Comment: Thanks for posting! +1

(See in situ)

Thanks for posting! +1

Thanks for posting as I appreciate the added information. This post is not meant to be argumentative, just comparing and contrasting information. One of my best friends is a geologist / water quality specialist for the Pennsylvania DEP and oversees fracking operations in his district. All of this information comes directly from him.

1. Perhaps it is an issue of slang vs. the actual definition but it is called the "slurry" in legislation and environmental publications.

2. "All water is collected in a lined pool on site and reclaimed off site." Before you made this very general, all encompassing statement you should have stated that all water is "SUPPOSED" to be... In theory, the government should be protecting our rights as well. This is the problem. Leaks getting into ground water can travel miles and again, before the DEP can investigate a site they have to prove where contaminated water came from. I don't think the spike in contaminated ground water is unrelated to the spike in fracking.

3. "The land is reclaimed as well." All energy producing land is once again, SUPPOSED to be reclaimed but that still hasn't happened with open air coal mines (stripping pits) here in PA. The energy companies throw up a wind turbine that produces no real energy so they don't have to reclaim it as it is still "energy producing."

4. Some companies keep geologists on site and others have them rotating through several sites. It is entirely possible that in the past, or some smaller companies / sites do not. More and more geologists today are getting jobs with these companies right out of school.

5. A portion of the chemical makeup of every slurry that gets submitted to the DEP and EPA are deemed confidential and unique to that company.

NOTE: I am not advocating violence in any way. The content of the post is for intellectual, theoretical, and philosophical discussion. FEDS, please don't come to my house.