Fracking and the Environment: Exploration licenses granted to search for shale gas in Lough Allen area

[New Vision]

Barnett Shale has highest rates for invasive breast cancer

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (scroll way down), the counties with the highest rates of breast cancer in Texas are in Tarrant, Denton, Wise, Parker, Hood, and Johnson Counties. The counties with the most natural gas production are, Tarrant, Denton, Wise, Parker, Hood, and Johnson Counties. Coincidence?

The article was linked from breast-cancer-treatments.net


Breast Cancer Rates Jump in the Barnett Shale

BY THE NUMBERS

According to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s 2010 inventory of gas production equipment in the 24 counties of the Barnett Shale, the same six counties with rising rates of invasive breast cancer also have the highest count of compressors, separators, tanks and other above-ground points of emissions. Here is the number of emission points for the six leading counties.

Johnson: 10,859 points
Tarrant: 8,659 points
Denton: 7,812 points
Wise: 7,475 points
Parker: 4,707 points
Hood: 2,337 points

Dr. Theo Colborn, the president of the Endocrine Disruption Exchange and one of the foremost experts on the health and environmental effects of the toxic chemicals used in fracking:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soE7junRaPA"]World-Renowned Scientist Dr. Theo Colborn on the Health Effects of Water Contamination from Fracking - YouTube[/ame]


Also => Chemicals involved in the fracking process - Tamborans claims


You wanna tell us THE SKY IS PINK, Count Bobulescu?

[Count Bobulescu]

So what? It wouldn't be the first false report by AP. Maybe you watch the video. You'll see that Josh Fox is responding to cancer cases and where the rise has been taking place there.

So what, is that you made the claim that it was "bad journalism" and "nothing but hot air" and now that you can’t support that claim you want to move on to another topic. You've boxed yourself into a corner.

You are also really not doing yourself any favors by repeatedly re-posting the same material. That’s called spamming the thread.

[fluffybiscuits]

So what, is that you made the claim that it was "bad journalism" and "nothing but hot air" and now that you can’t support that claim you want to move on to another topic. You've boxed yourself into a corner.

You are also really not doing yourself any favors by repeatedly re-posting the same material. That’s called spamming the thread.

CB as somone whom has seen the evidence and tried to judge it objectively, Newvision has a very strong case. The evidence before us is fairly persuasive...

[New Vision]

So what, is that you made the claim that it was "bad journalism" and "nothing but hot air" and now that you can’t support that claim you want to move on to another topic. You've boxed yourself into a corner.

You are also really not doing yourself any favors by repeatedly re-posting the same material. That’s called spamming the thread.

So you want to call me a spammer because I have to repeat some arguments (still ignored by you) for you? You're not trashing yourself here, CB, are you?

What fecking "corner" are you talking about?

Where are your real arguments against my claim that it is bad journalism of AP?

Didn't Josh Fox point in his clip out exactly what is happening here again?... How the media are acting ("the sky is pink")?

Isn't it the same pattern we see in the circulating AP article you are defending?

Did I not deliver more than enough evidence that Josh Fox was right with his claim of a rise of breast cancer rates just in the Barnett Shale?

Where is any confirmation outside this AP article that these researchers were really answering to questions raised by AP to them concerning Fox' video at that time?

You're walking on very thin ice just following an obvious campaign of AP (who is behind that?) to discredit a whole video clip by cherry-picking one single argument and trying to (unsuccessfully) twist it. That has also happened with GASLAND. No news.

But... Just from my "corner", I'm sure you have some answers to my questions above

[New Vision]

CB as somone whom has seen the evidence and tried to judge it objectively, Newvision has a very strong case. The evidence before us is fairly persuasive...

Don't you worry... CB always wanted a "neutral" approach on the subject. He was 50/50, but he "hoped" to become 90/10 pro fracking...

My butt!

[Count Bobulescu]

So you want to call me a spammer because I have to repeat some arguments (still ignored by you) for you? You're not trashing yourself here, CB, are you?

What fecking "corner" are you talking about?

Where are your real arguments against my claim that it is bad journalism of AP?

Didn't Josh Fox point in his clip out exactly what is happening here again?... How the media are acting ("the sky is pink")?

Isn't it the same pattern we see in the circulating AP article you are defending?

Did I not deliver more than enough evidence that Josh Fox was right with his claim of a rise of breast cancer rates just in the Barnett Shale?

Where is any confirmation outside this AP article that these researchers were really answering to questions raised by AP to them concerning Fox' video at that time?

You're walking on very thin ice just following an obvious campaign of AP (who is behind that?) to discredit a whole video clip by cherry-picking one single argument and trying to (unsuccessfully) twist it. That has also happened with GASLAND. No news.

But... Just from my "corner", I'm sure you have some answers to my questions above

Here be dragons, now you’re accusing the AP of being on a campaign to discredit fracking opponents. Absurd! AP have no dog in that fight, they’re a news agency dammit. Don’t you even understand that?

[fluffybiscuits]

Don't you worry... CB always wanted a "neutral" approach on the subject. He was 50/50, but he "hoped" to become 90/10 pro fracking...

My butt!

Ask him to sign up to the Newsletter, some excellent work there There was a few things I wanted to post here on this thread but I didnt want to undermine anything you wrote just in case a chara

[New Vision]

Here be dragons, now you’re accusing the AP of being on a campaign to discredit fracking opponents. Absurd! AP have no dog in that fight, they’re a news agency dammit. Don’t you even understand that?

You're not answering my questions, CB.

[New Vision]

Ask him to sign up to the Newsletter, some excellent work there There was a few things I wanted to post here on this thread but I didnt want to undermine anything you wrote just in case a chara

What newsletter? Post away, fluffybiscuits.

[New Vision]

Contaminated Inquiry

How a University of Texas Fracking Study Led by a Gas Industry Insider Spun the Facts and Misled the Public

Frackers Fund University Research That Proves Their Case

This study was one of the few studies cited in the University of Aberdeen study commissioned by the Irish EPA, and it was cited as an example of a peer-reviewed, proper, respectable scientific study.

University of Aberdeen ties to the petroleum industry:

[New Vision]

More evidence for fracking causing earthquakes:

Earthquake by natural Fracking

Sensitive seismometers characterize shock that are generated from moving fluids in the subsurface


Soil column after the Yushu earthquake of 14 April 2010, which was not caused by Fracking

Taipei (Taiwan) - Moving fluids under high pressure through a deep rock, earthquakes can be triggered. This process could now examine an international team of geophysicists in an earthquake in Taiwan in more detail. This was made possible with about two kilometers deep hole that was made after the devastating Chi-Chi earthquake-1999 directly into the region in the geological fault zone. The results of this study, the researchers published in the journal "Science" could be especially important for energy companies in the shale-bound natural gas by means of compressed fluids at depth - want to promote - the so-called Fracking. "The movement of high-pressure fluids in the subsurface - either through natural processes or injected with industrial activities - has the potential to trigger major earthquakes," write Kuo-Fong Ma of the National Central University in Taiwan and their colleagues from Japan and the United States. However, this effect could be previously never studied directly in a fracture zone. Thanks to a whole network of Seimometern that can register themselves smallest earthquakes, the research team have now been able to identify a clear link between the moving fluids in the subsurface and vibrations in the rock.

Since the rock layers led around the hole itself sufficient quantities of water, the researchers needed to inject liquids. The prevailing water pressure was sufficient to produce in the fracture zone further small rock fractures. This resulted in weak shocks, which could be detected by the sensors in the borehole and the surface. Approximately 100 of these mini-quake could record the researcher during a month. Since non-classical mechanisms of earthquakes, but the water movements were responsible for these earthquakes, they gave a new name: I-type events.

Such quakes can cause damage as a result of a natural hydraulic Frackings on the surface hardly. However, fluids are injected under high pressure into the ground, are more rock quarries and thus greater earthquake in the realm of possibility. For those looking for natural gas and oil in geologically unstable areas, such as in these experiments Fracking hence carries a non-negligible risk of earthquakes.

© Wissenschaft aktuell

Source: "Isotropic Events Observed with a Borehole array in the Chelungpu fault zone, Taiwan", K.-F. Ma et al, Science, Doi. 10.1126/science.1222119

Translated by Google. Original article => Erdbeben durch natürliches Fracking


Also => Forcing fluids through a fault

The movement of high-pressure fluids -- either from natural processes or from industrial activities that inject fluids underground -- has the potential to trigger large earthquakes by opening up cavities and cracks deep underground. However, until now, researchers had never directly observed this fluid-driven process in a fault zone. By studying the fault along which the magnitude 7.6 Chi-Chi earthquake occurred in Taiwan back in 1999, Kuo-Fong Ma and colleagues identified several small earthquake-like events, which they called I-type events. This Chelungpu fault zone currently exhibits low tectonic stress and the I-type events are so small that they register negative magnitude values. But, after modeling these I-type events, Ma and the other researchers suggest that they are associated with natural hydraulic fracturing, or the break-up of rocks by high-pressure fluids. The presence and location of these events can indicate when and where such fracturing is occurring, they say. These I-type events may indicate the formation of veins or other fluid features that are often observed in rocks surrounding active fault zones, and according to the researchers they might also be similar to the events produced by industrial fracking.

[Count Bobulescu]

There was a few things I wanted to post here on this thread but I didnt want to undermine anything you wrote just in case a chara

Oh dear Fluffy, that sounds suspiciously like a conspiracy, you could get locked up for that.

[Count Bobulescu]

Just to demonstrate I’m willing to consider both sides of an argument, rather than simply post one sided information here’s the video of the intelligence squared debate “No Fracking Way” in which the side I support is the loser.

Runs 100 minutes. The first ten minutes are just introductions.

http://intelligencesquaredus.org/deb...harm-than-good

[New Vision]

Just to demonstrate I’m willing to consider both sides of an argument, rather than simply post one sided information here’s the video of the intelligence squared debate “No Fracking Way” in which the side I support is the loser.

Runs 100 minutes. The first ten minutes are just introductions.

http://intelligencesquaredus.org/deb...harm-than-good

Well. On the one hand we have propaganda and tainted studies from the petroleum industry, on the other hand we have idependent scientists and researchers.

No wonder that after a brief discussion as shown people tend to get a clue that fracking certainly is a dangerous undertaking with vast consequences for our ecosystems and drinking water supplies.

There is indeed a need of more information going out to the public.

[New Vision]

Study: Greenhouse gases, climate change and the transition from coal to low-carbon electricity



Natural gas is not an effective "bridge fuel" to a carbon-free future. Only rapid deployment of low-emission technologies will achieve substantial climate benefits.