Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News EPA hands over fracking investigation to Wyoming

  1. Jun 24, 2013 #1
    EPA hands over investigation to the state who is being funded by an oil company?

    http://rt.com/usa/epa-fracking-study-water-pollution-073/
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 24, 2013 #2

    D H

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    That sounds a lot like the United Nations asking Muammar Gaddafi to investigate human rights violations.

    Oh, wait. They did exactly that. And now the EPA has followed the UN's lead.
     
  4. Jun 27, 2013 #3

    mheslep

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The federal government receives billions in revenues by way of leases and fees from oil and gas companies, not including their business taxes. I'm not sure I would single out one US state as "funded" by oil companies.
     
  5. Jun 27, 2013 #4
    There is a lot of evidence that fracking companies are making sealed settlements with individuals.

    http://www.allgov.com/news/where-is...es-with-contaminated-water-130610?news=850250

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-06-06/drillers-silence-u-dot-s-dot-water-complaints-with-sealed-settlements [Broken]

    bold mine:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  6. Jun 27, 2013 #5
    With the EPA out of the picture the state of Wyoming is receiving funding from the company involved to study this particular pollution issue.

    http://articles.washingtonpost.com/...mental-protection-agency-hydraulic-fracturing
     
  7. Jun 28, 2013 #6

    mheslep

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Maybe so, however the federal government which runs the EPA receives billions from oil and gas interests. Federal politicians receive millions in campaign donations from the same. If the OP's point is to show how Wyoming's opinion on the matter is being bought because of a revenue source ($1.5 million), I fail to see how the EPA's opinion is immune from the same influence.
     
  8. Jun 28, 2013 #7
    I can understand why the State of Wyoming did not want the EPA report to be released.

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-06/fracking-is-safe-except-in-wyoming

    The Indian tribes involved aren't at all happy either. Some good sub links in the link below. This topic goes much deeper than just the EPA dropping the nearly completed study.

    http://wyofile.com/wyofile-2/tribes-residents-say-epa-deserted-them-in-pavillion/
     
  9. Jul 14, 2013 #8
    You do know who Dick Cheney was and that there is a purposeful loop hole which was just installed some years ago just for fracking. Fracking is now exempt from the EPA clean water act....

    They are kind of stealing wheel barrels as people keep looking at the sand within the barrel saying they are stealing nothing. I have seen a few sites which list the USA as having over 1 million frack wells. Each well can consume up to 11 million gallons or more of water. Let us say the average is 7 million per well. That would be 7 trillion gallons of permanently poisoned FRESH water just in the USA.

    This is not contaminated water due to underground connections of other water sources, this is directly injected from clean NON salt water sources. 7 Trillion. If this simple estimate was off by a factor of 10 that is still 700 billion gallons of permanently poisoned water just in the US. This poisoned water is uncontestable and is a simple fact for which they try to hide.

    This method of course connects with other water sources and poisons many times that in factors of 10's to hundreds to thousands. Once these underground sources are contaminated, even though these areas are naturally filtered they are gone forever.

    70 Times the max amount of Radon can be in that fracked byproduct. Ionizing much material with a great surface area which was NEVER meant to be unleashed by nature in that way.

    Earthquakes. Oklahoma used to have 50 earthquakes a year up to around 1.0 or a little more tops. In 2011 they had over 1100 in an 11 month period with some going as high as 5.6 due to fracking. This is Oklahoma.....

    When you sync vibrations over a period of time you weaken the infrastructure below. Nature never intended for this. It is virtually INSANE. Due to global warming and the redistribuation of large amounts of water mass this will also increase stresses world wide. This stress is not an even displacement is it? Where will the water be more and where will it be less?

    When not if one of these gas, oil and water areas gets connected to a magma pocket and they will, it will make the A-Bomb look like a matchstick event.

    Water areas have been hit in past history by magma and the events were super explosions.

    Even if there was no super bad event of any kind, the areas that frack would have constantly weakened infrastrucures, piping, electric, water, etc..... Due to constant qaukes... This is very expensive. Whoe will pay for this?
     
  10. Jul 14, 2013 #9
    We over farm. This means there is much surface area which would have exponentially high transfer rate of sunshine to carbon. This rotation has been disrupted by greed. Many farmers could not afford to water their crops because the frackers bought their water source which raised the price of water. This means no crops and large land masses which do nothing but bake in the sun. This is not what nature had in mind due to normal cycling of billions of years. This intervention is huge and is a tremendous super heater to the upper atmostphere and can cause shifts in the jet stream or normal weather patterns further exasperating other problems.

    One thing affects another which affects another.

    Ethanol? What can be said? All things are connected.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: EPA hands over fracking investigation to Wyoming
  1. Barack Wins Wyoming (Replies: 19)

Loading...