Comment: Good Post, good conversation.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: . (see in situ)

Good Post, good conversation.

I normally think HuffPo is mularkey, but this article isn't that bad. All it really says is that the chemicals were injected, which is really no news. In fact, fracfocus was built to reveal exactly that. Towards the end they go on to talk about proprietary fluids. This is huge. Much like Coca-Cola has a secret formula to make Coke Classic, many of the service companies have spent millions in R&D to develop fluids and fluid additives. Everyone knows the basic ingredients in Coke (water sugar etc.), but the formula for how to create it is a secret. The same is true here. The service companies do not want to disclose anything beyond just the chemicals being injected. The chemicals that make up the slurries are known, but the concentrations are proprietary, and a range is given. For instance they may say 10-50% of "X" solvent is xylene. Essentially, we know it's been pumped and we know a good range of what has been pumped. Just a note here solvents are usually pumped at concentrations around 0.1-1 gallons per thousand gallons, so around 0.01-.1% (so 10-50% of that would be xylene). Most of the slurry is water and sand 95-99.5% on average.

I'm with you on the EPA. I'm happy a liberal administration vindicated frac', but at the same time I don't trust them. And in my mind that made no difference in determining my opinion on hydraulic fracturing.

There are a lot of interested parties in developing shale plays here in the US. The biggest interests are OPEC and Russia. Additionally, there are the environmentalists and (believe it or not) the coal mining groups. We have such abundant natural resources today that 20 years ago were never dreamed recoverable. We could see a radical change the geo-political landscape, especially when it comes to the Middle East and Russia. Fracknation does a good job of showing how Russia has actively campaigned against frac' in Western Europe (it's outlawed in France) so they can continue to be (pretty much) the sole source of natural gas to Europe.

Interesting stuff, no doubt. Probably a good topic for the DP at some point. I do my best to read the literature, and to be quit honest, there has never been a solid, scientific study to show even a single instance of a frac' job polluting a drinking water aquifer.