KREX Weather
Grand Junction
Montrose
Glenwood Springs
Grand Junction
81.0 °
Montrose
83.0 °
Glenwood Springs
75.0 °
Hundreds Turn Out for FrackNation, Turns into Heated Debate by
KREX News Room
|
This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled.
Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.
 |
You have indicated this comment should be removed.
The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .
Tina2 said on Friday, Feb 22 at 6:33 AM
The leftist enviros don't deal in facts. They prefer inaccurate propaganda.
Tommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 1:23 PM
Fact, the fracking industry does not comply with the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water acts. If the process is so clean and safe why won't they comply?
NotATommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 1:28 PM
Hey Tommy, let's see it on paper. Where's your' source?
Tommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 1:36 PM
Or you can simply Google the term "Haliburton Loophole".
Tommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 1:44 PM
They don't seem to allow me to attach any links to the comments. There is no debate about it though, they were excluded during the Cheney administration and I've never heard anyone dispute it. I also have never heard anyone explain why they need the exclusions if the process is safe. Again, a simple Google search for "Halliburton Loophole" will pull up plenty of hits.
BC said on Friday, Feb 22 at 1:57 PM
The bottom line is - that people can light the water coming out of their taps into a burst of fire - that's not propaganda - That's The Truth
Katie said on Friday, Feb 22 at 2:08 PM
BC - Did you watch FrackNation? I live here in northern PA and methane gas coming up from the ground into the wells/lakes/rivers is common and has been for hundreds of years (before fracking). In winter you can cut a hole in the ice of a local pond and set it on fire - this has been happens well before fracking began. Just one of the hundreds of examples. One has nothing to do with the other, and it scares me that so many people blindly follow what they saw in Gas Land, regardless of the truth.
MMW said on Friday, Feb 22 at 2:32 PM
"Or you can simply Google the term "Haliburton Loophole"." That'd be different if fracking affected drinking water. These jobs are normally pumped a mile or more beneath the lowest usable fresh water. The engineers that design these jobs go to great length to keep the fracs in zone and certainly out of water (water is expensive to lift and separate from the gas and oil) The industry gets the exclusions because it's stupid for the EPA to regulate it.
Tommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 2:41 PM
You are once again refusing to answer the question. If you say it is safe to our water supply then why does the industry need an exception? If you want more people to get behind the fracking movement this would be a huge help. I'm a firm believer in natural gas, I just don't trust the process in place and the more the industry hides and avoids regulation the less I trust them.
Kojiro Vance said on Friday, Feb 22 at 2:49 PM
The Safe Drinking Water Act, never regulated hydraulic fracturing. The EPA had no jurisdiction over HF, and still has none. The states regulate drilling and fracturing. All that Sec 322 (page 102 to be exact) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (the so called "Halliburton Loophole") did was to clarify law as it already existed.
Tommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 3:15 PM
Again, if it's so safe then why won't they comply? All other drilling operations that go through the water table have to, why did the Halliburton fight to get an exemption. I know it wasn't there when fracking first started, but that makes no difference. Horizontal fracking is a relatively new process for one, and once there are better safeguards available why not prove your safety and comply? When GM started building cars they didn't need seat belts and airbags, but if they want to keep building them they do. So why shouldn't fracking also need to comply with the current rules and regulations?
DavdN said on Friday, Feb 22 at 3:31 PM
If you want to argue that fracking SHOULD be covered under the safe drinking water act and SHOULD be regulated Federally, that's fine. But to act like they're hiding something because they refuse to comply is inaccurate. They were never covered under these federal guidelines in the first place so this idea of a "Halliburton Loophole" is nonsense. Let's set aside the extremism and try to have a rational conversation. The fact is natural gas is the cleanest fossil fuel and used in place of coal and oil will dramatically reduce global warming. We are going to need wind, solar, and natural gas moving forward to move toward a clean energy future. We just need to make certain that natural gas is recovered responsibly. This may mean having natural gas drilling regulated by the EPA and not by the states in which case it could be covered under the safe drinking water act, because it should be. Also, it should be federally mandated that all chemicals used in the fracking process be disclosed.
Tommy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 3:57 PM
I 100% agree with you DavdN, I support natural gas and have used it all my life. What I don't trust is the current method used for getting out of the earth. I'm not sure why you feel the EPA shouldn't have any say in the process though, as they have specifically excluded the industry from those acts, so that alone says they EPA should have some oversight. That's all I'm asking for, the industry to prove themselves the same way every other drilling industry has to. When you lobby for an exception like they have, that is a clear sign to the masses that you can not meet those requirements. At this point in the game I refuse to give the oil and gas industry the benefit of the doubt just because they say something is safe, their track record over the past 100 years or so does not get them that respect.
sincere said on Friday, Feb 22 at 5:48 PM
Tommy is right, the Fracers don't follow the Clean Water Act or get their 404 Permits that the rest of us have to.
StellaP said on Friday, Feb 22 at 5:59 PM
Dear folks who are concerned about lighting your water on fire. I live in Michigan and used to use a water well that also delivered methane through my faucet! That was in the 1970's, and no fracking anywhere near me (Detroit suburbs). It is completely natural in certain places.
Fred said on Friday, Feb 22 at 6:49 PM
The term "Haliburton loophole" like "fracking", is a word made up by the anties Safe Drinking Water Act EPA's central authority to protect drinking water is drawn from the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The protection of USDWs is focused in the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, which regulates the subsurface emplacement of fluid. Congress provided for exclusions to UIC authority (SDWA § 1421(d)) "The term 'underground injection' – (A) means the subsurface emplacement of fluids by well injection; and (B) excludes – (i) the underground injection of natural gas for purposes of storage; and (ii) the underground injection of fluids or propping agents (other than diesel fuels) pursuant to hydraulic fracturing operations related to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities." Clean Water Act Disposal of flowback into surface waters of the United States is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program.
Jeremy said on Friday, Feb 22 at 10:25 PM
The fact is that no matter how much evidence is presented on a high profile subject ignorance will be the victor.When people feel passionate about something, you will not convince them of the truth because they don't care about anything else except what they care about. It was apparent when after last nights screening, the first young lady in the Q&A session was so excited to ask a question that she thought would cause rise, she ignored the information in the movie and wound up looking a fool.
Bret said on Saturday, Feb 23 at 3:59 PM
Tommy, you said " if it's so safe then why won't they comply? All other drilling operations that go through the water table have to". Try to understand that the same wells that are hydraulically fractured DO have to comply with restrictions when drilling through the freshwater aquifers. The difference, as MMW pointed out, is that the frac's are taking place far below these aquifers and do not come into contact. There are layers of pipe and cement that protect the water from the fracturing fluids, thereby negating the need to regulate with relation to the Safe Drinking Water acts. There is actually less reason to regulate the chemicals in frac fluids than there is to regulate the chemicals that our farmers spread on their crops.
Louise said on Monday, Feb 25 at 1:45 PM
Regarding the comment in the story: "'I'm skeptical. [The fracking water] gets into the soil, into the water source, and I've seen people sick from environmental contaminants,' said Grand Junction resident Kathy Brechtel." ... I wish Kathy would have offered some proof to go along with her comment. You can say anything, but without support, it seems baseless.
Douglas said on Monday, Feb 25 at 2:17 PM
Tommy you seem like an semi intelligent person. If you would look at drilling & fracturing regulations you would find that all freshwater aquifers are protected by the wellbore design. A design in which aguifers are cased with steel tublars that are cemented in place and create a bond with the steel casing & the formations around them thus isolating the aquifers. This is done during the drilling phase, weeks & somtimes months ahead of any fracturing. The fracturing is done in the deeper formation far from the freshwater aquifers. There is no need for the EPA to pile on more regulations that slow down the process & increase cost for the end line consumers. As Bret mentions if your worried about freshwater water aquifers & or surface waters. Why not look at and over regulate Farmers & golf courses, home lawncare fertilizers just saying look around
Add a comment
Most Popular