Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The dark side of the natural gas boom

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
Louisiana1976 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 09:01 AM
Original message
The dark side of the natural gas boom
Victoria Switzer dreamed of a peaceful retirement in these Appalachian hills. Instead, she is coping with a big problem after a nearby natural gas well contaminated her family’s drinking water with high levels of methane.

Through no design of hers, Ms. Switzer has joined a rising chorus of voices skeptical of the nation’s latest energy push. “It’s been ‘drill, baby, drill’ out here,” Ms. Switzer said bitterly. “There is no stopping this train.”

snip

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/business/energy-environment/08fracking.html?em

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. A dark side price that almost certainly must be paid
A very reasonable argument can be made that paying a middle-eastern country $150/bbl for crude (plus the associated industry to refine and deliver that product)... hurts more people than potential contamination from natgas drilling.

Right now, natural gas is far cleaner and far cheaper than crude oil... and if it's produced here instead of in Dubai... that's a good thing too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'd feel better about NG production
Edited on Wed Dec-09-09 09:22 AM by safeinOhio
if the profit takers gave just compensation to individuals that pay the cost without hiring law firms to weasel out of it. Drill baby, just pay the fricking cost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Certainly... but that isn't an option with the Saudis, is it?
If it's done here at least it can be dealth with here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
2. ah..... the fracking craze. The companies buy people off with big promises
and meanwhille...do damages beyond the foreseen. Its been all over parts of NY State, people are now beginning to get a clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
5. Is New York’s Marcellus Shale Too Hot to Handle?
http://www.propublica.org/feature/is-the-marcellus-shale-too-hot-to-handle-1109

Is New York’s Marcellus Shale Too Hot to Handle?

by Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica - November 9, 2009 5:10 am EST

As New York gears up for a massive expansion of gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, state officials have made a potentially troubling discovery about the wastewater created by the process: It's radioactive. And they have yet to say how they'll deal with it.

The information comes from New York's Department of Environmental Conservation, which analyzed 13 samples of wastewater brought thousands of feet to the surface from drilling and found that they contain levels of radium-226, a derivative of uranium, as high as 267 times the limit safe for discharge into the environment and thousands of times the limit safe for people to drink.

The findings, if backed up with more tests, have several implications: The energy industry would likely face stiffer regulations and expenses, and have more trouble finding treatment plants to accept its waste -- if any would at all. Companies would need to license their waste handlers and test their workers for radioactive exposure, and possibly ship waste across the country. And the state would have to sort out how its laws for radioactive waste might apply to drilling and how the waste could impact water supplies and the environment.

What is less clear is how the wastewater may affect the health of New Yorkers, since the danger depends on how much radiation people are exposed to and how they are exposed to it. Radium is known to cause bone, liver and breast cancers, and the EPA publishes exposure guidelines for it, but there is still disagreement over exactly how dangerous low-level doses can be to workers who handle it, or to the public.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-09-09 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Who cares? They can just blame it on TMI ... (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. It should come as no surprise to people who know anything about radon levels

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
8. Kick (can't rec, didn't see until now).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:24 AM
Response to Original message
9. Concentration of radioactive substances has always been a problem...
Sometimes the scales that form on oil and gas extraction equipment are so hot they have to be classified as radioactive waste.

In the bad old days a lot of this stuff got recycled, and metal recycling plants still catch occasional loads of radioactive drilling pipe and other equipment.

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/oilandgas.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
10. Um, wait ... what was the bright side?
Lots of old-school robber barons still pursuing the "Nature is inexhaustible" ethos?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC