| Submit your comments on this article |
| Economy |
| Getting Gas Wrong |
| 2010-04-08 |
| US natural gas production is equivalent to 10M barrels/day of oil at a $23/barrel equivalent. The Obamie Commies don't like it any more than domestic oil production. According to a study conducted by IHS Global Insight, a ban on hydraulic fracturing would cost the United States $374 billion in lost Gross Domestic Product by 2014, would result in the loss of about 3 million jobs and would require a sixty per cent increase in imported oil and natural gas to make up the difference. Placing restrictions on the fluids that can be used for hydraulic fracturing would be slightly less painful, but painful enough. In that scenario, IHS's study foresees a $172 billion reduction in GDP, 1.4 million jobs lost and a thirty per cent increase in energy imports. |
| Posted by:ed |
| #8 I blame fracking Halliburton. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-04-08 17:01 |
| #7 I've seen what passes as drinking water from wells in much of Wyoming - fracking might improve it. I'll take my bourbon neat. Seriously, while fracking 'could' damage useful aquifers it would be hard to do and uncommon. Pretty stringent regulations exist and operational practice improves all the time. And Snowy gets it - that H2S that was in your drinking water forever all of a sudden is the fault of the oil companies once a drilling rig moves into the county. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-04-08 16:53 |
| #6 The second a natural gas well is drilled, all the contaminants that have been in the water supply nearby for the past hundred years suddenly become the natural gas well's responsibility. Meanwhile, people have been finding where to drill natural gas wells for that time period by finding where the water wells have natural gas mixed in for a similar time period. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2010-04-08 13:33 |
| #5 The solvents are the only mentioned fluids that would potentially contaminate ground water, and I don't know of any wells that are 6,000 feet deep. Alcohols or alcohol/solvent hybrids could probably be used if someone put the research into it. Just sayin. |
| Posted by: bigjim-CA 2010-04-08 13:06 |
| #4 Wyoming may modify 'fracking' rules State regulators in Wyoming and industry officials claim there's no single documented incident of drinking water contamination because of hydraulic fracturing in Wyoming. But Jones (attorney for the Wyoming Outdoor Council) contends there's been no way to know because there's not been an adequate attempt to monitor the activity. And the "proof" is right there with global warming levels of verification: EPA: Chemicals Found in Wyo. Drinking Water Might Be From Fracking Louis MeeksÂ’ well water contains methane gas, hydrocarbons, lead and copper, according to the EPAÂ’s test results. It must be from fracking because methane, hydrocarbons, lead and copper are not natural materials, esp over a natural gas well. |
| Posted by: ed 2010-04-08 13:04 |
| #3 Wyoming is about as Red as you can get. And they arent too thrilled with the hydraulic fracturing thats been going on under their feet. Why you ask? Seems that it ruined their water supply. Humans need to consume water to survive, we arent 98% petroleum, we're 98% water. Gotta figure out a better way folks.....just sayin |
| Posted by: 746 2010-04-08 12:17 |
| #2 It's not only gas production that's at stake. All, or nearly all, new domestic onshore oil production requires the producing zone of each well to be hydraulically fractured in order to release econocmially viable quantities of oil. Ban hydraulic fracturing, or restrict it to the point that it's useless, and domestic onshore exploration will essentially stop. But fracturing isn't the only target of this new effort. Pay close attention to their carping about the sorts of fluids that are periodically introduced into well bores. The might include, for example (to name a few): hydrogen peroxide (to remove sediments that collect in well bores over time), acids (to remove skins that form on well bores which block the recovery of hydrocarbons), solvents (to remove asphalts / paraffins / etc. from well bores & the nearby formation). Listen closely for the alarmism about the introduction of these sorts of fluids into well bores, that's going to be a key component of the new regulatory thrust. With it they'll finally kill domestic onshore petroleum production, a Holy Grail of the enviro-Nazi left. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2010-04-08 11:39 |
| #1 It should be noted that hydraulic fracturing is already regulated on the state and federal levels. Studying the practice once again will lead to one of two results. Either the EPA will conclude that existing regulatory protections are sufficient, which doesnÂ’t seem likely given this administrationÂ’s record when it comes to environmental issues, or the EPA will deem it necessary to pile another layer of crippling regulations onto an industry that has been one of the few bright spots in a floundering economy. Just so it's before the next election. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2010-04-08 11:08 |