you head so far up the oil companies press corps to have not noticed. But the Clean water act arrived in 1972. There has been an endless campaign to get automobile manufacturers to clean up their cars, to prevent 2-cycle motor boats, to change golf courses water practices. Some have worked, some have not, some are still in progress and I know for a fact I have campaigned against at least 3 golf course down here in NJ (We have also worked with several to alter designs and watering schemes to protect sensitive stream on their property.)

Non of which deflects from the fact that frac drilling for oil is still new technology and there are many, many case of illegal acts perpetrated by its practitioners. Which leads one to ask if they have been caught dozens of times, how many more did they get away with.

You were correct on one issue I stated 25 Million folks rely on drinking water from the Delaware, I was mistake it is only 17 Million. (I added NYC to the River Keepers numbers below, but it turns out they had already included them, sorry for the math error.)

The Delaware's 13,539 square mile watershed drains about four percent of the continental U.S. land area—and provides drinking water for 17 million people from four states.

Maybe the problem is not your slow typing but your inability to lie effectively, it seems we can read you fine we just are not believing you.

Agust

 

[Corndog]

So when will you begin you campaign? I look forward to reading your articles and donating to your non-profit organization that tracks down these dumpers of oil and brings them to justice. It's not that hard given how strict our laws are on oil dumping so I look forward to your great success. I't wonderful that you're so concerned about this issue since I assumed you didn't care much about the environment and seem content to lease it to the gas companies unfettered. What a refreshing break with tradition! We have so much in common. Let me know when it starts.

Grip,

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm in that post??? :rofl:

I agree with you whole heartedly, but unfortunately most Americans will just turn a blind eye until it's to late.

Cdog

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Maybe a little twinge of sarcasm but seriously, if FF wants to go after the polluters that's all right by me - though I am pretty sure that's not on his agenda. There are too many problems in the world for us to address them all at once and the easiest protest from people with a different agenda is to say - "Hey what about all this other stuff that you're not focusing on?" The point to other problems in order to make people who actually give a crap look like hypocrites. Of course with that kind of attitude you could never start anything because you're always thinking about the stuff you're not doing rather than the stuff that you are. I could respond to that with a quote from a band I used to like (and still do) -

"It has to start somewhere. It has to start some time. What better place than here? What better time than now?"

 

[Future Fanatic]

Maybe the problem is not your slow typing but your inability to lie effectively, it seems we can read you fine we just are not believing you.

Agust

Can you point to my lie? And what is it that you don't believe?

 

[Future Fanatic]

Maybe a little twinge of sarcasm but seriously, if FF wants to go after the polluters that's all right by me - though I am pretty sure that's not on his agenda. There are too many problems in the world for us to address them all at once and the easiest protest from people with a different agenda is to say - "Hey what about all this other stuff that you're not focusing on?" The point to other problems in order to make people who actually give a crap look like hypocrites. Of course with that kind of attitude you could never start anything because you're always thinking about the stuff you're not doing rather than the stuff that you are. I could respond to that with a quote from a band I used to like (and still do) -

"It has to start somewhere. It has to start some time. What better place than here? What better time than now?"

I agree with you about making a difference.

I agree that I am pointing out the hypocrisy.

With MUCH bigger problems in our area FOR DECADES, the question I'm asking is "why this? and why now?" Why is THIS the issue that begins people writing letters and posting threads? When SO many BIGGER problems affect the very thing these people seem concerned about (drinking water safety)?

I'm all for safety. I'm also all for facts.

The fact is, Golf courses take more water out of the Delaware watershed than gas companies. The fact is more oil, fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides are washed into the Delaware watershed than frac fluid. For decades and decades and decades...

So what is it about potential harm from frack fluid that has made people act?

 

[Ryan R]

I agree with you about making a difference.

I agree that I am pointing out the hypocrisy.

With MUCH bigger problems in our area FOR DECADES, the question I'm asking is "why this? and why now?" Why is THIS the issue that begins people writing letters and posting threads? When SO many BIGGER problems affect the very thing these people seem concerned about (drinking water safety)? Maybe we are the ones that need to type slower for you. This is not the issue that finally has people writing letters, some people have been doing so for decades. Now they are better informed and there are more of these concerned people writing letters and taking action today. But feel free to continue to ignoring that fact since doing so supports your agenda.

I'm all for safety. I'm also all for facts. It can also be argued you seem to be for gas company PR too.

The fact is, Golf courses take more water out of the Delaware watershed than gas companies. The fact is more oil, fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides are washed into the Delaware watershed than frac fluid. For decades and decades and decades... The fact is people have acted and continue to act upon these other problems. They have not always won, especially in past decades, but people HAVE acted. With what we've learned in our history regarding protecting clean water, etc. there are more people in today's world that are aware of and care about these issues now.

So what is it about potential harm from frack fluid that has made people act? Gee, I don't know pick a toxin.

You agree about making a difference yet can't understand why people are acting on their concerns over Marcellus drilling activities (FYI, the issue is more than just fracking fluid) so I guess that hypocrisy you're pointing out is your own then? Thanks for clearing that up for us. I notice you completely ignore the fact that people have spoken up regarding the previous issues you keep pointing to as issues none of us have cared about before. Do they recommend doing this in one of those gas drilling company PR documents you trust so much?

 

[Future Fanatic]

You agree about making a difference yet can't understand why people are acting on their concerns over Marcellus drilling activities (FYI, the issue is more than just fracking fluid) so I guess that hypocrisy you're pointing out is your own then?

Ryan, you could not be more wrong. You'll say anything, whether it makes sense or not to get in a dig... Yes everyone should act on their concerns... but those concerns should be based on facts.

LATELY posts have all been about how safe the FRACKING PROCESS is. I've tried to point out that because someone chooses to do something illegal, it does NOT make the PROCESS unsafe. If one's concern is the safety of the process, use EVIDENCE of it being UNSAFE to stop it.

TWO TOTALLY separate ideas NO hypocrisy.

I notice you completely ignore the fact that people have spoken up regarding the previous issues you keep pointing to as issues none of us have cared about before.

I've not ignored it. How many posts on this site about golf courses and why we should stop their water use? How many posts about banning the use of oil lubricants? How many posts about banning pesticides, herbicides or fertilizers? How many posts about stopping the use of drugs whose residues end up in our water?

Do they recommend doing this in one of those gas drilling company PR documents you trust so much?

UNTRUE. A LIE. THIS IS what your posts consist of?

AND THIS:

As far as where I learned about the legality of dumping used frackwater on highways a roomful of conservationists we're told it straight from a PFBC Commissioner's mouth.

So we should be reading this in the newspapers? Because THAT would be news.

 

[Ryan R]

Ryan, you could not be more wrong. You'll say anything, whether it makes sense or not to get in a dig... Yes everyone should act on their concerns... but those concerns should be based on facts. Yeah and you never try to get a dig in, especially on me. Please, wish I could hand you a quarter to call someone that might give a damn about that for ya.

LATELY posts have all been about how safe the FRACKING PROCESS is. I've tried to point out that because someone chooses to do something illegal, it does NOT make the PROCESS unsafe. If one's concern is the safety of the process, use EVIDENCE of it being UNSAFE to stop it.

TWO TOTALLY separate ideas NO hypocrisy. Maybe seperate to you but from the beginning my concerns have been with all aspects of Marcellus Drilling activities. Again, I'm not limiting my concern to fracking water or the safety of fracking process.



I've not ignored it. How many posts on this site about golf courses and why we should stop their water use? How many posts about banning the use of oil lubricants? How many posts about banning pesticides, herbicides or fertilizers? How many posts about stopping the use of drugs whose residues end up in our water? I don't keep running tallies on posts and their content, that's been your game. Agust just posted about what he's done on some of these issues though so there's one for your count. I've done some of the same as well for water quality issues other than Marcellus drilling. Do the posts need to show up here in order for it to count or provide proof to you that people are concerned about these other issues? Yeah, my logic is ridiculous.



UNTRUE. A LIE. THIS IS what your posts consist of?
AND THIS:


So we should be reading this in the newspapers? Because THAT would be news. I have no idea, I sure hope so. But I can tell you that there were probably more than 30 conservationists in the room including someone from TU National's staff. The comment was added to with this "they are doing it now, in the middle of the night, with unmarked trucks. If it's safe why are the companies doing it so secretive like this?" meeting day

I have no doubts you think I'm lying about it but it's not like I actually give a damn about that. Anyone that knows me would probably tell you I would not make something like that up.

 

[Future Fanatic]

So when will you begin your campaign? I look forward to reading your articles and donating to your non-profit organization that tracks down these dumpers of oil and brings them to justice. It's not that hard given how strict our laws are on oil dumping so I look forward to your great success. I't wonderful that you're so concerned about this issue since I assumed you didn't care much about the environment and seem content to lease it to the gas companies unfettered. What a refreshing break with tradition! We have so much in common. Let me know when it starts.

How can you write this? Does this not assume facts not in evidence, Sir?

We've read how people have been workin' on oil dumping and the like for years... if it's so easy since the laws are so strict...

But you'd agree that the evidence shows that waste oil in our nation's waterways is more of an environmental problem than fracking fluid, yes?

 

[Future Fanatic]

I have no doubts you think I'm lying about it but it's not like I actually give a damn about that. Anyone that knows me would probably tell you I would not make something like that up.

So, since it IS true, should we not be letting the world know? Where is Uncrowded? He's a writer, he must know some media types who could write something that the public should see. Since PA has shown that it has dropped the ball in terms of regulating the gas industry, shouldn't that "PFBC Commissioner" be out on his ass anyway? Name Names!

 

[Ryan R]

So, since it IS true, should we not be letting the world know? Where is Uncrowded? He's a writer, he must know some media types who could write something that the public should see. Since PA has shown that it has dropped the ball in terms of regulating the gas industry, shouldn't that "PFBC Commissioner" be out on his ass anyway? Name Names!

Why do you care anyway, you're enjoying your rural life up in NY and we Pennsylvanians are getting what we deserve right? I'm sure the concerned folks that heard it have already been letting their chapter memberships know about PATU's poisition on Marcellus drilling in PA.(we've had a campaign now for quite some time urging our membership to contact their state representatives and senators regarding a severance tax and other critical issues in volving Marcellus drilling. Sorry you didn't get a memo here.) No he shouldn't be out on his ass know it all, he didn't drop the ball for starters. Unfortunately the PFBC doesn't have regulatory authority with Marcellus drilling, mostly it's the PA DEP that does. And the PFBC has been informing PA DEP on what it thinks needs to be done regarding Marcellus drilling regulation and oversight. The PFBC has also been taking it's own steps to conduct investigations and beef up its own enforcement capabilies with regards to Marcellus, including forming a division solely for enforcement with Marcellus drilling activities. Marcellus drilling is a new entity here and I don't believe there were any regulations previously set forth to handle it because it is new, now Pennsylvania is scrambling to react appropriately. Should we have had stricter regulation within PA DEP oversight? Yes, most of the state's conservation groups would have told you that easily, we've constantly pushed for that need on other issues.

I'm not naming names here because, for starters, it's unnecessary. I don't know if this person has made that exact statement in other venues or to reporters. Knowing this person I'm sure they've at least made their feelings known, as a PFBC Commissioner, on our government's responsibilities with Marcellus drilling activities, whenever appropriate. I don't think it was meant to be a secret comment. But I also don't trust you, it's not your concern, and I believe one of your reasons for being here is to antagonize people here with many of your "questions."

 

[Agust]

So what is it about potential harm from frack fluid that has made people act?

The other issues you have stated (cars, golf course, pesticides, sprawl) are a concern, and as you said they have been around for decades. It is exactly for this reason we are concerned about the frac drilling. Once Pandora's box is open and the money starts flowing and people and communities become dependent on the jobs and income, the drilling will be allowed to continue regardless of how poorly it is done.

It is exactly for this reason that we want very strict guidelines and fines and bonds and restrictions placed on the process BEFORE it takes off in earnest. Everyone knows that the drilling will occur, our fear is that it will be done as irresponsibly here as it has been elsewhere. (A claim you will no doubt try and refute.)

Paradise lost is not easily recovered.

 

[Future Fanatic]

The other issues you have stated (cars, golf course, pesticides, sprawl) are a concern, and as you said they have been around for decades. It is exactly for this reason we are concerned about the frac drilling. Once Pandora's box is open and the money starts flowing and people and communities become dependent on the jobs and income, the drilling will be allowed to continue regardless of how poorly it is done.

It is exactly for this reason that we want very strict guidelines and fines and bonds and restrictions placed on the process BEFORE it takes off in earnest. Everyone knows that the drilling will occur, our fear is that it will be done as irresponsibly here as it has been elsewhere. (A claim you will no doubt try and refute.)

Paradise lost is not easily recovered.

Thank you. That is certainly a good answer to a question I've been asking for months.

 

[Future Fanatic]

Why do you care anyway, you're enjoying your rural life up in NY and we Pennsylvanians are getting what we deserve right?

Shouldn't we ALL be concerned that frack fluid is legally being spread on Pennsylvania's roadways?

Given how horrible that stuff is, shouldn't Pennsylvanians be made aware that their kids could possibly be unknowingly coming into contact with those chemicals walking to school? Shouldn't they know that a PFBC commissioner, whose duty it is to investigate pollution that may threaten the state's waterways is insisting that the practice of spreading it on highways is legal?
Shouldn't ANYONE who thinks frac fluid is a threat to the the environment and people's drinking water be asking questions of their leaders about and informing their fellow citizens of this practice?

I'm sure the concerned folks that heard it have already been letting their chapter memberships know about PATU's poisition on Marcellus drilling in PA.(we've had a campaign now for quite some time urging our membership to contact their state representatives and senators regarding a severance tax and other critical issues in volving Marcellus drilling. Sorry you didn't get a memo here.)

Should the emphasis RIGHT NOW be "severance tax and other critical issues"?
Maybe PATU should be more worried RIGHT NOW about FRAC WATER chemicals finding their way into trout streams as rain washes them off the roads?

No he shouldn't be out on his ass know it all, he didn't drop the ball for starters. Unfortunately the PFBC doesn't have regulatory authority with Marcellus drilling, mostly it's the PA DEP that does. And the PFBC has been informing PA DEP on what it thinks needs to be done regarding Marcellus drilling regulation and oversight. The PFBC has also been taking it's own steps to conduct investigations and beef up its own enforcement capabilies with regards to Marcellus, including forming a division solely for enforcement with Marcellus drilling activities.

The PFBC is charged with investigating pollution that may threaten the waterways of Pennsylvania. This commissioner is telling you that it is legal to spread pollution on roadways. FRAC WATER- you remember the horrible stuff that threatens the drinking water of millions?

Marcellus drilling is a new entity here and I don't believe there were any regulations previously set forth to handle it because it is new, now Pennsylvania is scrambling to react appropriately. Should we have had stricter regulation within PA DEP oversight? Yes, most of the state's conservation groups would have told you that easily, we've constantly pushed for that need on other issues.

One regulation I found, was that in Pennsylvania, Frac water is supposed to be brought to a water treatment facility that can treat it(not all can).

I'm not naming names here because, for starters, it's unnecessary. I don't know if this person has made that exact statement in other venues or to reporters. Knowing this person I'm sure they've at least made their feelings known, as a PFBC Commissioner, on our government's responsibilities with Marcellus drilling activities, whenever appropriate.

If we haven't read a quote from him in The River Reporter he's not doing all he can to protect the people of Pennsylvania.

I don't think it was meant to be a secret comment. But I also don't trust you, it's not your concern, and I believe one of your reasons for being here is to antagonize people here with many of your "questions."

You don't have to trust me.
It's everyone's concern.
And if you think asking questions is "antagonizing" then I KNOW I'm asking the right ones. YOU should have asked that so-called protector of the environment a few Antagonizing questions... for the sake of the trout AND the people of Pennsylvania.

 

[Ryan R]

"Shouldn't he be doing this? Shouldn't PATU be worried about that? Shouldn't you be concerned with these things?" How do you know PATU isn't worried about those things and trying to do something about them? How do you know the PFBC isn't investigating these things? How do you know he wasn't asked questions (he was the one that informed us that it was apparently legal in order to get the word out to others that might not know it. It was a shock to him as well. Not everyone knows everything like you do. You don't have a clue about a PFBC Commissioner's responsibilities or function though.) How do you know he's not trying to do something about it? How do you know Pennsylvanians aren't questioning their leaders about fracking? Yup you've got all the answers. Stop pretending you have the same type of concern. We get it, you've got money to make, antagonistic questions to ask, you are sure fracking is safe, and anyone concerned with it is concerned about the wrong thing and therefore somehow not concerned about everything else they should be regarding protecting our waterways.

 

[Future Fanatic]

"Shouldn't he be doing this? Shouldn't PATU be worried about that? Shouldn't you be concerned with these things?" How do you know PATU isn't worried about those things and trying to do something about them? How do you know the PFBC isn't investigating these things? You previously wrote "Unfortunately the PFBC doesn't have regulatory authority with Marcellus drilling, mostly it's the PA DEP that does. And the PFBC has been informing PA DEP on what it thinks needs to be done regarding Marcellus drilling regulation and oversight. The PFBC has also been taking it's own steps to conduct investigations and beef up its own enforcement capabilies with regards to Marcellus, including forming a division solely for enforcement with Marcellus drilling activities. Marcellus drilling is a new entity here and I don't believe there were any regulations previously set forth to handle it because it is new, now Pennsylvania is scrambling to react appropriately."How do you know he wasn't asked questions (he was the one that informed us that it was apparently legal in order to get the word out to others that might not know it. It was a shock to him as well. Not everyone knows everything like you do. You don't have a clue about a PFBC Commissioner's responsibilities or function though.) How's this sound: (notice it says PROTECT)
"COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Fish and Boat Commission
Policy Statement
Resource First
“Resource First” is a philosophy that describes the first priority of the commission’s mission and that of the Fish and Boat Code as well as the commission’s fundamental role in fulfilling and supporting the provisions of Article 1, Section 27 (Natural Resources and Public Estate) of the
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
It represents:
1. The commissioners’ belief that the Commonwealth’s aquatic resources are the valuable collateral that secures all fishing and boating activities.
2. The notion that protecting, conserving, and enhancing the Commonwealth’s aquatic resources is the agency’s first management priority.
3. The commissioners’ expectation that the agency’s activities, regulations, and methods of work will be evaluated and practiced within the context of this priority."
Also, their website says this:
"Waterways Conservation Officers are primarily enforce fishing, boating and environmental laws and regulations."

How do you know he's not trying to do something about it? How do you know Pennsylvanians aren't questioning their leaders about fracking? I specifically asked, not about Fracking, but the spreading of toxic waste on public roadwaysYup you've got all the answers. Only you would write this after reading a post of mine that asks no less than 7 questions(rhetorical as they might seem, but asked, if not only to find out YOUR stance).
Stop pretending you have the same type of concern. We get it, you've got money to make,(Hey, Mr. I think I understand Future Fanatic, I WILL make money. It may be tomorrow, next month, next year, five years, twenty years... To be honest, the longer the wait, the more money I will make. Do you really think I'm in a rush? antagonistic questions to ask, you are sure fracking is safeI've said, in multiple posts that it has problems. I even told people to push for closed loop systems to get rid of the "lined ponds" (where leakage and overflow can occur to damage ground water) You really need to pay closer attention., and anyone concerned with it is concerned about the wrong thing and therefore somehow not concerned about everything else they should be regarding protecting our waterways. And this statement is just evidence of your inability to understand my pointing out that an illegal act does not make a process "unsafe"

THAT all said, I still think we need to get to the bottom of this "spreading of toxic frack water on roads in the middle of the night in unmarked trucks is "apparently legal" " thing that this unnamed commisioner is insisting.

Don't you agree?

 

[Rusty Spinner]

The fact is, Golf courses take more water out of the Delaware watershed than gas companies. That's because drilling is just barely starting... The fact is more oil, fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides are washed into the Delaware watershed than frac fluid. For decades and decades and decades...

So what is it about potential harm from frack fluid that has made people act?

Two words: Dead Fish.

Tomorrow members of the NJDEP along with dozens of PATUers and other concerned folks are headed to Bucks County, PA to electro fish some trout that are in harm's way after yet another hydro frac fluid leak into a trout stream. So why are NJDEP employees headed to PA? Because PA is the wild west and their agencies have often turned their backs on the environment. This spill is receiving poor attention and NJ has plans to shame PA into action.

I've been largely quiet on this issue on NEFF on so many threads related to this issue. But my boss is widely seen as the leading environmental expert on Marcellus Shale hydro frack drilling, being invited by many loca Governors to help them better understand the issues around this process. She tells me horror stories of poorly regulated mines and the horific problems that ocurr as a result of the leaking of fluid in poorly regulated sites.

Now certainly not all drilling is bad for the environment and we very much need this energy, but there is too many poorly maintained wells and not nearly enough oversight and this coming from a Conservative who thinks big government ought to just get out of the way most of the time...

And now I'm off to focus on the Musky where, luckily, we have no Marcellus Shale!