Slashdot Mirror
Earthquakes That May Be Related To Fracking Close Ohio Oil Well
Frosty P writes "State leaders have ordered that four fluid-injection wells ('fracking') in eastern Ohio will be indefinitely prohibited from opening in the aftermath of heightened seismic activity in the area, an official said. A 4.0-magnitude quake struck Saturday afternoon near several wells that use 'fracking' to release oil deposits. It was the 11th in a series of minor earthquakes in the area."
Won't be long now till someone discovers that fracking might help turning the Big One pending into several minor quakes, and starts selling this idea.
The media keeps mixing and confusing fracking with saltwater disposal wells. (remember how much they confuse hackers and crackers)
Fracking is a one time process for increasing porosity of a formation immediately around the well at the time of completion.
A saltwater disposal well is normally a well(oil or gas) that has played out and is used to return unwanted saltwater back where it came from.
Fracking only affects an area within a few hundred feet of the well.
Right, it's all a giant hoax. I bet this Columbia geologist only got his PhD because he knew that years later there would be fracking projects he could sabotage.
I would modestly propose Nationalization of the Federal Reserve, as they seem to keep turning up at the various crime scenes.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
that when dems stopped the drilling in the gulf due to a massive oil spill, that the dems were blamed for impeding progress and destroying America, but now that a republicans gets a few tremors in his state, he wants to stop it quickly? Likewise, here in Colorado, the cities that have republicans in control have put temp stops to fracking in THEIR areas, calling it prudent, yet want us to continue fracking all over, importing oils from places like Nigeria, Iran, Venezeula, etc. and absolutely are opposed to spending money on electric cars?
And ppl do not understand why I WANT us to continue drilling all over USA. I figure that once Americans start to get earthquakes, polluted waters esp. in our aquifiers, and see the repercussions of this 'clean' source of jobs, then MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, we will finally figure out that we need to change our policy. And I can not think of anything that would be better then to get the west off imported energy (other than to add that we quit importing bad goods and food from china).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
"Common sense" in your case, apparently means "hysteria over things I don't understand, but still don't like."
How about stopping some of the idiotic spending that we're doing? God forbid we show a little fiscal responsibility instead of being fleeced fro more money...
I can understand not wanting carcinogens pumped into the water table, but the earthquake aspect seems like a non-issue to me as long as they're small. If small earthquakes are triggered, it means stresses in the fault lines were already present and are being relieved. Having a number of small earthquakes seems preferable to letting the stress build up until it triggers a large quake.
The article itself notes that earthquakes have occurred in that part of Ohio for nearly two centuries, and its size was well beyond the quite small theoretical maximum that could be induced by fracking. Extensive studies of fracking have shown no evidence of the contamination scare stories environmentalists have been pushing.
The people opposing fracking are the same people opposed to all uses of oil and as power sources.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
FTFA:
Then on Saturday, a magnitude 4.0 earthquake struck that released at least 40 times more energy than any of the previous 10 or more tremors that had rattled the region in 2011.
So all we need to do is to learn how to turn earthquake energy into electric power. Pumping fracking juice into the earth to purposely cause earthquakes could solve all our energy problems.
We've been doing it wrong all along: we've been pumping stuff out for energy, instead of pumping it in.
It might kinda suck for folks who live along fault lines, but with energy, you always have a "not in my backyard" crowd to deal with.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Yeah, but can you prove that the small fraking-caused quakes didn't release stress that would have caused a much more dangerous larger magnitude quake?
They still drill in The Geysers because the resulting quakes are predictably minor and the geothermal energy harvested is much more economically important than cracked foundations, paying millions in claims or not.
Actually, it isn't. The generation facility at The Geysers has never been profitable. It has always been under production and over budget. It must be seen as a failure on all levels. We don't even have reliable power in Middletown, for fuck's sake, let alone the rest of the county.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Having an opinion doesn't make one a shill or a troll, especially when there's as much evidence supporting his opinion as your own. The problem is there's absurdly little research from both the pro- and anti-fracking camps. On the one hand, Ohio's seismic activity has increased lately. On the other hand, it has been very inactive since the 1930's, and still remains relatively stable today. Then, of course, there's the possibility (mentioned many times already in this discussion) that releasing pressure could reduce the risk of a larger earthquake.
Comparing Ohio's seismic activity to California is ridiculous. In Ohio, the last big earthquake in 1937 toppled a few weak chimneys. In California, an equivalent earthquake (magnitude 5.4) happened in July of 2010. The faults in Ohio, even when active, pale in comparison to California's eternal fear of the next "big one".
There's no consensus among relevant experts about fracking's effects, but there's plenty of people willing to protest vehemently one way or the other. GP is right to call this out as fear-mongering.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
To those saying that earthquakes here are common, I live in Youngstown, and we have never had a locally originated seismic event. But as of March, we've had 11 quakes with epicenters near the well that has been shut down.
the debt that was created to help irresponsible citizens and the made worse by saving irresponsible bankers. Who in turn gave that money to irresponsible politicians so that they can afford to be voted back in by irresponsible citizens.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Ohio is on many small faults, the largest of which is the New Madrid fault. There are a few dozen significant earthquakes each year, the vast majority of which cannot be felt.
Despite what you "would think", data is easy to find.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
And umm. How are high taxes and high benefits working there in Europe?
Awesome actually:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/its-not-about-welfare-states/
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/no-its-not-the-welfare-state/
The countries with some of the highest taxes and best benefits (Sweden, Finland, Denmark) have some of the best finances.
And how have the low taxes and austerity helped Ireland and the UK? Are they bouncing back economically? (Ireland has a ~15% unemployment rate.) How has austerity helped the US "recover"?
The problem is that US spending on "useless" things like wars. While it does help people and companies manufacturing bombs and bullets, the general population isn't helped. Building and repairing bridges, sewers, paving roads, etc., would all employee people domestically and provide infrastructure for economic future activity once the economy recovers.
So yes, the books must be balanced (which is what Keynesians were saying from 2002-2006), but right now you want spending to kickstart the economy. The last stimulus package was too small (as Krugman for one predicted), and so the 'recovery' only was partial. If there was (say) another 2-3 quarters of stimulus spending we'd probably be in a much more cheery place.
I've got caviar stuck in my braces!
I really don't understand why someone like yourself - a person who lives in splendor undreamt of by most humans who ever lived - is unwilling to contribute to your community's well-being when that community is clearly in need.
Now, if you said "I don't think I should pay more taxes than people with ten times my wealth" I'd totally agree with you. But that's not what you said.
If you said "I don't want to pay for invading other countries and subsidizing rich bankster's lifestyles" I could understand that too. But you didn't say that either.
As I see it, you're wealthy enough to own stock, but you don't want to pay for the system that makes your wealth possible. Somebody's got to pay for it, but you want it to be someone else. You have enormous wealth and enjoy many privileges, yet you honestly think you're being oppressed. You personify our economic problem; you're barely one step above a welfare queen.