Drop in requests forecasts fewer near-term projects
the Green River formation said to contain as much as 1.8 trillion barrels of oil
— with as many as 800 million barrels that are recoverable.Can
you drill for this elusive oil product? NOCan you sell this product right
out of the strip mine? NOCan you recover this oil with out large amounts
of energy and water? NOCan they return the land after strip mining it to
any resemblance of it's former beauty? NOWhy mention 1.8 trillion
when only 800 million barrels are recoverable? Political motivation, since that
would last a couple days in America and cause years of damage to our Utah
lands.Vernal/the Basin needs to stop digging for it's money.
But, perhaps if Obama's pal Warren Buffet owned the railroad which would
haul the unrefined crude, then they would have allowed the full area to be
developed.Obama's energy policies are total failures, and must
be overturned as soon as possible!
The BLM is right in its decision and I will stand by them in full dress to stop
the carnage of method they use in recovering oil from shale and tar-sands. This
is not about jobs or economic growth, its about state government expansion with
windfall taxes. You may also notice that civilian population and news media was
excluded from this collaborative tri-state meeting with the BLM. The
method they use to get the oil is called "Fracturing" which means the
oil company will drill holes in the shale thousands or hundreds of feet then
inject tons of high explosives and detonate it like and underground atomic blast
to break up the sale and sand to release the oil. Then pressurize the blast hole
with water from our aquifers to force the oil out of the hole, oil being lighter
than water it floats to the top of the water pumped in. The results are an oil
saturated water supply which many areas of the country are now realizing the
contamination and hazards. Oil leaches through the fractured rocks
into the Colorado river and drinking water supply hundreds of miles away from
the fracture mine.
Fortunatly we can still depend on OPEC to fulfill our energy needs.
To "MyChildrensKeeper" I hate to be the one to bring facts into the
discussion, but if you read the DN article "Good news for fracking" they
reference studies that are showing that the process of fracking does not
contaminate the ground water. See the WSJ article "EPA Backpedals on
Fracking Contamination" to see the EPA recind its own study.You
can also read the Vancouver Sun's article "Fracking does not
contaminate groundwater: study released in Vancouver" there we "found
that the groundwater contamination often can be traced to above-ground spills or
mishandling of wastewater associated with the gas extraction process."So, who are you going to believe, whatever liberal media outlet sold you
the pack of lies, or are you going to believe the studies that have been done.
redshirt is talking about a newspaper maybe in canada, who also wants a pipline
for tarsands built to the gulf of mexico, so they can sell it to other countries
that have higher fuel costs then the u.s. which they will have the tax payers
pay for to increase oil profit for the oil companies. ask anyone near fracking
process what their water is like then you can tell the truth. its done in many
places and not just for oil shell, and you can never control the flow of toxins
from it going into ground water, if you really know what you are talking about.
its just like atomic waiste. no matter how good the containers are they will
break down in 100 years or a thousand and then people will die from it. nothing
humans have made stay intact forever. but atomic waiste will last the longest of
them all. its just like anthing there is a limit to how much a container can
hold. the earth can only hold so much. our oceans are sick from pollution and if
they die we do to. liberal or consevative, death dont care.
To "lket" since when was the Wall Street Journal and the EPA just a
newspaper in Canada?Go back and read the first part of my post.
After you do that, go back and read the articles. The newspapers were reporting
on actual scientific studies that even the EPA (not a newspaper in Canada)
recognized as proving that fracking does nothing to the groundwater, and it is
improper handling and other activities that have polluted the water.Please read before you speak, or in this case type.
RedShirt said:You can also read the Vancouver Sun's article
"Fracking does not contaminate groundwater: study released in Vancouver"
there we "found that the groundwater contamination often can be traced to
above-ground spills or mishandling of wastewater associated with the gas
extraction process.""contamination often can be traced to
above-ground spills or mishandling of wastewater associated with the gas
extraction process." (also know as fracking?) So your trying to disconnect
"surface mishandling" during fracking from fracking underground?So as long as the company poisons the water table from the surface your
good with that?Talk about not understanding oil company spin.
To "Happy Valley Heretic" as you pointed out, the problem lies in
handling the waste from the process. The same can be said about processing
Cows. If we just dumped the cow blood on the ground, we would poison the ground
and the water tables in the area. However, if we properly dispose of the waste,
there isn't a problem.Are you ready to stop eating hamburgers
because if cow blood is spilled on the ground in sufficient quantity the ground
will be poisoned?
Apples to Oranges, we were discussing "Fracking" Not slaughter houses.
You cannot trust or believe the government studies or oil company studies that
fracking does not contaminate as they are all proven lies.Once
fracking and cracking all the subterranean structural integrity, oil like water
will seek the least path of resistance and the path can run in a global
direction of the fracture.That report of contamination underground
water is a hoax and created information of could have or may have or must have
from small spill of a few barrels hundreds of miles from the oil fracture site.
There is real evidence of water quality before and after many of the fracturing
sites the dispute the claims of the oil companies. Remember, we have trillion
dollar empires with a lot of clouts and media belonging to these empires to
print and say whatever the empires want them to say.And what is this
about decontaminating the water? How do they decontaminate the billions of
gallons of water they pump in the ground during the fracturing process? The only
decontaminate is the oil they pump out to remove the water and pump contaminated
water back in the ground, out of sight and out of mind out of access.
To "Happy Valley Heretic" you are wrong. As you pointed out earlier.
The problem isn't the fracking process itself. The problem is how the
waste is handled. What is the difference between poisoning the groundwater with
fracking waste or slaughter house waste?
Fracking is done 5,000 feet deep or more. It does not ruin the surface land. I
have driven by wind mill areas such as in Spanish Fork canyon and
"camels" pumping oil and they do not take up much room compared to the
land around either. Contamination is possible and should be monitored. Often the
area is far from urban areas. 5 million gallons of water may be need in a
fracking and re frac jobs on a well, but this water is not lost. Fracking
cannot only make us energy independent, but we could take in $50 trillion or so
over a few years to pay off our debt. In time we may hope that alternatives will
be successful. Natural gas is the fuel we should use now.