Definitely not. The 400 metres of water from a water well would be pretty much unheard of to be that depth for a few reasons. A farmer would not want to drill that deep due to the expense, the water at that depth would not be fit for human consumption. The base of groundwater would be around that depth but water wells would most likely be much shallower in the 50 to 100m in depth.....at the 400 m mark the water would taste very salty.
To be fair, I was showing a worst case for the sake of argument. BGWP is often at 300 to 400 m. Sometimes shallower, sometimes deeper. As you know.
The other thing that hasn't been mentioned is that in a lot of the complainer stuff I've seen regarding fraccing, it's from out east in Pennsylvania, etc.
Generally speaking you can say that starting on the west of the continent and heading east it goes from thicker to thinner geologically. So pay zones and oil and gas traps are deeper out west. Drinking water aquifers need to be close to surface as mentioned above.
Those eastern states have shallower pay zones and fraccing could be an issue like JD suggested. But out here in Sask, AB, BC? Yeah right, it's crap well design if it's the oil and gas sector to blame.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
Texas is Texas. Western Canada doesn't get the crazy folding and faulting like they do. Eagle Ford is shallowest/youngest in the western gulf and it's 4,000' to 12000' depth. I don't know much about Texas though. Maybe someone here does.
Where are the water and chemicals used to Frac disposed of while they are fraccing? Is it at all possible that they are being released onto the surface which seeps into the aquifer? It's actually highly likely that this is happening and contaminating the fresh water that people rely on for drinking isn't it?
Where are the water and chemicals used to Frac disposed of while they are fraccing? Is it at all possible that they are being released onto the surface which seeps into the aquifer? It's actually highly likely that this is happening and contaminating the fresh water that people rely on for drinking isn't it?
If you did that in Alberta the government would sh^t down your throat with the heat of a thousands arses. Also benzene would be an awful frac fluid. Awful crap that stuff.
Also if a company is releasing produced anything ever onto surface they should be shot in the head.
Really? You honestly think that? The Alberta government doesn't seem to be on the side of the individual but stand up for big business. How is the Athabasca river doing right now and what are the fines being handed out to the mining company which released obscene amounts of junk into the river? They are still mining there aren't they? I have worked upwards of 20 years in the oilpatch in various degrees and have seen the garbage that companies get away with, the only thing that I see the Alberta government care about is revenues.
You don't think that wastewater/chemicals are spilled onto ground surface? With the amount of it being pulled out I would think you would be naïve to think it's all disposed of properly.
You don't think that wastewater/chemicals are spilled onto ground surface? With the amount of it being pulled out I would think you would be naïve to think it's all disposed of properly.
I could tell you about many extremely small spills (1 bbl) that I hear reported up several levels of management every week at our D&C status meetings. They are all also reported to the government and cleaned up.
If you did that in Alberta the government would sh^t down your throat with the heat of a thousands arses. Also benzene would be an awful frac fluid. Awful crap that stuff.
Also if a company is releasing produced anything ever onto surface they should be shot in the head.
So is Benzene used in Fraccing yes or no.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
I would hope not. I don't know all the billion different formulations. Why would they want to?
Dude I have no idea, that is why I asked the question.
Duffman's post seems to indicate that it is used, although to be honest, I still can't figure out what he is pissed about, fraccing or "Big Oil" as a whole.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
I worked for the government in department that would do the enforcing, so yess, 100% unequivocally they would. You believe otherwise you are a 9/11 truther type person. Mining, I know nothing about that.
and yes, sure there are small spills. The worst offenders are the ones 'who worked in the industry, as truck drivers, vac truck operators, they are the ones who will cut corners and do stupid crap. So maybe you worked for a shady place or were one yourself to think that.
The government can enforce a policy but if the accountability isn't there then what's the point. Who do the worst offenders work for? They are part of the process of fraccing and if they have a small spill above ground then it is highly likely that it will seep into the drinking water that is used by farmers.
I don't doubt that most spills are reported to the government, but what is the possibility that from the time that it is reported to the time the spill is cleaned up that the groundwater is already effected? It doesn't take a great mind to realize chemicals like Glycol will seep through the soil at a high rate of speed and taint the well water but looking at your previous posts it seems that their is no possible way that Fraccing could have any negative effect on a well, it has got to be the age of the well.
