New report: You can all calm down about fracking and earthquakes

posted at 3:31 pm on June 16, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

For some peculiar and irrational reason, the environmental lobby has perpetuated a particularly fierce campaign against hydraulic fracturing, a.k.a. fracking, the practice of using high-pressure injections of water, chemicals and sand to extract natural gas from underground. Greenies seem to take umbrage with anything that even apparently violates our ancient Mother Earth, but fracking has been around for decades and natural gas is a cheap, abundant, and relatively clean form of energy that fits well in our infrastructure — even the EPA admits that “natural gas plays a key role in our nation’s clean energy future.”

The natural gas jobs-and-investment scene is going gangbusters, but despite the boon to our economy and energy portfolio, environmentalists just can’t abide forms of energy that a) make money, and b) provide affordable energy to the masses. They’ve got all sorts of projects going to shoot the whole industry down.

The battle plan is called “Beyond Natural Gas,” and Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune announced the goal in an interview with the National Journal this month: “We’re going to be preventing new gas plants from being built wherever we can.” The big green lobbying machine has rolled out a new website that says “The natural gas industry is dirty, dangerous and running amok” and that “The closer we look at natural gas, the dirtier it appears; and the less of it we burn, the better off we will be.” So the goal is to shut the industry down, not merely to impose higher safety standards.

This is no idle threat. The Sierra Club has deep pockets funded by liberal foundations and knows how to work the media and politicians. The lobby helped to block new nuclear plants for more than 30 years, it has kept much of the U.S. off-limits to oil drilling, and its “Beyond Coal” campaign has all but shut down new coal plants. One of its priorities now will be to make shale gas drilling anathema within the Democratic Party. …

The federal Energy Information Administration reports that in 2009 “the 4% drop in the carbon intensity of the electric power sector, the largest in recent times, reflects a large increase in the use of lower-carbon natural gas because of an almost 50% decline in its price.” The Department of Energy reports that natural gas electric plants produce 45% less carbon than coal plants, though newer coal plants are much cleaner.

I know — go figure. Part of the environmentalists’ main argument against natural gas is that fracking causes a whole host of ills, from contaminating groundwater to causing earthquakes. Well, that contaminating-groundwater thing turned out to be a bust, and now there’s a new study out that oh-so-cautiously reports that, actually, fracking is not causing horrible humanity-ending tremors within the earth’s crust.

The controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas does not pose a high risk for triggering earthquakes large enough to feel, but other types of energy-related drilling can make the ground noticeably shake, a major government science report concludes.

Even those man-made tremors large enough to be an issue are very rare, says a special report by the National Research Council. In more than 90 years of monitoring, human activity has been shown to trigger only 154 quakes, most of them moderate or small, and only 60 of them in the United States. That’s compared to a global average of about 14,450 earthquakes of magnitude 4.0 or greater every year, said the report, released Friday.

The state of New York was under such an advanced state of environmentalist-influence that they went so far as to enact a fracking-moratorium pending further review. With the evidence decrying the hydraulic fracturing quickly wearing thin, however, Gov. Cuomo is considering allowing the practice in selective areas — a proposal that could never be considered without outrageous outrage from those greenie-types, of course.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…except for JugEars!

KOOLAID2 on June 16, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Supposedly the enviro beloved geothermal causes much more seismic activity than does fracking.

lizzie beth on June 16, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Even those man-made tremors large enough to be an issue are very rare

…November will be one of them!

KOOLAID2 on June 16, 2012 at 3:37 PM

If they feel it is causing problems, all that matters to a lib.

hillsoftx on June 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Fracking may not cause earthquakes but it does cause volcanoes. The good news is that you can keep volcanoes from occurring by heavily raising taxes and giving a large portion of that money to the U.N.

Bishop on June 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM

O opposes fracking not because of earthquakes or anything to do with the local environment. That’s all pretense. They do it because of climate change, or global warming, despite the fact that temperatures have arguably been cooling since 1998.

Take a torpedo to their global warming argument with two succinct points: 1. There is nothing unusual about current temps: the hockey stick graph has been fully debunked;there is simply nothing wrong with the climate. And 2. The ipcc tried to make the case that CO2 affecting climate temps is “settled science” by positing a causal correlation between CO2 and temps, but this is a specious false correlation (not causal). Indeed, the very foundation of the ipcc’s claim for CO2 driven climate warming has been repudiated. Yet, see algor repeat this monstrous deception in this must see 3 minute video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg&feature=player_embedded

anotherJoe on June 16, 2012 at 3:42 PM

End the DNC War on Science. These fracking skeptics are like Holocaust deniers!

philw1776 on June 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM

As long as there’s no fracking in Jellystone Park, Boo Boo’s okay with it

Ugly on June 16, 2012 at 3:44 PM

What they SHOULD be concerned with is geothermal and earthquakes.

See this cluster of earthquakes East of Cloverdale on this map? Those are due to water injection for geothermal energy production. I don’t see the “environmentalists” complaining about those quakes.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqscanv/FaultMaps/123-39.html

crosspatch on June 16, 2012 at 3:45 PM

The eco-Marxists in the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, et al can no longer be allowed to block access to our abundant natural resources without proposing a serious, economically viable alternative. I’ve had it with these elitist a-holes driving up the cost of everything though their ‘none of the above’ energy approach.

The Democrats claim to be the party of the poor and middle-class yet they’re very heavily influenced and funded by radical eco-extremists who make everyone poorer. How do they square that circle?

We need to wage war on these groups starting with working to stop all public funding of these grous by the EPA, Dept of Interior, et al, revocation of their charitable tax status, and revocation of their position of standing before the courts that allows them to sueon our behalf.

Charlemagne on June 16, 2012 at 3:52 PM

This is how life goes:
Half of everything you’re analyzing can be stated in simple terms.
The other half is way more complicated than you can understand.

Wisdom is knowing which way to think in any given situation.

Hence, we have multitudes of ignorant & even stupid people who think they know about these things bcs they read it in a book or heard it in the news.

Badger40 on June 16, 2012 at 3:56 PM

This is an attempt by real scientists to head off the bogus science expected to come from the loons at the EPA.

pat on June 16, 2012 at 3:57 PM

anotherJoe on June 16, 2012 at 3:42 PM

I would just say it’s simply a part of the same fraud. It is an attempt to destroy Capitalism and America by depriving us of affordable energy.

Flange on June 16, 2012 at 3:59 PM

For some peculiar and irrational reason, the environmental lobby has perpetuated a particularly fierce campaign against hydraulic fracturing,

It’s really not peculiar or irrational.

To enviro-types fracking must be dangerous. It is an effective means of producing evil dino juice and natural gas, so there has to be a problem with it.

After you accept that basic tenet of faith all that is left is to invent some hair brained theory pace: Global Warming/Cooling/Changing/Doinstuff.

CorporatePiggy on June 16, 2012 at 4:03 PM

It don’t matter whats you says…..

Fracking causes Earthquakes, it poisons the groundwater, it’s probably even seeping into the magma of the earth and we’re all gonna die in a fiery fracking explosion.

Aliens will prolly finds our little planet pebbles scattered around the Milky Way for 100,000 years.

They’ll stop their spaceships and say to each other, “yah, zzneep, zzneep, another planet that fracked.”

THIS, above, is what Enviro-wacko-nutjobs probably really believe.

PappyD61 on June 16, 2012 at 4:03 PM

. Yet, see algor repeat this monstrous deception in this must see 3 minute video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg&feature=player_embedded

anotherJoe on June 16, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Um, I’ll pass. Thanks anyway.

davidk on June 16, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Supposedly the enviro beloved geothermal causes much more seismic activity than does fracking.

lizzie beth on June 16, 2012 at 3:37 PM

You betcha. Geothermal projects take place where there is high heat gradient in the ground. And those high heat gradient areas are either very, very deep, or more often are in areas with some volcanic activity (not necessarily active, erupting volcanoes, but magma movement recent enough to still be very hot). And what is commonly associated with magma movement? Faults! And when faults get inflated with fluids, they do what? Move and cause earthquakes!

Fracing for natural gas production is very shallow relative to typical epicenters of earthquakes (where the fault moves). Fracing at 8000′ has very little chance of causing an earthquake to occur at 15000+ feet deep. Just as it has precious little chance of effecting ground water at 500′.

Coming out soon, later this summer, is a documentary called Frackland. It’s an answer to Gasland. Watch for it.

iurockhead on June 16, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Geothermal is robbing the earth of it’s heat and will cause the planet to implode (and probably contributes to global cooling).

Enviro-nut-job press releases in 5….4…..3….

PappyD61 on June 16, 2012 at 4:14 PM

Fracking may not cause earthquakes but it does cause volcanoes…

Bishop on June 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Dude! Volcanoes spew huge quantities of carbon into the atmosphere, thereby causing global warming. If fracking causes volcanoes then, logically, fracking must cause global warming. Therefore, fracking must be banned in order to save Mother Nature.

This is so obvious.

God, conservatives are so anti science, anti logic, and anti Nature.

Mr. Arkadin on June 16, 2012 at 4:15 PM

My wife was watching the new Dallas. Was this meme on display in it?

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Democrats must be held accountable for their support from liberal anti-energy groups. Make them, the EPA, and the Sierra Club explain why they have a ‘war on affordable energy’ and the working-class.

HoosierStateofMind on June 16, 2012 at 4:20 PM

I await the class action lawsuit against oil companies that their drilling caused a earthquakes. Some that are big enough to cause pain and suffering but not big enough to cause damage.

This is the reason why they are always trying to make the link. Not to stop simple drilling as a focus but to bled some blood money from the oil companies to the lawyers of greenies so they can’t afford to drill.

tjexcite on June 16, 2012 at 4:21 PM

Fracking causes global warming.

Environmental Marxism.

petefrt on June 16, 2012 at 4:21 PM

There’s an obvious point that everyone seems to be missing — if fracking did cause earthquakes, it would be a wonderful breakthrough in how to eliminate catastrophic earthquakes.

If we could trigger an earthquake every week to dissipate all the tension in a fault, there would never be sufficient build-up to cause great damage.

The big earthquakes all come from when it’s been too long since the last one.

Pythagoras on June 16, 2012 at 4:23 PM

you can relax about fracking…that’s not the issue.

the issue is that the left wants per capita Carbon to go *down*

that requires a total *redesign* of our economy…houses, cities, industries,…well, you get the drift

i know that our friend mccain is awfully worraied about money in politics…esp. republicsan money in politics

but, oddly, he never complains about the 400 million that climateworks has to design our future…and to educate us. that 400 million is just that one group.

he never complains at all about the vast amount of money that would make romney blush that aids the leftwing redesign our fur.

maybe russ feingold took him aside and told him…now john…the main thing here is to cut down on funding for conservatives…ok? got it?

and john says…yes, sir, sir

r keller on June 16, 2012 at 4:23 PM

i’m having lots of probs today with my keyboard…sorry

r keller on June 16, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Ees George Booooosh!

princetrumpet on June 16, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Geothermal is robbing the earth of it’s heat and will cause the planet to implode (and probably contributes to global cooling).

The heat removed by geothermal production is basically “fossil” heat that took millions of years to create through radioactive decay. At the current rate of extraction, that wouldn’t matter much but if we were to develop global geothermal heat extraction at a massive industrial scale, it could be catastrophic to life on Earth.

Earth loses gas to space every day. Volcanism adds gas. If volcanism were to stop or even slightly reduce to the point where the gassing out to space exceeds gas from volcanoes, the atmospheric pressure would decline and eventually the oceans would disappear. Most importantly it would be the loss of CO2 that would end life long before the oceans were lost. If volcanism reduces, the rate at which CO2 is scrubbed from the air through erosion and uptake by life would exceed CO2 production. As CO2 declines, plants become less productive and then the animals that rely on the plants become less productive.

At some point there is no longer enough CO2 to support plants and the animals die. It is estimated that we will likely reach the point of CO2 depletion in about 250 million years time, long before the sun gets too hot. Any reduction of heat from inside the Earth will speed that process up. We could, however, possibly reverse that by burying nuclear waste deep in the crust near the mantle.

crosspatch on June 16, 2012 at 4:32 PM

To the enviro-nazis and the Left Progressives in general, and Obama in particular,

“Frack you!”

coldwarrior on June 16, 2012 at 4:32 PM

My Spidey Sense is telling me that there is an 0bama EO coming out banning fracking.

jukin3 on June 16, 2012 at 4:32 PM

If fracking did cause small earthquakes, then there is reason to suspect that it might be used to prevent large earthquakes. Large earthquakes tend to be preceded by a lull in small earthquakes.

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:34 PM

The marxists that masquerade as environmentalists know that cheap energy is the key to industrial capitalism. They can’t destroy capitalism directly. They are trying to destroy it by eliminating cheap energy. All of their ‘solutions’ are diversions intended to hide their true objective from the fools that fund Big Green.

slickwillie2001 on June 16, 2012 at 4:36 PM

At some point there is no longer enough CO2 to support plants and the animals die. It is estimated that we will likely reach the point of CO2 depletion in about 250 million years time, long before the sun gets too hot. Any reduction of heat from inside the Earth will speed that process up. We could, however, possibly reverse that by burying nuclear waste deep in the crust near the mantle.

crosspatch on June 16, 2012 at 4:32 PM

I think there are supernova that are supposed to go off before then that are close enough to be extinction level events.

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:37 PM

My wife was watching the new Dallas. Was this meme on display in it?

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Limbaugh mentioned that show the other day. Said he will be following it closely as he was a huge fan of the original. As I recall he did say something about the new show mentioning this.

Del Dolemonte on June 16, 2012 at 4:38 PM

But it still poisons the ground water, right?

Cindy Munford on June 16, 2012 at 4:44 PM

There’s an obvious point that everyone seems to be missing — if fracking did cause earthquakes, it would be a wonderful breakthrough in how to eliminate catastrophic earthquakes.

If we could trigger an earthquake every week to dissipate all the tension in a fault, there would never be sufficient build-up to cause great damage.

The big earthquakes all come from when it’s been too long since the last one.

Pythagoras on June 16, 2012 at 4:23 PM

With the research and testing carried out in the past this is not an idea that is considered workable nor safe at this point. Both the USGS, California Survey and Cal Tech have looked into this potential for decades.

The problem with “lubricating” stressed fault planes was that they could never be sure they would not end up setting off a major event by injecting fluids into a fault system that was already stressed to a significant level, or that might cause a “cascade” to trigger a major event in an adjacent system.

Recent work has determined that some of the more recent moderate to large quakes in California initiated along previously unknown, minor, parallel to sub-parallel faults and set off a cascading effect that transferred stress to nearby larger fault systems that were already highly stressed.

A major concern in projects that propose earthquake mitigation by injection of fluids is this problem centered around the potential for inadvertently “cascading” of stresses into overdue “locked” systems.

So far the researchers are unable to determine the “actual” stored stress levels in the target systems, and adjacent systems, at the necessary depths.

The “litigation” in a “whoops” situation would be enormous.

Yoop on June 16, 2012 at 4:54 PM

a proposal that could never be considered without outrageous outrage from those greenie-types, of course.

…and I am sure this liberal will be out there with the rest…foaming at the mouth about how “wasteful” and “dangerous” it is to create all this unnecessary CO2 and pollution…..you know….after she gets done creating massive amounts of pollution and waste promoting herself:

http://www.intouchweekly.com/2012/06/madonnatourdemands.php

“If her MDNA tour demands are any indication, it seems Madonna is still a Material Girl! In Touch has learned the pop star’s backstage rider states she is traveling with a whopping 200-person entourage including 30 bodyguards, personal chefs, a yoga instructor, an acupuncturist and even an on-site dry cleaner.

Can you believe these are the same twits that whine about us driving SUV’s and running our Air Conditioners because it’s “killing the world”…….

Baxter Greene on June 16, 2012 at 4:56 PM

My clock causes the sun to go down.

I swear…it happens EVERY DAY at about the same time…!!!

Ragspierre on June 16, 2012 at 4:57 PM

James Lovelock (Gaia scientist) on shale gas and the problem with ‘greens’

Gas is almost a give-away in the US at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it: the amount of CO2 produced by burning gas in a good turbine gives you 60% efficiency. In a coal-fired power station, it is 30% per unit of fuel. So you get a two-to-one gain there straight away. The next two-to-one gain you get is that methane has only got half its energy in the carbon, the other half is in the hydrogen, so there’s a four-to-one gain in CO2 output from the same amount of electricity by burning methane. Let’s be pragmatic and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should be going mad on it. The fear of nuclear is now too great after Fukushima and the cost of building new build plants is very expensive and impractical. And it takes a long time to get them running. It is very obvious in America that fracking took almost no time at all to get going. It happened without any debate whatsoever. Suddenly you found there was this abundant fuel source. There’s only a finite amount of it [in the UK] so before it runs out we should really be thinking sensibly about what to do next. We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price. Hydro, biomass, solar, etc, have all got great promise, but they’re not available tomorrow, or even in 10 years. There’s a very good tidal stream farm that I’ve come across using a sunken barge with a turbine on it. It’s much more reliable. They should have gone ahead with the Severn Barrage.

J_Crater on June 16, 2012 at 4:58 PM

The word you are looking for when talking about ‘environmentalists’ is: Luddites.

These people want us to live in caves and not build fires.

They aren’t pro-environment so much as they are anti-human.

ajacksonian on June 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM

. Any reduction of heat from inside the Earth will speed that process up. We could, however, possibly reverse that by burying nuclear waste deep in the crust near the mantle.

crosspatch on June 16, 2012 at 4:32 PM

…But…but…Al Gore told us that it is like “a million degrees” below the Earth’s crust….
……………..so doesn’t that give us a pretty good cushion???????

Baxter Greene on June 16, 2012 at 5:01 PM

My wife was watching the new Dallas. Was this meme on display in it?

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Liberals write most of the crap on the TV box. It shouldn’t suprise us if they push their politics on us too. If nothing else, portraying those in the oil bidness as evil, greedy and corrupt will help the marxist cause.

Our nation started on a long downhill slide when the great industrialists of the Nineteenth Century began to be slandered as ‘robber barons’.

slickwillie2001 on June 16, 2012 at 5:09 PM

The word you are looking for when talking about ‘environmentalists’ is: Luddites.
These people want us to live in caves and not build fires.
They aren’t pro-environment so much as they are anti-human.
ajacksonian on June 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM

No. They want you to live in a cave while they go to an Al Gore convention.

MeatHeadinCA on June 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM

They’ll stop their spaceships and say to each other, “yah, zzneep, zzneep, another planet that fracked.”

PappyD61 on June 16, 2012 at 4:03 PM

I find your comment racist and offensive. I suppose you think all aliens say “zneep zneep” and then start probing. On behalf of the Visitors, I hope your znorzak gets caught in a hatching purb.

Save Gaia!

No Nukes is Good Nukes!

*frantic, way-up twinkles*

Axe on June 16, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Yet, see algor repeat this monstrous deception in this must see 3 minute video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg&feature=player_embedded

anotherJoe on June 16, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Um, I’ll pass. Thanks anyway.

davidk on June 16, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Um, why??

If you’re an algor fan, fine. But this video exposes gore as a deceit filled buffoon. So if your’re not an algor fan, this is the video for you.
More importantly, 99% of the public doesn’t even know the info on CO2 presented in the video. This info is critical in debunking, and getting the public to understand, that AGW is bullshit. So, I would hope you would watch the video, and more importantly, spread the word about it. Share it, promote it…

anotherJoe on June 16, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Dallas isn’t the only TV show to attack fracking with misstated facts. Rizzoli and Isles last Tuesday tried to make a company using fracking out to be an eco terrorist/criminal/killers. Look for more of this as it becomes widely used. It doesn’t contaminate ground water. The eco nuts have already lost a suit in TX over this.

Kissmygrits on June 16, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:19 PM

I watched long enough to see Bobby say that oil alternatives were the future, and that he not going to allow drilling on the ranch. And then I put it with Galactica and watched a few Top Gears.

Axe on June 16, 2012 at 5:16 PM

but despite the boon to our economy and energy portfolio, environmentalists just can’t abide forms of energy

That pretty much nails it right there. There is no (none, zero, zip, zilch, nada) form of energy that the environmentalists will embrace. Like dems in Congress supporting the next major weapon program while they kill the one on the brink of going to production, environmentalists will gush about the “next great source of energy” while working to kill existing sources, but once that next great source comes closer to reality, it will become the next “evil, planet destroying” dirty energy source.

It’s time to give the environmentalists the attention they deserve: a) laugh in their faces when they spew this nonsense, b) ignore them when they try to stop us from obtaining or using energy, c) do like Obama did with the permitorium and ignore any judicial rulings — continue to develop those sources of energy despite what some idiot judge says (worked for Obama, he set the precedent, it’s time for the rest of us to follow suit, and d) kick ‘em in the knees just because they deserve it.

AZfederalist on June 16, 2012 at 5:16 PM

You don’t get it Erika, all that extra CO2 in the atmosphere is pushing down on the surface causing the earthquakes to occur and volcano’s to erupt. It is a bad, bad molecule. //s

The Department of Energy reports that natural gas electric plants produce 45% less carbon than coal plants, though newer coal plants are much cleaner.

Now to my pet peeve. Burning methane produces a compound called carbon dioxide not the element called carbon. Burning coal (carbon) produce the same compound called carbon dioxide. The greenies are using the term carbon to scare people since most people have seen coal and charcoal dust and when they hear the term carbon relate it to that.

chemman on June 16, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Sierra Club’s next campaign: “Beyond Tsunamis”.

STOP CONTINENTAL DRIFT!!

STOP TECTONIC PLATE MOVEMENT!!

fred5678 on June 16, 2012 at 5:33 PM

There are many things in our great Nation I wish fracking did do.

Bmore on June 16, 2012 at 5:42 PM

But it still poisons the ground water, right?

Cindy Munford on June 16, 2012 at 4:44 PM

What doesn’t? Oh right… rain.

Ugly on June 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Dallas does have a storyline involving fracking and it is superb for many reasons. The undertone so far (2 episodes in) is that it is eeeevil.

Which must make sense in Hollywood but that’s not the way that most Texans view it, and it sure as hell isn’t the way people in non-green, government subsidized, unicorn-based energy view it.

Worth watching IMO. Could be a first in TV – first show to pole-vault over the shark before mid-season.

CorporatePiggy on June 16, 2012 at 5:50 PM

non-government subsidized I mean.

CorporatePiggy on June 16, 2012 at 5:51 PM

I own stock in various sized oil companies. But this, frankly, scares the ____ out of me.

I saw a movie with these enormous worms eating people and stuff and if it wasn’t fracking I don’t know what caused it. The gun nut in the movie saved the day. A guy named Bacon was in it.

Please cut fracking this out till I get more ammo. My AR-15 bullets are not quite enough like flying bowling balls to stop these worms, but I have ideas.

M-40, M-40…. or FGM 148! Those are identification numbers which come to me.

IlikedAUH2O on June 16, 2012 at 5:55 PM

The anti-fracking ground has shifted (sorry) to attempts to stop the mining of silica-sand, the perfectly round sand necessary for hydrofracking.

SW Wisconsin, SE Minnesota, and NE Iowa are the new battleground with enviro groups pushing mining “moratoriums”, in order to halt mining and transportation of frac sand.

If the enviros win on this ground (sorry,again) the necessary tolls for fracking will be denied and the industry will wither on the vine.

This is a real hot issue in the small towns along the upper Mississpi river.

Who ever wins these legal battles will win the frac war.

Bruno Strozek on June 16, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Studies are just like polls. Full of s*** until someone puts one with which you agree.

All I know is, I’ve lived my whole life in Oklahoma, and that is no shortage of years. I never felt an earthquake one, not a single, tiny, shred of ground shake, ever.

In the last 2-3 years I’ve felt many. Something is different. Whether that’s fracking, or plate tectonics, or God just doing a few tap dances I don’t know.

But something is different and happening to change things.

Boomer_Sooner on June 16, 2012 at 6:16 PM

But something is different and happening to change things.

Boomer_Sooner on June 16, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Not necessarily a change, but just long-period geologic “adjustments” that have a “cycle” that is much longer than the span of a person’s life.

The stable craton within which you live still undergoes adjustments to the underlying crust and mantle. The time between small clusters of adjustments is short in geologic time, but long in human time.

Then again, you have to consider a possible reactivation of the New Madrid at some time. That will be a ride.

Yoop on June 16, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Fracking does cause an increases in pole dancers.

SEE: North Dakota.

profitsbeard on June 16, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Yoop on June 16, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Maybe you’re right. I honestly don’t know and I freely admit as much. All I know is that things are happening. Is here that have never happened before in my many years.

Furthermore, a reading of only the first 3 paragraphs of the executive summary in the actual report claims that “fracking” and carbon capture both do cause seismic activity that has been felt, affected populated areas far from the actual sites, and been measured by the public in 13 different states all across the country, with carbon capture posing the highest risk and capability.

It merely says that, compared to the number of sites that these actions are taking places, which is hundreds of thousands, the number of “noticeable to the public” seismic occurrences is a low ratio of action>consequence results.

Like say, 100 new noticeable earthquakes in places that have never had them before, compared to 750,000 sites.

That’s still 4-7 earthquakes that I’d never felt before and 100 earthquakes(hypothetically). I find the slant of this writing a little misleading actually. It gives off the impression that studies have found that fracking doesn’t cause earthquakes.

It actually says quite the opposite.

Boomer_Sooner on June 16, 2012 at 6:49 PM


Dallas isn’t the only TV show to attack fracking with misstated facts. Rizzoli and Isles last Tuesday tried to make a company using fracking out to be an eco terrorist/criminal/killers. Look for more of this as it becomes widely used. It doesn’t contaminate ground water. The eco nuts have already lost a suit in TX over this.

Kissmygrits on June 16, 2012 at 5:14 PM

I caught that too. I told my wife that she can watch that show by herself from now on. She cancelled the DVR for the series…..

TBinSTL on June 16, 2012 at 7:21 PM

OK, but if I get any calmer they’ll be checking my vitals.

J.E. Dyer on June 16, 2012 at 8:07 PM

For those with out a clue… West Texas is full of oil and gas wells. Fracking has been in practiced in this area for over 50 years. Guess what, no earthquakes, no flaming kitchen faucets, and the Ogallala Aquifer has been pierced thousands of times by these oil and gas wells with no harm to the water within.

The problem is, Hollywood and New York nitwits know that they can put forth an anti-oil/gas documentary with no documentation and collect a bunch of production money from other Hollywood and New York nitwits and sell it to HBO. Then non-Hollywood nitwits will watch this documentary-with-no-documentation and believe it is the word from their god and use it as documentation for their nitwit opinions. If the documentary-with-no-ducumentation is scares enough other nitwits, they might even get an Oscar and a Nobel prize.

WestTexasBirdDog on June 16, 2012 at 8:42 PM

The Sierra Club is made up of socialists and burn-outs who realized they could not compete in free-market careers. They take up this movement to bring a “meaning” to their life, and try to stick it to the people who have the ability to compete in the free market. They can’t stand profits, and they know energy is an extremely profitable business.

These people don’t care about the environment at all. The environment is their Trojan Horse, just like the Soviets taught them.

goflyers on June 16, 2012 at 9:00 PM

My wife was watching the new Dallas. Was this meme on display in it?

Count to 10 on June 16, 2012 at 4:19 PM
Limbaugh mentioned that show the other day. Said he will be following it closely as he was a huge fan of the original. As I recall he did say something about the new show mentioning this.

Del Dolemonte on June 16, 2012 at 4:38 PM

MENTIONED!!?? Bobby’s son Christopher killed a few thousand Chinese by fracking a deepsea methane deposit!

Thankfully, the Chicoms kept it under wraps and the only known reference to the massacre is a single article on Google or something t

ex Dem from Miami on June 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM

As long as we’re getting in the habit of make-law executive orders, how about we get one that’s long overdue:

Sierra Club = terrorist organization
La Raza = terrorist organization
CAIR = terrorist organization
Muslim Brotherhood = terrorist organization

Nutstuyu on June 16, 2012 at 11:33 PM

It’s the locusts I’m worried about.

SomeCallMeJohn on June 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

There really is a very simple formula to follow: EPA/Sierra Club likes it = bad for America; EPA/Sierra Club hates it and rallies against it = good for America. Treat the Sierra Club like the terrorists they are, and eliminate the EPA completely. Take away every penny of their funding so they can’t even buy the electricity for their hybrids

jayhawkingeorgia on June 17, 2012 at 1:29 AM