Fracking gets more news coverage

[avb3]

You may not like the message, but reality is that fracking is becoming more and more of an issue on the radar screen.

This New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/us/04natgas.html) gives a succinct summary of the issue.

The oil and gas industry needs to be able to answer the questions brought up, and by keeping court records sealed were evidence suggests fracking was an issue, they are not being completely transparent.

There was a time when asbestos producers claimed their product was safe and we know different now.

We all need clean drinking water. If that doesn't exist, we don't either.

[hal53]

You may not like the message, but reality is that fracking is becoming more and more of an issue on the radar screen.

This New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/us/04natgas.html) gives a succinct summary of the issue.

The oil and gas industry needs to be able to answer the questions brought up, and by keeping court records sealed were evidence suggests fracking was an issue, they are not being completely transparent.

There was a time when asbestos producers claimed their product was safe and we know different now.

We all need clean drinking water. If that doesn't exist, we don't either.
sigh...here we go again........

[avb3]

sigh...here we go again........

I know, but just because you don't like the message, doesn't make it irrelevant.

I really do believe that the oil and gas industry, rather then playing ostrich as they do when settlements are sealed, are way better off in the long run to address issues upfront.

I also personally believe that the incidents where water well are affected are probably small, but not that they are non-existent.

If the oil and gas industry does not show this to be the fact, it may become subject to regulations which are based on fear, public outrage and not facts. Too many will rather believe bad then good about O&G, and when court records are sealed, conspiracy theories get fed.

Facts always win.

[cody c]

it should also do something interesting to the value of water/water rights in a few years when we start seeing alot more health issues involving ground water. But I suspect those that know water will become a commodity are already investing in water rights.

[timsesink]

When you're blowing holes in the earth, dumping toxins and using massive amounts of valuable water I think we have a huge problem on our hands.

[Dust1n]

When you're blowing holes in the earth, dumping toxins and using massive amounts of valuable water I think we have a huge problem on our hands.

x2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEB_Wwe-uBM

[NSRfishing]

you are satf that link proves it

[mulecrazy]

Don't forget that this in the USA. Their drilling and facking techniques are not the same as ours, or the same from formation to formation. One major thing that sets us apart from the americans is the use of surface casing. This is a secondary containment that all drilling rigs in canada use. It is a safeguard against groundwater contamination. They do not regularly use surface casing in the US. Thus, their risk of contamination is much much higher.

[hal53]

I know, but just because you don't like the message, doesn't make it irrelevant.

I really do believe that the oil and gas industry, rather then playing ostrich as they do when settlements are sealed, are way better off in the long run to address issues upfront.

I also personally believe that the incidents where water well are affected are probably small, but not that they are non-existent.

If the oil and gas industry does not show this to be the fact, it may become subject to regulations which are based on fear, public outrage and not facts. Too many will rather believe bad then good about O&G, and when court records are sealed, conspiracy theories get fed.

Facts always win.
so #1..consider that the article is in the New York Times
2) read Mulecrazy's post below
3) with or without proper well conditions, consider what depth they frac wells at in the Appalachia area??
so let's make a post on here , about something "i read or heard" and you have no idea what you're talking about....?????
Sorry Bud...must be a slow news day in your world....PM me if you would like further info....

[avb3]

so #1..consider that the article is in the New York Times
2) read Mulecrazy's post below
3) with or without proper well conditions, consider what depth they frac wells at in the Appalachia area??
so let's make a post on here , about something "i read or heard" and you have no idea what you're talking about....?????
Sorry Bud...must be a slow news day in your world....PM me if you would like further info....

I appreciate you may have more in-depth knowledge them many of us, me included.

What I am saying, is that regardless of the message or messenger, what does O&G industry gain, in the long run, by squelching evidence in court cases? It only feeds fuel to the fire of "conspiracy", and lord knows, there are many people who like to jump on that one.

As example, mulecrazy made some good points. Does that mean there is no contamination ever in Alberta? I suspect not. Is it wide spread? I also suspect not. Is it a potential issue? You betcha.

The chemicals used are hazardous. The amount of water required is significant.

Availability of water is becoming an issue in Alberta.

Everyone (well almost everyone) wants to see a strong and healthy O&G industry continue here.

But we also want the environmental impacts reduced.

And we want reclamation done in a timely manner. I am involved in one well reclamation issue that is now going on for 8 years. The foot dragging that went on was very frustrating to deal with. O&G sometimes are there own worst enemies.

[Digger1]

Now they say they don't know what's gonna happen when they start jacking CO2 down into the earth at high pressure.

[ishootbambi]

Now they say they don't know what's gonna happen when they start jacking CO2 down into the earth at high pressure.

yup....thats brand new and its anyone guess how it will react....:rolleye2:

[hal53]

so #1..consider that the article is in the New York Times
2) read Mulecrazy's post below
3) with or without proper well conditions, consider what depth they frac wells at in the Appalachia area??
so let's make a post on here , about something "i read or heard" and you have no idea what you're talking about....?????
Sorry Bud...must be a slow news day in your world....PM me if you would like further info....
just finished reports for the day, 0500 comes early, will reply tomorrow....

[Gust]

Now they say they don't know what's gonna happen when they start jacking CO2 down into the earth at high pressure.

I suspect a lot of sparkling Perrier.

[Sundancefisher]

I appreciate you may have more in-depth knowledge them many of us, me included.

What I am saying, is that regardless of the message or messenger, what does O&G industry gain, in the long run, by squelching evidence in court cases? It only feeds fuel to the fire of "conspiracy", and lord knows, there are many people who like to jump on that one.

As example, mulecrazy made some good points. Does that mean there is no contamination ever in Alberta? I suspect not. Is it wide spread? I also suspect not. Is it a potential issue? You betcha.

The chemicals used are hazardous. The amount of water required is significant.

Availability of water is becoming an issue in Alberta.

Everyone (well almost everyone) wants to see a strong and healthy O&G industry continue here.

But we also want the environmental impacts reduced.

And we want reclamation done in a timely manner. I am involved in one well reclamation issue that is now going on for 8 years. The foot dragging that went on was very frustrating to deal with. O&G sometimes are there own worst enemies.

You should be proud to live in Alberta. We have stringent regulations to protect ground water and provide for in many cases excessive protection of surface access. Our surface reclamation regulations are also strict. To state an occasional anomaly and ignore the majority that work well does nothing but promote witch hunts. I know some farmers in the past have intentionally ruined reclamation programs just to keep getting rentals. Does that mean all farmers are crooks and slimy...of course not. The majority of farmers are highly respected individuals.

I am happy to say that you want a healthy O&G industry and so does everyone else. It benefits ALL Albertans.

The fact is you can not be perfect in any jurisdiction but you try your best..learn and mitigate to protect people and the environment.

In the US they have less controls...less openness and that comes from a "information is valuable" mentality. Alberta went with a more openness and freedom of information will add value to the Province.

The fact you are stating an American conspiracy theory...that does not apply to Alberta should of been more clearer.

Cheers

Sun

[Rhino81]

I used to be a fracer. 7 years in the business. 3 years as a supervisor. Stimulating a gas formation in southern Alberta or saskatchewan is a lot different than people might think. All that pressure Thayer pump into the formation to fracture is all released within 24 hours of treatment. And the statement by Bambi, that co2 is a new process is as wrong as it can get. We have been fracing with co2 since I can remember. Nitrogen is a more popular treatment. Expansion is the reason for pumping energized fluid into the formation and once we have placed whatever propant (sand), or gas, ( co2, nitrogen, used to even use propane if you can believe that) we are intending to place the formation is bled off to a pressure tank or to atmpsphere and the down hole pressure is returned to normal. It just releases more gas into the well bore. There have been some cases in coal bed methane wells that have produced contamination in water tables but that has all been resolved. Mostly in the drumheller, Brooks, med hat area.

[avb3]

You should be proud to live in Alberta. We have stringent regulations to protect ground water and provide for in many cases excessive protection of surface access. Our surface reclamation regulations are also strict. To state an occasional anomaly and ignore the majority that work well does nothing but promote witch hunts.

Actually, it is not the only "anomaly" that we have on the property. We have over 50 O&G wells, and there is a LOT of foot dragging going on on those that should be reclaimed.

The 8 year saga is the worst example. In that case the company at first tried to do it on the cheap, and now have spent millions to address, guess what, ground water issues. The contaminated soils have to go to Swan Hills, and that is a long trek from the well.

Sure we get revenue, but it is cheaper for the company involved to pay the access fees versus reclaiming, and that is something that needs to be addressed.

We may have stringent ground water regulations, but the regulations are only as good as enforcement, right? Suffice it to say that water issues generally will become more and more an issue in the coming years.

[greylynx]

I used to sit on the fence on the fraging issue.

A P.M. to Hal set me straight.

[gopher]

I appreciate you may have more in-depth knowledge them many of us, me included.

What I am saying, is that regardless of the message or messenger, what does O&G industry gain, in the long run, by squelching evidence in court cases? It only feeds fuel to the fire of "conspiracy", and lord knows, there are many people who like to jump on that one.

As example, mulecrazy made some good points. Does that mean there is no contamination ever in Alberta? I suspect not. Is it wide spread? I also suspect not. Is it a potential issue? You betcha.

The chemicals used are hazardous. The amount of water required is significant.

Availability of water is becoming an issue in Alberta.

Everyone (well almost everyone) wants to see a strong and healthy O&G industry continue here.

But we also want the environmental impacts reduced.

And we want reclamation done in a timely manner. I am involved in one well reclamation issue that is now going on for 8 years. The foot dragging that went on was very frustrating to deal with. O&G sometimes are there own worst enemies.

If you like we could meet up and I will give you a glass of frack water to drink. It’s good clean drinking water.

[Sundancefisher]

Actually, it is not the only "anomaly" that we have on the property. We have over 50 O&G wells, and there is a LOT of foot dragging going on on those that should be reclaimed.

The 8 year saga is the worst example. In that case the company at first tried to do it on the cheap, and now have spent millions to address, guess what, ground water issues. The contaminated soils have to go to Swan Hills, and that is a long trek from the well.

Sure we get revenue, but it is cheaper for the company involved to pay the access fees versus reclaiming, and that is something that needs to be addressed.

We may have stringent ground water regulations, but the regulations are only as good as enforcement, right? Suffice it to say that water issues generally will become more and more an issue in the coming years.


Like I mentioned before...there are always anomalies. However without understanding the whole file and how old the well is and what has been tried and was the recommendation was from the soil studies etc. and if you are understanding and explaining it correctly it is hard to discuss. It may not be ground water but maybe there is a slow casing vent leak. Maybe work was done but it turned out after starting that it was worse then they thought. Maybe there was some petroleum contamination but they tried the bacteria approach to eat it naturally versus a larger ground disturbance total removal. Maybe then the removal was the only option. These are businesses so no one should expect them to pay $1 MM to reclaim when a $200K job would work.

In the end however...everyone wants you to have your surface back in the same state in which it was left. No better...no worse.

Sun

[sikwhiskey]

When you're blowing holes in the earth, dumping toxins and using massive amounts of valuable water I think we have a huge problem on our hands.

Opening existing fissures in the formation, not blowing holes in the earth. Unless they set off under ground Nukes like they did in Texas, and wanted to do in Alberta in the late 50's. Dumping toxins? Yes the the US do tend to dump this recovered/produced fluid into open-unlined evaporation pits.
And yes they are wasting alot of fresh water fracing, use N2, CO2, propane, diesel, or condensate after all thats were the majority of these toxic chemicals come from, the Earth.
The US could use some regulation.

[Ianhntr]

Actually, it is not the only "anomaly" that we have on the property. We have over 50 O&G wells, and there is a LOT of foot dragging going on on those that should be reclaimed.

The 8 year saga is the worst example. In that case the company at first tried to do it on the cheap, and now have spent millions to address, guess what, ground water issues. The contaminated soils have to go to Swan Hills, and that is a long trek from the well.

Sure we get revenue, but it is cheaper for the company involved to pay the access fees versus reclaiming, and that is something that needs to be addressed.

We may have stringent ground water regulations, but the regulations are only as good as enforcement, right? Suffice it to say that water issues generally will become more and more an issue in the coming years.

Boy are you right, and what enforcement. I have seen a creek that burns and was unaddressed for over 20 years in Northern Alberta. I've also seen a frac that destroyed over 55 km of a beautiful stream, Nothing pretty about it.
There are bad and good in all industries, O&G is high profile stuff. For good reason though, since a mistake or bad operator on one outfit can do a helll of a lot of damage.

[bearbait]

omg another big bad oil patch thread....oil and gas supports alberta and with out it we would be another poor province..nuff said.. stop whining the carpet cleaner guys dump more pollution then the oil patch..so dose your leaky truck...i guess some just never learn..read up on fractureing a gas or oil formation before running off some new york times piece as they know nothing about it eaither..

rant done...sorry in advance
rob

[bearbait]

why would they have to send soil to swan hills there are treatment land fills all over..cant see why it would goto ccs landfill in judy creek...

[Bound2Fish]

When you're blowing holes in the earth, dumping toxins and using massive amounts of valuable water I think we have a huge problem on our hands.

Your not "blowing holes" in the earth, you are opening up pores and and increasing perosity of selected formations. Then the wells are flowed back and in some cases 90% of what was pumped downhole is retrieved. They also do not go to the closest river and simply fill up the trucks to pump downhole and the fluids that return to surface are shipped off and recycled. Fracing gets such a bad name but really does little harm to the environment. Everything that leaves the wellsite has to be tested and sampled and sent to labs and approved, and depending on that approval it will determine what is done with the fluids, whether it be spread on land, disposed of in a disposal well, or sent to a site for processing. Fertilizing lawns have had more of an impact on the environment that fracing has. If you want, I can bring you down to the shop and sit you in front of some engineers who have travelled the world and have been doing this their entire lives and you can ask them whatever you want. And just as a disclaimer, I am no way an "expert".

[eastcoast]

omg another big bad oil patch thread....oil and gas supports alberta and with out it we would be another poor province..nuff said.. stop whining the carpet cleaner guys dump more pollution then the oil patch..so dose your leaky truck...i guess some just never learn..read up on fractureing a gas or oil formation before running off some new york times piece as they know nothing about it eaither..

rant done...sorry in advance
rob

I guerss we shouldn't ask what they do and just bow down to them?

they need us alot more than we need them,there are very few places left on earth that is sustainable and a friendly country like canada to drill in, we boot 1 out and 10 more are willing to take their place.

[DuckBrat]

There have been some cases in coal bed methane wells that have produced contamination in water tables but that has all been resolved. Mostly in the drumheller, Brooks, med hat area.

Resolved??????????????? BS head back to Rosebud and start asking some questions about Encanas practices and the state of the aquifer.

Our Fracking situation may be different than that of the states but one cannot argue the problems of pumping the volumes of freshwater back down those holes never to be recovered.

The situation is improving but we are far from being where we should be.

[bearbait]

I guerss we shouldn't ask what they do and just bow down to them?

they need us alot more than we need them,there are very few places left on earth that is sustainable and a friendly country like canada to drill in, we boot 1 out and 10 more are willing to take their place.

ya we dont need gas to heat our houses or to fuel our cars trucks planes..and who needs plastic its over rated...oil and gas is why alberta is what it is.. ive spent 15 years in the patch by no means am i an expert but i know alot more then some guys.. i wouldent tell your doctor how to do a surgery..if you dont know what a perferation or frac is why comment on it..:angry3:

[drake]

When you're blowing holes in the earth, dumping toxins and using massive amounts of valuable water I think we have a huge problem on our hands.

I absolutly agree!......

Some people on here need to pull their head out of the sand....

[Bound2Fish]

I guerss we shouldn't ask what they do and just bow down to them?

they need us alot more than we need them,there are very few places left on earth that is sustainable and a friendly country like canada to drill in, we boot 1 out and 10 more are willing to take their place.

Please expand on this thought, I would like to hear your comments on how they need us more than we need them? Do you think everything is made by hand with unprocessed, unrefined goods? Ever stop to think about how something is made? 99% of goods have used oil in one way or another to bring the product to the consumer.

[DuckBrat]

ya we dont need gas to heat our houses or to fuel our cars trucks planes..and who needs plastic its over rated...oil and gas is why alberta is what it is.. ive spent 15 years in the patch by no means am i an expert but i know alot more then some guys.. i wouldent tell your doctor how to do a surgery..if you dont know what a perferation or frac is why comment on it..:angry3:

Just because we use the resource does not mean we have to rape and destroy the land to get it.

as for your last statement I won't comment on your Frac job if done properly but you leave the enviro stuff to those qualifed. Just a thought.

[eastcoast]

ya we dont need gas to heat our houses or to fuel our cars trucks planes..and who needs plastic its over rated...oil and gas is why alberta is what it is.. ive spent 15 years in the patch by no means am i an expert but i know alot more then some guys.. i wouldent tell your doctor how to do a surgery..if you dont know what a perferation or frac is why comment on it..:angry3:

I know what perforation and fracing is and im not against it, I am against the attitude that they know what's right for us ,and we should just trust them and not oversee what they are doing.

[Bound2Fish]

Just because we use the resource does not mean we have to rape and destroy the land to get it.

as for your last statement I won't comment on your Frac job if done properly but you leave the enviro stuff to those qualifed. Just a thought.

Have you ever considered about how much water the average family consumes in a year, and how many of us water the lawn, fill up pools, wash our cars? Population is more of a concern when it comes to water usages, than the O&G. Perhaps a thinning of the herd is in order? Does that sound like a better idea to conserve this precious resource or perhaps is that a bit to harsh cause if we thin the herd, there will be less water consumption by the public and also from the O&G because they wouldnt have to drill and produce oil and gas to keep you from freezing in winter and getting your food to your mouth.

[avb3]

L...It may not be ground water but maybe there is a slow casing vent leak. Maybe work was done but it turned out after starting that it was worse then they thought. Maybe there was some petroleum contamination but they tried the bacteria approach to eat it naturally versus a larger ground disturbance total removal....

As the well is adjacent to an ephemeral wetland, issues are multiplied. Certainly they tried to deal with the reclamation prior to dealing with the removal. The longer they got into the project, the more issues arose. Much of the delay appeared to be that the company involved was looking for less expensive alternatives; perhaps the funds weren't in their current year budget? Who knows.

Maybe then the removal was the only option. These are businesses so no one should expect them to pay $1 MM to reclaim when a $200K job would work.

My information is that they have now expended a significant larger amount then $1MM - I would almost surmise that this particular well in the end may not have made them any money.

In the end however...everyone wants you to have your surface back in the same state in which it was left. No better...no worse.

It is not ONLY the surface, but mitigation on sub-surface issues. Eventually the company will have addressed the issue, but let's not forget it's been 8 years! There was a lot of foot dragging going on in this particular case, and we have seen other reclamation issues that were not handled in an expedient manner.

Fracking does take place on the property, and of course there are concerns that it is done properly. As someone else noted, the huge amounts of water alone is an issue when considering that we can't drink oil or gas, but we do need water.

How does the saying go? "Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over". One can't drink O&G, but the water needs to come out on top.

[drake]

ya we dont need gas to heat our houses or to fuel our cars trucks planes..and who needs plastic its over rated...oil and gas is why alberta is what it is.. ive spent 15 years in the patch by no means am i an expert but i know alot more then some guys.. i wouldent tell your doctor how to do a surgery..if you dont know what a perferation or frac is why comment on it..:angry3:

Doctors used to treat anxiety with cigarettes at one time.......but as information surfaced that cigarettes are cancer causing the practice was abolished.

[eastcoast]

Please expand on this thought, I would like to hear your comments on how they need us more than we need them? Do you think everything is made by hand with unprocessed, unrefined goods? Ever stop to think about how something is made? 99% of goods have used oil in one way or another to bring the product to the consumer.

do you know how much usable oil is left in the world and how much of that is easily accesable is free open countries? less than 10%, so why should we bow down to big oil comapnies and take their word for it? if we were to say kick out or bar a certain oil company from drilling here there would be more to take their place.

where else are they going to go saudi arabia? nope government owned, what about venezuela also government owned, nigeria sure if you don't mind bullets flying past your head or pipelines being bombed,point being the oil companies need alberta and canada more than we need them,it's time to start acting like it.

[chasingtail]

Have you ever considered about how much water the average family consumes in a year, and how many of us water the lawn, fill up pools, wash our cars? Population is more of a concern when it comes to water usages, than the O&G. Perhaps a thinning of the herd is in order? Does that sound like a better idea to conserve this precious resource or perhaps is that a bit to harsh cause if we thin the herd, there will be less water consumption by the public and also from the O&G because they wouldnt have to drill and produce oil and gas to keep you from freezing in winter and getting your food to your mouth.

When people fill there pools and water the lawn, that water is recovered through evaporation or leaches back into the aquifer. Pumping millions of m3 of water 3 miles underground is not recovered. With that said I am not against fracing, it pays my bills.

[gopher]

As the well is adjacent to an ephemeral wetland, issues are multiplied. Certainly they tried to deal with the reclamation prior to dealing with the removal. The longer they got into the project, the more issues arose. Much of the delay appeared to be that the company involved was looking for less expensive alternatives; perhaps the funds weren't in their current year budget? Who knows.



My information is that they have now expended a significant larger amount then $1MM - I would almost surmise that this particular well in the end may not have made them any money.



It is not ONLY the surface, but mitigation on sub-surface issues. Eventually the company will have addressed the issue, but let's not forget it's been 8 years! There was a lot of foot dragging going on in this particular case, and we have seen other reclamation issues that were not handled in an expedient manner.

Fracking does take place on the property, and of course there are concerns that it is done properly. As someone else noted, the huge amounts of water alone is an issue when considering that we can't drink oil or gas, but we do need water.

How does the saying go? "Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over". One can't drink O&G, but the water needs to come out on top.

Are you going to take me up on my offer of a glass of frack water?

[Bound2Fish]

do you know how much usable oil is left in the world and how much of that is easily accesable is free open countries? less than 10%, so why should we bow down to big oil comapnies and take their word for it? if we were to say kick out or bar a certain oil company from drilling here there would be more to take their place.

where else are they going to go saudi arabia? nope government owned, what about venezuela also government owned, nigeria sure if you don't mind bullets flying past your head or pipelines being bombed,point being the oil companies need alberta and canada more than we need them,it's time to start acting like it.

Do you know how much usable oil there is in the world? Cause theres some good guesses, but no one knows for sure. We are still finding more and more formations containing oil and our processes of retrieving the oil is getting better and better. But back to the post, what point are you trying to make? That other countries have government owned oil?

Anyways be back in a bit, have to have a meeting on how to figure out how to get more oil out of the ground to support the worlds population. Yeah I guess you call the people of the patch heros for everything they have given you. Including refining plants for that oh so tasty drinking water that goes straight to your house.

[avb3]

Are you going to take me up on my offer of a glass of frack water?

As the saying goes, you first. Let's not try an degrade this to "mine's bigger then yours".

The issues are real, and they need to be addressed from reality. Obfuscation or denials don't create credibility.

What does create credibility is advances in techniques that will minimize the use of toxic chemicals that have shown to leach into ground water, and techniques that will minimize the vast amounts of water now used.

I suspect fracking today is better then it was 15 years ago. I also suspect it will be better 15 years from now. I would like to get to that point a lot quicker.

I have no idea what the solution is, but I sure know there is a problem.

Doing the ostrich trick doesn't advance anything.

[gopher]

As the saying goes, you first. Let's not try an degrade this to "mine's bigger then yours".

The issues are real, and they need to be addressed from reality. Obfuscation or denials don't create credibility.

What does create credibility is advances in techniques that will minimize the use of toxic chemicals that have shown to leach into ground water, and techniques that will minimize the vast amounts of water now used.

I suspect fracking today is better then it was 15 years ago. I also suspect it will be better 15 years from now. I would like to get to that point a lot quicker.

I have no idea what the solution is, but I sure know there is a problem.

Doing the ostrich trick doesn't advance anything.
Lol BS. You said it all you suspect.

[avb3]

Lol BS. You said it all you suspect.

Like I also said, obfuscation and denials harm credibility.

Enough said.

[gopher]

Like I also said, obfuscation and denials harm credibility.

Enough said.

I am not a fracker but I am involved in directional drilling so when somebody wants to mess with my lively hood I get a little upset. I am not using my big boy rigger voice because I don’t want to hurt you feelings

[Sundancefisher]

As the well is adjacent to an ephemeral wetland, issues are multiplied. Certainly they tried to deal with the reclamation prior to dealing with the removal. The longer they got into the project, the more issues arose. Much of the delay appeared to be that the company involved was looking for less expensive alternatives; perhaps the funds weren't in their current year budget? Who knows.



My information is that they have now expended a significant larger amount then $1MM - I would almost surmise that this particular well in the end may not have made them any money.



It is not ONLY the surface, but mitigation on sub-surface issues. Eventually the company will have addressed the issue, but let's not forget it's been 8 years! There was a lot of foot dragging going on in this particular case, and we have seen other reclamation issues that were not handled in an expedient manner.

Fracking does take place on the property, and of course there are concerns that it is done properly. As someone else noted, the huge amounts of water alone is an issue when considering that we can't drink oil or gas, but we do need water.

How does the saying go? "Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over". One can't drink O&G, but the water needs to come out on top.

OK...

Let me ask you a few simple questions.

When was the well first drilled?

What are of the Province is this well located?

You are starting off complaining about fracing...yet this is not a fracing problem by the sounds of it. Would you say this is a true statement.?

You like oil and gas activity...but when it is in your backyard you are much more critical because it is impacting you directly? Is this a correct statement?

[eastcoast]

I am not a fracker but I am involved in directional drilling so when somebody wants to mess with my lively hood I get a little upset. I am not using my big boy rigger voice because I don’t want to hurt you feelings

of course the person to ask critical questions is a person who's livelyhood is directly involved, that will give a fair and balanced answer as always:sHa_shakeshout:

[gopher]

of course the person to ask critical questions is a person who's livelyhood is directly involved, that will give a fair and balanced answer as always:sHa_shakeshout:

Better off to read how bad it is in the New York Times for sure. What was I thinking?

[eastcoast]

Better off to read how bad it is in the New York Times for sure. What was I thinking?

I guess people were wrong when they said 2 wrongs make a right?

lets just leave the province in a toxic waste dump for our children and grandchildren im sure they will appreciate it,after all it might effect some people right now?

[gopher]

I guess people were wrong when they said 2 wrongs make a right?

lets just leave the province in a toxic waste dump for our children and grandchildren im sure they will appreciate it,after all it might effect some people right now?

Or you could move back to the east coast I here there economy is doing really well.:)

[eastcoast]

Or you could move back to the east coast I here there economy is doing really well.:)

that's an easy argument, try saying it on the drill floor next time you are up there:scared0018:

I have worked in the patch aswell as a perforator, open hole wireliner and a mwd hand,my brother is a tool push and I have many friends and relatives that work on the rigs in canada and around the world,do I want the oil patch to collapse nope, that doesn't mean we should let the oil companies do whatever they want to us and smile about it because it might effect some people, why don't we ask darryl katz if public funding for the arena is a good idea?

[gopher]

that's an easy argument, try saying it on the drill floor next time you are up there:scared0018:

I have worked in the patch aswell as a perforator, open hole wireliner and a mwd hand,my brother is a tool push and I have many friends and relatives that work on the rigs in canada and around the world,do I want the oil patch to collapse nope, that doesn't mean we should let the oil companies do whatever they want to us and smile about it because it might effect some people, why don't we ask darryl katz if public funding for the arena is a good idea?

How that cod fishery doing?:sHa_sarcasticlol:

[eastcoast]

How that cod fishery doing?:sHa_sarcasticlol:

offshore is doing really well actually thanks for asking,hibernia is steaming along,hebron is starting up soon,white rose is going along and terra nova is good aswell,lots of new jobs and people working,economy is doing good so I hear,real estate is booming etc.

[JohninAB]

gopher you are one class act, NOT!

[gopher]

offshore is doing really well actually thanks for asking,hibernia is steaming along,hebron is starting up soon,white rose is going along and terra nova is good aswell,lots of new jobs and people working,economy is doing good so I hear,real estate is booming etc.

Actually that’s good to hear

[gopher]

gopher you are one class act, NOT!

Are your feelings hurt?

[avb3]

OK...

Let me ask you a few simple questions.


When was the well first drilled?

Can't answer that now, would have to look back at records that aren't available right now. 1980's perhaps?

What are of the Province is this well located?

In the Brooks area.

You are starting off complaining about fracing...yet this is not a fracing problem by the sounds of it. Would you say this is a true statement.?

Your correct, this is not a fracking issue, although fracking occurs on the same property. Thread drift perhaps?

The issue came up as a an example of things in O&G not going right and taking an extraordinary amount of time to correct.

Look, issues exist in O&G, we all know that. We also all know how important O&G industry is to Alberta.

We all need to ensure that the industry can continue, but that means it needs to be as responsible as it can be.

We have seen wells on the same property infringing outside of their leases, encroaching on to wetlands, driving over sensitive areas and dragging feet on reclamation.

Some of that is because of the subs that the prime contractor uses, but that is not our issue, that is their issue.

So, we have a LOT of experience with many facets of the O&G industry. Much of it is positive and they act responsibly, but there is also an undeniable part of it that is irresponsible.

That irresponsible part of the industry needs to change.

Let's not hide the fact it exists, because it does.

You like oil and gas activity...but when it is in your backyard you are much more critical because it is impacting you directly? Is this a correct statement?

See my comments above.

[JohninAB]

Oh why yes they are gopher, I am in such an emotional state over your dribble. :sHa_sarcasticlol:

[gopher]

Oh why yes they are gopher, I am in such an emotional state over your dribble. :sHa_sarcasticlol:

Go back to try and win the popularity vote

[Bound2Fish]

If anyone would like to arrange an opportunity to get out in the field and learn how to frac first hand, I am sure I can arrange that. Also the pay isnt bad either. Then you can come back with your concerns and speak about something that you know and maybe then people will take you seriously.

[avb3]

If anyone would like to arrange an opportunity to get out in the field and learn how to frac first hand, I am sure I can arrange that. Also the pay isnt bad either. Then you can come back with your concerns and speak about something that you know and maybe then people will take you seriously.

I know how to fertilize my lawn.

I also know that doing so impacts things negatively downstream due to runoff.

Therefore I choose to mitigate my negative impact by mulching. Better water retention, and no harmful run off.

So, knowing how to do something doesn't mitigate potential negative effects, does it?

Fracking practices need to learn the similar mitigation. Perhaps in time they will.

[Sundancefisher]

Can't answer that now, would have to look back at records that aren't available right now. 1980's perhaps?



In the Brooks area.



Your correct, this is not a fracking issue, although fracking occurs on the same property. Thread drift perhaps?

The issue came up as a an example of things in O&G not going right and taking an extraordinary amount of time to correct.

Look, issues exist in O&G, we all know that. We also all know how important O&G industry is to Alberta.

We all need to ensure that the industry can continue, but that means it needs to be as responsible as it can be.

We have seen wells on the same property infringing outside of their leases, encroaching on to wetlands, driving over sensitive areas and dragging feet on reclamation.

Some of that is because of the subs that the prime contractor uses, but that is not our issue, that is their issue.

So, we have a LOT of experience with many facets of the O&G industry. Much of it is positive and they act responsibly, but there is also an undeniable part of it that is irresponsible.

That irresponsible part of the industry needs to change.

Let's not hide the fact it exists, because it does.



See my comments above.

Maybe unintentionally you are stating points as if they are common place problems versus rare problems. Everyone has problems from dealing with the drive thru getting your order correct...or getting the correct change back to maybe the egg has salmonella in it...to your car ran out of gas to the starter broke or your battery in the key ran out.

That does not then mean all restaurants are incompetent, all working teenagers are useless and all food is diseased and all cars are lemons.

My point is because of a problem I don't blow it out of proportion and treat a thread like something is pervasive when it is not.

For every problem like yours...there are thousands without problems. I strongly suspect the oil company is doing their best and much sader than you at the time and cost it is requiring to fix.

The reclamation issues sound like more of a spill than a well leak. Stuff happens...especially in the 1960, 70, 80's and into the 90's. So much has changed...complaining about current practices based upon past practices is unfair to this topic.

IMHO

[avb3]

Maybe unintentionally you are stating points as if they are common place problems versus rare problems.

My point is because of a problem I don't blow it out of proportion and treat a thread like something is pervasive when it is not.

I could accept your comment it this was a "one of". It's an example of the worst problem, but we consistently have to remind, deal with, and have actually "fined" operators for transgressions as I outline earlier (trespassing off lease, impacting wetlands etc.).

It seems to vary as to who staff, and especially supervisory staff, is. In the past, issues have been dealt with satisfactory, and then, with a change of supervisory staff, issues crop up a new, and efforts are needed to get them back in line.

That is the frustrating part... it's a never ending story.

And because of that, the cumulative issues become ingrained in memory.



With the number of wells on the property, our experiences goes well beyond picking an isolated incident.

[quote]The reclamation issues sound like more of a spill than a well leak. Stuff happens...especially in the 1960, 70, 80's and into the 90's. So much has changed...complaining about current practices based upon past practices is unfair to this topic.

IMHO

Agreed, practices are improving and will continue to.

However, the issue is current and continues. Maybe, just maybe, a reclamation certificate can be issue this year.

[Sundancefisher]

I could accept your comment it this was a "one of". It's an example of the worst problem, but we consistently have to remind, deal with, and have actually "fined" operators for transgressions as I outline earlier (trespassing off lease, impacting wetlands etc.).

It seems to vary as to who staff, and especially supervisory staff, is. In the past, issues have been dealt with satisfactory, and then, with a change of supervisory staff, issues crop up a new, and efforts are needed to get them back in line.

That is the frustrating part... it's a never ending story.

And because of that, the cumulative issues become ingrained in memory.

[quoteFor every problem like yours...there are thousands without problems. [/qutoe]

With the number of wells on the property, our experiences goes well beyond picking an isolated incident.



Agreed, practices are improving and will continue to.

However, the issue is current and continues. Maybe, just maybe, a reclamation certificate can be issue this year.

Would you agree that a few operators or a few individuals have problems versus all companies?

[Gust]

OK...

Let me ask you a few simple questions.

When was the well first drilled?

What are of the Province is this well located?

You are starting off complaining about fracing...yet this is not a fracing problem by the sounds of it. Would you say this is a true statement.?

You like oil and gas activity...but when it is in your backyard you are much more critical because it is impacting you directly? Is this a correct statement?

I like Suns response because I'm tired of a single activity elsewhere somehow representing the whole shabang. And besides, everything evolves in technology and know how/best practice per specific area. And there will always be Bay/Wall Street boys who have other ideas about how to run things (i.e., cut corners, salt the numbers, etc [[I wish I could elaborate on this but don't want to out some companies]]),, but from my experiences in "BIG OIL", the civil/hydro engineering was extensively strict when it came to reclamation. Not every company pushes the envelope when it comes down environmental impact and one company I worked with adhered to a stricter mandate than that put forth by the govt,, but that's not newsworthy. I'm not sure what I'm to understand from the original arguement,, is it about fraccing or about a company circumnavigating the rules on a specific site stateside?

[ishootbambi]

And the statement by Bambi, that co2 is a new process is as wrong as it can get. We have been fracing with co2 since I can remember..

i guess the rolleyes emoticon at the end of my post wasnt clear enough? anyone with the ability to read the english language could do a quick search on google and see for themselves that CO2 has been used in frac for around 40 years now......

but this thread was started by someone who would rather search for ANYTHING negative regarding frac....whether it holds any truth or relevance to practices in alberta.

and you dont need to explain frac to me.....im typing this from a well right now that we are setting up to frac tomorrow. ive been at this for more than 6 years now....

[avb3]

....
but this thread was started by someone who would rather search for ANYTHING negative regarding frac....whether it holds any truth or relevance to practices in alberta.

and you dont need to explain frac to me.....im typing this from a well right now that we are setting up to frac tomorrow. ive been at this for more than 6 years now....

As the OP, don't tell me why I posted the article.

Like I said in my OP, you may not like the message, or the messenger (the Times), but that does not negate the fact we, and I am using that as the collective we for us Albertans, need to make sure that just because the O&G industry is so important to us, and it is, that we neglect the negative issues.

As someone else pointed out a few messages ago, there are many O&G companies that ensure compliance, and some that go beyond requirements.

The trouble is, they get painted with the same brush as those that don't. And sometimes, the regulations are not where they should be either.

If we don't address the real environmental issues, especially as they impact water, we will get another round of environmental wackos in campaigns whereby they call the oilsands the "tarsands".

Support O&G, but also let's make sure not to disregard the real issues that exist.

[avb3]

Would you agree that a few operators or a few individuals have problems versus all companies?

As far as standard practices are concerned, there is no question most companies and most operators attempt to be compliant.

How does one deal with an process that inherently has problems built into it from an environmental perspective? Fracking is one of those processes.

I am not arguing that fracking should cease; I am arguing that it needs to improve its technology.

It will, at some point. Faster is better.

[Gust]

As the OP, don't tell me why I posted the article.

Like I said in my OP, you may not like the message, or the messenger (the Times), but that does not negate the fact we, and I am using that as the collective we for us Albertans, need to make sure that just because the O&G industry is so important to us, and it is, that we neglect the negative issues.

As someone else pointed out a few messages ago, there are many O&G companies that ensure compliance, and some that go beyond requirements.

The trouble is, they get painted with the same brush as those that don't. And sometimes, the regulations are not where they should be either.

If we don't address the real environmental issues, especially as they impact water, we will get another round of environmental wackos in campaigns whereby they call the oilsands the "tarsands".

Support O&G, but also let's make sure not to disregard the real issues that exist.

Since when did "Tarsands" become a politically incorrect a term? Serious:confused:

And all technologies evolve, they aren't static.

[avb3]

Since when did "Tarsands" become a politically incorrect a term? Serious:confused:

And all technologies evolve, they aren't static.

The greenies use it as a pejorative term. Industry and the AB government have been fighting that for some time.

You may want to take a look at this recent clip for the House of Commons:

http://youtu.be/OvSrusacht0

[MountainTi]

Don't forget that this in the USA. Their drilling and facking techniques are not the same as ours, or the same from formation to formation. One major thing that sets us apart from the americans is the use of surface casing. This is a secondary containment that all drilling rigs in canada use. It is a safeguard against groundwater contamination. They do not regularly use surface casing in the US. Thus, their risk of contamination is much much higher.

Really? Lot's of surface casing being used here in Pennsylvania.

[Sundancefisher]

As far as standard practices are concerned, there is no question most companies and most operators attempt to be compliant.

How does one deal with an process that inherently has problems built into it from an environmental perspective? Fracking is one of those processes.

I am not arguing that fracking should cease; I am arguing that it needs to improve its technology.

It will, at some point. Faster is better.

So you agree that the vast majority of companies are compliant. That some do as in all walks of life and situations...some by accident...an extremely few on purpose.

You agree that comparing the US to Canada is not fair.

You probably would agree that after hundreds and hundreds of thousands of wells drilled and fraced that if there was any significant problem...it would of been plainly obvious to Albertans. The Farmer lobby group is extremely loud.

[MountainTi]

So you agree that the vast majority of companies are compliant. That some do as in all walks of life and situations...some by accident...an extremely few on purpose.

You agree that comparing the US to Canada is not fair.
You probably would agree that after hundreds and hundreds of thousands of wells drilled and fraced that if there was any significant problem...it would of been plainly obvious to Albertans. The Farmer lobby group is extremely loud.

I gotta ask. Why do you say that? You think that all of todays technological advances in all aspects of oil/gas exploration originate in Canada? Not likely! The Marcellus formation here in PA is the same field that was being targeted in NY, and things here are done to stringent standards also.

[sikwhiskey]

Really? Lot's of surface casing being used here in Pennsylvania.

What would they attach there BOPS to without surface casing? A humpback whale maybe:sHa_sarcasticlol: Any Idea of the depths of the Surface Casing compared to the TVD of the production casing? I have a job offer in PA and been thinking about it.

[MountainTi]

What would they attach there BOPS to without surface casing? A humpback whale maybe:sHa_sarcasticlol: Any Idea of the depths of the Surface Casing compared to the TVD of the production casing? I have a job offer in PA and been thinking about it.

Tie it off to screw in anchors maybe? :)
Typical surface casing of 1000'. Marcellus at 5000' - 9000', horizontal from there.
The Marcellus is an enourmous field, there is a ton of work down here. Little different for a country boy from Alberta though, man are there a lot of people down here.
Oh yeah, it's fracing hot down here. You start sweating as soon as you walk out of the motel room

[hal53]

Tie it off to screw in anchors maybe? :)
Typical surface casing of 1000'. Marcellus at 5000' - 9000', horizontal from there.
The Marcellus is an enourmous field, there is a ton of work down here. Little different for a country boy from Alberta though, man are there a lot of people down here.
Oh yeah, it's fracing hot down here. You start sweating as soon as you walk out of the motel room
"TIE IT OFF TO THE SCREW IN ANCHORS MAYBE???"....thanks for the informative posts....Sheesh!!!!!

[Sundancefisher]

I gotta ask. Why do you say that? You think that all of todays technological advances in all aspects of oil/gas exploration originate in Canada? Not likely! The Marcellus formation here in PA is the same field that was being targeted in NY, and things here are done to stringent standards also.

Regulatory aspects are different. Public perception is different.

[MountainTi]

"TIE IT OFF TO THE SCREW IN ANCHORS MAYBE???"....thanks for the informative posts....Sheesh!!!!!

Lighten up there Hal, note the smiley face. Guess I should have used the sarcastic emoticon. Too much of this low priced american coors I guess

[MountainTi]

Regulatory aspects are different. Public perception is different.

You're right about the public perception aspect of it. This is pretty old country down here, people are set in their ways, and this is all pretty new to them. I think they are slowly starting to accept it and seeing the economic benefits that will come of it. It's funny, driving into West Virginia from here there are large billboards on the interstate proclaiming that coal is the cleanest and most environmentally friendly form of energy.

[ctd]

I will take a glass of your FRAC water. I won't drink water from your water well though unless you have a treatment plant and can attest to it being treated to conform to industry standards.

If your water well is located in a coal seam and the company performed a well stimulation (frac) then it is possible that the fracturing process may have caused a higher concentration of gas flow around the formation. The gas was already there just not flowing as much.

your water well always would have had concentrations gas and chemicles that occur naturally but may not have been large amounts because they would not have been able to flow as much.
Another answer may be that as your water well starts to dry up it no longer has pressure to hold back the gas that was entrained in the formation and this may be causing the excessive amounts of gas to come out of the water.

one has to look at all avenues and explore them in detail.

[Rhino81]

i guess the rolleyes emoticon at the end of my post wasnt clear enough? anyone with the ability to read the english language could do a quick search on google and see for themselves that CO2 has been used in frac for around 40 years now......

but this thread was started by someone who would rather search for ANYTHING negative regarding frac....whether it holds any truth or relevance to practices in alberta.

and you dont need to explain frac to me.....im typing this from a well right now that we are setting up to frac tomorrow. ive been at this for more than 6 years now....

I'm sorry. I wasn't only explaining to you, but to others that may not have the knowledge that we do. Wasn't my intention to to pinpoint u if that is how you took it. 40 years. I don't think so. I I also was replying to thread. Did not pm u.

[Gonehuntin']

I agree!......

Some people on here need to pull their head out of the sand....

Or somewhere else where the sun don't shine in some people's cases.. I'm no expert either.I do make my living as part of a crew that works flowing these fracs back , among other types of job.So I am biased. I know that many companies have made policy changes such as setting their surface casing deeper than strictly required by law for groundwater protection (10% of hole TD is minimum IIRC).We are not the excited states.We have far different and in many cases more stringent rules and regs.I have heard it said by many knowledgeable (read experienced) guys who have commented that in policy/procedures and practices they are YEARS behind us.

I just dislike people who have no firsthand knowledge whatsoever jumping on the anti fracking/anti oil and gas bandwagon.Enhanced hydrocarbon recovery methods may not all be perfect, but the people who do this for a living are the pro's.They know what they are doing and are a conscientious lot.The products they use to frac with are nasty sometimes, but let's remember where those products come from.The oil companies are responsible for the wells until cleaned up and abandoned, let's not forget their obligation in that regard, I don't see them forgetting about it.:fighting0030:

Let's just remember the role oil and gas plays in our province and lives, it pays a lot of bills for families, buys a lot of healthcare, equalization to other provinces (on the larger scale) etc.

And respect it.

[Sundancefisher]

I will take a glass of your FRAC water. I won't drink water from your water well though unless you have a treatment plant and can attest to it being treated to conform to industry standards.

If your water well is located in a coal seam and the company performed a well stimulation (frac) then it is possible that the fracturing process may have caused a higher concentration of gas flow around the formation. The gas was already there just not flowing as much.

your water well always would have had concentrations gas and chemicles that occur naturally but may not have been large amounts because they would not have been able to flow as much.
Another answer may be that as your water well starts to dry up it no longer has pressure to hold back the gas that was entrained in the formation and this may be causing the excessive amounts of gas to come out of the water.

one has to look at all avenues and explore them in detail.

I am hoping this is not on purpose.

I would respectfully suggest you don't seem to know what you are talking about...you talk terms that make you sound knowledgeable but in fact used incorrectly you are coming across dangerous in providing misleading information.

No company would ever frac a coal seam that is used for water well flow. That is a very silly example. The classic case of tap on fire syndrome is farmers or acreage owners that drill a water well into a coal seam...then produce water. Water is great for a while until the coal area around the well gets either depleted of water or the formation pressure gets decreased. The result is methane molecules that is adsorbed...electrochemically bonded to the coal molecules gets desorbed...bond gets broken and the methane moves freely to the well. This is the exact same process companies use to dewater a coal seam...but not in areas of water wells.

Regulations are that you can't frac shallow coals...and companies always do a water well survey in the area...just to make sure farmers know how crappy their water is BEFORE they drill.

Simple.